The death of the Tsars and the birth of Zion • BIG BROTHER in the 21. Century

As we saw earlier, since the times of Alexander II, the Tsars opposed the creation of a central bank by the Rothschilds; as it happened in England (Bank of England) and France (Bank of France), of which the Rothschilds were the major shareholders. [1] From that moment on, the Romanov family would suffer a series of… “accidents”.

Alexander II would be the first. After many failed assassination attempts (of which the first came in 1866; just three years after the dispute with the Rothschilds over the American Civil War), in 1881, three men awaited between the crowds for Alexander’s royal carriage from Manezh. The first man threw a bomb at the carriage; which was bulletproof. Alexander was unhurt, but he abandoned the carriage due to the explosion. At that time, the second man threw another bomb at Alexander’s feet. This time he was hit; and he fell on the street bleeding to death, with his legs torn away, his stomach ripped open, and his face mutilated. A third man would be detained minutes after, carrying a third bomb; which was not necessary; Alexander II died that same night. All three detainees belonged to the Narodnaya Volya party, [2] which already carried seven assassination attempts until that date. [3] One of the members of that organisation was a young man by the name of Aleksandr Ulyanov; he was the older brother of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (best known as Lenin), [4] who would later be financed by Jacob Schiff, through Trotsky, not only to start the revolution, but for quite a few years more after it was over. [5]

Alexander III succeeded to the throne that same year, and the Jews were blamed for the assassination; which caused an anti-Semitic wave throughout Russia, to which the new Tsar added stronger anti-Semitic policies. Aleksandr Ulyanov also attempted to assassinate Alexander III, for which he was sentenced to death and hanged in 1887. Alexander III died in 1894 due to kidney failure, which was later linked to the blunt trauma suffered at the Borki train disaster of 1888. [6] And there wouldn’t be anything unusual about Alexander’s death; if it wasn’t for the fact that the Borki train disaster consisted in a roof from one of the cars (casually the royal car) falling down exactly over the Tsar and injuring him; while no one else from his family was hurt. None of the three investigations carried out agreed on the direct cause of the crash. [7] Though, it seems that the Rothschilds were the ones that financed the Russian railroad network. [8] Nicholas II succeeded to the throne after Alexander III died.

But there is far more to this story. Alfonse de Rothschild was investing in Russian oil, which in the 1860s was already emerging as the European rival to the American monopoly of Standard Oil (owned by Rockefeller). In the early 1880s the Rothschild family had nearly two hundred refineries at work in Baku, Russia’s oil rich region. Though, by the mid 1880s the Baku-Batum railroad proved to be inadequate to transport the volume of oil produced. Another route was needed, and came in the form of the recently opened Suez Canal. Palestine was suddenly of interest to the Rothschilds as it provided access to the Suez Canal. [9] Benjamin Disraeli (Prime Minister of Britain) turned to the Rothschilds for the cash advance needed to buy shares in the Suez Canal Company. [10]

At the same time, Tsar Nicholas II instituted more anti-Semitic pogroms and discrimination against Jews; and many emigrated. The British Rothschilds were very concerned with this wave of Jewish immigrants into Western Europe and Britain. One potential solution considered to the problem of increased Jewish immigrants in Britain was to institute restrictions on immigration. However, this would likely backlash, in the sense that it would be viewed as comparable to expulsion. So, Edmond Rothschild began his personal campaign to create a Jewish homeland in Palestine in order to create a release valve for Jewish immigrants to put their political action behind a new cause, and to promote them emigrating to Palestine, and out of Western Europe. [9] His proposal for the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine served major economic interests of the Rothschilds and of the British Empire, so, Rothschild bought the Suez Canal for the British, which was the primary transport route for Russian oil. Palestine, thus, would be a vital landmass as a protectorate for British and Rothschild imperial-economic interests. In 1895, the Rothschilds, then one of the world’s leading producers and distributors of oil, co-sign an agreement with America’s Standard Oil to divide up world markets. It never took effect, presumably because of the opposition of the Tsar Nicholas II. [8] And we all know what happened to the last Tsar: he was executed with all his family in 1918 by Lenin’s Bolsheviks; funded by the bankers.

The Brutal Murder of Tsar Nicholas II and his Family

The U.S. State Department published a three-volume report in 1931 stating that Jewish-owned German banks conspired to send large sums of money to Lenin, Trotsky, and other Bolshevik luminaries to overthrow the Tsar.

In the nineteenth century, the Tsar began to discover that Jews were fomenting revolution and began to establish policies in an attempt “to russify the Jews through conversionist assimilation.”[1]

Historian Erich E. Haberer writes that this was largely forced assimilation, but Jewish scholar Benjamin Nathans seems to show that it was not forced; since the tsarist government wanted the Jews to integrate, they produced a number of academic programs that would be suitable to Jews. One of them was the university, “the setting in which selective Jewish integration achieved its most dramatic success.”[2]

When the Tsar was governing Russia, Jacob Schiff plotted against the government, supplied millions of dollars to the Japanese to overthrow the Russian government, and called Russia “the enemy of all mankind.”[3] Incredibly, Paul Johnson only mentions the idea that a number of Jews, including Jacob Schiff, sought to overthrow the Tsar’s government,[4] and on another occasion mentions Schiff in a positive light.[5]

Instead, Johnson tells us that during the tsarist government, “Everything was done to prevent Jews getting to university.”[6] Nothing could be further from the truth. Yes, the tsars were against subversive movements, in which revolutionary Jews played a major role. But they were not so much interested in marginalizing all the Jews in Russia, otherwise they would not have adopted programs for assimilation. Johnson’s History of the Jews seems to confirm this point; he writes that in Poland, Hungary, and Romania in the 1920s,

“The local Communist Parties had been largely created and run by Non-Jewish Jews…Jewish Bolsheviks were numerous in the Cheka (secret police), as commissars, tax inspectors and bureaucrats. They took a leading part in the raiding parties organized by Lenin and Trotsky to gouge grain out of hoarding peasants. All these activities made them hated.”[7]

Leon Blum wrote in 1901 that “the collective impulse” of the Jews “leads them towards revolution; their critical powers drive them to destroy every idea, every traditional form which does not agree with the facts or cannot be justified by reason.”[8]

Well, the fear that Jewish revolutionaries would want to usurp Russia’s traditional values had always been a concern of the tsars—not because the tsars were inherently anti-Semitic, but because the traditional government in Russia, which was built on the Western intellectual tradition, despised subversive activities such as Communism and Marxism.

Jews were about four percent of the Russian population at the turn of the twentieth century,[9] yet they not only dominated the Russian Revolution but initiated the movement. Johnson writes, “It is true that Jews were prominent in the Bolshevik party, in the top echelons as well as among the rank and file: 15-20 percent of the delegates were Jewish.” He moves on to say,

“One list showed that, of thirty-one top Soviet leaders, all but Lenin were Jews [Johnson’s book came out in 1987; later documents revealed that Lenin was also a Jew]; another analyzed the members of the Petrograd Soviet, showing that only sixteen out of 388 were Russians, the rest being Jews, of whom 265 came from New York’s East Side. A third document showed that the decision to overthrow the Tsar’s government was actually taken on 14 February 1916 by a group of New York Jews including the millionaire Jacob Schiff.”[10]

Yet Johnson plays down this involvement by saying that “these were Non-Jewish Jews.”191 Referring to the Revolution in an essay entitled “The Relentless Cult of Novelty,” Alexander Solzhenitsyn called it “the most physically destructive revolution of the 20th century” that sought “to sweep away all religions or ethical codes, to tear down, overthrow, and trample all existing traditional culture.”[11] Jewish historian Steven Beller said,

“It is well known that the leadership of the socialist party in Austria before and after the First World War was heavily Jewish. This was also the case for the group of theorists collectively known as the Austro-Marxists, the most interesting group of political theorists to emerge from the liberal bourgeoisie in Vienna. Of the major theorists in Austro-Marxism only Karl Renner was not of Jewish descent.”[12]

This is also true of those who conspired against the tsarist government. In fact, the U.S. State Department published a three-volume report in 1931 stating that Jewish-owned German banks conspired to send large sums of money to Lenin, Trotsky, and other Bolshevik luminaries to overthrow the Tsar.[13]

Jewish financiers such as Jacob Schiff in the United States and Max and Paul Warburg in Germany poured millions of dollars into the Bolshevik movement. Schiff is said to have given $20 million dollars to the regime—a sum equivalent to billions of dollars today.[14] Even The Jewish Encyclopedia calls communism and socialism Jewish phenomena.[15]

The culmination of all this is the death of Tsar Nicholas II. This is where Michael Walsh’s in-depth analysis comes in.

Michael Walsh: Across Russia’s vast eleven time zones Church bells toll as the nation evokes the centennial of the horrific and senseless slaughter of Nicholas II, Tsar of Imperial Russia, his wife, their five beautiful children, and staff. Dubbed Azrael’s abattoir the ritualistic and racist nature of their family’s diabolical end is marked in countless ways in every village and city.

Before the outbreak of the 1914 ~ 1918 war Warsaw shops patronised by the Jewish community furtively sold greeting cards the message of which would be lost on most Gentiles. Each greeting card carried the image of the tzadik. This image depicts a Talmudic Jew with Torah in one hand and a white fowl in the other. The bird’s head is a facsimile of Imperial Russia’s Tsar Nicholas II. Below this image is the inscription in Hebrew: “This is a sacrificial animal so is my cleansing; it will be my replacement and cleansing the victim.”

This message relates to the Yom Kippur atonement ritual in which the live sacrifice is swung about the head before being slaughtered by the shechita method; the creature’s blood being drained. This greeting card is a copy of American (Jewish) greeting cards first discovered in the United States in 2007.

The ritual slaughter of Tsar Nicholas II was the dream of many Jews. This curiosity is dismissed by palace media as being due to the Tsar’s alleged anti-Semitism. In fact, his anti-Semitism was hardly unique; many heads of state were outspoken in their criticism of the Jewish community.

Upon their being arrested the revolutionary Yakov Sverdlov ordered the slaughter of Tsar Nicholas II, his entire family, and all assistants. Regicide was a cherished ambition for this Jewish revolutionary. This is proven by the text of leaflets written by Yakov Sverdlov. These were published May 19, 1905, a date that marks the birthday of Nicholas II. The text on the leaflets: “Struck your hour, the last hour of you and all yours! This is a terrible judgment, the revolution is coming!”

The decision to massacre Russia’s Imperial family was taken by the Ural authorities. The decision is consistent with the stated demands of Yakov Sverdlov, Chairman of the Central Executive Committee of Soviets of Workers ‘and Soldiers’ Deputies.

The massacre’s organisers and accompanying guards were militants involved in the organisation of the future Communist party, R.S.D.L.P. Its 1905 genesis was in the Urals, when the group was under the direction of Yakov Sverdlov. At the time of the slaughter, the aforementioned were the main participants in the massacre of the Romanovs.

Long before the Wall Street-inspired 1917 coup that delivered Tsarist Russia to mostly American corporate interests, Yakov Sverdlov and Bolshevik insurrectionists served prison sentences or were otherwise exiled in Siberia. Militant Yakov Sverdlov was exiled to Turukhansk as was Josef Stalin, Julius Martov (Tsederbaum), and Aron Solts.

The malevolent Yakov Sverdlov gathered around him the most aggressive and ruthless elements of this loose-knit association of brigands. Yakov Sverdlov was reputed to be pathologically sadistic. Such were the gratuitous cruelties inflicted on those he regarded as expendable that even fellow party members already accustomed to extreme violence were appalled.

On the eve of the 1905 Revolution and during his exile Sverdlov formed an organisation known as The Battle Squad of the People Weapons (BONV). This sinister terrorist group slaughtered indiscriminately in ways that would make today’s ISIS terrorists appear docile by comparison. The band’s victims included anyone thought to be in the pay or sympathetic towards Tsarist Russia.

The victims of Yakov Sverdlov and his band of brigands: Slaughtered at Ipatiev house. 1st row: Nicholas II and his family (Olga, Maria, Tsar Nicholas II, Tsarina Alexandra, Anastasia, Alexei, and Tatiana), surgeon to Tsar Eugene Botkin and Royal chef Ivan Kharitonov, maid Anna Demidova and the Tsar’s valet Colonel Alexei Trupp.

The band increased its wealth following constant attacks on banks, post offices, cash desks, trains and shops. “They were desperate murderers” writes Eduard Hlystalov who describes the marauders leader as ‘the frail bespectacled Yakov Sverdlov.’

Philippe (Shaya-Isay Fram) Goloshchyokin, personal and plenipotentiary ambassador of Yakov Sverdlov, dealt with all the gang’s organisation detail. The Ural region was soon to become Yakov Sverdlov’s personal fiefdom. The revolutionary placed those he considered loyal to him in government positions throughout the Urals region.

‘Under the protection of the Tsar’s personal bodyguards, the train carrying the soon to be martyred family departed Tobolsk on April 26, 1918, to arrive in Tyumen during the evening of April 27. On April 30 the train from Tyumen arrived in Yekaterinburg, where Vasily Yakovlev signed over a delivery of the Imperial couple and their daughter Maria to the Head of Ural Council Alexander Beloborodov.

As the Bolsheviks increased their hold on Russia confidence was such that it was decided that the children, the ill Alexei and his sisters Olga, Tatiana and Anastasia were to re-join their mother, father, and sister Maria in Yekaterinburg. The children left Tobolsk in May 1918. Tsarevich Alexei and his three sisters arrived in Yekaterinburg on 23 May 1918, accompanied by a group of servants and officials of the royal retinue.

On July 16, 1918, the day before the massacre, there arrived in Yekaterinburg a special train consisting of a locomotive and a single passenger carriage. The few other passengers included one person in the black attire of a Jewish rabbi with his face disguised. The rabbi was greeted by Shaya Isaakovich Goloshchekin and accorded with maximum respect as might a visiting dignitary. The rabbi was accompanied by protection of six soldiers. Upon being directed to the basement of Ipatiev house the rabbi traced cabalistic signs on the wall: “The Tsar sacrificed, the kingdom destroyed! About this notifies all peoples.”

Leading executioners of the Imperial family whose Jewish names appear in brackets. Left to right: Top (Yankel Solomon Movshevich Sverdlov) Yakov Sverdlov, Philippe Goloshchyokin (Shaya-Isay Fram Goloshchekin) and Pyotr Voykov (Pinhus Wainer). Bottom row: Alexander Georgievich Beloborodov (Vaisbart Yankel Isidorovich), Konstantin Myachin (Vasily Yakovlev) and Georgy Safarov (Voldin).

Yakov Yurovsky supervised the Imperial family’s assassination. He was responsible for administering the coup de grâce and afterwards searching the bodies. Pyotr Voykov (Pinhus Wainer) took part in the shooting and assisted in carrying out the coup by bayoneting their victims. Later, he was delegated to destroy the family’s remains by a combination of dismemberment and the use of sulphuric acid.

The scrawled writing was afterwards found on the walls of the room in which the Imperial family was slaughtered. These were translated and transcribed by German-Jewish poet Heinrich Heine (1797-1856). The lines appear on the wall which the Imperial family had their backs to whilst being gunned down. There was also writing discovered near the basement window of Ipatiev House.

Belsatzar ward in selbiger Nacht / Von seinen Knechten umgebracht or in English ‘Belsatzar was, on the same night, killed by his slaves.’

In the Old Testament story, the King of the Gentiles, Belshazzar, saw ‘the writing on the wall’ foretelling his destruction (Daniel 5) and he was killed as punishment for his offenses against Israel’s God.

In a clever play on the original Heine quotation the unknown writer, almost certainly one of the killers, substituted Belsatzar for Heine’s spelling Belsazar, in order to signal even more clearly his intended symbolism. The Heine inscription described the racial / ethnic nature of the murders: ‘A Gentile king had just been killed as an act of Jewish retribution.’

According to the guard’s recollection, the Empress and Grand Duchess Olga with others during the massacre made a vain attempt at crossing themselves. Yakov Yurovsky reportedly raised his gun at Nicholas’s torso and fired; the Tsar fell dead after which his killer shot the schoolboy son of the Tsar and Tsarina.

An assortment of killers then began shooting chaotically until all the intended victims had fallen. Several more shots were fired and the doors were then opened to disperse the smoke and fumes. A few of the martyrs survived the carnage. These unfortunates were stabbed to death with bayonets by Peter Ermakov. It was necessary for him and others to use bayonets as with the doors now open there was a need to keep the noise of the carnage muted.

The last martyrs to die were Tatiana, Anastasia, and Maria. Between them, the sisters were carrying a little over 1.3 kilograms of diamonds sewn into their clothing. This had given them a degree of protection from the gunshots. These young women and girls were bayoneted to death.

Olga sustained a gunshot wound to the head. Maria and Anastasia were said to have crouched up against a wall covering their heads in terror until they were shot down. The Jewish revolutionary Yakov Yurovsky personally killed Tatiana and Alexei. Tatiana died from a single bullet through the back of her head. Alexei received two bullets to the head, one behind the ear after the executioners realised he had not been killed by the first shot. Anna Demidova, Alexandra’s maid, survived the initial onslaught but was stabbed to death against the back wall while trying to defend herself with a small pillow that was filled with precious gems and jewels.

While the bodies were being placed on stretchers, one of the girls, possibly Anastasia, cried out and covered her face with her arm. Ermakov grabbed Alexander Strekotin’s rifle and bayoneted her in the chest. When it failed to penetrate the young woman’s torso he pulled out his revolver and shot her in the head.

Some of Pavel Medvedev’s stretcher bearers had by now begun to rifle through the victims’ clothes for valuables. On seeing such activity Yakov Yurovsky demanded that they surrender looted items or be shot.

In the hasty burial of the bodies, several jewels like these topazes were overlooked by Yurovsky’s murderers and eventually recovered by White Army investigator Nikolai Sokolov in 1919

The attempt to completely destroy the Imperial family’s remains began the following day. This operation was assisted by Yakov Yurovsky and carried out under the direction of Pyotr Voykov (Pinhus Wainer). The occasion was supervised also by Goloshchyokin and Beloborodov.

Pyotr Voykov recalled that dreadful scene with an involuntary shudder. He said that when this work was completed the dismembered cadavers were thrown down a forest mine. Upon this appalling scene of carnage was poured gasoline and sulphuric acid. In a vain attempt to destroy all evidence of the massacre the parts were afterwards allowed to burn for two days.

Pyotr Voykov afterwards recounted: “It was a terrible picture. We, the participants of the burning corpses were downright depressed about this nightmare. Even Yurovsky, in the end, could not resist and said that even those few days and he would have gone mad.” (Besedovsky G. Z. ‘On the Road to Thermidor’ M., 1997. S.111-116).

Soon after the massacre, Yekaterinburg was liberated by the White Armies. An aim of the liberating armies was to discover the mystery of the Imperial Russian family’s disappearance. To carry out his investigations the White Army’s delegated investigator, Nikolai Sokolov dressed as a peasant in order that he drew as little attention to himself as possible. It was at this point that the reward for the assassination of the Imperial family posted by Wall Street banker Jacob Schiff was settled. Jacob Schiff (1847~1920) is the Jewish-American banker whose financial clout funded the 1904 ~ 1905 Japanese in war against Tsarist Russia. Schiff’s apologists and palace historians say the banker’s generosity was on account of the alleged anti-Semitism of Tsar Nicholas II.

On the basis of the material brought before it the White Army’s official investigator Nikolai Sokolov drew the following conclusions: ‘the corpses were brought to the mine under the cover of darkness in the early morning of July 17, 1918. Clothing was roughly cut (damage is found on buttons, hooks, and eyes). The corpses were then dismembered and completely destroyed by fire and sulphuric acid.

At the same time, the bodies of those executed were heated with fat added to by lead from bullets. To explain the later finding of jewels Nikolai Sokolov explained that according to the testimony of the witness Tyegleva the Grand Duchess secretly sewed jewelry in her clothing. The princesses had also secreted gems in their apparel, some of which went unnoticed during the disposal of the family’s remains.

When the mine shaft was later excavated there were discovered much jewelry. From the torn brassieres a rain of pearls and precious stones cascaded. Some jewelry, mostly earrings, and pendants lay unnoticed in the surrounding grass. Despite the discovery of the jewelry the executioners and body disposal team worked quickly to finish their work with their paying attention to individual items. Witnesses reported the movement of cars and trucks, carts and riders near Ganina Yama 15 km north of Yekaterinburg. This area during the period July 17 to 19, 1918 was cordoned off by Red Guards. Nikolai Sokolov writes that during these days were also heard grenade explosions.

Ganina Yama (Ganya’s Pit or Ganina hole). Investigator Nikolai Sokolov at the site of a bonfire. Nikolai Sokolov devoted his life to collecting documents and evidence relating to the murder of the Romanovs.

Nikolai Sokolov later managed to find two orders drawn up by Pyotr Voykov on July 17, 1918. These orders had been placed with a local drugstore named Russian Society. Each order bore the requirement to issue employee Commissariat Zimin with sulphuric acid. The first order was for 5lbs with 3lbs more placed in the second jar. In total, Zimin was issued 11lbs of sulphuric acid for which was paid 196 roubles and 50 kopecks. According to Nikolai Sokolov, the sulphuric acid was delivered to the mine on 17 and 18 July.

At the mine itself traces of two large fires were discovered. Here, dozens of objects have since been discovered that relate to the murdered Imperial family. Many items were burned or otherwise destroyed. Nothing was spared of the Tsar’s family; even their pet dogs were slaughtered.

Nikolai Sokolov. To carry out his investigations the Nikolai Sokolov dressed in peasant in order that he draws as little attention to himself as possible.

Following the massacre of the Imperial family, the German-born Jacob Schiff celebrated the funding of the 1917 Bolshevik coup which had brought about regime change in Russia. Schiff had personally underwritten a substantial reward for the murder of the Russian royal family.

This Jewish banker’s investment funded a tyranny which, at the time of its collapse in 1990, is estimated to have directly or indirectly led to a loss of life estimated between 70 and 100 million mostly European Christians. Thus, Jacob Schiff appears to have achieved the dubious distinction of being the biggest killer in the history of humankind.

On the night of the New York celebrations a letter penned by the banker was read out to the ecstatic attendees.: “Will you say for me to those present at tonight’s meeting how deeply I regret my inability to celebrate with the Friends of Russian Freedom the actual reward of what we hoped for and striven for these long years.” ~ Jacob Schiff, New York bankers, ‘Kuhn, Loeb & Co. Quote: New York Times, March 24. 1917.

From this point on the insurrection was to continue until 1922. Soon after the expulsion of the White Armies corporate America and Europe moved in to plunder the assets of the nation that was before the coup Imperial Russia.

Yekaterinburg bore the name of Sverdlovsk from 1924 to 1991. The street and Ipatiev House where the Imperial family was placed under house arrest before their slaughter was renamed Sverdlov Street. In this grim building, Imperial Russian Emperor Nicholas II, his family and members of his household staff, were massacred. In 1991 a decision was made that this city’s name be returned to its original name of Yekaterinburg.

The Russian President Vladimir Putin during his tenure has atoned for the crimes carried out by the Bolsheviks. Throughout the Russian Federation now appear monuments dedicated to the memory of the Gulag network of slave camps. Ipatiev House was razed to the ground during the Soviet period in 1977. Since, on the ruins of the demolished house, stands Yekaterinburg’s Church of the Blood Cathedral.

In addition to the cathedral the Church of St. Nicholas (the Tsar has since been canonised) has been built at the Romanov Monastery. This holy place of pilgrimage is situated close to where the Tsar and his family’s remains were discovered at Ganina Yama.

About Author: Michael Walsh, an international journalist and broadcaster, was voted Writer of the Year by the Euro Weekly News Group of Newspapers. The author of 48 book titles, Walsh was the leader of the British Movement from 1968 to 1984. He now lives in Spain. Some of his books include Witness to History, Life in the Reich, Ransacking the Reich, The Red Brigands, Slaughter of a Dynasty, etc

[1] Erich E. Haberer, Jews and Revolution in Nineteeth-Century Russia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 9.
[2] Benjamin Nathans, Beyond the Pale: Jewish Encounter with Late Imperial Russia (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002), 201-202.
[3] Naomi Wiener Cohen, Jacob H. Schiff: A Study in American Jewish Leadership (Waltham, MA: Brandeis University Press, 1999), 38.
[4] Paul Johnson, A History of the Jews (New York: Harper Perennial, 1987), 459.
[5] Ibid., 369.
[6] Ibid., 424.
[7] Ibid., 451-452, 452-53.
[8] Ibid., 458.
[9] Yuri Slezkine, The Jewish Century (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 204), 105.
[10] Johnson, A History of the Jews, 459.
[11] Alexander Solzhenitsyn, “The Relentless Cult of Novelty,” Catholic Education Resource Center.
[12] Steven Beller, Vienna and the Jews, 1867-1938: A Cultural History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 17.
[13] http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/forrel.asp.
[14] See Gary Allen, None Dare Call It Conspiracy (Cutchogue, NY: Buccaneer Books, 1976).
[15] Cyrus Adler and Isidore Singer, ed., The Jewish Encyclopedia (New York: Funk-Wagnalls, 1901-1906), 583-585.

The Juxtaposition of the Cold War v. “Evil Communists”, the Diversity Industrial Engine and the Movement to Free Nelson Mandela

By: Muunyayo

There are three key matters here. Cold War, a poem we learned in the first grade and Nelson Mandela. The backdrop is my own experience growing up in the eighties (I was born in 1979). These perspectives are my own, as a child in the eighties.

I was in the first grade in 1985. I am going to give perspective of these matters from how the energy felt in the eighties – then contrast it with what I have come to know today.

There are links between the the Cold War, how communists were especially described to us in the 1980s, the emergence of the Sun Poem, the current state of affairs involving the Sun Poem, the world rejecting to understand the history of the Boers in South Africa and the calls for liberation of political prisoner Nelson Mandela by the Neo-Liberal West.

Conclusion: the “Russians” were the bad guys in the Cold War. A big part of why the Russians were bad is because they were Communists. During the 1980s the diversity indoctrination began in the first grade with a poem about diversity. At the height of the 1980s, there was this call to “Free Nelson Mandela!!” throughout the Neo-Liberal West, however being very specific, growing up in the metropolitan Boston area. The fuckery of this is that it turns out Nelson Mandela was a straight up Communist.

The deception? How can communists be our ideological enemy capable of our extinction via nuclear annihilation and, simultaneously, we are rallying around freeing a communist? The only answer….

This is a true circle jerk. Is there a good explanation for the the contradiction between the simultaneous support of a communist whilst conducting a theater of the preparing for ominous nuclear obliteration as a result of tensions with communists – because they are communists? Is the component of being indoctrinated to embrace diversity interlaced with all of this?

The answer is quite frankly the White communists are the bad guys but the Black communists are okay for they are fighting against evil White [media implied] oppression.

Now, allow the web of remembrance tell the tale.

PART ONE: THE COLD WAR VERSUS THE COMMUNISTS

Elementary School Environment in 1980s:

It is important to reiterate that in elementary school in the public school system growing up in the metropolitan Boston area in the 1980s:

  • Communists are the biggest enemy America has.
  • Everyone is equal to each other and it is not acceptable to have in-group preference to groups based on race.
  • America is rallying behind a black communist for he is being prisoned because he is black and this is racist.
  • What the aforementioned three things mean? Racists are worse than communists. And only White people are capable of being racist.

Let’s look back at history for one moment:

Capitalism Fueled Marxism, Literally and Figuratively:

The fact that the Soviet Union was built under the implementation of Marxism and Communism, the ideological labels themselves, it was the ideological labels that were instrumental in the depiction of the Soviet Union as inherently evil, when it came to the way the media marketed the Cold War to the American people.

It is without question that the exercise of implementation of the Marxist and Communist system that began with the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917 were indeed filled with fuckery. It is important to note that Jewish Wall Street bankers, funded the Bolshevik Revolution.

It is also true that Karl Marx, who is Jewish, the primary author of the Communist Manifesto, benefited from the benefits of passive income generated through interest, dividends, rents, royalties and realized gains on the sale of stocks and bonds earned via his uncle brokering trades on his behalf on the floor of the London Stock Exchange. This has been well documented by serious scholars…to begin…you have access to this book right here:

THE RED PILL: All along, pure financial capitalism fueled Marxism and Communism from the very beginning. This is an absolute fact.

Retcon: Retroactive Continuity

Earlier this morning I read a blog post and in the title was the term “Retcon”. What does this word mean? Per the Merriam Webster dictionary, Retcon means:

Retcon is a shortened form of retroactive continuity, and refers to a literary device in which the form or content of a previously established narrative is changed.

Retcons are often encountered in serial formats such as comic books or television series, where they serve as a means of allowing the work’s creators to create a parallel universe, reintroduce a character, or explore plot lines that would otherwise be in conflict with the work. Essentially, a retcon allows an author to have his or her cake and eat it too, as it enables the return of dead characters, the revision of unpopular elements of a work, and a general disregard for reality.

The Eighties • Cold War and Reagan Democrats:

During the 1980s, this was the twilight years of the Cold War. America and by extension, the Neo-Liberal West, were pitted as the beacon of freedom, liberty –

Ronald Reagan was President. He was an actor. He became President, a Republican. Yet a different type of Republican. Maybe you have heard of “Reagan Democrats.”

This definition I found is simple enough: A person who traditionally votes for the Democrats, but who as an admirer of Reagan or his policies may be (or has been) influenced to vote for the Republicans (now historical). Hence in later use: a conservative Democrat.

Basing this on my anecdotal experience growing up in New England. Reagan was the personification of American Exceptionalism. A movie star, Hollywood, a man whose face is like a caricature of himself.

An actual caricature (from Point Break)

The Cold War had it’s deep history over decades. And obviously there were events along the time line that, at a minimum, from the perspective through individuals getting their information via newspaper, radio and television, at a very limited pace (versus narrative spin overload provided by our digital age circa 2021): the “Russians getting the bomb”, the Cuban missile episode, spies, double/triple agents, JFK and RFK assassinations, the “sixties” happened. Boomers. The boomers did their memetics in the sixties. They “experimented”. Others took their roles as radicals quite seriously.

And so began their Long March Through the Institutions.

Open the borders and let freedom ring.

By the 1980s it still seemed that a nuclear war was just a press of the button away. That’s how it was conveyed to us in elementary school. At least the rumor of all out explosive combat worldwide via air, sea, land and space seemed like it was going to happen.

The other side of the Cold War. The words Russians/Soviets/Communists/enemy/evil were used interchangeably. The USSR were the bad guys. That’s how it was depicted (please remember that this was my perspective as a boy yet aged of ten in essence).

Information Intake Circa 1985:

Keep in mind, please, 1985. Circa 1985, there was very limited mediums of information being circulated versus the current age of the internet. In the morning came the Boston Globe and/or Boston Herald newspapers. Fancy people got the Wall Street Journal too. There were even afternoon papers that came out, one was the Patriot Ledger distributed south of Boston. We had cable television but it was basically like 25 channels. Half of them movie channels. Local news on the ABC/NBC/CBS affiliates followed by 30 minutes of national news, brought by Dan Rather, Peter Jennings. This was the extent of information. (When we had projects for history or social studies classes there were these places called libraries, where we would go to do this thing called Google research. And would access physical books, often an encyclopedia. An encyclopedia was similar to Wikipedia. Only, the encyclopedia was not editable and did not lean left, nor right – for the most part the encyclopedia was apolitical. However, American Exceptionalism was thematic throughout the materials.

Russia/USSR/CCCP/Red hockey uniforms in the hockey bubble game – they were demonized completely.

Kids would lob insults at each other and say “you Russian fuck face!!” And stuff like that. Being called a Russian was the insulting part. Fuck face was digestible.

Ivan Drago and the Advent of American Egalitarianism:

A great piece of Hollywood (and I mean this for Rocky IV was a good film. It was a rare piece of Hollywood material that was not laced with sexual degeneracy and malfeasance.)

Rocky IV came out in 1985. This was right as I entered elementary school. USA vs. Russia Soviet Union. The winner of this boxing match would determine the fate of the most significant geopolitical struggle of the century.

Ivan Drago was the Russian antagonist. COMMUNIST. Although he said barely anything in the film (I wonder if the actor qualified for Screen Actors Guild health insurance even?)…he was big, muscular, with the spiked up hair. Ivan Drago. The COMMIE-SCUM. He is like a robot (pre-AI/deep machine learning capable) – he only knows of throwing punches. At the beginning of the film he is lifted into the ring where this ridiculous Branson, Missouri type of show is happening, with James Brown singing Living in America and the whole thing with Rockette-like dancers and all the optics of America celebrating America!! And Drago is looking around, as if, since he is from the dark ages, has never witnessed music, dancers, strobe lights… basically electricity is brand new to Drago. He’s made to look bewildered, at the Branson-Vegas-Cocaine-James Brown-Red/White/Blue spectacle takes place.

Communists have never been allowed to have fun. They have never seen a celebration before. There is no music, dancing, partying or electricity allowed in the Siberian frozen waste land of the COMMIE-SCUM evil, Satanic Soviets.

We will fucking nuke the Russian bastards if this film ends badly. And yes, because Drago is an evil, red, Soviet, godless, wicked fucking bad COMMUNIST, he fights Apollo Creed and Drago MURDERED Apollo Creed. What really happened is that Drago was prepared for the fight, although it was just “an exhibition,” there is still the element of honoring the competitive element in a boxing match. Drago beat the shit out of Apollo. Apollo passed away. Rocky sees what comes next. He’s going to have to fight Drago. FIGHT THE COMMUNIST.

The movie peaks with Rocky going the full twelve rounds with Drago. And in perfect, 1980s-styled unrealistic ending-necessary type of movie, the COMMUNIST BASTARD RUSSIANS begin cheering for Rocky as the boxing match presses forward. Yeah, the BAD, ENEMY, SOVIET, COMMUNIST RUSKIES are cheering for Rocky.

The metaphor these Jewish film critics would frame up when reviewing the movie is that Rocky is metaphorical for American freedom, democracy! Rocky is the way out of the evil/satanic/murderous/Sputnik/KGB/nuclear-steroid using COMMUNISTS.

Emphasis on:

COMMUNIST

Ok so Rocky wins the fight. The entirety of the world was rooting for Rocky, in essence, rooting for America. America has to come out victorious in this Cold War for the threat of COMMUNISM LOOMS.

Egalitarian Neo-Liberal Cultural Marxism is Born:

At the end of the film, comes well, I would say, the unrealistic Pozzz. Rocky speaks words into the microphone for the arena to hear and for the broadcast-watching world to hear. He says things like “youz didn’t like me too much and I guess I didn’t like youzz neither”…”but if I can change, AND YOU CAN CHANGE, WE ALL CAN CHANGE!!!!” – ahh yeah everyone goes bananas and this is the end of the struggle against COMMUNISM!!!

That speech at the end is the MOST SPOT-ON piece of American Exceptionalism morphing into EGALITARIANISM.

This is the purpose of me writing this thing. The Rocky movie is the best I could do to illustrate what the 1980s felt like. The end of film, with the COMMIES rooting for the toddler-Globohomo is completely insincere. The end of the movie in this regard is insincere. This is (((HOLLYWOOD))) fucking with the natural order of things because it feels good, it’s the feeling.

This is important. Throughout the entirety of my public school, pre-collegiate career, NEVER were the reasons for the Cold War EVER dug into except for the fact it was us versus THE COMMUNISTS!!!! COMMUNISM IS THE THREAT. That’s it, there was no further examination of the causes, the deep, tangled web of the drumming up of the Cold War.

PART TWO: THE RISING SUN OF DIVERSITY

The following is the examination of the Sun Poem, part two of three:

Sun Poem / Equality / Racism™:

Though I do remember very vividly our first lesson in egalitarian, Neo-Liberal, cultural-Marxist (ironic as fuck huh?!?!?), equality infused propaganda.

It was this poem. By this Asian woman. It was called the Sun Poem. We recited it so many times I to this day remember it word for word ….

“Are you greater than the sun;

that shines on everyone:

Black,Brown, Yellow, Red, and White,

the sun does not discriminate.”

There is an agenda behind this poem.

We said this in every single class. Dozens of times a day. We made arts and crafts projects centered around this Sun Poem. We even wrote out the poem in little scrolls and let thousands of helium balloons carry the message up into the sky and into the vast expanse of the never to carry the message, literally and figuratively, across the land.

This was our first lesson in equality programming. The rumour was that a former student of the elementary school wrote this poem and she was in middle school now. All year long all we ever did was recite this poem, have little parades with harmonious arts and crafts projects centered around the words of the Sun Poem.

Bigger Picture Emerges:

The Sun Poem was the centerpiece of a public service campaign to promote racial and ethnic harmony throughout the city of Boston.

The poem is written by Sara Ting. The public service campaign was (and still!) is a much more elaborate, ongoing, grift that is commonplace in the End Racism™ sector of the economy that has taken the place of manufacturing and engineering labor in the United Soviet Stassi States of America.

Check this timeline out:

The Sun Poem, lacking the inertia of what would today be called “viral” – is plastered throughout Boston, on subways, buses, commuter rail trains, billboards lining major highways – emanated all the way out to all the suburban towns outside of Boston. By magic. On its own it was just so necessary that this morphed into the Sun Poem Workshop, seen below:

Propaganda, at it’s purest form. Look at how they defined their efforts:

“The workshop it’s designed to use poetry, creative writing and oral expression as a way of sensitizing students to appreciate differences in people.”

This is literally a compassion thermometer!!! This is the archetypal of Cultural Marxist indoctrination. Business is looking good…

Grants are obtained! Well of course grants and contributions were obtained because the entire End Racism ™ ultra-mega industry depends on racism to persist and mutate and for the notion of “hate” to grow and spread. For if the racisms and hates ever were defeated, well that would leave an awful lot of philanthro-capitalists without a place to sink tax deductible charitable contributions into. Furthermore the tax-exempt, not-for-profit entities that receive these grants and contributions would not be able to dictate their annually-growing budget to carry out their “mission statements.”

Clarification of For-profit vs. Nonprofit Business:

I worked in public accounting in audit and attestation due diligence exclusively on not-for-profit entities for three years. It is commonplace that each year, a budget is generated for the subsequent operating cycle and the specific expense line item that experiences the greatest consideration is the salaries of the executives and management components of payroll.

It is a very common misconception that a nonprofit does not earn money, or make money. They do. It’s a matter of how enhanced value of the business entity is allocated.

The primary difference between a for-profit and a nonprofit is the ownership aspect.

A for-profit conducts business operations to maximize shareholder wealth. The shareholders appoint the Board of Directors (via voting allocated along the lines of shares held) to oversee the financial well-being of the business from a bird’s eye view. The Board of Directors hire the management. Management is responsible for the carrying out of business operations with the primary objective of maximizing shareholder wealth. When things do not meet the expectations of shareholders, they will initiate the surgery; remove existing Board members. Newly appointed Board members hire new management. And the cycle continues.

A nonprofit conducts business operations in order to carry out the mission statement of the business entity. The Board of Directors is typically appointed by the largest people, companies, foundations and the like that contribute the largest sums of money to the not-for-profit. The Board is responsible for monitoring business operations from a bird’s eye view and appointing management to carry out the day to day facets of activity that meet the objective of the entity’s mission statement. The residual increase in net assets through an efficiently run operating cycle belong to the mission statement – that is, any value-add belongs to the not-for-profit itself at the end of the operating cycle.

If you would like to read more about how the global financial system abuses nonprofits there is a blog post I wrote here (please do not allow yourself to be distracted by the effort I am making here though):

World Unity, Inc. : Nonprofit with What Mission?:

The Sun Poem swelled into the formation of World Unity, Inc. The mission statement of the not-for-profit is to eliminate all forms of prejudice, biases and discrimination. This is the Forever Racism ™, forever setting into momentum a stream of grants and contributions from those seeking a tax deductible benefit. The funds in turn are income for the tax-exempt, not-for-profit business. There are three compartments that expenses incurred flow into:

  • Program: these are direct expenses for carrying out the Mission Statement. An example would be the cost for leasing billboard space to post a message of “love and unity.”
  • General & Administrative: these are the normally occuring operating expenses the business endures; salaries, payroll taxes, rents, insurance, utilities are typical G&A expenses.
  • Fundraising: these are direct expenses spent in a manner to raise more grants, contributions and donations. An example would be the launch of a website that is designed and launched with the explicit intent of raising new contributions.

Well, that World Unity, Inc. monument is quite the high pile of actual dog shit! It’s quite the waste of aluminum. What does this tower of tinfoil have to do with a poem? What does anything these bad actors have to do with anything practical, other than ensure a juicy, fat, steady stream of grants and contributions?

Winning design, 16 years of dedication to finalize the site, “did no work out.” Apparently, Grammar, too, is doomed, as is any semblance of quality control over the content on this oven-tier website.

I have downloaded and reviewed the annual income tax returns, Form 990, for a random three of these sixteen years. The implementation of the design was never intended to work out. For if it worked out, there would be no need to solicit funds to work it out!!! The grift of the century!

2014, what a year for fighting against Hate™. Take the poem and turn it into a song!

There is nothing suspicious about the timing of this contest – which solicited heavy donations in advance – whilst the Ferguson, Missouri riots were raging on and BLM was coming into it’s own as a nifty social militant tax-exempt entity of its own. Now they have a tinfoil tower and a song. It’s been 30 years since the Sun Poem was penned, it seems that the battle against the Racism™ isn’t going very well. Which is great for our going concern as a business generating new grants and contributions to fight the war!

2016: August 2016, in the midst of the most competitive, narrative-control imperative Presidential election campaigns in the history of the country. The Democrats platform was in essence:

  • Elect woman, break glass ceiling, Equality ™
  • Opposing candidate is KKK, Aryan Brotherhood, confirmed neo-Nazi – must utilize all isms.
  • Sun Poem —->fighting hate—–>fighting Trump
    • (nothing suspicious about the timing of the ads here, also, it should be noted, a tax-exempt entity may jeopardize it’s tax-exempt status if it engages in direct election actions).

2017: a poster contest. These tend to be the same lot of people that are behind the climate emergency hoax – 420 art schools having their students create the SAME ARTS AND CRAFTS PROJECTS I PARTICIPATED IN WHEN I WAS SIX YEARS OLD, CIRCA 1986! There are no words here.

The title of the winning piece – get this – “Equal” 😂🤣😂🤣

It is actually named EQUAL!!!!!!!!

I feel shock and awe.

Awe shocked, if you will.

March 2018: the Boston City Council adopts this Official Resolution in which the Sun Poem is a powerful tool to overcome our biases and – wait – how the fuck is this a powerful tool? The Sun Poem is nearly 33 years old and as of 2018 race relations across the country were in worse shape than ever!

Also, Boston’s City Council is occupied by a bunch of open Marxists ….

This resolution is a testament to the vassal-corporate-whore policy makers doing what they do best: NOTHING.

Minimum wage increases, health care for all, infrastructure enhancements, the opiate epidemic – real issues requiring real authoritative intervention – where are Official Resolutions to address matters requiring a fix?

Behold, the mid-life crisis Sun Poem, now on a document with a seal. This is all our policy makers do. Nothing.

June 2020: notice the timing. There is some Ting wrong with the timing of these events. This coincides with the great racial reckoning of May 2020. The incident in Minneapolis between the police and a criminal, mid-crime. Fire up the coffers with some fresh Floydian donations – we are attending five meetings – to somehow get the developers of this real estate project to intertwine the Sun Poem into development.

This is beyond horseshit at this point. This constitutes fraud. Coercing donors and would-be donors into pouring more money into some sort of abstract adaptation of Sun Poem representation at these meetings. FRAUD.

2021: this is beginning to appear to be satire. The Five MINUTE Leadership Dialogue Series. Seven minute Abs (from those infomercials late 1990s). Five Minute Leadership.

Thought provoking questions…oooh…I have a question….

ARE YOU GREATER THAN THE SUN???

Things get even better with this FRAUD.

SSL Certificate Issues & Donate:

Take a look at these two circled areas:

You see that little ⚠️ circled? That means this website in not secure. It’s SSL certificate has been compromised, or it was never there in the first place.

The second area I circled is the “DONATE” button. The absolute last thing one would ever ever do on the entirety of the entire whole internet is to enter payment information into this website. See even the browser states:

Basically, if one – out of curiosity – wants to know what kind of wild ride identity theft can be like – make a donation to the Sun Poem lady and fuck all your shit up real nice.

[Sara] Ting & AssociatesFRAUD:

One would think the beating this Sun Poem FRAUD should end at this point. It gets even worse. I scroll to the bottom of the webpage and there are links!

I’ve got to check out this Ting and Associates.

The comedy writes itself at this point:

WOW! First of all, two different names of the entity [Sara] Ting & Associates – but they are Diversity Training Consultants. There are no other three words within the English language that can be arranged alongside each other that encapsulates exactly the bullshit we have at hand…

DIVERSITY TRAINING?!??!?!

Diversity is our greatest strength. For every single second of every minute, of every hour, of every day, of every week, of every month, of every year, of every decade, of every century…is is browbeaten into our faces that (somehow) diversity is our greatest strength.

Diversity is fucking chaos. If diversity came with some sort of instinctually desired strength, THERE WOULD BE NO NEED TO REMIND US OF HOW STRONG THIS STRENGTH IS!!!

And Diversity Training? Hahahahaha – that, THAT is an oxymoron. A paradox. Like a title “Full Tank of Empty Gas.” Train to be diverse. The concept that training is even suggested – suggests that diversity is a fucking shitstorm. It’s impossible. It doesn’t work. It’s total horseshit. It’s subversive. It’s malicious. It’s a scam. It’s the root of all rot in Western Civilization. And it is this hijacking of the West that has arose from Sun Poem type of operations.

Diversity brings us dishonest harmony in place of honest conflict. That is reality.

PART THREE: NELSON MANDELA, PRISONER OF RACISM

The Praise for Nelson Mandela and the Demonization of the Boers of South Africa

There is this so-called Apartheid of South Africa. The real history of South Africa begins with Portuguese ships touching upon the area today known as the nation-state of South Africa and the surrounding areas of the southern portion of Africa began in the 1400s.

It was in the 1650s that groups of Dutch families settled in the area at this time. There were other European settlers as well, Germans and French, though it was mainly Dutch farmers who began to arrive in South Africa began at the Cape of Good Hope. The Dutch farmers settled there from an early stage and were known as Afrikaaners or Boers.

In the Cape of Good Hope, this is where a trading post was opened to the world mechanism of trade via sea in the 1650s. Many ships that traversed between Europe and modern day India, China and other places would utilize this trading port as as this was an optimal, intermittent position in routes of trade used in the 1650s and beyond. Spearheaded by this economic activity, over the course of the following 150 years is how South Africa and territory settled by the Boers became a target for acquisition by the British Empire. (Note: the British Empire was under the control of Jewish money).

The Boers resisted attempts by the British Empire to take control of their home. The British failed to annex South Africa. (I am not going to spend more time on this history for it is not the crux of what I am aiming for, however, I highly recommend all of you to acquaint yourselves with the real history of the Boers.)

In 1984, which runs concurrent with the Cold War-infused nuclear fear of COMMUNISTS, a song came out. This song:

The Specials – Free Nelson Mandela. This song got HUGE in America as it did elsewhere in the world.

In the eighties and early nineties, the breakdown given to us in public school was that Nelson Mandela was a political prisoner. His political ideology was equality for the black population. Result, evil White men were imprisoning the black man. End of discussion.

I pondered this recently as over the last five years, I have become informed on the real history of South Africa. And the history of the Boers. So who is Nelson Mandela? This picture raised my eyebrow:

Umkhonto weSizwe (“Spear of the Nation”) or ‘MK’ as it was more commonly known, was launched on the 16th December 1961. On the same day in 1838, the Afrikaners had defeated the Zulus at the Battle of the Blood River and it was perhaps significant that the armed struggle was launched on this particular day, more than one hundred years later. The formation of MK followed a series of events that made it necessary for the national liberation movements in South Africa to move towards a more significant challenge to the white minority government. The African National Congress (ANC), together with the South African Communist Party (SACP) and the members of the Congress Alliance, the South African Indian Congress, the Coloured People’s Congress and the Congress of the Democrats, had been engaged in peaceful acts of resistance which aimed at forcing the government to eventually recognise the rights of Black people in South Africa. However, the 1950s and the early 1960s, showed the intension by the South African government to further isolate the country’s black people through various laws and severe repressive measures. In addition, in the face of repressive measures by the state, came the need to change tactics in the manner in which the ANC, SACP and the Congress Alliance had been approaching the struggle for freedom and equality.

At the time of MK’s formation, Nelson Mandela was a prominent ANC leader, and highly aware of the general unrest and wave of radicalism sweeping the country after the Sharpeville incident which had occurred in March of that year. While Mandela’s status as member of the SACP has been long-disputed and ambiguously answered by Mandela himself, testimonies by senior-level SACP members confirm that Mandela did in effect join the SACP, thereby cementing the alliance between the SACP and a number of militant ANC groups anxious to break free from the ANC’s previous policy of non-violence. Mandela was recruited straight to the SACP Central Committee, although his name never featured on the membership list. This is potentially due to the fact that, in order to avoid detection, membership to the Central Committee was known to a few. 

Mandela had denied affiliation with the South African Communist Party but his African National Congress worked in solidarity with them against apartheid before his 1962 arrest. A statement read after his death by the South African Communist Party declared he was a member of the party as of 1962.

The bottom line is that Nelson Mandela was a communist. I have read countless essays and articles and the consensus if that he was the leader of the ANC – the ANC had merged with the SACP.

So communists are no longer the bad guys. However, the WHITE MAN is now the bad guy. Rocky Balboa is the real racist.

And the Soviet Union fell. America’s egalitarianism has morphed into “white people are inherently racist” and cannot be saved for their sin of whiteness in the Church of the Woke. Nelson Mandela is dead. South Africa is a nation on the brink. So isn’t America. However, the racism industry is bigger than ever. All manufacturing of goods has been exported overseas decades ago. In the place of those jobs, we have diversity training, Black Lives Matter as a mega-mega-super-ultra cesspool of a nonprofit allowing for fuckery – endless fuckery.

And the Sun Poem…remains….

Proto-Indo-European Society: A short Introduction — European Origins

Western society is often thought of as profoundly patriarchal, capitalist and power hungry, as has been shown multiple times throughout history. But how deep these traits run within our ancestry has only come to light within the last few decades with the reconstruction of Proto-Indo-European society.

Proto-Indo-European Society: A short Introduction — European Origins

The European presence in India — Business History

Arrange the following events in a probable chronology: Large scale naval explorations become possible Mariner’s compass is devised to help determine cardinal directions Europeans ‘discover’/travel to different parts of the world The Spanish and the Portugal empires were some of the earliest to be established The English constitute English East India Company in 1599 to […]

The European presence in India — Business History

LIFE IN THE THIRD REICH and The World Political Situation Then and Now. — Lampshades and Soap

a speech by Friedrich Kurreck.                  English translation by Eric Thomson. I am happy to inform you about our life in Hitler’s time, for today’s politicians and mass media are purposefully untruthful about that time. I am a Thüringer who grew up in a farming family with seven children, and I have vividly experienced Hitler’s time. My profession […]

LIFE IN THE THIRD REICH and The World Political Situation Then and Now. — Lampshades and Soap

DAMNATIO MEMORIAE FOR THE 21ST CENTURY? • Identity Dixie • Tactical Hermit (Guest Writer)

Guest: Tactical Hermit

Source: https://identitydixie.com/2020/04/30/damnatio-memorae-for-the-21st-century/

Damnatio Memoriae is the latin phrase meaning “condemnation of memory,” in the sense of a judgment that a person must not be remembered. It was a form of dishonor that could be passed by the Roman Senate upon traitors or others who brought discredit to the Roman State. The intent was to erase someone from history, a task somewhat easier in ancient times, when documentation was much sparser.

Georgia’s former disgraced governor, Nathan Deal, removed Confederate Memorial Day and Robert E. Lee’s birthday from the state calendar. This, of course, followed in the wake of the decision to remove the Confederate Battle Standard from the South Carolina Statehouse. As this “political bandwagon” has gained steam over the years, every weak-minded and spineless politician, regardless if they are from the South or not, has been more than eager to jump on and demonize all things Southern and Confederate in an attempt to strike them from American history forever.

Erasing history that certain controlling elements of a nation finds offensive, stubborn, or worse yet, “politically incorrect,” is nothing new. In fact, it has been practiced for thousand of years. Xerxes, a Persian ruler from the 5th century B.C., is said to have threatened the Spartan King Leonidas with, “Erasing Sparta from the very histories…” if they did not submit and take their place as yet another proxy Persian slave state. Many early cultures had some form or another of this practice, but, of course, it was the heavyweight champion of tyranny and political corruption, the Romans, who perfected it. The only reason that we know what little we do today about Roman misdeeds are the remains of certain records of high-profile Roman citizenry of whom Damnatio Memoriae was decreed.

It is interesting to note that when we look at the description of what specific actions were taken when Damnatio Memoriae was imposed over 1,500 years ago on an “unwanted” individual, it eerily fits what is occurring today to America’s Southern and Confederate leaders:

Striking the individual’s name from all official record books;
Seizing all possessions;
Striking anything with their likeness or picture (statues, murals, paintings); and
Their will nullified and their grave defaced.
Moving into the 20th century, it would be the Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin who would show the world that not only could anyone who crossed him disappear from this world and history, but their entire families could as well. Sadly, historians can only guess at the number of people that were relegated to this despicable fate. The current estimate stands at around 11 million, but with a death toll reaching upwards of 62 million for the total number of people killed in the Second World War and through multiple Soviet purges, expulsions, and forced sentences to labor camps (gulags). These figures are hard to even comprehend.

One of the greatest examples of Stalin’s “erasing of existence” was Nikolai Yezkov, Head of the NKVD, or the Soviet Secret Police. After the Great Purge and in 1938, Yezkov fell out of favor with Stalin’s inner circle and was suspected of being a traitor. After being tortured for four days and nights, Yezkov finally admitted to being a traitor (big surprise there) and he was purged from history. Historians would later give him the nickname “The Vanishing Commissar.”

Regardless of your feelings on the South or the Confederacy, history shows us very plainly that this practice of “eliminating history,” and the people in it, has nothing to do with “morality” or “justice,” as most who support this practice claim. As a nation, we cannot pick and choose what periods, or people, of history we will remember and which ones we will not. It doesn’t work that way.

Did America have some painful periods in our history? Yeah, we did. And, I can tell you as a military historian, the Civil War period is rife with injustices, and not just regarding chattel slavery either. Look at the war crimes committed against Southern civilians (both black and white) by Sherman or the entirety of the “Reconstruction” period; a nasty piece of history indeed, but I don’t see General Sherman being erased anytime soon from the histories. In fact, I see him being glorified as a “great leader.” The historian Victor Davis Hanson even included Sherman in his book The Savior Generals: How 5 Great Commanders Saved Wars that were Lost, from Ancient Greece to Iraq. Ask any true Southerner, one who knows their history, and they’ll tell you about how their relatives suffered through “Reconstruction” and I can guarantee “great leader” and “savior” will not be the adjectives used to describe Sherman!

AUTHOR: IDENTITY DIXIE GUEST: O I’m a good old rebel, now that’s just what I am. For this “fair land of freedom” I do not care at all. I’m glad I fit against it, I only wish we’d won, And I don’t want no pardon for anything I done.

-By The Tactical Hermit

Please visit The Tactical Hermit.

Lügenpresse!!! New York Times Attempting to Attribute Recent Storms to “Climate Change”

This is an example of the Virus-Cyber-Climate emergency fear mechanisms at work. The New York Times is part of the mainstream media apparatus, which is one of the tentacles of the globalist, Zionist, technocratic oligarchy that wishes to instill the FEAR into ALL OF YOU. It’s latest iteration comes:

This is the article: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2021/10/27/us/cape-cod-noreaster.amp.html

A few quotes from the article:

Officials in the area had moved quickly to prepare for the nor’easter, in part scarred by the intensity of several storms this summer that exposed the region’s vulnerability to extreme weather events made more frequent and intense by climate change.

from NY Times article

And this quote:

Someday maybe we’ll just have a regular rainstorm. We don’t seem to get those much anymore,” Joseph Fiordaliso, who leads New Jersey’s utility board, said at a news conference on Tuesday, adding, “Climate change is real, and we have to work to mitigate as much of it as we possibly can.”

from NY Times article

These storms – and storms themselves have been in existence since FOREVER. Whether one ascribes to Christian doctrine, or to perhaps one is well acquainted with the Celts, amongst many others I could write here, storms have been in existence since ancient times.

I’ve been alive since 1979 and we have had a shit-ton of storms since then in New England. I’ve lived in New England for some 32 of my 42 years (living elsewhere in the world for work purposes the other ten years – of which storms occured in those places I lived too)…

The Great Reset is meme’ing any/all weather events as abnormalities that are due to “climate change”.

Just so all of you know, the idea of using climate change (an environmental emergency) was conceived by the globalist consortium known as the Club of Rome, I’ve written about them here:

I have also shared information on my blog about MIKHAIL GORBACHEV, yes him, as he stated in 1996 that the possibility of an environmental emergency would we manipulated to usher in a New World Order:

With the hoax of a climate change emergency, they will ultimately tell you the earth will burn up beneath your feet if you do not surrender your rights to private property ownership. If the sheep give in to this? Well, they will find a new home in the smart cities grid (one of the clearcut objectives of Agenda 2030’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals). Through this barrage of propaganda, soon enough the people will be begging for a breathe of fresh air from an eye dropper and Rabbi Klaus Schwab makes that decision.

If you think I am being obtuse then I suggest you return to watching Don Lemon or Rachel Maddow, or David Rubin and Ben Shapiro, whatever keeps you comfortable.

The NY Times is under control of the global financial system. How? Through:

  • Ownership of stock (equity)
  • Stock ownership affords VOTING RIGHTS
  • The Voting Rights are utilized at shareholder meetings
  • At these meetings is where major issues of the viability, financial well-being and other important matters are brought up and voted upon
  • It is at these meeting that members of the Board of Directors are appointed
  • Presence on the Board of Directors – a shareholder can be appointed to the Board (ie a financial institution from BlackRock, or Goldman Sachs, or Comcast, or a private equity firm – can become a Director)
  • Directors are responsible for appointing the Executive Management (ie CEO, CFO, COO) which carry out operations of the business entity
  • Take a look at the current NY Times Board: https://www.nytco.com/board-of-directors/

I wanted to make a simple blog post therefore I did not cut and paste the BoD here but from the page I can tell you these truths about the Directors:

  • Mostly Jewish
  • Ties to these companies:
    • Facebook
    • Microsoft
    • Google
    • Verizon
    • JP Morgan
    • Aspen Institute
    • GoDaddy
    • Harvard College
    • Columbia University
    • Ernst & Young LLP
    • Clinton administration
    • A slew of venture capital and private equity firms

Have a look at the Board of Directors yourself:

https://www.nytco.com/board-of-directors/

It is also important to note here that the New York Times in it’s history has had Directors, Executives, Editors, Journalists and other employees that have been members of the globalist one world order La Kosher Nostra type of organizations like the World Jewish Congress and B’nai B’rith. Also the spooky groups like the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission. And the Think Tanks like the CFR, Brookings Institute, Cato Institute, Heritage Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, Carnegie Endowment, Ford Foundation, Christopher Lloyd Foundation (yes 88mph that Christopher Lloyd), Atlantic Council, etc.

And please keep in mind the networking that occurs amongst the NY Times with the entire industry.

This is how Climate Change Emergency becomes the weapon!!!

The entities I listed are all members of the World Economic Forum. The World Economic Forum was founded by Klaus Schwab. The World Economic Forum entered into a partnership with the United Nations in June of 2019, a strategic partnership. What was the intent of this partnership?

To summarize; The partnership was created in order for the World Economic Forum to carry out the implementation of the United Nation’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals, contained within Agenda 2030. The realization of Agenda 2030 is underway under the scheme called The Great Reset.

This blog post I wrote gives tremendous detail. I put alot of effort into it. Please read it if you want to discover the recent origins of The Great Reset:

I am 42 years old and it is commonplace to have Nor’easter storms. They have occured throughout New England and the northeast portion of the United States (and also affecting Canada – and other places) since – since FOREVER.

The Jew York Times is meme’ing together the phenom known as nature with their climate hoax. Storms have been happening since forever!!

Every storm = climate change. Because the Jews say so.

Lügenpresse!!!

Saint Flour is a “Town for All Centuries” in the deep heart of France • Deep Heart of France

×

There are several towns in central France that are famous mostly for “being medieval”. Many of them are immaculately restored; they give you an idea of how they must have looked in the 13th or 14th centuries. (Think of the incredible ensemble of medieval architecture in Sarlat-la-Caneda or the settings right out of The Three Musketeers in the “most beautiful village” of Pérouges.) They exist now primarily as tourist attractions where the curious traveler can have a window into life as it might have been in the distant past…

Continued at the source: Saint Flour is a “Town for All Centuries” in the deep heart of France

Hatred of Traditional Hierarchy—The Democrats’ Link from the Old South to “Anti-Racism”

The Democrats’ race politics have consistently been a means to an end: destruction of traditional class hierarchies.

Source: Hatred of Traditional Hierarchy—The Democrats’ Link from the Old South to “Anti-Racism”

The Middle Ages – A Short Overview of the History of the Medieval World

The history of the Middle Ages is about the history of the medieval World of Europe and its near peripheries.

Historically, the idea of “The Middle Ages” was forged in the Renaissance to mark out the period between AD 500-1500, between Antiquity and (Pre)Modernity. As such, the history of the Middle Ages should not be thought of as just any other period in our global history. Just as we have to acknowledge that the Chinese history of the Tang Dynasty between AD 618 – 907 touches very peripherally upon European history, we must think of “The Middle Ages” as a distinct period in the history of Europe, which only peripherally had an impact (if any) on the history of China in the said period. Today, it has become fashionable to write histories of the Global Middle Ages. Here, we consider this a conceptual misunderstanding. It is, indeed, possible to write a global history about the period between AD 500-1500. But this should not be called a History of the Middle Ages.

Continued at the source…

Source: The Middle Ages – A Short Overview of the History of the Medieval World

Part IV of IV—A Brief History of World Credit & Interest Rates • 1775 – Present The World Revolution | Armstrong Economics

As with most wars, noble motives are usually portrayed in some slogan that attempts to hide the true underlying financial incentives. The English Crown’s attempt to control and prevent irresponsible paper money issues among the Colonies, was a major cause of the Revolution. Of course, England for nearly 70 years, practiced extracting gold and silver from the Colonies in payment for taxes, leaving the colonists with less valuable coppers as well as a large barter system. Some argue that the Crown had left so little hard currency within the Colonies that it had forced them to issue paper currency. But if we look at the first two specific accusations, as set forth in The Declaration of Independence, we find that they centered on the paper money question. The first deals with the King’s refusal to give “assent” (consent) to laws permitting additional paper money issues. The second accuses the King of forbidding his Governors to pass laws on the issue of paper money for emergency purposes without obtaining his consent before hand.

“He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for public good. “He has forbidden his Governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance unless suspended in their Peration till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended he has utterly neglected to attend to them.”

With the breaking of ties with England, the Colonies began to issue paper money like the floodgates had just been opened. Backing was, of course, not there. In fact, on one paper currency issue in 1778 in Georgia, reference to its backing of the currency was plainly stated on its face. The notes stated that they were payable or redeemable from the proceeds of properties confiscated from Tories. Gold, silver and even copper coins disappeared completely from circulation once the war began. Paper money began to be printed for decimal coinage denominations as well. At first the money circulated freely and with support of the people. However, in 1777 what would become one of economic history’s most drastic examples of paper money depreciation began. Below are the official exchange rates as published by each Colony and the Federal Government. These rates were used for $1 worth of gold or silver as originally valued in 1775. However, it should be pointed out that those who held Continental Currency were, for the most part, unable to exchange them even at the official rates. Eventually, holders of this currency received nothing in return which prompted the saying, “not worth a Continental.”

Continental Cur $40.00 for $1 April 1780
N.Y. & Conn $40.00 for $1 April 1780
South Carolina $52.50 for $1 May 1780
Mass., NH & RI $100.00 for $1 June 1781
New Jersey $150.00 for $1 May 1781
Penn. & Delaware $225.00 for $1 May 1781
Maryland $280.00 for $1 June 1781
North Carolina $800.00 for $1 Dec 1782
Virginia $1000.00 for $1 Jan 1782
Georgia $1000.00 for $1 Feb 1785

Despite the fact that the Continental Currency ceased to circulate in April 1780 and the official exchange rate was set at $40 to $1, holders of this currency were unable to redeem it. Yet Continental Currency became a form of speculation. Even though the Articles of Confederation had promised payment, it was not until seven years later when the Constitution of the United States in 1787 recognized that there was an obligation to redeem these otherwise worthless scraps of paper. By October of 1787, Continental Currency was being traded at the going rate of $250 for $1 in gold. This meant that the 1780 official rate had further depreciated raising the value of gold from $800 an ounce in 1780 to $5,000 an ounce in 1787 in terms of Continental dollars.

The government was in no position to exchange the Continental Currency at any rate. The economy and lack of faith were simultaneously taking a nosedive straight down. Eventually, gold peaked in late December 1790 but only after Congress passed an Act on August 4th, 1790. This Act provided a means for refinancing debts and from October 1st, 1790 to September 30th, 1791, Congress agreed to redeem $100 in currency for $1 in bonds of indefinite maturity. Through this method of dealing with the worthless currency, Alexander Hamilton, Secretary of the Treasury averted a prolonged U.S. economic depression.

Many people refrained from exchanging their Continental Currency for bonds that paid 6% interest because the Act of 1790 provided that the currency would still be redeemed and that it was not mandatory to exchange it for bonds. The bonds were eventually paid in 1813 and those who held their currency in hopes of getting something more than a 1% return on what they had, received nothing!

Depending upon where you were and what colonial currency you held, the exchange rate between paper currency and one ounce of gold varied from $800 to $10,000 per ounce. Despite Ben Franklin’s early warning in his publication of 1729, “A Modest Enquiry into the Nature and Necessity of Paper Currency,” America’s game with paper-economics was far from over. Before this experience with credit and money would end with the British Depression of 1815, many new economic theories would emerge from great men such as Adam Smith in his publication, “The Wealth of Nations.” In 1809 a pamphlet entitled, “The High Price of Bullion a Proof of the Depreciation of Bank-Notes” was published by a London broker named David Ricardo who was 37 at the time. This pamphlet eventually established Ricardo as a major economic theorist who became influential in shaping the 19th Century.

The final years in late 1700’s were filled with turmoil and speculation along with rising interest rates and inflation to varying degrees worldwide. In the United States, the year 1786 was marked by Shays’ Rebellion in Massachusetts during September. The uprising was aimed to prevent further foreclosures of farms in the country’s continuing economic depression that had followed the war and the debt crisis that resulted from the deep depreciation of the currency. State militia at the time prevented seizure of the Springfield arsenal in confrontation with over 800 armed farmers. This rebellion did succeed in having the state supreme court adjourn without returning indictments against the farmers. However, the entire affair only served to bring the attentions of the state to the severity of the depression at the time.

As economic hardship continued along with financial uncertainty, Benjamin Franklin was moved to write in a letter to a French acquaintance in which one of his immortal sayings was given birth – “Nothing is certain but death and taxes.” During 1791, the U.S. money markets collapsed following the failure of some land companies organized by the famous New York speculator William Deur. The failure of his land scheme to settle the Ohio Valley resulted in a $5 million loss to New York investors, which was equal to the total value of all the real estate in New York City at the time. Speculation had been quite rampant in numerous ventures and shares. United States bank script, originally offered for $100, had risen to $195 on the New York market but crashed back to $110. Alexander Hamilton authorized the Bank of New York to step in and buy government bonds and debt in an effort to inject cash into the system and lower interest rates.

By 1796, France suffered ruinous inflation as her assignats (currency) of 1790 declined in the face of nearly 2000% inflation within the past six years. Flour rose dramatically from 40 cents a bushel in 1790 to over $5 in 1796. Wood advanced from $4 a cartload to $250 while a pound of soap jumped from 18 cents to $8. Eggs, which had cost 24 cents a dozen in 1790, soared to $5. Interest rates in France skyrocketed. The 5% rentes of the government fell in price driving the effective yield on government debt to 40% on average. The implied yield of French government securities began to ease somewhat dropping back to 30.1% in 1798. But in 1799 there was some renewed fear and the implied yield rose once again to 34% as the price of government securities declined.

This devastating inflation in France led to the French Revolution which brought Napoleon to power. In 1800, Napoleon immediately reduced government spending and established the Banque of France. The implied yield on government debt issues (5% rentes) declined back to 16.28% in 1800 and continued to fall to 9.3% in 1801, 9% in 1802 and finally down to 8.8% in 1803. Napoleon was proclaimed emperor in May 1804 after selling the Louisiana lands to the United States in 1803 for $15 million in an effort to raise capital to fund his military ambitions.

In 1806, Europe was engulfed in war with Napoleon. The Holy Roman Empire that had existed since the year 800 came to an end on July 12 under French auspices. Napoleon occupied Berlin and placed his older brother on the throne in Naples while his younger brother assumed the throne in Holland. Britain announced a blockade of Europe that sent U.S. commerce falling by 66%. President Jefferson introduced a bill to exclude many British goods in retaliation.

In 1807 a British man-of-war fired upon the U.S. frigate Chesapeake and removed four alleged deserters. President Jefferson closed U.S. ports to all armed British vessels. By 1810, duties on U.S. customs fell to $6 million as a loss of trade with Britain and France drastically reduced revenue to half that of its 1806 level. That same year, a bullion report issued by the British government economists established the “intrinsic value” theory of money. Bank notes may be useful as a medium of exchange, however the notes must bear a definite ratio to the amount of coin and bullion in the vaults. The report proclaimed that government cannot create money, which is in reality, a token of labor performed. Government can acquire money only through taxation or by borrowing. For government to issue irredeemable paper money is to violate the sanctity of contracts, to cheat creditors, to increase prices and to disrupt business. Largely the economic theory that was published that year supported Smith and Ricardo.

By 1812 Napoleon invaded Russia and the beginning of a series of defeats caused Napoleon to retreat from Russia on October 19th. The British defeated Napoleon’s forces in Spain during July of that year. Despite these events, interest rates in France declined to their lowermost level of 5.98% in 1808. Confusion over Britain’s 1807 ban on U.S. imports eventually forced the US to declare war on Great Britain as an economic depression widened due to the serious loss of trade with Europe.

Interest rates in the United States on long-term government bonds had declined from the 8% high of 1799 down to their lowest level of 6.02% in 1802. The peak in British government interest rates came in 1798 at 6.35% and had also declined to their lowest point of 3.8% in 1802.

The Rothschilds began to become quite prominent during the early nineteenth century. Back in 1801 the German moneylender Meyer Amschel Rothschild, 58, became financial adviser to the landgrave of Hesse-Casal. Rothschild served as an agent of the British Crown in subsidizing European opposition to Napoleon. In 1812, the Duke of Wellington was financed with gold coin smuggled south by the eight sons of Meyer Rothschild. With no language other than Yiddish, the Rothschilds used fake passports, false names, disguises, and bribes to elude the French in what became one of the great international loans of modern times. One of the sons, Nathan Meyer Rothschild, 38, established a banking house in London. In 1815, he used carrier pigeon reports from Belgium that advised him of Napoleon’s defeat at Waterloo. Rothschild depressed the price of British consols by selling aggressively short on London markets. He then used his agents to buy the consols back at distressed prices and when the news reached London of the British victory, prices soared reaping himself a huge fortune as consols rose in price from 61 to 72.

By 1814, Europe’s 22 years of war came to an end along with America’s 3 year War of 1812. In the aftermath, depression began to set in moving into 1815. British government interest rates fell from 5.49% in 1814 down to their lowest level of 3.56% in 1817. The first U.S. Panic of 1818 was initiated in part by the failure of the Baltimore branch of the second Bank of the United States. The U.S. entered an economic depression in 1818 that had led to appeals by U.S. manufacturers for higher protective trade tariffs. The depression became worldwide sparking political repression in Spain, Latin America and Great Britain as illustrated by the Peterloo Massacre which was a public appeal to reform the tax laws. Britain instead passed laws banning public speaking and private training in the use of firearms. In Spain the infamous Spanish Inquisition was put to an end as the result of revolution. In Greece a war of independence broke out in 1821 that continued into 1831. Mexico declared independence from Spain in 1821 and Guatemala and Peru soon followed. Riots appeared in Ireland and the Ashanti War broke out in 1822 in Africa. Brazil proclaimed independence in 1822 from Spain and in 1823 the Monroe Doctrine was proclaimed in the U.S. that opposed European influence in the Western Hemisphere. In 1823 France invaded Spain and the Burma Wars involving Britain emerged in 1824. By 1830 cries were being heard from the south within the U.S. for secession. Clearly, war broke out in the aftermath of economic hardship as history had so often revealed.

In 1837, the United States entered another economic depression following the failure in March of the New Orleans cotton brokerage firm of Herman Briggs & Company in the wake of yet another wild speculative boom. Inflated land values, speculation and wildcat banking contributed to the crisis which became known as the “Hard times” of 1837-1843. New York banks suspended payments in gold on May 10th and financial panic ensued. At least 800 U.S. banks suspended gold payments in total and 618 banks failed before the year was out. Gold completely disappeared from circulation and employers were forced to pay their help with what became commonly referred to as a “shinplater” which was private bank currency of dubious value and far too often outright counterfeit. Over 39,000 Americans went bankrupt loosing some $741 million as the depression reduced many to starvation. The depression spread to Britain and the rest of Europe as well. Congress authorized the issue of U.S. treasury notes not to exceed $10 million on October 12th in a move to help ease the devastating economic financial crisis. By 1839 the depression had not improved very much. Within the next few years, the states of Pennsylvania and Maryland defaulted on their bond issues.

As the U.S. debt crisis expanded, interest rates soared once again. From the 4.25% yield on government securities, which had been the low established back in the 1820’s, government yields rose to 6.14% by 1842. Eventually, government yields declined falling back to 4.02% in 1853. But the Panic of 1857 succeeded in sending government yields back up to the 4.81% level by 1858.

In California, the gold rush of 1849 had brought unbelievable levels of inflation and some outstanding records in interest rates as far as American history is concerned. The gold rush only complicated the transition from Mexican to American ownership at the time and a speculative bubble had developed going into the Panic of 1857. Cattle prices in particular multiplied rapidly at times reaching 400% gains or more depending upon the locality. The Mexican cattle rangers of Southern California became extremely wealthy overnight and borrowed against the substantial rise in land values. Interest rates up until 1854 were COMMONLY trading at the 60% level per annum with some isolated historical records illustrating 96% rates per annum. The creditors were some Eastern Yankees but mainly the Swiss, German and French financiers. Needless to say when the bubble burst, the large Mexican cattle ranchers went bankrupt losing vast portions of land that ended up in the hands of some wealthy families that lasted well into the 20th century.

With tensions remaining high in the East, U.S. government interest rates remained well above the 4% level. As the Civil War began, government yields in the North rose to levels in excess of 7% by 1861. Interest rates rose sharply during the Civil War but they did not reach the extreme levels that had been established during the War of 1812. This was largely due to the strong financial position in the North combined with heavy issues of non-interest-bearing legal tender currency called “greenbacks” – a term referring to the lack of backing other than the green ink on the reverse side of the note.

The greenbacks were traded as if they were a commodity on the New York Stock Exchange relative to gold. So although interest rates did not reach new highs – currency depreciation did! A gold panic struck in 1864 sending the value of the greenback down by nearly 80%. Another gold panic struck in 1869 which prompted the coining of the term “Black Friday” as gold soared once again and the stock market crashed.

Meanwhile, the Confederacy also used paper money to finance up to 60% of their war expenditures and 5% was funded through taxation while only 30% were actually raised through the sale of bonds. Initially, Confederate government bonds were floated in 1861 bearing an 8% yield. With some military successes under their belt, the issue of 1862 saw government bond yields decline to 6%. However, Confederate currency began to depreciate significantly. From the 100-par level of December 1861, the trading range of the Confederate bonds in 1862 was 103-104. The 1863 trading range moved to 109-200 illustrating a 50% depreciation in the currency. The Confederate government began to restrict the purchase of its bonds according to the issue date of the currency itself. Notes issued prior to April 20, 1863 could be used toward the purchase of 8% bonds, but after August only 7% bonds. From August 1863 thereafter, paper currency was no longer valid in the purchase of government bonds at all.

In 1864, the Confederate government forced the population to convert the currency into 4% yielding bonds by imposing a taxation rate of 10% per month on anyone holding large bills that had not been converted. The Confederate government issued a 6% bond backed by cotton at 8 pence per pound, which became known as the “Cotton Loan” issues. Of course the South lost the war and all Confederate currency, notes and bonds became worthless.

The Panic of 1873 in the U.S. was aided when Jim Fisk, the leading member of the gold ring from 1869, was killed by Edward Stokes. In the aftermath, it came to be known that Fisk had been raiding the treasury of the Erie Railroad. The famous Wall Street banking house of Jay Cooke & Company failed on September 18th creating what became known as “Black Friday” on the stock exchange. On September 19th, the stock market tumbled fiercely forcing the New York Stock Exchange to close for 10 days. By year-end, over 5,000 business firms failed while tens of thousands came close to starvation as soup kitchens opened in New York. But the financial panic was not limited to the United States. Panic also struck in Vienna during May 1873 causing European investors to withdraw capital from the United States as panic spread to other European nations.

Interest rates in the United States had risen moving into 1873. The yield on government securities moved back to the 5% level following a low of 4.07% in the wake of the Panic of 1869. Municipal bond yields rose to 5.58% while high grade railroad bond yields jumped to nearly 6.5%. Interest rates on French 3% rentes moved up to 5.25% in 1873 while British 3% consols moved up moderately to 3.21%. Interest rates in Switzerland moved up on an annual average basis from 3.22% in 1868 to 5.34% by 1873 while extreme intraday highs reached 7%. German interest rates at the Reichsbank moved up from the 1867 low of 4% to as high as 6% in 1873 but this was still significantly below the levels of 1866 when German rates topped at 9%. The discount rate officially rose in Belgium from the 2.5% low in 1867 to as high as 7% in 1873 but Dutch rates for the same period rose from 2.5% up to only 6.5% in 1873.

The economic depression in the United States following the Panic of 1873 continued well into 1878. Nearly 10,500 U.S. business firms failed in the process. In 1879, the United States resumed specie payments for the first time since 1861 in an attempt to help boost foreign trade and bring an end to the economic depression.

Following the major depression of the 1870’s, additional serious panics still inflicted the world economy in 1881, 1890, 1893, 1895, 1896, 1899, 1901, 1903, 1907, 1914, 1920 and 1929. Depression took place during 1883-1885, 1893-1894, 1896-1897, 1920-1921 and the Great Depression of 1929-1939. Periods of prosperity were the Gold Resumption Prosperity of 1879-1883, the Railroad Prosperity of 1886-1893, the 1895 Recovery, the Corporate Merger Movement of 1899-1903, the 1905-1907 Recovery, 1915-1919 World War I Boom, the New Era of Prosperity 1922-1929, also known as the Great Bull Market and the Roaring 20’s, and at last the 1940-1944 World War II Boom.

Although interest rates remained highly volatile during the later part of the nineteenth century, the shift in capital concentration was clearly underway. Each new panic that sent interest rates higher found U.S. peaks significantly lower than those in Europe with the exception of Britain. Government yields reached their lowest level on a global basis going into 1900 and private corporate rates began to command premiums well above those of government. This was not the case during the later part of the eighteenth century and certainly not during the early part of the nineteenth century.

By the mid twentieth century, capital continued to shift from Europe in the direction of the United States. Now even British rates were at a premium to those of America. As the inflation increased following World War II, capital concentration in the United States peaked by 1966 and began a trend of disbursement throughout the world. As capital concentrated in Switzerland on the back of excessively rising world taxation, Swiss rates became the lowest in the industrialized world. The sharp rise in interest rates following the birth of the world floating exchange rate system in 1971 began a clear and decisive new trend that was normal by all historical standards as the shift in capital flows began to realign national wealth on a global scale.

The lessons of history have a lot to offer us. To governments, history warns of the perils that await fiscal irresponsibility. Clearly, a little debt or the excessive use of credit now and then is not dangerous to the financial future of any nation. But when such irresponsibility continues without a view toward the future, that nation will perish in financial ruin. Thus far no nation or empire has ever resisted the temptation of credit. The question that history has left mankind is simply when will we ever learn from the mistakes of our past? When man borrows against his future income, he robs himself of the fruits of his own labor.

 

Source: 1775 – Present The World Revolution

Part III of IV—A Brief History of World Credit & Interest Rates • 1690 – 1774 A.D. The Dawn of Capitalism | Armstrong Economics

by Martin A. Armstrong

©Copyright PEI

1690 – 1774 AD
The eighteenth century was a period of strong economic and political growth for Britain. Constitutional parliamentary government, which had replaced the monarchy, appeared to foster great national expansion. The currency of Britain remained very stabled during the eighteenth century. There were no debasements and gold was made officially legal tender in 1717. By 1774, payments in silver were limited to 25 pounds, which effectively created a gold standard by defacto.

Nonetheless, the British government was indeed the biggest primary borrower. The national debt grew always due to war efforts. A usury limitation on interest was finally established at 6% but was later reduced to 5% in 1714. Private debt was set according to government rates and maturities. Because of this limitation of interest, private borrowings could be funded only when government demand for borrowings declined. This often created small credit crunches particularly during periods of war. The English national debt rose from 1 million pounds in 1689 to 900 million by 1800. Interest rates tended to decline on government debt from an 8% high down to 3% by the mid-1730’s. However, as government debt escalated, rates began to rise. The steepest advances came after the government floated the famous 3% consols of 1751. From 1754 onward, rates tended to rise. By the end of the eighteenth century, consols fell by 50% in price and the government was forced to pay rates as high as 6.5%.

Eighteenth century Britain was also a period of inflation and speculation. As capital concentrated once again and prosperity blossomed, speculation took the form of many strange circumstances. Insurance companies prospered during this period and the policies that they issued were the target of speculators. Life insurance was bought when one wished to gamble on another’s life. Insurance on ships was another commonplace speculation.

More organized speculation was also present. A large and liquid market had sprung up in the trade of company shares. Government often floated debt through the means of attaching lotteries. Of course, the famous South Sea Bubble took place in 1720. This was actually promoted by a government scheme to convince holders of government debt to convert it into the shares of an official trading company known as the South Sea Company. In theory, this government-sponsored company would hold the government debt as an asset. The problem was that the share prices rose from 128 pounds to 1000 pounds per share that year. Holders of debt were enticed to swap their debt for shares as they stood by and watched share prices soar. When the bubble burst, share prices collapsed back to the 135 level. The outrage was so indignant that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was imprisoned and Parliament passed the “Bubble Act” which greatly restricted the formation of any new companies.

A similar speculation, but less known, was the Mississippi Bubble. This was of French origin also involving a government sponsored trading company intended to promote trade between New Orleans and France. The venture failed to attract reputable emigrants and New Orleans remained no more than a dismal collection of wooden shacks. The entire affair turned out to be yet another stock speculation that sent many French investors into financial ruin.

Although history would like to classify these two incidents as unusual, the truth is that investors were eager for speculation of any kind. Commodities were also the target of speculation as were many shares of private companies. Both the Mississippi and South Sea stocks received the greatest attention because they were the leading speculative issues of the time. But it is important to keep in mind that speculation was not restricted to these issues and was widespread showing up even in the Americas. In fact, speculation was also widespread in Japan, which had no financial connection with that of Western Europe or America. The shogun Yoshimune banned all expensive clothing, furniture, cakes, candies, and other extravagances in an austerity decree in hopes of controlling inflation.

The words “Stock Exchange” first appeared in 1773 over the door of New Jonathan’s Coffee House when a fee was levied on admittance. Stock trading was traditionally done on the “curb” outside. Often, traders would congregate in coffeehouses. Jonathan’s was a central meeting place and served as the cradle for the London Stock Exchange which eventually moved into its own building in 1802.

Industrialization was flourishing in Britain while in France the guilds fought hard to retain their monopolies and refused to accept any new ideas. This closed mind approach in France eventually set the stage for its economic decline and British dominance. France had lost most of its colonial empire but gained somewhat as a military power in Europe. The Italians had never recovered from the defaults of France and Spain and Germany was still a group of small states restricting trade and imposing tariffs against one another.

French defaults to some extent still occurred during the eighteenth century. The previous debt issues that paid 7% to 8.5% were simply reduced by force in 1710. By this it is meant that the government simply stated that it would no longer pay the higher rates of interest. Government debt tended to yield higher rates of interest in general by 1-2% over that of good quality private issues. Therefore, in 1720 when the Mississippi Bubble arose, a similar scheme to exchange government debt for stock was fairly well received particularly since the same scheme was in effect in Britain.

The Dutch lost most of their trade as nations expanded ports. Their alliance with Britain increasingly made them the smaller partner in the pact and eventually, the Dutch gravitated more toward a center of finance than trade.

In the United States, the colonists had brought with them the English laws regarding usury that for the most part set the legal maximum rate at 6%. But this limitation on interest rates was not uniform throughout all the colonies. Massachusetts had established the maximum rate at 8% in 1661. Virginia set the legal usury rate at 5% while Pennsylvania established its rates ranging from 6% to 10%.

The invention of paper money within the western world is largely credited to the American Colonies. Although Marco Polo during the 1300’s brought back news of how the Emperors of China circulated mulberry bark paper as money, the news had little more effect upon Western minds than to serve as a humorous joke. But one of the early paper money issues in Europe came in 1661 and was issued by Stockholm’s Banco to avoid a constant movement of payments in Swedish copper plate money which was heavy and bulky to say the least.

In the Americas, paper money began as an emergency measure in 1685 in Canada when the French military payroll failed to arrive. In order to pay the troops, the intendent, Jacques Demuelles took normal playing cards and cut them into quarter sections. He then inscribed denominations, signed the scraps of paper and declared them to be legal tender as well as redeemable when the “ship came in” – which gave rise to that memorable phase. After a while, this seemed to be a fool’s game and sooner than expected, additional playing card issues emerged as money in 1686, 1690, 1691 and 1692. Payment of course was deferred from one year to the next and the scheme was suppressed for a while in 1701. However, card money continued until eventually a collapse of the monetary system in Canada took place in 1757.

The first official governmental issue of paper money began in the Province of Massachusetts Bay before the Bank of England attempted it in 1694 followed by the Bank of Scotland in 1696. But by far, America would become the greatest experiment for paper money economics.

England had adopted the policy of extracting gold and silver coin from the American Colonies and most transactions during the 17th and 18th centuries were accomplished with paper money or drafts for goods from British merchants.

The real start of this paper money experiment came in 1690 when Massachusetts Bay paid for a military expedition to Canada during King William’s War with paper money referred to as Bills of Credit. To encourage circulation, the Bills of Credit would gain you a 5% discount when used to pay your taxes. From this point on, most other Colonies followed the lead and issued paper money in payment largely for military expenses. This form of paper money was called specifically “Bills of Credit” since the Crown did not extend the right to any Colony to issue “money.” Money was a term reserved to mean a unit of circulating medium of exchange whereas the “Bills of Credit” were borrowed for a public expenditure following in the European tradition.

Of course, inflation had long since been a problem within the Colonies even before paper money came into general circulation. An example of this inflation can be seen by studying the official valuations of the coins in circulation at the time. Specifically, in 1645 Virginia had placed an official value on the Spanish dollar from 6 shillings, then down to 5sh and later back to 6sh when just in 1642 it had been circulating at the rate of 4sh. Inflation and the constant revaluation of silver Spanish dollars resulted in complaints from British merchants that culminated in the Act of Parliament in 1707 which effectively set a limit of 6sh as a maximum value that Spanish dollar could be used for in trade.

At first, paper money was generally being issued for war expenditures that came about as the result of King George’s War (1741-1748) and the French and Indian War (1754-1763). At times, the Crown itself virtually ordered the New England Colonies to cover the expenses of these wars by issuing paper money thereby avoiding the need to use gold and silver.

But during 1733, paper money began to be issued for such things as the building of courthouses, jails, lighthouses, harbors, forts and many other forms of public expenditures. In 1769, Pennsylvania issued paper money for the relief of the poor in Philadelphia.

The early part of colonial economic history began to take a much more volatile path with the invention of quasi-banks. The “loan office” was a scheme for economic manipulation as well as corruption. Commissioners supervising the loan offices were designated by the Colonial Assembly. Paper money was then issued and lent to private individuals who in turn placed their land or silver belongings up for collateral. The first loan office was set up in 1712 by South Carolina and by 1737, all other Colonies had followed with the exception of Georgia. Many loans were repayable with the notes, however, the interest was in some cases payable only in coin (hard currency). In 1741 Parliament required the immediate redemption of all such private paper money since the economy had become quite flooded with various forms of paper currency.

This period in history was filled with frequent financial panics. Of course the earliest recorded economic panic took place in 1683 but strangely enough, it was worldwide. In Japan the Prime Minister Hotta Masstoshi was assassinated and the shogun Sunayoshi was left with no able counselors. Inspired by Buddhism, Sunayoshi issued an edict that prohibited the killing of any living creature. He extended special protection and privileges to dogs and in the process sent the Japanese economy into ruin.

In 1683 Charles II compelled the City of London to surrender its charter and injected his own various aldermen and officers by royal appointment. Municipal charters throughout England were revoked in an effort to give the Tories control over municipal governments and their officers. Some defeated Whigs conspired to assassinate the king in what became known as the “Rye House” plot. The conspirators, and some falsely accused political adversaries, were put to death but the affair aided in creating a severe economic panic at the time.

Again speculation was bursting forth in many areas around the world. The first commodity futures trading actually had its humble beginnings not in Europe or America but in Japan as merchants banned together to trade rice receipts in 1690. Numerous financial panics followed the period in 1711, 1720, 1731 and in 1745. Utilizing the exchange rate for paper currency from the Massachusetts Colony, we can achieve some sense of how inflation was taking place in America which was contributing to wild speculations and the eventual economic panics.

Looking at the exchange rate for only Massachusetts, we find that accumulative inflation during this period had reached 752%. Paper money had been issued at an uncontrollable rate that had caused inflation to move in leaps and bounds.

In 1740, England had become so concerned with the depreciation of the American Colonial paper money, that each Colony was required to prepare a completely detailed report on the status of their currency. In 1749, England had actually sent sufficient English silver and copper coins to redeem the paper currency at the rate of 7.5 to 1 shilling sterling. This action aided in bringing about a temporary end to runaway inflation that had inflicted the Colonies in America. It was formalized by an act of Parliament that became effective September 29th, 1751 with the following provisions.

  1. No extensions, reissue or deferment in the redemption dates or amounts of existing paper money issues within the New England Colonies.
  2. No change in the legal tender status of existing issues.
  3. No relaxed enforcement or extensions of mortgage loans that were used to secure paper money issues.
  4. No new legal tender issues of any kind.
  5. No new issues of paper money for emergency expenses unless redeemable from taxes at face value plus legal interest to be paid within 5 years.
  6. No new issues of paper money for normal expenses unless it would be redeemable from taxes within 2 years.

The stringent controls on paper currency provided by the Act of Parliament in 1751 began to be ignored by the Colonial Assemblies. Each colony was ruled technically by a governor who had to sign the laws passed by the Assemblies. Growing resentment towards England and the Crown was building up over the 1751 Act which virtually transferred control of the currency to the Crown. Despite the fact that the Crown was just stepping into a situation that had become intolerable, this transfer of control to the Crown was not appreciated to put it mildly. The Colonial Assemblies had grown dependent upon their habit of printing money whenever they chose. Therefore, the Assemblies began to ignore the Act of 1751. When a Colonial Governor would refuse to sign their decrees to issue more money, the Assemblies were not without means of forcing him to comply. In New York, the Governor’s salary, which was paid by the Assembly, was simply not paid for over 1 year until he finally signed their bill allowing the Colony to issue more paper money. Other Colonies used the same tactics to win over their Colonial Governor’s approval for paper money issues.

 

Source: 1690 – 1774 A.D. The Dawn of Capitalism

Part II of IV—A Brief History of World Credit & Interest Rates • 500 A.D. – 1690 A.D. The Fall of Rome to End Dark Ages | Armstrong Economics

The fate of the Roman Empire of the West had been cast with the sack of Rome in 410 AD by the Goths followed by the Vandals in 455 AD. What was once Rome was divided with the Franks in Gaul (France), Visigoths in Spain, Angles, Saxons and Jutes in Britain and theOstrogoths followed later by the Lombards in Italy. However, the barbarians had long admired Roman culture and subsequently became civilized. Much of the Roman culture and monetary system was thereby retained. While many of these new barbarian states continued to mint coinage in Roman style and denomination, eventually gold began to disappear from the money supply to be replaced by silver coinage in the form of a denier, denaro, phenig and penny all taking their name from the old Roman denarius.

The Byzantine Empire was certainly not immune to crisis concerned debt. The moneylenders and moneychangers were quite unpopular. They were forbidden to hold public office as time went by. The empress Sophia in 567 A.D. summoned the moneylenders before her and confiscated all agreements to, and pledges of, debt thereby simply forgiving all debts – a move that was obviously welcomed by the populace.

By the year 622, the Arab nations were on the rise. They had conquered Egypt, Syria and Persia and in 669 they took Asia Minor by storm. In 698, the Arab armies captured even Carthage and followed with an invasion of Spain in the year 711. The Arab goal to conquer the balance of Europe was finally thwarted at the Battle of Tours in 732. Nevertheless, the Arabs controlled the Mediterranean, which had essentially cut off all trade in Western Europe. The economy diverted to one of agriculture and mercantilism died a quite death. Cut off from world trade, the Latin tongue began to disappear and the emergence of independent languages began throughout Western Europe.

This was the atmosphere that history has labeled the “Dark Ages” and while coinage existed, the lack of commerce and increased hoarding had seriously reduced circulation. It was the rise of Charlemagne that brought light to this dark period in man’s history. Much of the circulating currency was still old Roman coins. Charlemagne brought forth a great monetary reform that has survived into our present day. He introduced the “denier” which was a silver coin eventually referred to as a penny. Twelve of these silver pennies equaled one “sou” which later became known as a shilling in many parts of Europe. Twenty shillings equaled one pound.

The Capitularies of Charlemagne, circa 800 A.D., also dealt with the issue of credit. Undoubtedly, this legal code had been highly influenced by the severe inflationary trends and debt crises that had plagued the final years of the Roman Empire. The charge of interest on loans was strictly forbidden. It was during this period when the evils of excessive debt were viewed not only as destructive socially but as a sin under church law known as usury. Any exception to this view on charging interest remained highly controversial for the following thousand years well into the Middle Ages.

The tenth century was a period of slow advance. While much of central Europe did not benefit, the Venetians gained major concessions in trade from Constantinople and the uptrend in trade brought with it wealth. Moneylenders in Venice were actually respected while banking facilities re-emerged out of the need to finance maritime ventures. The Vikings began to settle back into the position of traders rather than raiders and secure a dominant role in maritime trade between Northern Europe and the Mediterranean. Meanwhile, the Arab power, that had dominated the previous century and brought about the Dark Ages in Western European culture, gave way to decay. By the eleventh century, the Europeans were pushing the Arabs out of Sicily and Sardinia. By 1096, the First Crusade had re-established Italian dominance in the Mediterranean once again.

Nonetheless, the eleventh century was not void of its speculations and inflations. Currency was in a constant state of confusion and the practice of debasing the precious metal content, which had been absent in the West since the final days of Rome, reappeared. Merchants became wealthy enough that they emerged as the new bankers capable of lending to the king. The economic power of Venice had continued to expand and more sophisticated financial transactions, such as insurance, began to emerge.

Records of interest rates in Western Europe during this time are hard to find. When transactions were recorded, most have not survived unlike the clay tablets of Babylon. But documents have survived largely beginning with the late twelfth century. Of the evidence that has emerged, again we find that interest rates were rather high in poor nations, such as Britain, and significantly lower in the major trading nations. Although interest rates in Britain were 43% per annum or much higher, it must be kept in mind that long-term loans were not the norm. Interest rates were typically quoted on a weekly basis – 2 pence on the pound per week (43 1/3% per annum). This was the going rate for the best-secured loan. Those with poor collateral or credit were paying 80-120% per annum.

The thirteenth century was an age of accelerated economic expansion. The Mongol conquest of Asia played the final role in destroying the Arab Empire. This also opened the door for trade with China and it was the era of Marco Polo. Genoa rose to challenge Venice and Florence emerged as the strong international banking center. But even in the thirteenth century, the credit of merchants and landowners was viewed to be much better than that of government. Nobles were on the decline and much of the land became freehold.

Interest rates to a prince were often 30-40% as in the case of the Emperor Frederic II. Legal limits on interest rates began to rise once again. In Modena, the maximum rate was set at 20% while in Milan and Genoa the maximum rate was established at 15%. The trading cities remained quite wealthy and the legal maximum rates of interest were typically much less. In Verona, the maximum rate was 12.5% while in Sicily it was set at 10%. The maximum legal rate in Britain, however, remained at 43 1/3%. Germany perhaps had the highest during this period – 173%.

The prosperity of the thirteenth century brought with it inflation and speculation once again. Commodity speculating was common and many bankers participated with depositor’s funds. Currency was still being debased and new gold coinage was struck in Florence (florin) and in Venice (ducat). Economic prosperity had reached it peak.

The fourteenth century brought with it the Hundred Years War and the Black Plague. Both the kings of England and France defaulted on their national debts and most of the banks in Italy went broke. Financial chaos had become so widespread that in Venice, the bankers were forbidden from speculating in commodities and the government required that two fifths of all deposits be invested in the public debt. The world economy was in severe decline. Interest rates during the fourteenth century rose dramatically. Italy often charged 50% on loans to the once prosperous Netherlands and questionable loans demanded rates of interest as much as 100% per annum.

The fifteenth century was one of transition and expansion. The early part of this century still suffered from periodic plagues and the evils of unsound finance. But the wealth of nations also began to shift. Both the Dutch and English began to emerge as important international traders. In the central part of Europe, the cities of Geneva, Augsburg and Nuremberg rose in importance serving as the trade bridge between the new economic powers of the Dutch and English linking them with the Italians. Florence regained her glory and the Medici Bank of that city became the largest in Europe with branch offices scattered throughout Europe and into Northern Africa and Levant. Venice, however, continued to lead in trade ahead of Genoa.

Contemporary writers of the era have recorded much of the atmosphere. Once again this century brought forth the re-emergence of the capitalist. These were individuals who were extremely wealthy and no longer needed to be merchants or traders. They profited as moneylenders and were held in high esteem once again. This set the tone for a new age of capitalism. Trade was no longer the main goal – everyone wanted to acquire more money instead of land. This was a similar atmosphere that had existed in Socrates day. Nations sought new gold deposits more so than trade, which resulted in wars that were often fought for financial consideration.

The credit of government or the crown was still very dubious. In both France and England loans to the crown were forced upon the people who were paid no interest whatsoever. This quickly laid the foundation for greater organized taxation that followed in the centuries thereafter. Those who were willing to lend to the crown did so at high rates of interests. Charles VIII of France was reported to have paid 42% to 100% on a loan to the Genoa banking house of Sauli to fund his invasion of Italy after the Medici refused.

Commercial business rates declined from the 10-12% range in Italy down to 5%-8%. The emergence of local savings and loans known as “montes pietatis” were formed in many towns beginning around 1462. The montes pietatis were intended to provide much more reasonable rates charging 6% in comparison to the normal pawn rates of 32.5%-43.5%. Some pawnshops during this period were legally limited to 20% as was the case in Florence.

The sixteenth century was a powerful period in time. This was the century that opened the world leading with the discovery of the Americas. But the vast hoards of precious metals brought back from the Americas created sharp increases in inflation. Commodity prices rose dramatically – nearly 300% during 1550 to 1620. England, Spain and France all competed for dominance in the Americas and in Europe. This rapid rise in inflation and the loss of a monopoly on trade through the Mediterranean caused a decline in Italian influence. Royal debtors defaulted on the Italian banks and Italy was on its way toward becoming a second class economic power.

Despite the fact that usury laws still prevailed in church doctrine, the expansion of debt was prolific. Much of the debt was incurred for war. There were but only 25 years during this century when large-scale wars in Europe were absent. Local towns and cities had gained in credit worthiness and when funds ran out, the crown exploited the credit of the towns and cities sending most of them into financial ruin.

There was a sufficient quantity of debt issued from around Europe that the first major exchange emerged in Antwerp. The exchange grew to 5000 members and bills of exchange, bonds, demand notes, deposit certificates and credit instruments of all sorts were traded back and forth daily. An exchange emerged trading commodities in Antwerp and the city became the new financial capital of Europe with hundreds of ships visiting its port each day.

The ravages of debt were soon to worsen. Antwerp was forced into default by the unsound finances of the Spanish Crown in 1570. In 1576, unpaid Spanish mercenary armies sacked Antwerp and the exchange was destroyed. The marauding armies also sacked Rome and financial chaos grew. The financial turmoil in Italy and Spain, combined with the surge in inflation, aided greatly in creating the Protestant Reformation.

The French & Spanish Defaults
During the seventeenth century, the practices of unsound finance finally took their toll. The Crowns of Spain and France defaulted on all their debts and they destroyed their Italian and German bankers in the process. In fact Spain defaulted on her debts in 1607, 1627 and again in 1649. Despite the seemingly rich gold and silver flows coming from the New World, everything had been pledged as collateral often five to ten years in advance. All the gold and silver flowed straight to the Genoa bankers and the Spanish money supply became greatly debased and reduced to a mere copper standard.

The Spanish default destroyed the Fuggers who had risen during the sixteenth century to be perhaps the largest banker up until that time. They were located in Augsburg and had been the first great German bankers with a reported capital base of 5 million guilders. This once great banking establishment was completely ruined by the defaults of Spain.

The French defaults were also dramatic. There were two main periods of severe debt crisis in France in 1589 and 1648. The crisis of 1648 essentially destroyed the remaining Italian bankers – primarily Florentines. An exchange in Paris had emerged in 1639 where credit instruments traded regularly. The French government “rentes” (perpetual loans) traded rather well until the debt crisis of 1648. The French finances were again reformed where interest rates on previous government notes was arbitrarily reduced to 5% while other perpetual notes were simply paid off at a fraction of the previous agreements.

Out of this turmoil, the Dutch gained independence from Spain. The southern provinces had been given to Spain in 1598 as a dowry for the daughter of Philip II who history recalls as Isabella. Quickly after independence, the Dutch built a trading empire instituting new rules and banking practices that would serve as a model for other nations decades later. Germany went through the Thirty Year’s War (1618-1648) which was largely a struggle between Protestant and Catholic factions. This kept Germany as a collection of small states and the demise of the Fugger banking house more or less sealed the fate of Germany during this period in time.

England was ruled by the Stuarts and practiced reasonably sound finance in comparison to that of France and Spain. Gresham had revised the finances of the British government actually instilling a sense of honor to finance. His famous law for which he is best known, bad money drives out good, struck at the heart of depreciating currencies through debasement. Another major advantage of Britain was that it stayed away from foreign moneylenders for the most part. This helped to concentrate wealth within the domestic economy. However, England had practiced the art of forced loans to the Crown so one should not look upon England as a well managed affair during this period. Debts began to rise but the practice of forced loans came to an end under Charles II during the last quarter of this century.

The phrase most commonly used for two people going out to dinner when each party pays their own way is “going dutch.” This saying has its roots in the seventeenth century. The small Dutch Republic fought wars against England and France. The French actually invaded Holland but were defeated when the Dutch opened the dikes. But a large part of the success of the Dutch was owed to their efficient credit system within which even the government enjoyed honorable status and low interest rates.

The efficient Dutch government brought much faith and prosperity. There was more capital in Holland than borrowers. Speculation emerged as always whenever capital has concentrated to such an extent. The first stock market trading emerged in Amsterdam in 1613. Debt issues began trading on the exchange in 1672. Of course one has to mention the famous Tulip Speculation. The highest recorded price paid for a single tulip bulb took place in 1636 for the incredible sum of 4600 florins. In 1985 U.S. dollars, this would be close to $460,000 using gold at $400 per ounce.

The financial transformation of Britain came with the revolution of 1688. Previously, the Stuarts and Tudors restricted and controlled affairs. England never had a significant bank, exchange or organized money market and its national debt was never organized either. As capital began to concentrate during the later part of the seventeenth and primarily during the eighteenth century, prosperity and the emergence of the capitalist developed.

Prior to the revolution of 1688, banking began to evolve in the form of goldsmiths. These chaps quickly began to learn what the Italian bankers had discovered more than a hundred years before that only a small portion of the deposits needed to be retained to cover withdrawals. The large part of the deposits could be lent for interest or invested. Goldsmiths began to pay interest on deposits once this was discovered. But still many of the most prominent goldsmiths were ruined when Charles II suspended all payments on his debts to them in 1672.

Nonetheless, English banking contributed to the evolution of the industry. Checks were known to have been used dating as far back as the 1670’s. Receipts for deposits of gold with the goldsmiths circulated as paper money transferring assets from one person to another without physically handling the gold. The charging of interest had been considered to be a sin under the Catholic Church doctrine. Most Italian bankers got around this through clever means of disguising the interest as foreign exchange fees or transfer costs. In Britain, however, there were legal limitations on how much interest could be charged, but there were no laws against usury. Therefore, the receipts and contracts of debt circulated much more freely since they were drafted in British pounds rather than in some confusing foreign exchange contango.

 

Source: 500 A.D. – 1690 A.D. The Fall of Rome to End Dark Ages

Part I of IV—A Brief History of World Credit & Interest Rates • 3000 B.C. – 500 A.D. The Ancient Economy | Armstrong Economics

3000 BC – 500 AD—The Rise and Fall of Babylon – Greece – Rome

Credit is usually thought of as a modern invention of perhaps only a few hundred years old. It is true that a few more clever forms of credit have emerged during our current century such as plastic credit cards. But beyond that, credit has existed long before man invented an official form of money. Credit has existed from the very dawn of civilization. Man has always attempted to borrow from his neighbor if not cold hard cash, then at least a cup of sugar now and then. Some say that prostitution is the oldest profession; history actually suggests that the oldest profession may indeed be that of the moneylender.

As civilization emerged, a gradual need for a legal system became apparent. Much of the earliest recorded laws concerned the issue of credit and the price thereof – interest. A chap named Hammurabi, King of the first dynasty of Babylon, authored the earliest known formal laws around 1800 B.C. within which we find the first recorded attempt to regulate interest rates. Hammurabi established a ceiling or maximum rate of interest that a moneylender might charge a borrower. On loans of grain, which were repayable in kind, the maximum rate of interest was limited to 33 1/3% per annum. On loans of silver, the maximum legal rate was established at 20% – although some records have revealed a few rare instances when the rate of interest charged was as high as 25%.

Although interest rates of 20-25% in Babylon may appear excessively high, in India comparable rates of interest were quite similar. The legal limitation on interest rates during the 24th century B.C. in India was established at 24%, according to the Laws of Manu.

Nonetheless, every loan in Babylon, according to the laws of Hammurabi, had to be witnessed by a public official and recorded in a written contract. The penalty for charging more than the legal rate through any means was quite severe – the debt was simply cancelled. Collateral could be pledged in the form of land or some possession. A debtor could also pledge his wife, children or slaves. In extreme cases, the debtor could even pledge his person but the law forbids personal slavery of a debtor beyond three years.

The Law of Hammurabi remained unchanged for most of the next 1200 years. It is quite obvious that interest rates had often been charged well in excess of 33 1/3% during previous periods. Unfair practices also existed and many of these were addressed by Hammurabi. For example, creditors were forbidden from calling a loan made to a farmer prior to harvest. If the crop failed due to weather conditions, all interest on the loan would be cancelled for that year. In the case of houses, due to the scarcity of wood, a door could be used as collateral and was considered to be separate from a house. Architects were held responsible for defects in construction and could be put to death if the building collapsed and killed the occupant.

One who is unfamiliar with archaeology might suspect the ability to trace the price of gold, commodities or interest rates back thousands of years. Nevertheless, contracts etched into clay tablets have been uncovered recording all aspects of man’s early social and economic behavior several thousand years before Christ. Many loans took the form of a bearer note or bill, which the creditor could then sell, to another party. Some loans were subject to call while others bore a fixed rate of interest and a fixed maturity.

Records of international loans from one nation to another have also survived in clay tablets involving the Babylonians, Assyrians, Elamites, Hittites and Syrians. The Egyptians were more of a state-run economy highly authoritarian in nature leaving few records of interest and credit.

Another popular belief is that modern banking began following the Reformation, which marked the dawn of Capitalism. Again, this notion gives far too much credit to modern civilization while ignoring the archives of history. Although in early times moneylenders existed, they rarely accepted deposits. But in Babylon, records have revealed two major banking establishments that closely parallel the functions of our modern-day bank. The banking houses of the Egibi Sons and the Muradsu merchant bankers engaged in large-scale operations. Lending took place to individuals, merchants and governments. Deposits were accepted and transferred to another account upon a draft being presented. Deposits also earned interest and notes would be discounted as well as bought and sold. Even venture capital transactions took place where the bankers became the financing partner.

The sophistication of early banking institutions is quite surprising too most. There may not have been the instantaneous transfers but there was evidence of drafts, accounts, transfers, deposits, bearer notes and even overnight rates of interest during some periods.

As a result of formalized banking and widespread use of credit, history is littered with countless debt crises that have occurred regularly since the Babylonians right through into modern times. It appears that the endless cycle of borrowing more than one can repay has sealed the fate of just about every government that has ever existed.

Records of the Babylonian era illustrate quite clearly that cyclical regularities in the rate of interest charged exist from the very beginning. Silver loans at one point were over the legal limit reaching 25% clearly as a result of a short-term credit crunch. Nevertheless, the state during other periods granted silver loans as low as 12%. Additional evidence of the period establishes some temple loans of barley given at 20% and silver at 6.25%.

A history of credit and interest reveals one major trend that has been consistent through all time. The stronger an economy the lower the rate of interest. Interest rates are always at their lowest level internationally when capital reaches its point of maximum concentration. This normally results in a strong currency and high levels of confidence in general.

Interest rates also remain substantially above world rates in nations where confidence is low. Currently, this is true for South and Central America as well as in most third world nations. This observation does not arise merely from the events of today. Even during the days of Babylon, we find the same variance in rates with the lowest rate dominant in the strongest economy, which was the center of the Babylonian Empire. However, interest rates were usually much higher in neighboring nations which at times were more than twice those in Babylon. As the decline of Babylon came about during the fourth and fifth centuries B.C., interest rates soared with minimum rates reaching around 40% on silver loans. During the sixth through ninth centuries B.C., silver loans in Assyria and Persia were often in the 40-50% range.

The Bronze Age (2400-1200 B.C.) produced a vibrant economy around the Aegean Sea. Few records have survived so our knowledge of credit and interest is a bit vague for this period in time. It is known that the standard value was cattle – not gold. Gold formed the medium of exchange but it was not the standard unit of value. This is similar to our period of the modern Gold Standard insofar as cattle would be gold and gold would be the paper currency. We also know that there were fluctuations in gold relative to the standard unit of value – cattle. It is also highly probable that credit was once again abused and contributed to the economic decline along with changes in weather and increases in natural disasters.

This was the “golden age” of the Minoan-Mycenaean era that came to an end with the fall of Crete in 1400 B.C. followed by the Dorian invasion of 1200 B.C. This was period of which Homer wrote so memorably recording the great Greek Heroic period and the glory of the Trojan War. It was followed by barbarism and the period known as the Dark Ages.

As the world emerged from this dark period, civilization began to flourish once again. It is during this period when money was first coined by the Lydians – known today as a part of modern Turkey. This invention of money greatly aided in the expansion of international trade. The Greeks were the rising stars of the period much like the Japanese of the late 20th century. Capital began to flow back to mainland Greece bringing with it inflation, hoarding and wild speculations. In the Ibid we find references to this new age of materialism…”In next to no time the commercial genius of the Greek rises to the notion of speculation…capital accumulated is only an investment with a view to accumulating more.”

As history has shown time and time again, every great speculative boom has been inevitably followed by the proverbial bust. A severe credit crisis had materialized in Athens in 594 B.C. that had prompted major reforms in credit prescribed by the Laws of Solon. Solon was a poet that was named by Athens to revise her laws in hopes of correcting the economic devastation. Farmers were threatening rebellion in Attica and a debtor not only risked personal slavery but that of his entire family as well. Once a slave, creditors could do with them as they saw fit. Many families were broken up and sold in overseas markets. The debt crisis was indeed severe and the widespread personal slavery had become a major problem that threatened to destroy the Greek Empire.

The Laws of Solon were the first major reform to the legal code of Hammurabi. Although the Greeks lifted all maximum limitations on the legal rate of interest a moneylender might charge, personal slavery was completely banned. All those who had been enslaved for debt were freed and those sold into slavery in foreign lands were brought back at the expense of the state. Many debts were cancelled and others were secured by land when possible. The issue of inflation was dealt with by devaluing the drachma by 25% and weights and measures were increased in size. Political power had shifted from landowners to capitalists and this was reappointed once again back in the hands of the property owners. Citizenship was also granted to immigrants who were skilled. The speculations had indeed prompted stories throughout the Aegean that must have been similar to those concerning the United States with its streets paved in gold. You might say that this was perhaps one of the worst debt crises in ancient history. The Laws of Solon in 594 B.C. was indeed a major reform that dealt directly with the issues of a major debt crisis.

Over the following 100 years, the laws of Solon had helped insofar as avoiding massive debtor slavery but interest rates were still free to float without legal limitation. The customary rate on secured loans tended to move back and forth between 16%-20% per annum. The scarcity of precious metals also aided in creating somewhat of a depressionary atmosphere at times. This may have been a contributing factor to the widespread political upheavals that came in 508 B.C. – the birth of democracy in Athens. Often overlooked, however, was a similar political change in the new emerging empire – Rome. In light of modern-day political change, which first attempted to emerge in China during 1989 and quickly spread to Eastern Europe, the period of 508-509 B.C. was just such a period in ancient times. Revolution broke out in Rome in 509 B.C. less than a year following the political changes in Athens. This revolution in Rome marked the birth of the Roman Republic.

Interest rates in general tended to decline in Athens following the emergence of democracy from the customary rate of 16% down to 10-12% for fully secured loans on real property. This was also aided by the major silver discoveries of Athens in 483 B.C. that vastly expanded the money supply. After 400 B.C., speculation and the capitalistic system re-emerged in full bloom. Hoarding of coinage had become quite commonplace – particularly when dealing with the temples. The temple at Delphi is often referred to as the financier of the Greek Empire lending money for interest regularly. Not only were there typical moneylenders, but professional money managers also emerged. Socrates was reported to have entrusted his capital for investment with just such a personal friend. Finance and capital had become very sophisticated. Interest rates rose during this period quite sharply. Common rates of interest for a merchant voyage were 30% during wartime and 22.5% in peacetime. But as speculation flourished, maritime interest rates rose as high as 60% and in some isolated records appeared to be as great as 100% for more risky ventures.

Strangely enough, there is more recorded history on interest rates of this late Greek period than there is in much or early Rome. Perhaps the most interesting fact is that public credit of the state was considered to be the worst. Government more often than not simply never repaid its debt. Interest rates to a state or city were recorded to be as high as 48% annually. This was also the case during the Middle Ages in Western Europe. The credit of Greek states was so poor that often the only means of obtaining a public loan required the co-signature of a wealthy citizen willing to guarantee that state’s obligation. At times, the states were forced to pledge all revenues as security. Some states even resorted to borrowing based upon what was known as a life annuity. In return for a loan of 5000 drachma, the state agreed to pay the creditor 500 drachma each year for the remainder of his life. In the record of the Delos temple for the years 377-373 B.C., only two out of thirteen loans to Greek states or cities were repaid resulting in a loss of nearly four fifths of the original principle. This illustrates why there was such a low-level of confidence in government during this period.

At the dawn of the Roman Empire, credit regulation was again part of the legal code and as always was prompted by severe debt crisis. The legal limitation on interest was established at 8 1/3% per annum as set forth in the Twelve Tables – circa 450 B.C. Anyone who violated the maximum limit was subject to a fourfold penalty. The Roman law did substantially lower the maximum rate of interest. Nonetheless, personal slavery was permitted but provisions in the law did protect the well-being of the debtor slave.

The Roman experience with credit forms yet another long list of trial and tribulation. Major widespread debt crisis affected the Roman State many times through the early Republican era. In 367 B.C., the debt crisis was alleviated by charging all previous interest payments against principle and then writing off the balance of all debts. Julius Caesar used a similar tactic during the debt crisis of his era which had undoubtedly provided some incentive for his assassination since many of the moneylenders were in reality the senators of Rome.

Interest rates during the Roman Empire reached their lowest levels of about 4% during the reign of Augustus by 25 B.C. but soon gave way during the debt crisis of 33 A.D. when it was difficult to borrow at the legal limit of 12%. This debt crisis or 33 A.D. marked the beginning of a long rise in rates that continued for the following 400 year period. Nevertheless, the trend toward lower rates of interest that came under Augustus was confined to the core of the Roman Empire largely in Italy. Interest rates ranged between 12% and 48% in the provinces similar to what took place during the Babylonian era.

 

Interest rates during the Roman Empire reached their lowest levels of about 4% during the reign of Augustus by 25 B.C. but soon gave way during the debt crisis of 33 A.D. when it was difficult to borrow at the legal limit of 12%. This debt crisis or 33 A.D. marked the beginning of a long rise in rates that continued for the following 400 year period. Nevertheless, the trend toward lower rates of interest that came under Augustus was confined to the core of the Roman Empire largely in Italy. Interest rates ranged between 12% and 48% in the provinces similar to what took place during the Babylonian era.

 

The chaos of unfunded pension brought a collapse to the social structure during the third century. The collapse in the currency contributed to massive reforms and tax-hikes as well as the introduction of passports that people could not travel until they paid their tax. The chaos also led to the rise in Christianity as people prayed to their gods and nothing happened. This economic chaos of the 3rd century set in motion the eventual outgrowth to the collapse in interest rates and banking after the fall of Rome in the West in 476AD.

Ironically, the last Western Emperor took the name Romulus who was the founder of Rome and Augustus the firm Emperor. Hence, Rome died with a man named for the beginning.

Consequently, with the fall of Rome, there was a view that borrowing was evil and we ended up with the Sin of Usury – the charging of interest of any kind as Christian philosophy began to emerge. We can see from the above chart that as capital shifted to the East, the lowest interest rates emerged there and Roman rates rose singaling the fall was on schedule.

Much of the recorded history of early Byzantine economic policy is littered with this battle over interest. Justinian’s Code of the sixth century favored the bankers who were quite important to the state. He declared that “the ancient rate of interest is exorbitant” and thereby reduced the old Roman legal limit of 12.5% set by Constantine The Great down to a range of 4-8% according to the creditor. Bankers were allowed to charge the highest interest rates of 8% while private citizens were limited to charging a 6% rate. Curiously enough, public officials were restricted to charging 4% rates of interest per annum. Maritime loans were always much higher due to risks at sea and these were capped at 12%.

 

Source: 3000 B.C. – 500 A.D. The Ancient Economy | Armstrong Economics

New England Heritage: Deborah Sampson, Revolutionary War Soldier • Sharon, Massachusetts

Deborah Sampson Gannett (December 17, 1760–April 29, 1827) was one of the only women to serve in the army during the Revolutionary War. After disguising herself as a man and enlisting under the name Robert Shurtliff, she served for 18 months. Sampson was severely wounded in battle and received an honorable discharge after her gender was discovered. She later successfully fought for her rights to a military pension.

In Sharon, Massachusetts, there is a park as well as a street named after her. There is a famous statue that stands at the front of the Publix library. Her house is also a historical site, as well as her final resting place.

The Visigoths in Gaul • medieval.eu

Of all the barbarians entering the Roman Empire in Late Antiquity, the Visigoths were among the first to forge a successor-kingdom. Scholars disagree as to the early nature of this fledgeling polity, but the result is clear: the centre of the first barbarian kingdom in the 5th century came to be located at Toulouse.

Source: The Visigoths in Gaul