All too true, Mr. Cook.
First off, this is not an article on economics. As has been well noted, few outside the autism spectrum read those. Well, besides libertarians. And maybe autistic libertarians.
Okay, maybe this is an essay on economics, but only incidentally.
Really, I’m writing about society in general — inclusive of everything from culture to horticulture. You see, my thesis here is that Gresham’s Law — “bad money chases out good” — actually applies beyond the confines of economics, extending into things much more essential, not to mention more interesting. The very law-likeness of this market mechanism itself suggests that it is couched in a certain metaphysical verity transcendent of money matters. It is “economic” in the broadest, albeit archaic, sense of the word — according to Webster’s 1828 dictionary’s, 7th definition — regarding “the distribution or due order of things.” Which is to say, ontology, or reality in general.
So long as we’re speaking of the archaic conception of economy, we dare not miss the fact that Noah Webster listed its primary definition as “the management, regulation and government of a family or the concerns of a household.” The foremost definition and focus of the concept, then, was the inner maintenance of bloodlines.
This is the near opposite of its assumed meaning today. Clearly, modern “economists” eschew this insistence that the sustentation of the clan is the central concern and definition of economics in favor of bloodless fiduciary schemes like Marxism, Keynesianism, Straussianism, Objectivism, etc. Hence the misanthropic alien-insectoid personalities associated with the study of economics today.
But focusing on Gresham’s Law in particular, we find a redoubled correspondence to kinship in the terminology by which our fathers spoke of ‘bad money’: they called it adulteration.
[P]oliticians . . . come to feel that manipulation is a greater source of reward than is production. This is the essence of corruption.
While we are looking at the moral influence of real property, let us observe, too, that it is the individual’s surest protection against that form of dishonor called adulteration . . . a steady shrinkage in the value of money . . . but whatever it may be called, it represents the payment of pledges with depreciated media.
Adulteration can, of course, be a useful political weapon . . . values determined politically under shortsighted popular control tend to depreciate. . . .
As property becomes increasingly an abstraction and the sense of affinity fades, there sets in a strong temptation to adulterate behind a screen of anonymity.1
We of course recognize the term adulteration as cognate of adultery, stemming from the compound of add and alter. The simplest meaning of which is alteration of an original substance by addition of a dissimilar substance, synonyms for which include alloy, taint, corrupt, mix, commingle, bastardize, hybridize, amalgamate, miscegenate, and mongrelize.
No creative wordsmithery on Weaver’s part, adulteration was long the standard terminology for everything from clipped coins to fractional reserve currencies and inflation. Adulteration stood for the compromised value of any commodity cut with an inferior substance. And there is still some lingering acknowledgement of this concept at law: specifically, Title 21 U.S. Code § 342, which forbids various sorts of adulteration in our food supply. Historically, anything less than a pure medium of exchange, be it in doubloons or beets, was understood as a thumb on the scale, a cheat, a fraud. And Weaver’s identification of the causal factors leading to adulteration as loss of national ‘honor’ and ‘affinity’ tie the matter intrinsically with loyalty to one’s tribe. Compromised monetary media could be foisted only upon a people of compromised politics — and compromised politics bespeak compromised ethics and religion. All of which connote a compromised national identity. In God’s law fiscal values are tied up with moral values because thou shalt not adulterate, nor murder, nor steal, nor lie, nor covet. Truth be told, it may be argued that compromised currencies violate all ten commandments, even the third, as every fiduciary transaction transpires on an implicit oath of honest exchange, and all oaths are religious things reliant upon the witness, arbitration, and therefore the name of God Himself. Furthermore, Americans removed all doubt in this matter with the addition of the words “In God we trust” on our currency.
But let’s back up.
G. Edward Griffin, author of the definitive work on the Federal Reserve and its foreign occupation, The Creature from Jekyll Island, has explained not just Gresham’s Law, but also the spirit which animates and enforces it:
As governments became more brazen in their debasement of the currency, even to the extent of diluting the gold or silver content . . . a way had to be found to force people to accept these slugs as real money. This led to the first legal-tender laws. By royal decree, the ‘coin of the realm,’ was declared legal for the settlement of all debts. Anyone refusing it at face value was subject to fine, imprisonment, or, in some cases, even death. The result was that the good coins disappeared from circulation and went into private hoards. After all, if the government forces you to accept junk at the same rate of exchange as gold, wouldn’t you keep the gold and spend the junk? That is what happened in America in the ’60s when the mint began to issue cheap metal tokens to replace the silver dimes, quarters, and half-dollars. Within a few months, the silver coins were in dresser drawers and safe-deposit boxes. The same thing has happened repeatedly throughout antiquity. In economics, that is called Gresham’s Law: ‘Bad money drives out good.'[2. G. Edward Griffin, The Creature from Jekyll Island, pp. 147-148]
While penny ante counterfeiters and speakeasy loansharks may be deleterious to society, their impact is marginal by definition. But their presence testifies to the germ of corruption in a given people consonant with the taint of alien ethics, and therefore, a foreign faith – typically championed by, or on behalf of, a foreign ethnicity. The cliches of vaguely Eastern/Armenoid lenders, bookies, and financiers are cliches for a reason: because they reflect reality.
But if not otherwise arrested, the effects of Gresham’s Law ripple outward from those ghettos, driving all good money before the encroachment of bad until the usurers attain leverage in the halls of power. Indeed, according to Gresham’s principle, the state that allows bad money on the margins of society will at length necessarily be ruled by it.
Within the halls of power, the financier’s prerogative is to impose universal use of the debased media for the whole society, even going so far as criminalizing the possession of the pure monies which preceded their spurious product. The monetary alchemy of usury, then — perhaps more than any other means — enables statism. Even if a monetary theory seems at first blush something apart from statism, the impulse of absolute bureaucratic manipulation weds bureaucracy of state and the bank (engineered control of money), and so comes the reciprocity between them. And Gresham’s Law is seen nowhere in so strong an effect as where states declare by law equal value between unequal media. This is why between the synergistic market theories of debt capitalism and world communism (which it actually enables), R.E. McMaster, Jr., identified economics as “Satan’s basecamp.” It is the master hub of scientific manipulation, from which revolution can be compelled in all spheres.
One such sphere is suggested by Griffin’s mention that ‘a way had to be found to force people to accept these slugs as real money,’ as it is a precise parallel of the state’s dealings with so-called interracial marriage and non-White citizenship. Likewise too, as Griffin points out, with the consequences of remonstrance: ‘anyone refusing it at face value was subject to fine, imprisonment, or, in some cases, even death.’ All the aforesaid have turned out to be the fates not just of the monetary purist, but the racial purist in equal measure.
The parallel is underscored by his identifying this phenomenon with the demonetization of America silver in the 60s. This is significant not just on account of the overall turn to more radical liberalism in that era, but to be exact, the Coinage Act of 1965, presided over by Lyndon Johnson – the same president who in the same year signed the Hart-Celler Immigration Act that fundamentally and dictatorially altered the demographic character of America. And Jim Crow laws (applying the “separate but equal” principle of our Declaration of Independence) were also overturned with the 1965 Voting Act. So it was that the adulteration of our money and our populace hit these mega-milestones in tandem under the auspices of Johnson’s Great Society, and to like effect in their respective spheres, with bad chasing out the good.
But something similar had transpired with respect to the demonetization of gold in 1933 under FDR’s New Deal policies. This is clear in the revolutionary affirmative action quotas instituted by FDR’s Public Works Administration in 1934. As the Roosevelt Institute tells it,
But this is the President who appointed a far greater number of blacks to positions of responsibility within his government than any of his predecessors, so much so in fact that this group became known as the “Black Cabinet” or “Black Brain Trust” in the press. FDR was also the first president to appoint an African American as a federal judge; to promote a black man to the rank of Brigadier General in the Army; and, incredible as it might seem, the first president to publicly call lynching murder — “a vile form of collective murder”-which W.E B. Dubois applauded as something that sadly was long overdue. Overall FDR’s administration tripled the number of Africa Americans [sic] working for the federal government, including thousands of black engineers, architects, lawyers, librarians, office managers, and other professionals, and under his leadership, and with the strong support of Eleanor Roosevelt, the Democrats included the first specific African American plank in the party platform at the 1936 convention.
Which is to say that FDR, the man under whom we were forced to accept paper in place of gold, and to pretend as if they were the same thing, is the same corrupter under whom our society was forced to accept artificial African appointments over our people as if they were the same as our own.
But these too were built on earlier adulterations in Wilson’s revolutionary Federal Reserve Act of 1913, wherein a consortium of banking shills acting as fronts for the Rothschild-owned Bank of London affected a profound bastardization of our currency, all by a sorcery which Griffin aptly termed the “Mandrake Mechanism,” creating currency from debt itself, and opening the inflationary floodgates.
Coincident with the birth of the Fed and its having attained the power to draft nigh limitless fortunes against the collateralized flesh and blood of Americans, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) sprang into existence in the same year, and with a likewise limitless budget. Their mission is “to stop, by appeals to reason and conscience and, if necessary, by appeals to law, the defamation of the Jewish people. Its ultimate purpose is to secure justice and fair treatment to all citizens alike and to put an end forever to unjust and unfair discrimination against and ridicule of any sect or body of citizens.”
What defamation is it that they are committed to routing? Principally, the New Testament truth that the Jews murdered Jesus, and the secondary fact that Judaism is a false religion which must be rebuked in order for men and nations to be free under God. But subservient to these goals, the above mission statement also champions religious, cultural, and racial pluralism, which is to say, moral relativism. And that over against the objective truth of the Christian worldview which framed our civilization, nation, past, and identity. So then, the ADL is dedicated to and run by an extreme anti-Christian minority bent on overturning and suppressing Christian doctrine. Just as their financiers corrupted our money, the ADL’s objectives from the outset were to corrupt Christian morality in America. And where the Church resisted corruption, they have drafted floods of legislation to outlaw the Christian religion whole cloth. The gravity of this situation beggars the imagination.
As has been underscored by so many others, it was the fiat currency conjured out of thin air via the Federal Reserve Act which funded the Bolshevik coup in Russia, founding the Comintern, and which paved the way to the First World War, a war which would fracture the solidarity of Christendom and decimate the European stock worldwide.
We could also note the presaging of the Fed in the Aldrich-Vreeland Act of 1908, which formalized the banking cartel under color of law as well as the practice of writing up runs of “script” currency (credit) in place of actual money. This of course coincided closely with the commission and publication of the revolutionary philo-Semitic Scofield Reference Bible. Scofield’s work was famously funded by Woodrow Wilson’s advisor, president of the American Jewish Committee and League of Jewish Patriots, ultra-Zionist Samuel Untermeyer, as well as Mssrs. Gompers, LaGuardia, Strauss, Baruch, and Schiff. Jacob Schiff, the same man acknowledged as a prime architect of the Federal Reserve Act. Yes, the same people who paid so handsomely to adulterate the Bible and Christian doctrine in America are the ones who also adulterated our money. The exact same people.
Prior still, we saw a similar interrelation between monetary adulteration in Lincoln’s greenbacks — particularly his interest-bearing $20 bill — and the adulteration of our national citizenship in the 14th amendment. Under Lincoln’s usurpation of power the federal government assumed the right to debase citizenship and the very concept of nationhood no less than our media of trade. All were declared interchangeable like so many bricks in the tower of Babel.
God’s Law-Word demands honest weights and measures (Deut. 25:15; Lev. 19:36) and prohibits usury against one’s own people (Deut. 23:19), describing it as a means of taking dominion over foreign nations (Deut. 23:20). From the Christian perspective therefore, subjecting our own to usury is to enslave our own children. Usury is a form of slavery by definition, and affected upon us by men of foreign folk and faith who consider themselves our rightful masters.
In keeping with their sorcerous ways, even the order in which they stripped our treasury bore symbolic import: as gold is emblematic of kings and dominion, and silver of common purity and righteousness, the demonetization of ’33 implied an overthrow of kings, and the demonetization in ’65 connotes the overthrow of purity in the common people. Both of which correspond quite accurately to the sociopolitical revolutions of both eras.
Speaking now from the isolated quarters of a diminishing subculture, the agrarians have been the watchmen unheeded with respect to foodstuff commodities. Alongside matters of culture and liberty lost to industrialized farming and Big Agribusiness, they remain prophets against the adulteration known as GMOs.
As it turns out, simply by existing, frankenfood seedlines have a tendency to go where the wind blows them, cross-pollinating in fields of heirloom seed, despoiling the natural strains with their taint. And worse, because the engineered seeds are under patent, it creates an incentive for groups like Monsanto to seek total monopoly by intentional corruption of heirloom fields. Yes, if an otherwise heirloom field is found to have some GMO growing in it, the heirloom farmer is subject to fines, and the designers of the synthetic seed can sue for patent violation, often resulting in bankruptcy for the farmer. This of course amounts to a shakedown of the traditional farmer, compelling him to buy the genetically-augmented seed and offer up his farm as another beachhead in the invasion driving out the good seed.
Along these lines, Joel Salatin is poignant on the implications of industrial farming GMOs:
A culture that just views a pig as a pile of protoplasmic inanimate structure to be manipulated by whatever creative design a human can foist on that critter will probably view individuals within its community and other cultures in the community of nations with the same type of disdain and disrespect and controlling-type mentality.
As Salatin is also wont to say, if men will not treat the pig according to “the piggishness of the pig,” we have done something which transcends all discussion of pigs; we have traded God’s garden for the hellscape of Dr. Moreau’s island laboratory, and become collaborators in Satan’s conspiracy to confound the divine order of races, nations, and families under God.
As regards the family, its late displacements too have been connected by others, such as Goodson, directly back to the monetary issue:
The direct result of this iniquitous financial system has been the undermining of normal family life and a dramatic reduction in female fertility. Again the Foundations (especially Rockefeller) were behind this diabolical scheme which was created to draw women into the income tax net, destabilize society and set up the New World Order. In this manner the link between usury and demographic decline has been established. Even if the usury system should be abolished in its entirety within the next five to ten years, these trends will not be easily reversed over both the short and medium term. If usury remains intact, the world must brace itself for a depression, similar to the Dark Ages, which will last for many centuries.[3. Stephen Mitford Goodson, A History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind, p. 163. Emphasis mine.]
Yes, demographic decline in a people is tied with the value of their money due to certain intrinsic axiological realities back of both. Stock of all manner, be it money, inventory wares, or blood, are mutually reinforcing and sustaining things. One is not corrupted without some implied pressure of corruption upon the others.
But hasn’t God commanded us redundantly to holiness (separateness) of things to their right categories all along? Indeed, He has everywhere in Scripture underscored a certain ‘irreducible complexity’ of the Christian life. And the valuation of things — all things — matters because He imbued them with value by their differentiation from other things. Apart from those defining distinctions, all value is lost.
Integration in particular, everywhere it has been attempted, has affected what is derisively called “White flight.” Indeed, the admission of a foreign substance drives out the preexisting purity. Especially where the government exacerbates the impropriety by mandating total equality of those unequal substances.
Under such circumstance, even those families of the original homogeneous stock which remain tend to give way to miscegenation, producing then another and more thorough level of hybridization. And that hybridization, rather than ameliorating hostilities as the first generation of integration advocates assured us it would, typically enhances that hostility toward the dwindling minority of the unmixed White stock. Because in such an environment, the new mingled majority looks increasingly on any vestigial White populace as an affront to the lofty soteriology of integration. Any left not bearing the external mark of that mystic union are rightly presumed to have persisted only by way of some lingering discriminatory attitude or preference for their own. As if there were some special value in the White stock apart from others. This tacit insult cuts the mulatto to the quick. And so it is that the majority of the most radical Black militants have been mulattos. Their admixture itself enrages them against the continued existence of Whites and compels them to drive the remnant from the face of the earth. In this way, Gresham’s Law is a formula of revanchism and race war.
As it pertains to the microcosm of the homogeneous family, if the Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner scenario is not safeguarded against from the outset, the first individual of a disparate religion, politic, culture, or race presented for marriage into said clan will of necessity precipitate more. Because concession to and forbearance of that first unequal yoke, as if it were equal, grants in abstract the propriety of more such adulterations. Once an alien is admitted into the family, the family is, both literally and conceptually, denatured. And an alien strand cannot be woven in without tangible compromise of the affinity and affection which kinship is designed to affect. Apart from insistence on purity of media, the meaning of money is ultimately lost, and in terms of kinship, apart from the pursuit of union of like kind with like kind, the meaning of marriage and family slips as well.
Just as with the recent redefinition of marriage to include the fraud known as “gay marriage,” miscegenation was not long since taken entirely for granted as contrary to the institution of marriage and family. But, as with interracial marriage in 1967, the government’s fiat declaration of equality over this new conception of marriage is already beginning to drive the previous definition of marriage from the popular mind, cheapening the institution of marriage in whole. After all, the more inclusive a definition of marriage, the less defined it actually is, and as it draws near meaning everything, it ceases to mean anything. Just as adulterated money precipitates an inevitable depreciation and eventual collapse of a currency, so too does the adulteration of marriage and family trend inexorably toward irrelevance for that institution in society. The contemporary uptrend in unwed births accompanying these redefinitions bear that thesis out amply.
No, this extension of Gresham’s Law beyond things economic is not merely musing on implied consequences, but acknowledgment of pandemic trends in the present: just as the cuckoo bird egg laid in the nest of the sparrow spells doom for the sparrow’s own, non-White children reared by Whites and imputed the birthright of our people eat up resources which would have otherwise rightly been allocated to White children. And as we’ve seen, that initial acceptance also incites social pressure for homogeneous families next door to accept the strange child as equal with the other neighborhood children, and as valid a candidate for marriage with their children as any White child. Thereby miscegeny, interracial adoption, and like infidelities displace the natural offspring of a people, diminishing and ultimately disinheriting them in keeping with “the vengeance of the covenant” (Deut. 28; Lev. 26).
Parenthetically, it must be said that there are few sights so sad as that of an elderly White couple acting the part of grandparents to their non-White “grandchildren.” Much as people try not to notice, none can entirely ignore the crestfallen look in the eyes of aged White men, conceding to the debasement and effectual termination of their own lines. But absent any legitimate heirs, and under no small pressure to impute to the foundling or mixed bastards full heirship, most, despairing of hope, yield. Thus, not only is the fruit of one house cut off, but by compound pressure, it further normalizes the adulteration, demanding, as it were, that others accept the fiction as truth, and lead in the place of gold.
Be it monetary, agricultural, familial, racial, or doctrinal, adulteration in any of these at length implies entry of the others due to a certain irreducible complexity of society. Each such imposed adulteration is undertaken in the assumption of the scientific organization of society under the god-state. Which, if granted, is equally bereft of scruples in each category and as prone to artifice in one as in another. If you do not drive back the camel getting his nose under the tent-flap, you are that much less likely to turn him back at the first hump, and at the second, the beast is all the way in. Or, in biblical parlance, “a little leaven leavens the whole loaf.”
So it isn’t just that adulterated media drives out its sound alternative; it seeds the principle of adulteration in every venue and domain. If you depreciate or despoil the media by which a people sustain themselves, your embrace of the rebellion against objective value cannot be confined to things monetary. The sorcerous rebellion against God’s created order is a voracious entropy, an insatiable Tiamat which, once unleashed, is faithful only to its essence — the destruction of boundaries, distinction, and, ultimately, all value.
But even if finance, the love of money, Mammon, proves to be ‘Satan’s basecamp,’ and the adulteration of currency the functional lynchpin for the deracination of society, that basecamp is itself a squatter’s camp pitched by that first alien interloper, and that lynchpin is thrown by that dark stranger who defrauded our first parents, passing off the produce of the tree for something that it wasn’t. The taint is not native to the money, but injected therein by false doctrine. The corruption precedes materiality in the spiritual realm, in hearts alien to our faith and folk.
But we are the ones who have been beguiled again and again, by the promise of prosperity and a return, as it were, to Eden by means other than that prescribed of God. Until we return to honest monies, our universities, seminaries, churches, nations, and families will continue suffering adulteration through the leverage of adulterated money. For it was not merely their covert theft which led the Christian kings of old to expel, castrate, or execute moneylenders, but the creeping corruption which their trade affected on all rungs of society. The byword by which they came to be known was not hyperbole: they are indeed ‘nation-wreckers’. God rescue and keep us from being their collaborators in our own destruction.
- Richard Weaver, Ideas Have Consequences, pp. 139-141 ↩