Yes, I've saved that video in a draft on Hamilton the Traitor. When I wrote that, I thought I was the only person who thought Hamilton sold out the revolution. But even for my going light on Hamilton here, I've gotten pushback from our 'buddy' Matt Ehret, who insists on conflating Franklin and Hamilton for wanting the same economic system. They couldn't be more diametrically opposed!
Funny, I was just thinking about who funded that musical. It's such an odd choice of topic, don't you think? Why would that be the first major musical to come out in decades?
I used to lament the gaps in my education around history - you know the way it was taught in education - now I think oh good, one less thing to unlearn. :-)
Yes yes yes! I feel the same way, Kathleen. I hated history in school--memorizing dates and names and famous battles. But now I think, no wonder. The good stuff was all deleted and papered over with trivia.
Quote: “In 1763 the now mature Franklin was again called before the British Board of Trade. Prior to his appearance, he had occasion to travel throughout Europe where he was shocked by the poverty and desperation”
(Of course we are talking here about “poverty and desperation” at the onset of the industrial revolution.)
At 1:03:40 of the Goodson audio, reinforcing what you have written:
From Chapter IV: A Century of Struggle: Rothschild versus The People
“In 1763 American statesman, Benjamin Franklin (1706- 1790) visited London, where he was shocked to observe slum conditions and the wide prevalence of poverty. When the British parliament asked Franklin to explain the source of prosperity of the American colonies, he replied as follows:
“That is simple. In the colonies we issue our own money. It is called colonial script. We issue it in proportion to the demands of trade and industry to make the products pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating for ourselves our own money, we control its purchasing power, and we have no interest to pay anyone.”"
Yes, exactly. Thanks for that. I also remember that he traveled through Ireland and Scotland, and this would have been not so long after the era of white slavery.
I’m stretching my segue rights here but – regarding that “poverty and desperation”, this compelling passage came to mind … (from over a century earlier)
From “The Third Rome”– Matthew Raphael Johnson
Chapter 7 – The Russian Peasant Under Serfdom (opening quote)
“The Russian leads a simpler life than other Europeans. The gulf between rich and poor is not as great as in the West where some wallow in riches and others are sunk in the depths of misery. Everyone in Russia, rich and poor, eats to his heart’s content and lives in well heated houses, whereas in the West the poor suffer from cold and hunger. […] This life for the workman and peasant in Russia is better than in other countries.”
J. Krihanitch, 1646, a Serbian by birth and a graduate of the Catholic College in Vienna, after spending five years in Russia (quoted by A de Goulevitch in “Czarism and Revolution”)
Oh my!! “The Pete Quinones Show. His 'Reading Solzhenitsyn's 200 Years Together' serious w/ Matthew Raphael Johnson” Found it on Rumble. I am diving into that and downloading now.
I originally listened (and followed along with the PDF) to the reading by Alex Linder.
I have gone a little quiet on Pete Quinones (just eased off a bit after noting that he is a little too pro-Trump for my liking and there is much behind a paywall, including comments) but I can’t get enough of Matthew Raphael Johnson. I have an extensive dossier along with several (seven in fact) of his books, and have Mentioned him on a few occasions.
You lay everything out so beautifully J... always clear, generous and helpful. Have recently - after all this time - actually downloaded the app! Makes a difference. Ty.
Yes, the initial quote is brought down from Tereza’s book (Chapter 5 – this thread), and I was just reinforcing with a passage from Goodson’s ‘History of Central Banking’.
Thank you, Tony! And yes, I've given some thought to that. The newly-emancipated colonists (except for the slaves, of course) were adamant that they didn't want a standing army in peacetime. Each new State/ Republic would control and train its own militia, so they could never be turned against them or used for offense against other States or Countries. So I would use the term militia rather than soldiers during peacetime.
Hamilton wanted specie so that an executive could collect direct taxes to fund them and wouldn't have the bother of going through Congress to decide how to use them--INTERNALLY or externally.
If scrip pays for the military, it would mean each state or locality would have to contribute equally the troops that would serve. That would end foreign intervention right there. Now we have the economic draft. My hometown is on the border of West Virginia, the military's happy hunting ground. Lynndie England and others who took the fall for torture at Abu Graib were recruited from there. They also put high security prisons there, so when prisoners are released, they stay in the area since they can't go anywhere else.
Even in wartime like the Revolution or now, specie/ dollars could pay commonwealths in West Virginia, who then pay their soldiers in scrip/ carets. Carets would strengthen the local community by circulating at a 2:1 rate to the dollars in the Treasury.
It would be a temporary sacrifice by some that would make the next generation free of that coercion. And the people of the commonwealth could refuse if they didn't agree that the cause was worth sacrificing their children. They could also refuse to transfer dollars earned in the military to carets at a 1:1 ratio. This means that returning soldiers would be the same as foreigners in paying twice the amount for housing and local goods/ services. That would also end the use of the military for aggression against other communities, like the mercenaries who did fight against Shay's Rebellion.
Thank you so much, Pauline! It's a lot of material and so much that was new to me at the time. I found out about Shay's Rebellion in the oddest way--correcting my daughter's workbook on proofreading. It had a paragraph on why they were rebelling and I thought, well that sounds like a good reason. Much later, I read about it in Howard Zinn but I still wonder if the workbook author (not a school version) slipped that in.
This was SO educational, thank you Tereza! The first passage that jumped out at me was:
“Gold and silver were not true measures of a stable value, it claimed, because they varied based on whether they were scarce or plentiful. The proper measure of the value of a currency was in labor. As long as the increase in currency was matched by an increase in production there would never be inflation”
Later, you mentioned "Debtors’ [sic] Prisons". I had left the following anecdotal digression on your earlier Chapter 03
I'm glad to see someone wading into the comment thread, Julius. This was a lot of information to take in on a Saturday night, although I guess it's Sunday morning for you, is that right?
On the quote, yes, it's strange to me that those looking for an honest currency want it to be backed by precious metals. Franklin showed that was the source of monopolies on credit, usurping whole governments.
And of course, I know you're thinking about National Socialism and the Feder bills, is that what they were called? Where they were backed by labor? I'm thinking that Feder bills were initially spent into existence by the Nat'l Soc gov't for public projects--as was the other 4/5ths of money in Pennsylvania's system. And then it circulated until it was eventually collected back in taxes, to be either respent or retired.
Michael Hudson says that foreign debts should always be denominated in the borrower's currency. That would be similar to my suggestion about France funding its own soldiers with its own currency, then having US dollars in its Treasury for future products after the war was won.
And yes, I had just read your links on the debtor prisons and prison ships for minors! OMG. So horrific. Even though terrible things are certainly happening now, I take hope that we're not as complacent about the infliction of pain as we were a mere generation ago.
And you mentioned Shakespeare. I'm now reading Shakespeare's Secret Messiah by my friend Joe Atwill, about the dark-complexioned Jewish woman who may have written the sonnets and much of the plays, subversively putting anti-imperial content in. I'm sure I'll be covering it in the future.
Thanks you Teresa, very interesting. Your contention that northern monopolies and southern plantations could have been dismantled makes we wonder what would have happened to slavery and the civil war.
Yes, I'll be getting to the civil war in an upcoming chapter. The spoiler alert is 'it's not what we've been told.' I think that's the spoiler alert for every chapter.
Until I reread this chapter out loud, I had forgotten that 67% of the cost of the war was issued as fiat currency: 39% was scrip issued by the colonies and 28% was faux-specie issued as Continentals but not really backed by silver coins.
Why did they need the Continentals? If the money was to pay the soldiers, and the soldiers needed the money to pay the taxes on their farms, the scrip would serve the purpose.
I think the Continental was to get northerners to fight in place of southerners. The slaveowning states had to use all their fighting men to put down slave rebellions, which were spreading like nano-aluminum fueled wildfire. Otherwise the slaveowners would have needed to use their specie--or issue a scrip that represented their future produce.
Oh and you told me about Shakespeare's Secret Messiah, is that right? I told Julius in the comment thread that I was reading it. Fascinating!
Hi, Dean. I think it's worth exploring whether Bitcoin is a form of scrip, representing a unit of labor, or a form of faux-specie, aka digital gold. Scrip was 20% created by mortgages, representing the labor of those who'd built the home or developed the land, and 80% issued by local gov't for projects the community wanted--post offices, libraries, roads, or local militia for self-protection. It was collected back in taxes and mortgage payments, so it kept recirculating locally.
Specie paid the mercenary militia that forced 4000 Massachusetts men to sign confessions for amnesty or face prison or execution, if Samuel Adams had his way. If it wasn't for specie, we wouldn't be in the constraints we are today, with the usurpers owning all the homes and therefore our labor.
Bitcoin is either generated by the usurpers, who control the computing power to farm it, or is bought using one of the imperial currencies that I describe as pieces of slave. As Franklin says of gold, it has no fixed value but is speculative. You're betting that it will trade to someone else for more imperial currency in the future, at a time when that currency is buying fewer pieces of slave.
But it will never buy sovereignty because, like precious metals, it's another empire-chip. It's not equally distributed as a starting point for trade. It treats local exchange the same as global, favoring the oligarchs who control global trade and extraction. And it leaves the oligarchs owning all the houses, so that the money to buy them returns to them.
Agreed on the Ponzi schemes, not sure about lazy. Most people I know are looking for a way that their savings will be secure and not depreciate while inflation soars. If an honest way of making and saving for retirement existed, I'd agree with you. I don't think Bitcoin is the answer, as I elaborate in those articles. But I think Bitcoiners are being set up, exploiting their desperation, not necessarily greed.
"Humanity is divided into two: the masters and the slaves; or, if one prefers it, the Greeks and the Barbarians..."
To generalize and actualize Aristotle's quote, we could say that those two categories are the Jews and the Goyim, as the status of the slave has been legalized before Aristotle's time in the Torah. If the tenth commandment of Yahweh officialized the status of slave, we should also look nowhere else for the origin of racism and eugenics, Bill Gates, Yahweh's faithful servant, can confirm it to you.
You raise an interesting point, jamalh, and one I've wondered about. The system of feudalism and archons in ancient Greece is remarkably similar to the one that was imposed earlier in Egypt by the Hyksos, using the Habiru as a terrorist force from within: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/hebrews-in-egypt-slaves-or-masters? The Torah story of Joseph (Sephardic) brags about the method.
When Ahmose I evicted the Hyksos and Habiru from Egypt, did they go to Greece and do the same thing? As Nefahotep says, Infiltrate, ingratiate, usurp. Is that how their system of democracy, aka vote for your favorite archon, became our system today, enabling their rule over us?
From my research, you're certainly right, that the origin of rule-over-others is in the playbook of the Torah. But all the names have been changed to protect the guilty and indict the innocent. The Judeans were, perhaps, the bravest warriors against this system of theocratic/ economic rule. Palestinians are their descendants. The word Jew derives from Judean, but not the people.
The important question is who wrote the Torah and its ideology of slavery. That was, I suspect, the Hyksos/ Heka Khasut, which I translate as superstitious usurpers. I suspect their descendants are the Doge and the Black Nobility, as Frances Leader terms them. The occult practices go along with their deception. The people are always being used, even those at the top. Taking back power over our own lives and communities is key.
If slavery were to be the main purpose of the creation of homo sapiens, as asserted by M. Tellinger in his book "Slave species of the gods", this would explain why slavery is a concept going back to beginning of humanity and why the custodians of our planet want now to restore definitively that original purpose by using the very same technology of genetic engineering they used in the first place.
That religion can give a "divine" dimension to slavery is to me an indication that religion has been the control instrument originally designed to control the slave. I therefore see the Torah directly inspired by the master and the Hyksos only selected henchmen on the level of the "chosen people".
What would be the point of having such a belief? It would be accepting something with no evidence that life is hopeless. And how do you know slavery is a concept going back to the beginning of humanity? That's not what anthropologists like David Graeber and David Wengrow say in The Dawn of Everything.
I suspect that the Torah, specifically, was the control instrument used to induce slavery on a massive scale. The NT followed in its tracks. The Habiru were the henchmen but the Hyksos were the ones who usurped rule over Egypt, and perhaps spread that method to Greece. Who do you mean as the master?
What is more important to me is to come closer to something that makes sense and that I think brings me nearer to the truth about myself and my fellow humans. I assume that slavery is a concept going back to the beginning of humanity because it is mentioned in the oldest historical "archives" available to us, that greatly predate the Torah and describe the creation and beginning of humanity. David Graeber and David Wengrow, in their book, did not see fit to mention Sitchin's translations of those Sumerian clay tablets, which forms the basis of M. Tellinger's book.
I thought you went very lightly on Hamilton.
• The Miseducation Of Hamilton: America's First Shadow Banker Redefines Reality
https://www.bitchute.com/video/wB9Q88sgdxc/
I wonder if ‘Hamilton’ the Broadway musical was funded by USAID [rhetorical]??
Yes, I've saved that video in a draft on Hamilton the Traitor. When I wrote that, I thought I was the only person who thought Hamilton sold out the revolution. But even for my going light on Hamilton here, I've gotten pushback from our 'buddy' Matt Ehret, who insists on conflating Franklin and Hamilton for wanting the same economic system. They couldn't be more diametrically opposed!
Funny, I was just thinking about who funded that musical. It's such an odd choice of topic, don't you think? Why would that be the first major musical to come out in decades?
Confirmation, if any was needed at this point, that our friend Larry Romanoff was right about our 'buddy' Matthew Ehret 😁
Oh I hadn't seen that, although Julius has supplied me with more than enough evidence. Do you have a link?
In that video he does state that it was the Rockefeller Foundation - Rockefeller, Soros, USAID ... whatever!
Another gem from Julius' golden archive😊🏅
Thanks. Really educational. I'm rather ignorant about this history.
I used to lament the gaps in my education around history - you know the way it was taught in education - now I think oh good, one less thing to unlearn. :-)
Yes yes yes! I feel the same way, Kathleen. I hated history in school--memorizing dates and names and famous battles. But now I think, no wonder. The good stuff was all deleted and papered over with trivia.
Exactly! (We musta sensed it.) :-)
Quote: “In 1763 the now mature Franklin was again called before the British Board of Trade. Prior to his appearance, he had occasion to travel throughout Europe where he was shocked by the poverty and desperation”
(Of course we are talking here about “poverty and desperation” at the onset of the industrial revolution.)
At 1:03:40 of the Goodson audio, reinforcing what you have written:
From Chapter IV: A Century of Struggle: Rothschild versus The People
“In 1763 American statesman, Benjamin Franklin (1706- 1790) visited London, where he was shocked to observe slum conditions and the wide prevalence of poverty. When the British parliament asked Franklin to explain the source of prosperity of the American colonies, he replied as follows:
“That is simple. In the colonies we issue our own money. It is called colonial script. We issue it in proportion to the demands of trade and industry to make the products pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating for ourselves our own money, we control its purchasing power, and we have no interest to pay anyone.”"
Yes, exactly. Thanks for that. I also remember that he traveled through Ireland and Scotland, and this would have been not so long after the era of white slavery.
I’m stretching my segue rights here but – regarding that “poverty and desperation”, this compelling passage came to mind … (from over a century earlier)
From “The Third Rome”– Matthew Raphael Johnson
Chapter 7 – The Russian Peasant Under Serfdom (opening quote)
“The Russian leads a simpler life than other Europeans. The gulf between rich and poor is not as great as in the West where some wallow in riches and others are sunk in the depths of misery. Everyone in Russia, rich and poor, eats to his heart’s content and lives in well heated houses, whereas in the West the poor suffer from cold and hunger. […] This life for the workman and peasant in Russia is better than in other countries.”
J. Krihanitch, 1646, a Serbian by birth and a graduate of the Catholic College in Vienna, after spending five years in Russia (quoted by A de Goulevitch in “Czarism and Revolution”)
Recently subscribed to The Pete Quinones Show. His 'Reading Solzhenitsyn's 200 Years Together' serious w/ Matthew Raphael Johnson is just excellent.
Incidentally, listened to MRJ the other evening. Thoroughly enjoyed.
https://www.radioalbion.com/2025/02/the-orthodox-nationalist-is-new.html
Oh my!! “The Pete Quinones Show. His 'Reading Solzhenitsyn's 200 Years Together' serious w/ Matthew Raphael Johnson” Found it on Rumble. I am diving into that and downloading now.
I originally listened (and followed along with the PDF) to the reading by Alex Linder.
https://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=564752
I’ll tidy that up along with the readings by Pete Quinone and MRJ and do a Book Mention when I can.
One source to the PDF:
https://mailstar.net/Solzhenitsyn-200YT-Complete.pdf
(One of my treasures is a leather-bound two-volume set that was gifted to me by a good friend who has since passed away.)
I have gone a little quiet on Pete Quinones (just eased off a bit after noting that he is a little too pro-Trump for my liking and there is much behind a paywall, including comments) but I can’t get enough of Matthew Raphael Johnson. I have an extensive dossier along with several (seven in fact) of his books, and have Mentioned him on a few occasions.
• The Russian Orthodox Medievalist (home page)
https://www.rusjournal.org/
• Odysee Channel ИСХС-NIKA – Invincible Orthodoxy
• (including a substantial ‘playlist’ by MRJ – you have to search individually on Odysee – the parent youtube site was taken down)
https://odysee.com/@InvincibleOrthodoxy:3?view=content
I haven’t got around to that one on New Khazaria just yet but have it bookmarked and logged, and have it open on Odysee
• The Orthodox Nationalist 02-05-25 : Is the “New Khazaria” Project Dead? – Matthew Raphael Johnson - Radio Albion
https://odysee.com/@RadioAlbionLBRY:e/TON_020525:1
• The Daily Nationalist 02-06-25 : Offhanded Genocide – Matthew Raphael Johnson - Radio Albion
https://odysee.com/@RadioAlbionLBRY:e/DN_020625:9
You lay everything out so beautifully J... always clear, generous and helpful. Have recently - after all this time - actually downloaded the app! Makes a difference. Ty.
Is this Teresa's book Julius?
Yes, the initial quote is brought down from Tereza’s book (Chapter 5 – this thread), and I was just reinforcing with a passage from Goodson’s ‘History of Central Banking’.
Thank you 👍
Scrips to pay for soldiers… 🤔
Fantastic essay Tereza!
Thank you, Tony! And yes, I've given some thought to that. The newly-emancipated colonists (except for the slaves, of course) were adamant that they didn't want a standing army in peacetime. Each new State/ Republic would control and train its own militia, so they could never be turned against them or used for offense against other States or Countries. So I would use the term militia rather than soldiers during peacetime.
Hamilton wanted specie so that an executive could collect direct taxes to fund them and wouldn't have the bother of going through Congress to decide how to use them--INTERNALLY or externally.
If scrip pays for the military, it would mean each state or locality would have to contribute equally the troops that would serve. That would end foreign intervention right there. Now we have the economic draft. My hometown is on the border of West Virginia, the military's happy hunting ground. Lynndie England and others who took the fall for torture at Abu Graib were recruited from there. They also put high security prisons there, so when prisoners are released, they stay in the area since they can't go anywhere else.
Even in wartime like the Revolution or now, specie/ dollars could pay commonwealths in West Virginia, who then pay their soldiers in scrip/ carets. Carets would strengthen the local community by circulating at a 2:1 rate to the dollars in the Treasury.
It would be a temporary sacrifice by some that would make the next generation free of that coercion. And the people of the commonwealth could refuse if they didn't agree that the cause was worth sacrificing their children. They could also refuse to transfer dollars earned in the military to carets at a 1:1 ratio. This means that returning soldiers would be the same as foreigners in paying twice the amount for housing and local goods/ services. That would also end the use of the military for aggression against other communities, like the mercenaries who did fight against Shay's Rebellion.
Fascinating Tereza! Really enjoyed this. Thank you.
Thank you so much, Pauline! It's a lot of material and so much that was new to me at the time. I found out about Shay's Rebellion in the oddest way--correcting my daughter's workbook on proofreading. It had a paragraph on why they were rebelling and I thought, well that sounds like a good reason. Much later, I read about it in Howard Zinn but I still wonder if the workbook author (not a school version) slipped that in.
This was SO educational, thank you Tereza! The first passage that jumped out at me was:
“Gold and silver were not true measures of a stable value, it claimed, because they varied based on whether they were scarce or plentiful. The proper measure of the value of a currency was in labor. As long as the increase in currency was matched by an increase in production there would never be inflation”
Later, you mentioned "Debtors’ [sic] Prisons". I had left the following anecdotal digression on your earlier Chapter 03
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/03-white-slavery/comment/91735361
I'm glad to see someone wading into the comment thread, Julius. This was a lot of information to take in on a Saturday night, although I guess it's Sunday morning for you, is that right?
On the quote, yes, it's strange to me that those looking for an honest currency want it to be backed by precious metals. Franklin showed that was the source of monopolies on credit, usurping whole governments.
And of course, I know you're thinking about National Socialism and the Feder bills, is that what they were called? Where they were backed by labor? I'm thinking that Feder bills were initially spent into existence by the Nat'l Soc gov't for public projects--as was the other 4/5ths of money in Pennsylvania's system. And then it circulated until it was eventually collected back in taxes, to be either respent or retired.
Michael Hudson says that foreign debts should always be denominated in the borrower's currency. That would be similar to my suggestion about France funding its own soldiers with its own currency, then having US dollars in its Treasury for future products after the war was won.
And yes, I had just read your links on the debtor prisons and prison ships for minors! OMG. So horrific. Even though terrible things are certainly happening now, I take hope that we're not as complacent about the infliction of pain as we were a mere generation ago.
And you mentioned Shakespeare. I'm now reading Shakespeare's Secret Messiah by my friend Joe Atwill, about the dark-complexioned Jewish woman who may have written the sonnets and much of the plays, subversively putting anti-imperial content in. I'm sure I'll be covering it in the future.
Incidentally, Daniel Kristos (Ba'al Busters) has just been replaying the following.
• "A History Of Central Banking And The Enslavement Of Mankind" By Stephen Mitford Goodson [AUDIOBOOK] - MrWhiskeyShits
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhyLRDcAfoo
I am still looking for the source of a multi-part audio that I have downloaded.
Wow - so many theories about Shakespeare! I look forward with interest.
Thanks you Teresa, very interesting. Your contention that northern monopolies and southern plantations could have been dismantled makes we wonder what would have happened to slavery and the civil war.
Yes, I'll be getting to the civil war in an upcoming chapter. The spoiler alert is 'it's not what we've been told.' I think that's the spoiler alert for every chapter.
Until I reread this chapter out loud, I had forgotten that 67% of the cost of the war was issued as fiat currency: 39% was scrip issued by the colonies and 28% was faux-specie issued as Continentals but not really backed by silver coins.
Why did they need the Continentals? If the money was to pay the soldiers, and the soldiers needed the money to pay the taxes on their farms, the scrip would serve the purpose.
I think the Continental was to get northerners to fight in place of southerners. The slaveowning states had to use all their fighting men to put down slave rebellions, which were spreading like nano-aluminum fueled wildfire. Otherwise the slaveowners would have needed to use their specie--or issue a scrip that represented their future produce.
Oh and you told me about Shakespeare's Secret Messiah, is that right? I told Julius in the comment thread that I was reading it. Fascinating!
This is why we bitcoin
Hi, Dean. I think it's worth exploring whether Bitcoin is a form of scrip, representing a unit of labor, or a form of faux-specie, aka digital gold. Scrip was 20% created by mortgages, representing the labor of those who'd built the home or developed the land, and 80% issued by local gov't for projects the community wanted--post offices, libraries, roads, or local militia for self-protection. It was collected back in taxes and mortgage payments, so it kept recirculating locally.
Specie paid the mercenary militia that forced 4000 Massachusetts men to sign confessions for amnesty or face prison or execution, if Samuel Adams had his way. If it wasn't for specie, we wouldn't be in the constraints we are today, with the usurpers owning all the homes and therefore our labor.
Bitcoin is either generated by the usurpers, who control the computing power to farm it, or is bought using one of the imperial currencies that I describe as pieces of slave. As Franklin says of gold, it has no fixed value but is speculative. You're betting that it will trade to someone else for more imperial currency in the future, at a time when that currency is buying fewer pieces of slave.
But it will never buy sovereignty because, like precious metals, it's another empire-chip. It's not equally distributed as a starting point for trade. It treats local exchange the same as global, favoring the oligarchs who control global trade and extraction. And it leaves the oligarchs owning all the houses, so that the money to buy them returns to them.
Here's the point-by-point analysis I did comparing my caret system, based on Franklin's scrip, to Bitcoin: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/bitcoin-vs-the-caret and my follow-up to Mathew: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/mathew-crawford-and-digital-god.
...because Ponzi schemes 'R US!
Just another form of Mammon Worship.
Inherently LAZY!
Agreed on the Ponzi schemes, not sure about lazy. Most people I know are looking for a way that their savings will be secure and not depreciate while inflation soars. If an honest way of making and saving for retirement existed, I'd agree with you. I don't think Bitcoin is the answer, as I elaborate in those articles. But I think Bitcoiners are being set up, exploiting their desperation, not necessarily greed.
"Humanity is divided into two: the masters and the slaves; or, if one prefers it, the Greeks and the Barbarians..."
To generalize and actualize Aristotle's quote, we could say that those two categories are the Jews and the Goyim, as the status of the slave has been legalized before Aristotle's time in the Torah. If the tenth commandment of Yahweh officialized the status of slave, we should also look nowhere else for the origin of racism and eugenics, Bill Gates, Yahweh's faithful servant, can confirm it to you.
You raise an interesting point, jamalh, and one I've wondered about. The system of feudalism and archons in ancient Greece is remarkably similar to the one that was imposed earlier in Egypt by the Hyksos, using the Habiru as a terrorist force from within: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/hebrews-in-egypt-slaves-or-masters? The Torah story of Joseph (Sephardic) brags about the method.
When Ahmose I evicted the Hyksos and Habiru from Egypt, did they go to Greece and do the same thing? As Nefahotep says, Infiltrate, ingratiate, usurp. Is that how their system of democracy, aka vote for your favorite archon, became our system today, enabling their rule over us?
From my research, you're certainly right, that the origin of rule-over-others is in the playbook of the Torah. But all the names have been changed to protect the guilty and indict the innocent. The Judeans were, perhaps, the bravest warriors against this system of theocratic/ economic rule. Palestinians are their descendants. The word Jew derives from Judean, but not the people.
The important question is who wrote the Torah and its ideology of slavery. That was, I suspect, the Hyksos/ Heka Khasut, which I translate as superstitious usurpers. I suspect their descendants are the Doge and the Black Nobility, as Frances Leader terms them. The occult practices go along with their deception. The people are always being used, even those at the top. Taking back power over our own lives and communities is key.
If slavery were to be the main purpose of the creation of homo sapiens, as asserted by M. Tellinger in his book "Slave species of the gods", this would explain why slavery is a concept going back to beginning of humanity and why the custodians of our planet want now to restore definitively that original purpose by using the very same technology of genetic engineering they used in the first place.
That religion can give a "divine" dimension to slavery is to me an indication that religion has been the control instrument originally designed to control the slave. I therefore see the Torah directly inspired by the master and the Hyksos only selected henchmen on the level of the "chosen people".
What would be the point of having such a belief? It would be accepting something with no evidence that life is hopeless. And how do you know slavery is a concept going back to the beginning of humanity? That's not what anthropologists like David Graeber and David Wengrow say in The Dawn of Everything.
I suspect that the Torah, specifically, was the control instrument used to induce slavery on a massive scale. The NT followed in its tracks. The Habiru were the henchmen but the Hyksos were the ones who usurped rule over Egypt, and perhaps spread that method to Greece. Who do you mean as the master?
What is more important to me is to come closer to something that makes sense and that I think brings me nearer to the truth about myself and my fellow humans. I assume that slavery is a concept going back to the beginning of humanity because it is mentioned in the oldest historical "archives" available to us, that greatly predate the Torah and describe the creation and beginning of humanity. David Graeber and David Wengrow, in their book, did not see fit to mention Sitchin's translations of those Sumerian clay tablets, which forms the basis of M. Tellinger's book.