Showing posts with label Central Banking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Central Banking. Show all posts

Friday, August 21, 2026

Debt Trap: Western Finance Replaced Productive Capitalism | Michael Hudson

In an in-depth discussion, American economist Michael Hudson and Norwegian political and international relations scientist Glenn Diesen examine the historical and economic roots of the financial instability currently confronting Western economies. Hudson argues that the Western financial system is unsustainable because debt grows faster than the economy's capacity to service it.  

Historical Debt Relief Traditions
Unlike ancient Mesopotamia, where rulers from the third millennium BC onward periodically proclaimed "clean slate" debt cancellations, known as andurarum or misharum, which wiped out agrarian debts, freed people in debt bondage, and restored land to cultivators, the modern West has never institutionalized such resets. Similarly, the biblical Jubilee tradition echoed these practices by mandating the periodic release of debts and restoration of property. 


postpone it until a time of ease.

Islamic tradition likewise established a clear obligation to grant debt relief: the Quran (2:280) requires creditors to grant a debtor in genuine hardship a postponement until a time of ease, while encouraging creditors to forgive all or part of the debt as a superior act of charity. These ancient and religious practices helped preserve a viable productive population and limited creditors’ ability to monopolize the means of production. 

From Industrial to Finance Capitalism
The absence of comparable mechanisms today has contributed to extreme polarization of wealth and power. Western economies have shifted from industrial capitalism, which directed investment toward factories, machinery, research, infrastructure, and productive employment, to finance capitalism. 
 
Early modern wage-rent-tax slaves at Ford's assembly lines.
 
The latter prioritizes wealth accumulation through leverage and debt, corporate takeovers, real estate speculation, and asset-price inflation rather than tangible capital formation. This transition has contributed to deindustrialization and concentrated gains among the top holders of financial claims. 
 
Western Central Banking and Creditor Power
Western central banks reinforce this dynamic further: rather than acting as public authorities empowered to cancel or suspend debts that have become unpayable, as Bronze Age rulers did or as Islamic traditions of debt respite prescribe, they primarily support commercial banks and asset markets, enforce creditor claims, and resolve crises by expanding their own balance sheets—thereby protecting the financial sector while leaving household and productive-economy debt intact.  
 
The development of European banking was deeply shaped by the Crusades, when the Church and later secular states used debt to finance warfare. Over time, fiscal policy became increasingly subordinated to banking interests, reversing earlier anti-usury traditions and embedding institutions designed to enforce debt collection rather than protect debtors.

Brokers at the New York Stock Exchange in 1963.

Without an authority comparable to the ancient "divine king," whose duty was to keep debt within the population's capacity to repay, Western constitutions historically concentrated political and economic power in the hands of a creditor oligarchy. Contemporary central banks, rather than reversing this concentration, operate within the same creditor-oriented framework. 

China’s Public Credit Model
By contrast, China treats credit as a public utility under state control through the People's Bank of China. The state limits the emergence of an independent financial class capable of operating outside state priorities and channels credit creation toward national development—factories, machinery, and infrastructure—rather than speculative bubbles.
  
People's Bank of China Headquarter, Beijing.

Because the central bank remains a public instrument, China retains greater practical capacity, analogous to the debt-relief practices of ancient Mesopotamia and the Islamic principle of relieving hardship, to restructure or write down debts that threaten productive capacity and social stability. This approach supports industrial growth and limits the systemic polarization seen in the West.
 
The Ponzi Dynamics of Western Debt
Hudson describes the Western system as a Ponzi scheme: new debt is continually required simply to service interest on existing loans. Because a large share of bank lending fuels asset inflation rather than productive investment, more income is diverted into debt service, domestic demand weakens, and the economy stagnates.   
 
Mug shot of Charles Ponzi.
 
The resulting reliance on continually expanding debt, combined with geopolitical pressures surrounding the dollar and the oil trade, leaves Western economies increasingly vulnerable to financial and economic instability.

Tuesday, April 21, 2026

Entering the First Global Total War | Alex Krainer

In their conversation, Lena Petrova (IR, MBA, CPA, and political economy analyst) and commodities trader, former hedge fund manager, and geopolitical analyst Alex Krainer examine the dimensions of what he terms the "First Global Total War," driven by major energy and trade disruptions and broader global market stress stemming from the US war against Iran.
 
» This is not the Third World War. This is the First Global Total War. « 
 
Krainer frames the present moment as a systemic confrontation between two competing models of governance: the Western-led, British-derived system of free trade (globalism)—criticized as fostering a regulatory and labor "race to the bottom"—and the emerging multipolar framework rooted in Alexander Hamilton’s American System of political economy (economic nationalism). The latter is a protectionist, nationally oriented, and genuinely wealth-creating model that was applied with notable success by the United States, Germany, and Japan in the 19th century, and later as sovereigntist derivatives by Korea, Mexico, Brazil, Iran, China, and numerous other nations throughout the 20th and early 21st centuries. 
 
"The Monkey System:" 1831 cartoon attacking Henry Clay's "American System" from a
Jacksonian Democratic perspective favoring limited federal economic intervention.
 
Krainer forecasts a prolonged systemic confrontation with significant implications for global energy production, industrial output, trade, and food markets, arguing that tensions and worldwide wars will persist until the foundations of the current Western neocolonial financial architecture (including private central banking) are fundamentally challenged, ultimately defeated, and replaced.
 
 
Since April 3, ten oil refineries, power plants, and energy facilities across
 seven countries have been destroyed by "fires," "explosions," and "accidents."   
 
Escalation of Conflict
Krainer interprets the wars in Ukraine and West Asia as interconnected theaters within a broader strategic struggle. He argues that Western powers seek to open additional fronts—potentially in the Baltics, the Balkans, and around the Strait of Malacca—to prevent de-escalation in Ukraine and sustain strategic pressure.

Energy as a Strategic Lever
Control over energy flows, particularly through chokepoints such as the Strait of Hormuz and the Strait of Malacca, is presented as the central axis of conflict. Krainer characterizes this dynamic as part of a long-standing effort by Western neocolonial financial interests to preserve influence over the Eurasian landmass.

Commodities Markets and Inflation
On the economic front, Krainer contends that elevated equity valuations are being sustained by central bank liquidity, masking underlying structural fragility. This, he argues, has produced a growing divergence between financial markets and the real economy. He anticipates upward pressure on oil and other commodities, describing current price behavior as slow-moving and lagged in its response to geopolitical developments.

 
Rise of a Parallel System
Krainer highlights the gradual emergence of alternative financial and commodity networks operating beyond Western institutional control. He notes that many countries in the Global South are exploring paths outside IMF-aligned frameworks, despite the political and economic risks involved.

  

Sunday, September 7, 2025

State Central Banking vs Private Central Banking | Wen Tiejun

Let's delve into the core reasons underlying the strategic confrontation between the People's Republic of China and the United States of America, as this unveils a significant systemic discrepancy: [...] The issuance of the renminbi (RMB) is fundamentally based on the authority of the Chinese government, specifically through the People's Bank of China (PBC). The basis for the issuance of the renminbi is definitely not gold. The reason this money is valuable is because it is a sovereign currency issued by the state and backed by state authority. Empowering a sovereign currency establishes credit. The currency creates credit, and the sole resource available is political authority. Thus, political authority, governmental power, and the administration in control align with the currency system.
Wen Tiejun (温铁军) is a Chinese agricultural economist and a professor at the Renmin
University of China, best known for his studies on the Three Rural Issues in Mainland China.
 
On the other hand, the source of the US dollar's credit is an institution established by private bankers, not a country. Pay attention, this difference matters: The US dollar is actually issued by an institution called the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is neither an official entity nor a government institution; instead, it is an organization operated by private bankers. This particular organization possesses the authority to issue the national currency and determines the financial policy of the United States, which the government then implements.
 
 
» The root cause of global chaos is financial capital globalization, which is
supported by military hegemony. « Wen Tiejun's complete discourse video.  
 
This occurrence is quite rare across the globe, both in terms of nations and systems. In the majority of countries, it is the political power of the state that grants authority to its national currency, forming a sovereign currency. In a select number of nations, such as the United States, institutions are established by private banking entities, and the government subsequently enacts the policies of these private banker collectives.

[...] Therefore, throughout the extensive history of the United States, numerous influential presidents have attempted to reclaim monetary authority. All of them ultimately failed. Almost every president who was resolute in their determination to reclaim monetary authority ended up deceased, including the widely recognized Kennedy assassination. These events all share similar demands to restore monetary rights back to the government, yet none of these plans have been fully realized.

[...] China continues to maintain its national control over financial capital. For what specific purpose? In recent years, when China faced global crises and a decline in exports, the Chinese government mainly relied on national finance, investing in infrastructure that may not yield immediate profits. A straightforward example is the allocation of funds for the construction of roads and railways in rural, mountainous, and even desert regions. All these investments cannot be recovered in the short term, and it's also difficult to recover them in the long term. So, should we invest? We should, because if we don't, businesses will have no market and workers will become unemployed. On the other hand, the government would have to use its finances to pay for unemployment benefits. Rather than doing that, it's better to invest. 

» The United States exploits the world's wealth with the help of "seigniorage." It costs only about 17 cents to produce a 100 dollar bill, but other countries had to pony up 100 dollar of actual goods in order to obtain one. It was pointed out more than half a century ago, that the United States enjoyed exorbitant privilege and deficit without tears created by its dollar, and used
the worthless paper note to plunder the resources and factories of other nations. The hegemony of the US dollar 
is the main source of instability and uncertainty in the world economy. «
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China, 2023. 

[...] I perceive this as one of Trump's most proactive and forward-thinking policies—to focus on the advancement of infrastructure development. His most significant challenge is that the US lacks the so-called state-owned enterprises (SOEs) similar to those in China. Additionally, it doesn't have a state-owned banking system. China's system uses state banks to receive currency from the government, which is directly paid to state-owned enterprises. These enterprises then directly engage in infrastructure construction, maintaining China's economic growth and sustaining employment. The US uses private banks to issue more currency to buy government bonds, which then leads to a virtual capital expansion, with two hands shifting the crisis to the whole world.

[...] Analyzing this with American theory suggests China's state-owned banks and state-owned enterprises are inefficient. They don't provide tax revenue and occupy a large amount of capital. But just because financial resources are utilized doesn't mean nothing is produced. A significant amount of wealth is indeed generated, but this wealth manifests in the form of airports, seaports, train stations, highways, and high-speed railway systems. None of these investments can generate returns in the immediate short term. Consequently, a substantial amount of capital in China's state-owned banks is currently tied up. According to general free-market economic theory, those that can't be recovered soon should all go bankrupt. As long as you genuinely and sincerely execute what is purportedly stated in the media today, China's economy should have gone bankrupt long ago because its large investments can't be recovered quickly.

»
I think he [US Fed chairman Jerome Powell] is a very stupid person, actually. «

Not-calling-the-shots POTUS, July 13, 2025.
 
[...] How Trump might approach the situation? He doesn't have China's methods. So, how will he do it? By relying on private bankers to reform America's railways? How long will it take to recoup the investment? Why would private individuals invest in rebuilding American roads and airports? Private investment is dropping. This is similar to what's happening in China: whenever there's an economic crisis, China's private investment decline is inevitable. So, how do you counter it? You have to rely on state investment to push it up. One goes down, the other goes up. That's how it is. 
 
»
The US uses private banks to issue more currency to buy government bonds, which then 
leads to a virtual capital expansion, with two hands shifting the crisis to the whole world. «
 
A significant number of individuals are critical of China's system. I don't intend to imply anything else; I'm merely suggesting that you observe the actual impact. I also don't wish to defend this so-called closed system of China because I equally dislike this bureaucratic system, but it actually maintains the nation's foundational employment and crucial economic development.
  

Saturday, August 23, 2025

The Game of Chess, and the Masters of the Board | The Honorable One

Chess can show you how the world is run, who is really in power, and how to break it. There are six types of people who run the modern world. First you need to understand who is at the bottom.
 
 » Someday, someone will return and flip the board. « 
 
Number one, the pawns—the masses. They follow orders, pay taxes, are predictable, and get sacrificed in each game. Without them, there is no game, no power, no state, no Suki system. They are the majority in every game, the foundation of all power, and yet they are too weak to realize it. 

Number two, the rooks—the 20% who do 80% of the work: long hours, efficient, diligent, straight shooters. They are like machines. But they get stuck when routines change, they are not flexible enough, and they are useless on their own. They need number three:

 
» Everyone is afraid of the queen. «  

The knights. For a long time they just sit. Then they leap over walls, surprising everyone. Their paths and creativity are unpredictable. They connect dots no one else connects. They are ahead of the curve and unplug first. They walk into uncharted terrain. But one wrong step, and they fall. 
 
Knights need number four by their side: A good bishop to protect them. He is a quiet planner, the one who can wait. He is patient and prepared with a plan to strike months or years from now. But bishops are nothing compared to number five:

» It's their game. « 
 
The queen can strike anytime, anywhere, in all directions. Everyone is afraid of the queen. Who are the queens of this world? Central Bankers, those who run the Suki agencies, the military—those who can take out anyone anytime anywhere. The rules and laws of pawns, knights, and bishops do not apply to them. 
 
» Families that cannot be named. « 

So why is number six, the king, in power, and not the queen? The king takes small steps in the back rows, unnoticed. Nobody fears him. He holds power through legacy. Queens wield power for decades; kings and their families hold it for centuries. Who are the kings of today's world? The families that cannot be named. They have trillions but don’t appear on Forbes lists. Money does not matter to them—they print it. Everyone plays chess, but they are the ones who provide the board. They decide how many fields the board has and how long the game will be played. 
 
» We are the oil in your dressing, the flour in your bread, the meat on your dinner table. «  
A largely unknown American family dynasty of 14 billionaires traces its fortune to William Wallace Cargill in 1865. The Cargill-MacMillan family business, Cargill Inc., became one of the world's largest private companies. With revenues of $177 billion, it controls 22% of US beef production, and its low public visibility stems from its dominance in the food supply chain, where it and three other firms handle 70–90% of the global grain trade.
 
It's their game, and it is hard to exit. But there is a way: You only win if you don't play. You stop paying, you stop playing. All the game is run by money—consumption, production, access, bureaucracy, taxes. If you stop the money flow, the game stops. Someday, someone who has stopped playing and walked away from the game will return and flip the board: Game over for all the kings and all their Suki helpers. Honor will come.
 
 

 “Suki,” Russian prison slang for traitors and bitches (сука/суки), denotes globalist elites, corporations, and establishment figures—who embody hypocrisy, manipulation, and betrayal. They uphold the “Suki system,” the oppressive order of financial dependency, surveillance, digital control, censorship, and cultural erosion. “The Grim” is the The Honorable One, and the adversary of the Suki. He stands  for growth, reliability, integrity, independence, incorruptibility. He rejects victimhood, consumerism, culture of comfort, indulgence, entitlement, materialism, and resists the Suki system mentally, emotionally, financially and spiritually.
 

See also:
 
了解你的敌人
Know your Enemies.
 

Sunday, August 10, 2025

Money Creation—Banking’s Best-Kept Secret | Richard A. Werner

In an era when gold was money, people believed it was essential for transactions. But carrying gold was perilous—dangerous even today in cities like London, let alone in the 15th-17th centuries amid bandits on lawless roads. So, people sought safe storage. Professions handling gold, like goldsmiths crafting jewelry for kings, aristocrats, and the wealthy, had secure vaults and private guards. Naturally, individuals deposited their gold with these goldsmiths for safekeeping.
 
» We don't need to lend actual gold. «
"The Moneychanger and His Wife", painted by Quinten Matsijs, 1514.
 
To prove ownership, depositors received receipts—crucial evidence in case the goldsmith died and his son denied the claim. Goldsmiths charged a fee for this service, which seemed fair. Now, imagine we’re neighbors in Hampshire. I’m buying a plot of land from you, and we agree on a price in gold. My gold’s stored with a goldsmith in London. “I’ll go fetch it,” I say. You reply, “What’ll you do with it? You’ll risk your life fetching it, and then I’ll have to risk mine carrying it back.” We pause, then realize, “We might as well leave it there, and I’ll give you my deposit receipt.” Thus, these receipts for deposited gold evolved into Europe's first paper money—gold certificates, transferable and convenient.
 
Goldsmiths soon noticed that depositors rarely withdrew their gold; it stayed put, which was handy. This led to secrecy-shrouded practices. People knew goldsmiths held gold reserves, so they approached them for loans when in need. But until about 350 years ago, lending at interest was illegal in most European countries, forbidden by Christian doctrine and Biblical prohibitions against usury. A goldsmith might whisper, "Maybe I can lend, but keep it secret because I'll charge interest." The borrower agrees: "I'll pay, and we'll keep it secret." Goldsmiths began lending out portions of the deposited gold—especially standardized bullion—while swearing everyone to secrecy to evade arrest for illegal interest.
Shylock in The Merchant of Venice, Act IV, Scene I, by William Shakespeare, 1596.
 
As guilds do, goldsmiths convened to discuss trade secrets: “How do we handle lending too much gold? We need to work together—if one runs short, the others help, or else the whole scheme unravels, and we all get arrested for interest altogether.” One innovative goldsmith proposed, "I've got an idea—we don't need to lend actual gold. The next guy who comes begging every Monday—I've turned him down before. But now I'll lend to him to show you."
 
»
 All banks have always created money out of nothing. 
That's the secret of banking. «
 
The borrower arrives, pleading. The goldsmith says, “Today I’ll lend. Standard contract: small print, interest, your daughters sold into slavery if not repaid.” “Fine,” the borrower consents. “One more thing: 300 grams of gold. Sign here, I sign, and I lend it—but you must deposit it with me immediately.” The borrower protests, “I need the gold.” “You get the deposit receipt,” replies the goldsmith. “Yes, that’s all I need.” With the loan contract signed, the goldsmith records it as an asset on his balance sheet. He hands over the 300 grams of gold momentarily—now you see it, now you don’t—and it’s redeposited. The borrower leaves with a receipt for a new deposit.
 
» 
Banking has not been very well understood: legally, a "deposit"
is a loan to the bank, now owned by the bank, not the depositor. «
 
Double-entry accounting, invented for banking to obscure such maneuvers, made it appear legitimate: “All correct; the borrower deposited.” But it is fraudulent—the borrower enters with no gold and leaves with a document claiming a deposit, without increasing the goldsmith’s actual reserves. This is the essence of modern banking: fractional reserve lending and money creation out of thin air, born from these historical practices.
 
Reference:
 
» Today, due to the institutionalisation of interest and the advent of digital money, roughly 97 percent of modern money comes into existence as interest-bearing debt—i.e., it “comes into being only when someone promises to pay back even more of it.” «
Yusuf Jha, 2013.
 
See also: