A new currency would allow our elites the control over us that they crave.
From Doug Casey’s International Man blog: “The Crowning Glory of Keynsianism.”
Readers of this publication will know that for some time, I’ve forecasted the creation of a new monetary system by which governments and banks gain total control over all monetary transactions.
On the surface of it, this may seem an impossible goal, as it would be so all-encompassing and would eliminate economic freedom entirely. Surely, it would not be tolerated. However, I believe that it’s not only relatively easy to create, but it will be sold in such a way that the public will see it as an absolute panacea to their economic woes. Only those who are far-sighted will understand its level of destruction in advance of its implementation.
Apparently I’m not alone is seeing a coming push to ban cash, and that it would be a grave threat to liberty.
[T]here are many (myself included) who are eager to see what we believe would be the well-deserved downfall of Keynesianism, as the debt-ridden, entitlement-driven economies of the world collapse under their own ponderous weight.
But this hope may well be premature. In my belief, there is a final rabbit in the Keynesian hat, and that rabbit is the electronic currency described above. And if such a currency could be sold to a gullible public in one country, it could be sold just as easily in other jurisdictions.
This being the case, it would not be much of a leap if the concept were to be discussed universally and many governments were to announce that an international electronic currency, issued by the IMF, would solve all the currency problems, including those of currency exchange and international trade.
The laws and culture of a society are based on its religious beliefs. We are undergoing a rapid devolution from recognition of the Divine Law upon which America was founded. Therefore everything is in flux. When God is traded for the shifting whims of man, the law changes, freedom dies, and no one is safe.
Keynes’ economic ideas are beloved by little tyrants. And as for his life views, he would have loved gay “marriage.” There is a solid reason his philosophy was in concert with “live it up today, and to Hell with tomorrow.” His personal appetites meant he would produce no lasting fruit—no children—so why should he care what his views would do to future generations?
Ideas have consequences.