|
A sequel to "The Double Whammy of Geopolitical Global Gold Games"
Antal E. Fekete
Gold Standard University
aefekete@hotmail.com
In my last article I suggested that the superpowers China, Russia, and the
United States may be, without they knowing it, racing towards reopening their
Mints to the monetary metals. The governments of these countries are like the
heroes of Greek tragedies: they are drawn to their fate by destiny. There is
no way for them to avoid Kismet, regardless of what they do. Many readers have
asked me to explain what the term "opening the Mint to the unlimited coinage
of gold and silver free of seigniorage charges" means.
I should start by stating that the Mint is a monetary institution far more
important than the Central Bank. It is an ancient and venerable institution.
The Central Bank is a relatively new invention, hardly venerable. It was conceived
to make ordinary people absorb the unpaid and unpayable debt of kings. The
importance of the Mint is not to be found in its altogether negligible role
of coining small change, the so-called subsidiary coinage which people use
to make small purchases. The Mint is all-important because it is designed to
produce real money. The origin of the Mint is intertwined with religion.
From the point of view of political economy, the Mint is a reminder of the
fact that, ultimately, real money is created (and extinguished) by the people
and not by the government, or banks approved by the government. For example,
the U.S. Constitution reserves the power to create money directly to the people
themselves who convert gold and silver at the Mint into the coin of the realm
(and extinguish money by melting it down). This is a power like habeas corpus that
cannot be delegated, still less usurped. If the government grabs it, then,
in the admirable phrase of Malcolm Muggeridge, it becomes the power of habeas
cadaver. The Mint is the symbol of Constitutional Money, the only kind
not subject to manipulation.
So much so, in fact, that the Mint had to be closed to gold forcibly in
order to deny people access to constitutional money, and in the hope that
the government could usurp their power to create money. History had to
be falsified to conceal the fact of power-grab. According to the official
version the Mint was never closed down as it continued to produce subsidiary
coins. There were some housekeeping changes, yes. But nothing major.
This lie was exposed by William Jennings Bryan, the Democratic presidential
candidate in 1896 when he denounced the power-grab in describing it as "the
Crime of 1873". He was referring to the closing of the U.S. Mint to silver
in 1873, the first major violation of the Constitution's monetary provisions.
People fell for the obfuscation. They were not interested in checking out
the charges of Bryan. What crime? What closing? What Mint? Lots of silver coins
are in circulation, can't you see? People didn't understand the difference
between the full-bodied silver coin, the constitutional standard dollar, and
subsidiary silver coins that were not full-bodied. The nominal value of the
full-bodied coin, produced on account of anybody tendering the right quantity
and quality of metal, coincides with the market value of its metal content.
By contrast, subsidiary coins are produced on account of the Treasury and their
nominal value is always higher than the market value of their metal content.
The difference between the two is called seigniorage, the profit going to the
Treasury. There is no seigniorage on coining the standard dollar, the coinage
of which is unlimited, in contrast with that of subsidiary coins with limited coinage,
which explains why people accept them in circulation for the higher nominal
value. (The cost of producing the standard coin, like that of constructing
and maintaining public roads, is covered by taxes.)
The banks are supposed to be a handmaiden to the Mint. After the closing of
the Mint to gold and silver the banks became the boss and the Mint was reduced
to the status of a handmaiden. This was a violent revolution, the full meaning
of which has never been explained by our institutes of higher learning. Slavery
works best if people don't think of themselves as slaves. The Mint is the symbol
of freedom. It is the very antithesis of slavery. Yet imposing slavery on the
people is as simple as closing the Mint to gold and silver. People are no longer
free. They have lost their God-given right to create and extinguish money.
They have become slaves since the government has extorted the right of first
refusal on their produce and savings. As Keynesians famously boast: "taxes
for revenue are obsolete". Once closed to gold and silver, the Mint makes taxation
for revenue superfluous. It is freed up for devious purposes. Now, for the
first time, taxation can be used to manipulate the economy and to manipulate
the people. The government can stamp an entire industry out of existence by
taxing it to death. Less conspicuously, it can boost the income of one branch
of industry, or one group of citizens, at the expense of another. The Mint,
if people can keep it open to gold and silver in defiance of the machinations
of the government and banks, is both the symbol and instrument of freedom.
Once it is forcibly closed, freedom is lost and the way to the pauperization
of people is thrown wide open.
I often come across the objection that the government does make gold and silver
coins available to the people who care to have them. There are officially produced
eagle coins in the United States, maple leaf coins in Canada, panda coins in
China, and koala coins in Australia. This does not look like the Mint being
closed to gold and silver, does it? People who use this argument only betray
their ignorance and prove how easy it is for the government to fool public
opinion. Gold and silver coins that governments currently produce are meant
to confuse the issue. They are an eyewash. These are souvenir coins struck
on Treasury account, sold at a premium prices including seigniorage charges.
People may feel good about having them, especially when gold and silver prices
are buoyant. But their right to constitutional money has not been restored. The
Mint is still closed to gold and silver. The people's right to unlimited
free coinage is still being usurped by the banks. Rather than celebrating,
people ought to be upset that their government stoops so low as attempting
to lead them by the nose.
As I said, the Mint is one of the most ancient political institutions brought
about by our civilization. In the early history of Rome over twenty-five hundred
years ago the Mint where gold and silver pieces were struck was a sacred and
inviolable place. In fact, the Mint was housed in the Temple of Juno (wife
of the chief god Jupiter). Our linguistic heritage shows this most clearly:
the English word 'money' is derived from the Latin word 'Moneta', the surname
of Juno. Juno Moneta, literally Juno the Vigilant, refers to the legend that
Juno's sacred geese on Capitolium saved the city from being sacked. With their
loud cackling they alerted the sleeping town that enemy soldiers have scaled
the walls under the cover of night and are ready to slaughter the inhabitants.
Thus the English word money has connotation of vigilance. Vigilance,
that is, to preserve freedom which is inseparable from constitutional money
facing, as it is, constant threat from adventurers such as John Law, Keynes,
Friedman, to name only a few. Sad to say, this connotation has worn off completely
by now. People no longer have any idea that their freedom is being destroyed
little-by-little, as their money has been corrupted.
Oh Juno Moneta, where art thou? And where are thy sacred geese?
Oh sacred geese of Juno, whither migrated thee? Why are thee not cackling now
as a new attempt is being prepared to murder innocent people in their sleep?
Compare the Mint of Juno to the Central Bank of the United States, the Fed,
which is less than one hundred years old. During its brief existence it has
done more monetary mischief than all the monetary mischief perpetrated by governments
during the twenty-five hundred year history of the Mint, including the endless
debasement of coinage through the dilution of metal content. The most recent
follies of the Fed raise the question whether it will live to celebrate its
centenary, or whether pig-headed and ham-handed central bankers will destroy
the dollar that was entrusted to their care in 1913. Already, the dollar has
lost 99 percent of its purchasing power, and is manifestly in danger of losing
the remainder during the next five years or so. Quite obviously this could
have never happened if the U.S. Mint had been kept open to gold and silver,
which is the reason why the Constitution demands it.
The oldest central bank in Europe is the Riksbank of Sweden. It opened more
than thirty years before the Bank of England. The early central banks in Europe
were all established in order to fund the unpaid and unpayable royal debt.
The newly chartered banks were in turn given privileges such as the monopoly
of issuing bank notes, as well as immunity from being sued in case of non-performance
on contracts.
Milton Friedman and his monetarist cohorts completely misrepresent the relationship
between the Mint and Central Bank. They allege, falsely, that a price-fixing
scheme is involved. In their topsy-turvy world the gold standard, and the Mint,
are institutions negating the free market. In fact, however, the truth is that
bank notes are not money; they are merely promissory notes whereby the
Central Bank promises to pay bearer money on demand. Only the full-bodied coins
into which the Mint converts gold and silver on account of anybody tendering
the right quantity and quality of metal constitute money. You cannot find price-fixing
in this process with a magnifying glass. The charge of price fixing was planted
maliciously by Milton Friedman in order to denigrate and discredit the gold
standard. His suggestion that the Central Bank is the creator of money, and
the Mint is merely an embellishment, wholly unnecessary to boot, is a shameless
lie. Friedman is celebrated as the father of the floating dollar by the monetarists,
who consider it as a triumph in having set the gold price "free". In fact,
Friedman is the assassin of the dollar and will be remembered as such.
The fact of the matter is that the Central Bank is anxious to keep its notes
competitive with full-bodied gold coins. Therefore it promises to redeem its
notes by paying out gold at the statutory rate. So it is not the gold price
that is fixed. Just the opposite: it is the value of the bank note that is
fixed in terms of gold. The central bank that does the fixing has no other
way of maintaining the value of its credit without coercion. The central
bank, of course, wants to get rid of this restraint. It can, through coercion.
The floating dollar implies coercion through legal tender laws. Full-bodied
gold and silver coins never need legal tender protection. There is not one
instance recorded in the monetary annals of a creditor ever refusing to accept
the full-bodied coin in repayment of debt.
No doubt, for the Central Bank to live up to its promise to pay gold to bearer
on demand takes knowledge, expertise, and discipline. When adventurers take
over management backed by other adventurers at the Treasury, they engineer
a default on the promise to pay out gold and promote the dishonored note as "money".
How do they get away with this highway robbery? They do because of the coercion
of legal tender.
The term "legal tender" did not always indicate coercion. Originally it was
a limited obligation to ensure smooth circulation of the subsidiary
coinage. For example, the copper could be legal tender up to a dollar and,
the nickel, up to five dollars. When adventurers took over the Treasury, the
first thing they did was to torture the meaning of the term. They made it an unlimited obligation
to accept irredeemable paper currency in discharge of debt.
After the default adventurers at the Central Bank and the Treasury initiated
an elaborate check-kiting scheme whereby the latter issued irredeemable promises
which were accepted by the former, and vice versa. According to Milton Friedman
the depreciation of irredeemable currency can be avoided by restricting the
issue through a quantity rule, e.g., the note circulation must be increased
at a steady annual rate of, say, three percent. However, his thesis amounts
to saying that fraudulently issued promises can be given permanent and enduring
value, as though people were too dumb to understand fraud when they see it.
In other words, Friedman confuses delayed exposure of fraud with inability to
expose it. But what kind of a monetary system is it that so vitally depends
on assuming that people are inherently stupid? Historically, no monetary fraud
has ever succeeded. Every attempt to make the currency permanently irredeemable
has been exposed as fraudulent and consequently collapsed. All irredeemable
currencies, without exception, have ended up in the garbage heap of history.
The irredeemable dollar is different only in so far as the unprecedented magnitude
of the fraud necessarily takes longer to expose. But longer is not forever.
After all, for the first time in history an attempt is made to fool all the
people all of the time. And we have it on the authority of Abe Lincoln that
this is not possible.
It is another matter if the irredeemable currency is stabilized before the
final collapse, by opening the Mint to gold (or silver, or both). There are
historical precedents such as the greenback of Civil War vintage. In that instance
common sense and monetary science prevailed and came to the rescue of the moribund
dollar. Today, both common sense and monetary science appear to be badly lacking.
This would make the outlook rather gloomy.
However, there is a ray of hope: international competition in the monetary
arena. Neither the Chinese nor the Russian central bankers do at heart believe
in constitutional money any more than their American colleagues. They certainly
enjoy their unlimited power to issue the currency in unlimited quantities.
Nevertheless, they are not stupid. Both the Russians and the Chinese want to
put an end to American monetary hegemony whereby the U.S. government can obtain
real goods and real services from all countries of the world in exchange for
irredeemable (read: fictitious) promises to pay. They realize that the only
road to defeating the American monopoly is the Yellow Brick Road. They have
quietly embarked upon an ambitious program of remonetizing gold through the
back door. They keep a low profile about it as it is in their interest to acquire
as much gold as possible on the best terms possible.
No matter how you look at it, there is a Gold War going on in the world. The
alignment of the antagonists is the same as it was in the Cold War. The name
of the game is: who will end up with the largest pile of the precious yellow?
Remember the adage: "He who has the gold makes the rules."
The competition of the superpowers to acquire gold will ultimately lead to
an infinite escalation of its price. As unlimited amounts of rubles and yuans
are printed to buy up the limited amount of gold that is available, the competitive
devaluation of currencies will reach a frenzied stage in destroying the value
of all currencies. Competitive devaluation is a destructive process.
American, Russian, and Chinese central bankers will find that their hands are
forced by events. After all the false fits and starts they will hit upon the
winning strategy: the constructive process of opening their Mint to
the unlimited coinage of gold. This is the only logical thing they can do,
whether they like it or not, after the stage is reached whereby cartloads of
paper currencies fail to fetch even one grain of gold.* Opening the Mint will
be the only way to attract all the available gold and silver in the world to
their shores, benefiting their prostrate banking system that will be quick
to issue gold instruments acceptable in global trade.
The U.S. will be forced to do the same, but it is questionable that being
a follower rather than the leader will save the American economy from further
disintegration.
There is no reason why the U.S. government could not retain monetary leadership
in the face of the Russian and Chinese challenge. All it has to do is to open
the U.S. Mint to both gold and silver before they open theirs. To do
this would take fine statesmanship such as presidential candidate Ron Paul
is offering to the American people.
Unfortunately, a great deal of damage has been done mainly because the educational
system has been corrupted in exiling monetary science and sound economics from
the curriculum. Keynesian and Friedmanite economics rule supreme in academia.
Adventurers at the Treasury and the Federal Reserve take full advantage of
the prevailing ignorance. Bad-mouthing of gold in the financial press continues
unabated.
If the U.S. government fails to act and misses this last opportunity to stabilize
the dollar, then the American people will be exposed to excruciating economic
pain. People of other lands will not fare much better. When their dollar-denominated
assets go up in smoke, they will blame America. Anti-American feeling in the
world will hit an all-time high. America will lose all her allies in the face
of an increasing number of enemies. And, as famously stated by Alan Greenspan,
America will be unable to procure war matériel for its military.
The only way to avoid catastrophe is to open the U.S. Mint to gold and silver
while it is not too late, as advocated by presidential candidate Dr. Ron Paul.
* Note that I am not prophesying that cartloads of paper currencies will fail
to fetch a loaf of bread. In fact it is perfectly feasible that the price of
bread, along with other prices of consumer goods, will fall in the wake of
deflation. The process herein described is not one of hyperinflation. It is
one of competitive devaluation by the superpowers in order to corner gold.
Reference:
A.E. Fekete, The
Double Whammy of Geopolitical Global Gold Games, January 30, 2008
GOLD STANDARD UNIVERSITY LIVE
Session Three, will be held in Dallas, Texas, February 11-17, 2008.
For details, see: www.professorfekete.com
|