Communitarian Economics

Communitarian economic theory is a major part of the emerging supra-national system. This is what we will end up with after the coming economic collapse. Sadly, like all things communitarian, it's obscure, uncovered and, if barely mentioned, easily played down by our complicit press. When knowledgeable players discuss the Federal Reserve Bank and the diving dollar, they steer us far, far away from any valid discussions of the driving force for all the suggested, marvelously innovative changes.

"Communitarian Economics: How to Cut the Deficit and Put America Back to Work" by Amitai Etzioni (the "everything expert"):
http://aladinrc.wrlc.org/dspace/handle/1961/1133

"Communitarian Economics" by Norton Garfinkle:
http://www.gwu.edu/~icps/econ_garfinkle.html

Who is Norton Garfinkle? He's an interesting fella. He was a professor of Economics and Economic History at Amherst College 1957 to 1967. (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_Garfinkle) Business references don't seem to include his membership on the board of the Future of American Democracy Association -- direct link: http://thefutureofamericandemocracyfoundation.org/index.html.

Not only is he part of the Communitarian Network and another Phi Beta Kappa (as is Robert Zollnik new Head of the World Bank and Condolessa Rice, head of the Bush campaign team called Vulcans), he's chairman of Oxford Management Corporation (whatever that is.. can't find anything about it) and has been involved in many other very successful corporations as well (one sold for 300 mil).

"Norton Garfinkle is immediate past chair of NHF. Mr. Garfinkle serves as chairman of the George Washington University Institute for Communitarian Policy Studies. He is also chairman of Oxford Management Corporation and chair of the executive committee for the Lamaze Institute for Family Education." http://www.nationalhospicefoundation.org/i4a/pages/Index.cfm?pageid=36

According to http://www.allbusiness.com/company-activities-management/company-structures-ownership/6723734-1.html in 1999 he served as chairman of

"Cambridge Management Advanced Systems Corp., which has developed a revolutionary air safety system for the Federal Aviation Administration that provides continuous accurate and timely information on visibility and sky conditions at airports around the clock in all weather environments."

This makes me wonder about what happened on September 11, 2001. Did the FAA adopt Garfinkle's "revolutionary air safety system"? That'd be interesting to know.

This very wealthy, highly eductated, closely connected, upper class society man is an expert on the American middle class:

"Norton Garfinkle. The American Dream vs. The Gospel of Wealth: The Fight for a Productive Middle-Class Economy. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2006. ix + 230 pp. ISBN 0-300-10860-5, $22.00 (cloth)

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

The essential argument of Norton Garfinkle's book is that the American economic policy history can be understood as a struggle between those who believe that economic growth is best achieved when Washington's objective is to protect and extend the interests of the middle-class against those who say that the American economy is stronger, when national policy allows the richest Americans to pursue their interests fully. Garfinkle is firmly in the middle-class camp."
http://es.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/extract/8/1/196

Anyway, we are entering the new age of collectivist-capitalism, so

"Throw out all the econometric models—we are now officially into uncharted territory."

Thanks to Chris Bieber for forwarding this March 12, 2008 article by Michael Mandel in Business Week: "The Fed's Historic Innovation"
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/mar2008/db20080311_914398.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index_top+story

The goal of every school of Communitarian Thinking is to introduce innovative solutions to problems and conflicts. Many people explain this process as the "Problem-Reaction-Solution" paradigm. Communitarianism is always the solution.

Economics was not one of the subjects I studied in college. By the time I went to school, few Americans were beng taught the original American System of Political Economy. I didn't learn about the original American political and economic system until winter -2002/2003, when Nordica printed List's book offline when she was babysitting for Shalee in Ten Sleep. We modified our Hegel tutorial to include List and the American system soon after. My political courses were separated from banking, economics and markets. I studied programs and policies and I did "follow" the money going into Central America in the 1980s, but I never had a class that included the CFR, the TC, fractal reserve banking or the private Fed. Economics was taught in other sub-classes though, and it was merged under the new social sciences, which Gorbachev and Etzioni dubbed "socio-economics," in 1991.

Unlike my level of comprehension in (watered down) American political principles, 19th century economic theory gave me a headache the same way 19th century philosophy did, so I avoided it. I've since furthered my study of American politics but as for the suject of political economy I have mostly all questions and few answers. I don't think I'll ever have the time to go back and figure out what the exact differences are between the First National Bank of the United States established under President George Washington and the Federal Reserve Bank (which is privately owned). According to the "left" there is no difference, and Andrew Jackson is held up by both "sides" as a great American president for refusing to renew the National Bank's charter. We touched on this subject slightly in Part II of the Anticommunitarian Manifesto. I still think McKinley's assassination is an important missing piece of communitarian infiltration into the USA, for many reasons, not the least being the fact that innovative solutions to American finances became the norm after he was dead.

Peter Myer's elist has also sent some good articles that I'll paste here later. In the meantime I suggest we all consider the possibilty that our money may soon be quite useless and the brutal reality of what that means. There is a reason all new emergency powers' acts include confiscation of stored goods. Hide it well America. We're in for one hell of a depression. It should become so bad that the American people will BEG for a solution, which has been well studied, written, planned, and organized in preparation for that monumental day.

Politicans & Banking - What they need to know - Richard Cook

As most of my regular readers know, I do not support or endorse either progressives or conservatives. I can't; I identify all modern "sides" in political debates as potential tools that can be used to help bring on the final Hegelian synthesis, called communitarianism. But that doesn't mean I can't find and use valuable research produced by every "side." And, for what it's worth, the progressive left, in my opinion, usually comes the closest to seeing through the globalists' Hegelian ruse. Richard C. Cook is a great example of this. These monetary and historical banking concepts are the KEY to understanding why the Plan is so successful. We learned very early on in our ACL research that if we didn't study the banking system then we couldn't possibly understand the globalist's plans.

So we spent years trying to understand why the economic system decided upon by President Washington and Alexander Hamilton, i.e "The American System" is so obscured or, if mentioned, scorned and ridiculed. A. Hamilton is accused of having ties to European banks and discarded as an "imperialist," yet Thomas Jefferson (the father of "democracy" who introduced the two-party system) is the one who appointed Swiss banker and eugenicist Albert Gallatin as Secretary of the Treasury. It was Jefferson's Vice-President, Aaron Burr who killed Hamilton in a "duel," for reasons that still remain unknown to us. What's more, the only political party that appears to understand Friedrich List (The National System of Political Economy) and the American system are the communist inspired cult followers called LaRouche Democrats.

Will there ever be a history lesson on American economics that isn't influenced by party propaganda? What was the original American system, and is it even remotely possible we can retrieve it before our entire system collapses? Why was it so important to destroy our National Banking system only to replace it with the private corporation called the Federal Reserve?

From Blackheath Books via Peter Myer's elist:

The 2008 Presidential Election: Concepts Progressives Must Know About
Monetary Policy and History

by Richard C. Cook
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7613

Global Research, December 14, 2007

highlights:

* The main justification for laissez-faire economics is the unsupported assertion found in Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations that a hidden hand—“Hand, the Invisible”—will benefit the common welfare if individuals within the economic system pursue their own individual interests. This fallacy is the basis of so-called “classical” or “liberal” economics and is also a part of the ideology of the conservative branch of the Republican Party and the theology of its fundamentalist constituency. It is reflected in the view of the “Austrian School” of economics and was the basis for the monetarist policies of the 1970s and the “Reagan Revolution” of the 1980s. It has been disproved countless times by progressive economists. The main problem is that money in a complex economy is so easily manipulated by insiders.

* Opposing laissez-faire economics was what was called in the nineteenth century the “American System.” This was based on Renaissance ideas of nationalism, reflected in Europe by the German and Italian cameralists, who said that the central government had the right and obligation to regulate economic and financial affairs for the benefit of the nation. The most cogent expression of these views was Emmerich Vattel’s The Law of Nations, used as a manual of government at the First Continental Congress in 1775. The New Deal, which created the modern American physical economy until it was wrecked by the Federal Reserve-induced recession of 1979-83 and the “Reagan Revolution,” was a modern expression of the American System.

* The American System was based on actions by government to direct investment into infrastructure development, including health and education. This included government purchase of shares in development corporations and direct funding of projects through tax revenues and
government borrowing.

* During the early to mid-19th century, the American System was funded at the state level of government and saw the building of canals and railroads, improvement of waterways and harbors, turnpikes, etc. The federal government first became involved with infrastructure through the Army Corps of Engineers, then, during the Civil War, with the building of the transcontinental railroad and funding of land-grant colleges. The American System was copied in Germany, Japan, China, and Russia and elsewhere around the world. It was viewed as completely contrary to the British imperialist model.

* The American System as manifested through the New Deal saw the TVA, WPA, CCC, Hoover Dam, funding of school and hospital construction, public water and sewer systems, municipal gas and electric systems, rural electrification, etc. More recent examples were the interstate highway system, R&D investment, the manned space program, and creation of the internet. Today there are no more such projects serving as economic drivers for the U.S.

So if the American System developed by Hamiliton and Washington was viewed as "completely contrary to the British imperialist model," then what was Jefferson's system?