LDS Freedom Forum

The "ism" of the Anglo/Saxon Communes as they lived before the 8th Century is what they called "Socage." We would call it by Joseph Smith's description as, "Consecration and Stewardship."

True Communism, the ism of the ancient Communes, comes from one of the two uses of the word FORCE among humanity.

In True Communism the word force is used so that each person uses FORCE upon themselves, people in True Communism force themselves to seek virtue.

False Communism is the other use for the word FORCE, that someone or group of people get to force other people deemed inferior.

Lets return to the True Communism of the Anglo/Saxons and of Joseph Smith.

We will have Zion again once we understand the True "ism" of the Communes of ancient Nordic Europe, the one true application of FORCE among humanity.

God Bless,
Darren

There is nothing wrong with true communism. The family is structured communistically. Having a society with some mutualist tendences, such as, say, a farm that is owned by the "commons" or a mutual aid business is a brilliant idea and should be implemented in America. The problem is that Karl Marx's "communism" isn't really communism, that's the biggest deception of all time. True intellectuals (who Marx ripped off and slandered) like Bakunin and Proudhon knew that Marx was really just promoting state socialism where the bankers could easily exploit the system. Not communism and not freedom.

Socialism and the United Order Compared

Elder Marion G. Romney Of the Council of the Twelve Apostles

What I am going to give you now is a statement I have prepared in answer to the question, "Is Socialism the United Order?" Some of you may have already heard it. This is the first time I have ever attempted to give a talk a second time. My excuse is that the Brethren have asked me to give this talk here tonight.

I suppose the best way to start a comparison of socialism and the United Order is with a definition of the terms. Webster defines socialism as:

Socialism defined

"A political and economic theory of social organization based on collective or governmental ownership and democratic management of the essential means for the production and distribution of goods; also, a policy or practice based on this theory." (Webster's New International Dictionary, 2nd ed. unabridged, 1951.)

George Bernard Shaw, the noted Fabian Socialist, said that:

"Socialism, reduced to its simplest legal and practical expression, means the complete discarding of the institution of private property by transforming it into public property and the division of the resultant income equally and indiscriminately among the entire population." (Encyclopedia Britannica, 1946 ed., Vol. 20, p. 895.)

George Douglas Howard Cole, M.A. noted author and university reader in economics at Oxford, who treats socialism for the Encyclopedia Britannica, says that because of the shifting sense in which the word has been used, "a short and comprehensive definition is impossible. We can only say," he concludes, "that Socialism is essentially a doctrine and a movement aiming at the collective organization of the community in the interest of the mass of the people by means of the common ownership and collective control of the means of production and exchange." (Ibid., p. 888.)

Socialism arose "out of the economic division in society." During the nineteenth century its growth was accelerated as a protest against "the appalling conditions prevailing in the workshops and factories and the unchristian spirit of the spreading industrial system."

Communism, starting point

The "Communist Manifesto" drafted by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels for the Communist League in 1848 is generally regarded as the starting point of modern socialism. (Ibid., p. 890.)

The distinction between socialism, as represented by the various Socialist and Labour parties of Europe and the New World, and Communism, as represented by the Russians, is one of tactics and strategy rather than of objective. Communism is indeed only socialism pursued by revolutionary means and making its revolutionary method a canon of faith. Communists like other socialists, (1) believe in the collective control and ownership of the vital means of production and (2) seek to achieve through state action the coordinated control of the economic forces of society. They (the Communists) differ from other socialists in believing that this control can be secured, and its use in the interests of the workers ensured, only by revolutionary action leading to the dictatorship of the proletariat and the creation of a new proletarian state as the instrument of change. (Ibid.)

German Socialism

A major rift between so-called orthodox socialism and communist socialism occurred in 1875 when the German Social Democratic party set forth its objective of winning power by taking over control of the bourgeois state, rather than by overthrowing it. In effect, the German Social Democratic party became a parliamentary party, aiming at the assumption of political power by constitutional means.

Fabian Society

In the 1880's a small group of intellectuals set up in England the Fabian Society, which has had a major influence on the development of modern orthodox socialism. Fabianism stands "for the evolutionary conception of socialism . . . endeavoring by progressive reforms and the nationalization of industries, to turn the existing state into a 'welfare state.'" Somewhat on the order of the German Social Democrats Fabians aim "at permeating the existing parties with socialistic ideas [rather] than at creating a definitely socialistic party." They appeal "to the electorate not as revolutionaries but as constitutional reformers seeking a peaceful transformation of the system." (Ibid.)

Forms and policies of socialism

The differences in forms and policies of socialism occur principally in the manner in which they seek to implement their theories.

They all advocate:

(1) That private ownership of the vital means of production be abolished and that all such property "pass under some form of coordinated public control."

(2) That the power of the state be used to achieve their aims.

(3) "That with a change in the control of industry will go a change in the motives which operate in the industrial system. . . ." (Ibid.)

So much now for the definition of socialism. I have given you these statements in the words of socialists and scholars, not my words, so they have had their hearing.

The United Order

Now as to the United Order, and here I will give the words of the Lord and not my words. The United Order the Lord's program for eliminating the inequalities among men, is based upon the underlying concept that the earth and all things therein belong to the Lord and that men hold earthly possessions as stewards accountable to God.

On January 2, 1831, the Lord revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith that the Church was under obligation to care for the poor. (See D&C 38.) Later he said:

"I, the Lord, stretched out the heavens, and built the earth, . . .and all things therein are mine.

"And it is my purpose to provide for my saints, for all things are mine.

"But it must needs be done in mine own way. . . ." (D&C 104:14-16.)

Consecration and stewardship

On February 9, 1831, the Lord revealed to the Prophet what his way was. (See D&C 42.) In his way there were two cardinal principles: (1) consecration and (2) stewardship.

To enter the United Order, when it was being tried, one consecrated all his possessions to the Church by a "covenant and a deed which" could not "be broken." (D&C 42:30.) That is, he completely divested himself of all of his property by conveying it to the Church.

Having thus voluntarily divested himself of title to all his property, the consecrator received from the Church a stewardship by a like conveyance. This stewardship could be more or less than his original consecration, the object being to make "every man equal according to his family, according to his circumstances and his wants and needs." (D&C 51:3.)

This procedure preserved in every man the right to private ownership and management of his property. At his own option he could alienate it or keep and operate it and pass it on to his heirs.

The intent was, however, for him to so operate his property as to produce a living for himself and his dependents. So long as he remained in the order, he consecrated to the Church the surplus he produced above the needs and wants of his family. This surplus went into a storehouse from which stewardships were given to others and from which the needs of the poor were supplied.

These divine principles are very simple and easily understood. A comparison of them with the underlying principles of socialism reveal similarities and basic differences.

Comparisons and contrasts: Similarities

The following are similarities: Both

(1) deal with production and distribution of goods;

(2) aim to promote the well-being of men by eliminating their economic inequalities;

(3) envision the elimination of the selfish motives in our private capitalistic industrial system.

Differences

Now the differences:

(1) The cornerstone of the United Order is belief in God and acceptance of him as Lord of the earth and the author of the United Order.

Socialism, wholly materialistic, is founded in the wisdom of men and not of God. Although all socialists may not be atheists, none of them in theory or practice seek the Lord to establish his righteousness.

(2) The United Order is implemented by the voluntary free-will actions of men, evidenced by a consecration of all their property to the Church of God.

One time the Prophet Joseph Smith asked a question by the brethren about the inventories they were taking. His answer was to the effect, "You don't need to be concerned about the inventories. Unless a man is willing to consecrate everything he has, he doesn't come into the United Order." (Documentary History of the Church, Vol. 7, pp. 412-13.) On the other hand, socialism is implemented by external force, the power of the state.

(3) In harmony with church belief, as set forth in the Doctrine and Covenants, "that no government can exist in peace, except such laws are framed and held inviolate as will secure to each individual the free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property" (D&C 134:2), the United Order is operated upon the principle of private ownership and individual management.

God-given agency preserved in United Order

Thus in both implementation and ownership and management of property, the United Order preserves to men their God-given agency, while socialism deprives them of it.

(4) The United Order is non-political.

Socialism is political, both in theory and practice. It is thus exposed to, and riddled by, the corruption that plagues and finally destroys all political governments that undertake to abridge man's agency.

(5) A righteous people is a prerequisite to the United Order.

Socialism argues that it as a system will eliminate the evils of the profit motive.

The United Order exalts the poor and humbles the rich. In the process both are sanctified. The poor, released from the bondage and humiliating limitations of poverty, are enabled as free men to rise to their full potential, both temporally and spiritually. The rich, by consecration and by imparting of their surplus for the benefit of the poor, not by constraint but willingly as an act of free will, evidence that charity for their fellowmen characterized by Mormon as "the pure love of Christ." (Moro. 7:47.)

Socialism not United Order

No, brethren, socialism is not the United Order. However, notwithstanding my abhorrence of it, I am persuaded that socialism is the wave of the present and of the foreseeable future. It has already taken over or is contending for control in most nations.

"At the end of the year [1964] parties affiliated with the [Socialist] International were in control of the governments of Great Britain, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Israel, and the Malagasy Republic. They had representatives in coalition cabinets in Austria, Belgium, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, and Switzerland, constituted the chief opposition in France, India, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand and West Germany; and were significant political forces in numerous other countries. Many parties dominant in governments in Africa, Asia, and Latin America announced that their aim was a socialist society." (Encyclopedia Britannica, 1965 Book of the Year, p. 736.)

United States has adopted much socialism

We here in the United States, in converting our government into a social welfare state, have ourselves adopted much of socialism. Specifically, we have to an alarming degree adopted the use of the power of the state in the control and distribution of the fruits of industry. We are on notice according to the words of the President, that we are going much further, for he is quoted as saying:

"We're going to take all the money we think is unnecessarily being spent and take it from the 'haves' and give it to the 'have nots.'" (1964 Congressional Record, p. 6142, Remarks of the President to a Group of Leaders of Organizations of Senior Citizens in the Fish Room, March 24, 1964.)

Socialism takes: United Order gives

That is the spirit of socialism: We're going to take. The spirit of the United Order is: We're going to give.

We have also gone a long way on the road to public ownership and management of the vital means of production. In both of these areas the free agency of Americans has been greatly abridged. Some argue that we have voluntarily surrendered this power to government. Be this as it may, the fact remains that the loss of freedom with the consent of the enslaved, or even at their request, is nonetheless slavery.

As to the fruits of socialism, we all have our own opinions. I myself have watched its growth in our own country and observed it in operation in many other lands. But I have yet to see or hear of its freeing the hearts of men of selfishness and greed or of its bringing peace, plenty, or freedom. These things it will never bring, nor will it do away with idleness and promote "industry, thrift and self-respect," for it is founded, in theory and in practice, on force, the principle of the evil one.

As to the fruits of the United Order I suggest you read Moses 7:16-18 and 4 Nephi 2:-3, 15-16. If we had time we could review the history, what little we know, of Zion in the days of Enoch and about what happened among the Nephites under those principles of the United Order in the first two centuries following the time of the Savior.

What can we do?

Now what can we do about it?

As I recently reminded my wife of the moratorium on the United Order, which the Lord placed in 1834 (D&C 105:34), that socialism is taking over in the nations and that its expressed aims will surely fail, she spiritedly put to me the question: "Well, then, what would you suggest, that we just sit on our hands in despair and do nothing?" Perhaps similar questions have occurred to you. The answer is, "No, by no means!" We have much to do, and fortunately for us the Lord has definitely prescribed the course we should follow with respect to socialism and the United Order.

Constitution God-inspired

He has told us that in preparation for the restoration of the gospel, he himself established the Constitution of the United States, and he has plainly told us why he established it. I hope I can get this point over to you. He said he established the Constitution to preserve to men their free agency, because the whole gospel of Jesus Christ presupposes man's untrammeled exercise of free agency. Man is in the earth to be tested. The issue as to whether he succeeds or fails will be determined by how he uses his agency. His whole future, through all eternity, is at stake. Abridge man's agency, and the whole purpose of his mortality is thwarted. Without it, the Lord says, there is no existence. (See D&C 93:30.) The Lord so valued our agency that he designed and dictated "the laws and constitution" required to guarantee it. This he explained in the revelation in which he instructed the Prophet Joseph Smith to appeal for help,

Just and holy principles

"According to the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles;

"That every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment.

"And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose. . . ." (D&C 101:77-78, 80.)

Sustain Constitutional law

Previously he had said:

"And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them.

"And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind and is justifiable before me.

"Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land [the test of its constitutionality in the words of the Lord here is whether it preserves man's agency];

"And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this cometh of evil.

"I, the Lord God, make you free therefore ye are free indeed; and the law [that is, constitutional law] also maketh you free.

"Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn.

"Wherefore, honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil." (D&C 98:4-10.)

These scriptures declare the Constitution to be a divine document. They tell us that "according to just and holy principles," the Constitution and the law of the land which supports the "principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before" God; that, "as pertaining to [the] law of man whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil." They remind us that the Lord has made us free and that laws that are constitutional will also make us free.

"When the wicked rule, the people mourn"

Right at this point, almost as if he were warning us against what is happening today, the Lord said: "Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn." Then, that we might know with certainty what we should do about it, he concluded: "Wherefore, honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold. . . ."

In its context this instruction, according to my interpretation, can only mean that we should seek diligently for and support men to represent us in government who are "wise" enough to understand freedom—as provided for in the Constitution and as implemented in the United Order—and who are honest enough and good enough to fight to preserve it.

". . . under no other government in the world could the Church have been established," said President J. Reuben Clark, Jr., and he continued:

". . . if we are to live as a Church, and progress, and have the right to worship as we are worshipping here today, we must have the great guarantees that are set up by our Constitution. There is no other way in which we can secure these guarantees." (Conference Report, October 1942, pp. 58-59.)

Now, not forgetting our duty to eschew socialism and support the just and holy principles of the Constitution, as directed by the Lord, I shall conclude these remarks with a few comments concerning what we should do about the United Order.

What to do about United Order

The final words of the Lord in suspending the order were: "And let those commandments which I have given concerning Zion and her law be executed and fulfilled, after her redemption." (D&C 105:34.)

Further implementation of the order must therefore await the redemption of Zion. Here Zion means Jackson County, Missouri. When Zion is redeemed, as it most certainly shall be, it will be redeemed under a government and by a people strictly observing those "just and holy principles" of the Constitution that accord to men their God-given moral agency, including the right to private property. If, in the meantime, socialism takes over in America, it will have to be displaced, if need be, by the power of God, because the United Order can never function under socialism or "the welfare state," for the good and sufficient reason that the principles upon which socialism and the United Order are conceived and operated are inimical.

In the meantime, while we await the redemption of Zion and the earth and the establishment of the United Order, we as bearers of the priesthood should live strictly by the principles of the United Order insofar as they are embodied in present church practices, such as the fast offering, tithing, and the welfare activities. Through these practices we could as individuals, if we were of a mind to do so, implement in our own lives all the basic principles of the United Order.

As you will recall, the principles underlying the United Order are consecration and stewardships and then the contribution of surpluses into the bishop's storehouse. When the law of tithing was instituted four years after the United Order experiment was suspended, the Lord required the people to put "all their surplus property . . . into the hands of the bishop" (D&C 119:1); thereafter they were to "pay one-tenth of all their interest annually. . . ." (D&C 119:4.) This law, still in force, implements to a degree at least the United Order principle of stewardships, for it leaves in the hands of each person the ownership and management of the property from which he produces the needs of himself and family. Furthermore to use again the words of President Clark:

". . . in lieu of residues and surpluses which were accumulated and built up under the United Order, we, today, have our fast offerings, our Welfare donations, and our tithing all of which may be devoted to the care of the poor, as well as for the carrying on of the activities and business of the Church."

What prohibits us from giving as much in fast offerings as we would have given in surpluses under the United Order? Nothing but our own limitations.

Furthermore, we had under the United Order a bishop's storehouse in which were collected the materials from which to supply the needs and the wants of the poor. We have a bishop's storehouse under the Welfare Plan, used for the same purpose. . . .

"We have now under the Welfare Plan all over the Church, . . . land projects . . . farmed for the benefit of the poor. . . .

"Thus . . . in many of its great essentials, we have, [in] the Welfare Plan . . . the broad essentials of the United Order. Furthermore, having in mind the assistance which is being given from time to time . . . to help set people up in business or in farming, we have a plan which is not essentially unlike that which was in the United Order when the poor were given portions from the common fund."

It is thus apparent that when the principles of tithing and the fast are properly observed and the Welfare Plan gets fully developed and wholly into operation, "we shall not be so very far from carrying out the great fundamentals of the United Order." (Conference Report, October 1942, pp. 51-58.)

The only limitation on you and me is within ourselves.
A Prayer:

And now in line with these remarks for three things I pray:

(1) That the Lord will somehow quicken our understanding of the differences between socialism and the United Order and give us a vivid awareness of the awful portent of those differences.

(2) That we will develop the understanding, the desire, and the courage born of the Spirit, to eschew socialism and to support and sustain, in the manner revealed and as interpreted by the Lord, those just and holy principles embodied in the Constitution of the United States for the protection of all flesh, in the exercise of their God-given agency.

(3) That through faithful observance of the principles of tithing, the fast, and the welfare program, we will prepare ourselves to redeem Zion and ultimately live the United Order, in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

THE BEGINNING OF MODERN COMMUNISM

Niccolo Machiavelli

Modern Communism is not at all hard to understand, if one only first understands what it is that they are talking about.

There was once a man who lived in Italy whose name was Niccolo Machiavelli. He lived there from 1469 to 1527. This was the time when the Turks took over the area that would allow them to walk right into Italy any time that they wanted to. This was a terribly disconcerting situation for everybody who lived in the area, but it worked with a particularly telling effect upon the mind of Niccolo Machiavelli.

He asked why Italy didn’t have mighty conquerors at their head like the Turks have. They used to have mighty warriors like Julius CAESAR. Now all that they had was a crazy German KAISER; and he was no great warrior; he and his predecessors for the last hundreds of years had just spent their time quibbling with the Popes over who really had the authority behind the Coinage of Europe.

Niccolo Machiavelli said that there was no more time. Time had run out. It was now imperative that Catholic Europe have a defender like the warriors of old to keep it from falling before the mercilessness of these unforgiving erstwhile opponents of Europe in the Crusades. The time had come for a real European fighting leader of the old stamp, and Niccolo was perceptive enough to see what had to be done to get one.

He hearkened the minds of his listeners back to the very beginning of European civilization. “What was that?” It was Aristotle’s concept of how the terribly energetic politician is in harmony with the Energy, that makes the One-spin spin, at that precise moment when he gets his correct hunch that makes him a great politician. “But let’s face it,” Machiavelli said, “What is it that this correct hunch gives him the impulse to do that is the power that in turn is the basis of European Civilization?” “Well, that is easy,” he said, “it is an impulse that impels him to just get up, go out, and GRAB that power.”

“This is the ultimate basis of our Civilization,” Machiavelli said, “a true leader who just goes out and GRABS THE POWER, far, far from just sitting around and quibbling about it.”

This made a most profound impression on the Pope and Kaiser, for they could see the uncontestable logic of his reasoning. However, though Niccolo flattered himself that he was a profound thinker on the subject of “statecraft” still and all be was only an “upper-middle rank” public official and wasn’t able in any way to be aware of all of the points at issue which the Pope and Kaiser could see.

These two traditional leaders of Europe did reconcile at that time. They did reconcile differences and did commit to a joint effort from then on. But, what Machiavelli was urging them to make their GRAB for was the very highest of stakes so it had to be done in just the right setting.

Just the right setting was the “Rebirth of Socrates” scenario wherein all of the Christian people of Europe were introduced to the heart of the statecraft by which they were governed.

The high, high “stakes,” of course, was the power to control the credit-belief-faith of the Christian people of Western Europe, something which had long since slipped out of the control of their offices during those centuries of quibbling and into the control of the Gild System. It had to be taken back if there was ever to be any real “leader” in Europe again. Machiavelli had convinced them that the true way to get it was to GRAB it. So they tried. They failed.

Their Failure

When the Pope and Kaiser met entrenched resistance to their attempt to GRAB the power to control the credit-belief-faith of Europe, they said to the resistors, “How dare you try to stop us; we are the persons traditionally in control of the faith of Christian Europe; get out of our way.”

The answer to them was, “What did you ever have to do with the Gild System? Nothing. What do you at present have to do with the Gild System/Banks of Europe that control the credit of the people of Europe? Nothing. As far as we are concerned you are nothing more than another couple of potential bank robbers whom we will shoot on sight if you make a false move at our ‘banking resources.’” That was that; they failed.

With this specific separation of the two parties, that is, the Gild System from Catholicism (which, theoretically, had had the general authority over such things as the banking facilities of those times,) that separation is considered to be the cross-over from medieval to modern times. Many felt that there had to be some accommodation. The instance of events in England can show us one such accommodation.

England’s Problem

When the people of England reacted to treat the attempt by the Kaiser and the Pope to GRAB the power to control the credit resources of England as nothing but the attempt of another couple of bank robbers, they had to have someone to take their old places. They decided to let King Henry VIII do that.

Though this elevation of the English monarchy to that role did address the problem, it didn’t answer it at all. The problem still had to be answered.

Simply put, the problem was this: “Who has the right to exercise control over the credit-belief-faith of the Christian people of England, given that the traditional claimants, the Easterlings’ Kaiser and the Pope don’t have that right? And, where and when did anyone that you do suggest get that right?”

This produced a little overdone monarchy adulation in England for a while, but England found that it was able to muddle its way through that period.

What really changed things was when the showdown war between the Kaiser and Pope on one side and the Hansa on the other side broke out in Germany in 1618.

The Hansa was being destroyed, the English people were being permanently alienated from the Kaiser and the Pope; and the question that had been put off before, now urgently needed attention. “Who has the right to exercise control over the credit-belief-faith of the Christian people of England?” There were no answers that satisfied adequately. The members of Parliament quarreled and divided into factions. The Factions quarreled.

That faction in Parliament which stood for a continuation of total monarchy adulation, that is, that they continued saying that Henry III’s successors were the legitimate heirs to the claims of the Easterlings’ Kaisers and of the Popes to the power to control the credit-belief-faith of the Christian people of England, lost first. This was the Episcopalian Party. Their leader, the Archbishop of Canterbury, also, soon lost his head for pushing for this continuation.

The next party in Parliament that lost was that which pushed the rights of all of the priests of the religion of the people of England to administer the power to control the credit-belief-faith resources of the people of England. This was the Presbyterian Party. It lasted long enough to propose one grandiose plan before it collapsed.

The party that prevailed was that of the organized congregations of each of the townships of England; that was the Congregationalist Party. They beheaded the King (King Charles I) and ran England for a while like it was a “U.S.A. of England.” But, the leaders of these congregations of the Christian believers of England had NO suggestion for how to permanently manage the power that controlled the credit resource which the Christian belief of these people generated. When the very gifted military leader of the Congregationalists died, all of the people in Parliament were forced to come up with the idea that has managed that power ever since.

England’s Idea

The idea they came up with to manage that power in the future was to take up the firm resolve that they would NEVER TALK ABOUT it any more. They would in fact keep on managing that power, but if forces in England jumped upon them too hard asking them where they thought that they got the authority from to control the Christian faith of the people they would motion to the monarch.


That would get those forces off of their backs for a breathing space — while those forces were pestering the monarch as to where he thought that he got that authority from — to figure out a way to get rid of them again when the monarch motioned back to the Parliament, after those forces had worn him out.

So, this was England’s idea for how to manage the power controlling the credit resource generated by the Christian faith of the people of England: to throw it back and forth between the Parliament and the Monarch like a “hot potato.”

Political Parties

Still, as anyone gets to know who witnesses this hot potato tossing in England for any length of time, the functional management of that power in question rests with the Parliament, just as it always has since the congregations from England’s townships had begun to run Parliament directly.

That brought up the solemn question of who it was who has the right to manage that power within Parliament or who, for that matter, has the power to manage Parliament.

This provoked the Earl of Shaftesbury to put on his thinking cap to come up with the answer that the whole world has had recourse to since. He hearkened the remembrance of his colleagues back to that time of the scrambling for power in Parliament between the Episcopalians, the Presbyterians and the Congregationalists. He wanted to organize them just like one of those groups to GRAB control over the whole Parliament.

“But,” one might say, “the ‘Episcopalians,’ ‘Presbyterians’ and ‘Congregationalists’ are churches (trying to be “the English Church” of the Magna Carta)!” “Well, maybe so,” the Earl of Shaftesbury said, “but all that I have in mind is the fitting vehicle with which to GRAB that power to control the credit-belief-faith of the people of England as it rests in Parliament on the ‘hot potato’ basis that it now does.”

That organization, so organized by the Earl of Shaftesbury to make that GRAB, was the world’s first POLITICAL PARTY, the “Whig Party.” ALL POLITICAL PARTIES trace their origin back to it.

Secularizing

This now brings us to the heart of this chapter on Communism.

“Essentially, what was it that lost out when the Kaiser and Pope listened to Machiavelli and made their GRAB to reestablish their right to manage the credit resources of Europe that had slipped from their control since the Crusades?” “What was it that lost out when the Earl of Shaftesbury came up with the concept of a ‘political party’ as the entity that would thereafter GRAB at that power?”

Let us see.

In the first place let us be forthright about a specific point. Although the word “Rebirth” (“Renaissance”) euphemistically may make some few people think about Christ’s “rebirth” doctrine, the Renaissance is NOT a glorification by the Kaiser and the Pope of Christ; it is a glorification by them of Socrates. It was Socrates that they wished to have “reborn” for contemplation by the people of Europe. According to Socrates they had the legitimate right to the power of control over the credit resources of the European people.

“Who lost in this shifting of the direction of what the people of Europe ought to contemplate?” Well, Christ lost in that.

Now let’s have a look at the church organizations that the Earl of Shaftesbury was going to make use of in his successful GRAB for that same power that the Kaiser and Pope had unsuccessfully just GRABBED for; let us look in particular at that church organization which had been most successful in the struggle of all of those organizations one with another in England, that of the Congregationalists.

“What was it that, from ‘immemorial time,’ the organizations of each of these congregations, that was made up of the Christian people of each of the townships of England, had been organized for?” The Catholic Church said that it was for the peoples’ custom to gather every week in their townships to take “the Lord’s Supper” called “the communion” by the Catholics; that was THE reason that the Catholics called these English townships, “communes.”

But, now here comes the Earl of Shaftesbury who just has a “restricted” use for this organization. ALL that he is going to need it for is just to serve as the most effective instrument coming to his mind with which to GRAB the power to control the credit resources of England — as that power rested in Parliament on the “hot potato” basis that it did.

This is an “open and shut case” of secularizing Jesus Christ out of something that had previously been considered to be exclusively devoted to Him. And, that brings up the next section which, in turn, will show us most clearly what Karl Marx and his Communists are talking about — that is, exactly what they take as their stand.

The “Enlightenment”

The Earl of Shaftesbury and those who thought like him in England and elsewhere, down to the time of the American Revolution, gave to History the turns of events in the mental orientation of the people in or from Europe that historians call, “The Enlightenment.”

The critical issue during this phase of history ― as it was before as well as after ― was this question of which we have been speaking: “Who has the right to the power controlling the credit-belief-faith of the Christian people of Europe?”

THE ENTIRE CHANGE between what are called “medieval” and “modern” times was the Kaiser and Pope GRABBING at that power and using Socrates as their justification (instead of using Christ as their justification).

They failed. However their failure created the vacuum in the thinking of the people either in or from Europe that has created all thinking which we classify under the designation “modern.” It is the quandary of that question, “Well, if, as regards the traditional parties, the Easterlings’ Kaiser and the Pope, of whom, with lip-service, we have said since the Crusades that they have the right to control the credit resources of Europe, we now say that they don’t have that right, WHO CAN HAVE THAT RIGHT?”

The way out of that quandary was found by the thinking that has been called, “The Enlightenment.” Simply put they said, “The ultimate authority to which the Pope and the Kaiser appealed in Socrates’ sayings was just the idea to which Machiavelli pointed them — that ultimately the basis of power in Orthodoxy is that which goes to a politician just because he GRABS it. Now, we are going to have to rethink a few things. Instead of thinking of such things as the Parliament of England as the ‘general conference’ (as the term is used on the Wasatch Front) of the religion of the townships of England, we are going to have to start thinking of these ‘folk congresses’ of the people of Northern Europe as the Greek concept of ‘Politics.’ That done, that makes us leaders of these parliaments of Northern Europe, who find ourselves in this ‘quandary,’ into ‘politicians.’ That done, ‘What is the difference between us and the people to whom it used to be customary to restrict that title, i.e. the Easterlings’ Kaiser and the Pope?’ We are politicians also, so we can GRAB at that power too, just the same way that Machiavelli told the Pope and Kaiser to.”

This GRABBING by the parliamentary leadership of Europe gave to the world the Enlightenment. But, what we have said so far doesn’t yet introduce us to what Marx felt that he had to say.

In the GRABBING, this new breed of “politician” came upon the phenomenon that, just as the Kaiser and the Pope had found that they could justify their GRAB to control the credit generated by the Christian faith of the European people by removing Christ from the debate, so they also found success in controlling that self-same credit resource as they removed Christ from the center of things.

To be brief, then, all that the Enlightenment is, is the new breed of politicians of Europe who, in their GRAB to control the credit resources of the Christian people of Europe, say: “Look, what do you need Christ for in this particular thing or in that particular thing? We are specialists, scientists, professionals, experts, philosophers, doctors, lawyers, engineers, teachers, thinkers, poets, technicians in this or that particular area. Therefore what do you need Christ for, in this or that area? You have us!” This is the thinking of “the Enlightenment” that has, in general, characterized the thought of the English-speaking people in North America from about the year 1700. And, although it was good enough for most of the people there, it wasn’t good enough for Karl Marx.




(to be continued)

Marxism

Interestingly enough, Marxism rests on the “casting in concrete” of the Enlightenment, into the Constitution of the U.S.A., by the adoption of the First Amendment — which thereafter has had the effect of almost totally secularizing thought in the U.S.A. Since, therefore, this “casting in concrete” has had such a profound effect we ought to spend a little time on its motivation.

In order to “slam shut” the door on any possibility that any claim to the English freeholder rights held by all Americans, which rights had been acquired by those people through the initiation ceremonies into the Christian religion that had always been a part of the Gilds of English farmers, which ceremonies were instituted in the English colonies at their first founding, the principal thinker of the Big Party in the American South made the statement that those freeholder rights have nothing to do with Christianity.

That stand has effectually secularized the U.S.A. ever since.

That stand sparked the French Revolution.

That stand is the basis of Modern Communism. Let us now see how that came to be.

If you really get the “new breed of Politician” down and press him as to where he thinks he gets the right to control the credit-faith of the Christian people of Europe (such as the “hot potato” throwing “politicians” of England), you eventually get out of them that they are just doing what Machiavelli told the medieval breed of politicians to do: “GRAB IT.”

The effectual means which they found to do this was to exclude Jesus Christ from the particular area of endeavor over which, at a given moment, they wanted to GRAB that power.

So, let’s be blunt. We are talking about “Banking.” “What is Banking?” It is the power to CREATE Credit. “How is it that this new breed of politicians of modern times CREATES credit, as they have made the modern institutions of Banking?” “What is Banking?” “Where does it come from?” “What is the source of its power?” Bluntly put, Banking is the ability to “rip off” the FAITH which people have had in Christ by substituting Socrates’ BELIEF in politicians for it.

So Marx, a Ph.D. in History, gets his answer from this new breed — middle-class breed — of politicians of modern times (in contrast to the “upper class” politicians of medieval times to whom Machiavelli had addressed his remarks) that they get their authority to GRAB control of the credit resources of the Christian people of Northern Europe through Machiavelli from Socrates, just as the Kaiser and Pope had. Call that their “Machiavellianism of the Middle Classes.”

Marx has an answer. He says, “This is all crazy. The true group that has the right to GRAB the power to control the credit-belief-faith of the people of Europe are the ‘masses’ of those people, themselves.”

“Yes,” one answers, “but then how are they ever going to be able to organize to do such a thing — in the way that the Earl of Shaftesbury organized his medieval-English-church-without-Christ (his First Political Party in the World, the Whig Party) to grab that power?” He was able to use people who had experiences with real church organizations, to exclude Christ from this or that particular thing over which they wanted to GRAB the power at issue.”

“I’ll take care of that,” said Marx. “I’ll form a political party for them. And, for the experience part needed I’ll use the knowledge of such things that I have from reading my history books.”

“But, who’ll listen to you,” they said, “you would have to come up with such an incredibly stupefying statement, to be the point of this GRAB of yours for power, all of the way up from the very lowest sewer, your ‘Machiavellianism of the Masses,’ that it itself would be able to redo the entire thinking of Europe from its beginning?” “I can do that,” says Marx. “My history books tell me that the means that your ‘Machiavellianism of the Middle Classes’ has used to GRAB the power to control the credit resources of the people of Northern Europe —that exist because of the Good Faith in Jesus Christ which the rules of the Gild System require of them in order to deal one with another — is that means by which your Middle-Class Machiavellians remove Jesus Christ from this or that particular matter over which they wish to GRAB the power. The way that I and my Communists will GRAB ALL POWER over everyone on Earth, who has now picked up on that set of rules, is by exponging everything about Jesus Christ out of the heart of the life of Europe, as History has told it to us.”

“And just how will you do that?” “By telling the World that the ‘-ism,’ the credit-belief-faith, of the people of the ‘communes’ of Northern Europe — which North European townships Catholicism has from the beginning called ‘communes’ because of their basic function as the means whereby the people of Northern Europe could gather together every Sunday to take what they called ‘the Lord’s Supper’ but which Catholicism called ‘the Communion’ — has nothing whatsoever to do with ‘the Lord’ Jesus Christ.”

“The ‘-ism’ or the belief of the communes of Northern Europe has nothing at all to do with ‘belief in Jesus Christ,” says Marx. Though they have solemnly believed that from ‘immemorial time’ or not,” says Marx, “doesn’t matter; all that that feature of it was, was a trick played upon them by Catholicism.”

So Karl Marx founded his “political party” on the incredibly stupefying message to the people of Northern Europe that the belief of their fathers, back through ‘immemorial time,’ in Jesus Christ as the center and origin of the Good Faith which created the credit resource by which Northern Europe had recently taken over the Earth, was nothing but a trick upon them by Catholicism. That Good Faith that had become that credit resource was just the surviving legacy of the Gild System which never had anything at all to do with Catholicism nor the concept of Jesus Christ that Catholicism had introduced to Europe. And, all that the Gild System was, was the remnant of the folkways of Northern Europe, nothing more. In substantiation of this Marx merely pointed to his History books.

This incredibly stupefying message to the people of Europe has had an effect. It has created a number of States in Europe and elsewhere which have operated upon that idea just discussed. And, the idea producing that message has been the basis of power for a most effective GRAB of control over the credit resources of the people living in Russia as well as elsewhere. But it does have a weakness.
That weakness is that if, in fact, Jesus Christ does have something to do with the origin of the Good Faith of the townships of Northern Europe, the basis of power of Marx’s idea vanishes. It would, so to speak, just “evaporate.” With its vanishing Marx’s Communist Party has no theory for its GRAB of the control of the credit resources of any country other than that it is just the last successful bank robber to have come along; and there is no way that it can continue to function, by its own law structure, under that theory.

So the basis of power of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union would just evaporate, as would that basis of the other Communist countries around the world, if, in fact, the Lord Jesus Christ did have something to do with the origin of the townships or communes of Northern Europe which were the basis of the Gild System, directed until late History by the Hansa.

It would take no bombs to do this, no missiles, no submarines, no massive armies, spy-systems etc., no trillion-dollar defense budgets, just a simple “yes” or “no.”

GOOD FAITH

Value

Regardless of what side of the world’s political fence one might choose to stand on, in the year 1982, either the “Free Enterprise” side or the Communist side, there is only one entity of value for the control of which the highest of powers on either one of those sides is GRABBING.

That single entity of value is the resource of the credit-belief-faith of people somehow operating under those rules of the medieval Gild System that the English-speaking people call “the Law Merchant.”

This single entity of value is at once the most valuable and useful thing which mankind has ever discovered. The “Good Faith” of the people of Northern Europe, which is the basis of the Law Merchant, is the one thing that mankind has ever discovered that is so much more valuable and useful than gold or silver ever were, as circulating exchange media, that the disappearance of both of the latter as circulating exchange media, is scarcely missed.

There are a number of different ways that the sociologist could identify this single entity which mankind has found to be the most valuable and useful thing which it has ever come upon. They could call it, “the survival of the ancient folkways of the North European people,” “the surviving portion of the Gild System,” “the organizational features of the Hansa that have been resuscitated by the United Nations and the International Court of Justice” or “the international customs that are evidence of general practices accepted as law” which are recognized by those latter two organizations. Or one could get general and call it such a thing as, “the perceptible structures of the Protestant Ethic.” One could even get so imprecise and general as to call it, “the reaction of Northern Europe to the attempted GRAB by the Kaiser and Pope for the credit resources of that area, i.e. Protestantism.”

The Answer

In view of these things, there is an answer to the observations of Socrates at the beginning of Part One of this Book, that “money is the most precious treasure that the human race owns” and that “money is nothing other than an unwavering faith of people in their politicians.” It is indeed true that all of the instrumentalities of the Good Faith of the people who transmitted the rules of the Law Merchant to us, are called, “money.” But that is where the identification ends. Today it is feasible that all true money, coins, could be totally done away with and not missed at all.

However, just as politics wishes people to use the term “money” and does not like to go into the specifics of the history of money, as it has been covered in these Books, nor the specifics of the origins of the Law Merchant as they have been covered in this Book, we have gone into those specifics.

So to Socrates we can now answer that the most useful and valuable thing that the human race has ever come upon, the Good Faith of the people of the townships of Northern Europe, is far more valuable and useful than money. And not only does that Good Faith not have anything at all to do with his invention of money, it has nothing to do with his concepts of Orthodoxy, Politics and his System for Learning. And, most of all, it has nothing whatsoever to do with him.



(to be continued)

Georg Hegel

This sifting and picking state of mind of this time was not without some movement in the opposite, the more peaceful, direction. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel was a man, active just at this same time, who caused such movement.

Before one can understand Hegel or that movement, though, it is necessary that one understand Germany. In the first place, Germany is the land of Christ. All things, in the states that were there, in Hegel’s day, had to be justified in terms of Christ. Hegel’s profession was that of a university philosophy professor. Moreover, as a true German, Hegel’s life was committed to finding the way to Christ and at the same time to show it to others. Also, being a North German of the Hansa heritage, he was beset with a commitment to freedom — particularly that type of freedom that Christ taught and practiced. This freedom was obstructed by the State. It is said that in his young life he was nearly obsessed to discover the origins of Christianity and to solve the riddle “How Christianity came to be the anti-freedom state force that it was?”

Not really finding any satisfying answer, he committed his mind to a dialogue, theoretically between his mind and all other men, of how the minds of all men would inevitably come to the freedom that Jesus will give them. THE POINT IS THAT HE EMPHASIZED THE ROLE THAT THE GILD PLAYS IN THIS LIBERATION, The Hansa superstructure over the Gild System had been dead by then for about 150 years. Moreover, the gilds themselves would soon disappear when the Prussian State would make its fatal move to reinstitute its “new Roman Empire” over all of Germany. But, Hegel’s emphasis on gild life would eventually contribute to other large-scale social undertakings.

The main thing to remember, in order to be able to sympathize with the plight of these Germans at that time, is that the impact of their ancient folkways, that had just subdued their country under Napoleon and were now starting to rock the whole world, got their inspiration from the SECULARIZATION of those folkways.

Now, their identification of these folkways with Jesus Christ, and in particular the identification of the GILD SYSTEM with Jesus Christ, in the minds of all who had shared in the leadership of the Hansa, was absolute. These Germans of Prussia and North Germany were “soul-shocked” that anyone could conceive of “secularizing” the heart of their most deeply felt religious persuasions.
And, that is the main reason why the soul-shocked public consciousness of Prussia/North Germany at length saw no way for Germany to put its mind to the task of its advancement, except by bringing out of the crypt and dusting off the idea of uniting Germany as a “new Roman Empire” with the Prussian kings as its Kaisers, when events finally led to that possibility after Bismarck’s forces had defeated those of Napoleon Bonaparte III.

The Founding of The Reichsbank

The Prussian Chancellor Bismark had the King of Prussia proclaimed the “Kaiser” of a new German Reich as “Wilhelm I” by the assembled princes from the rest of Germany at the Versailles Palace on. January 18, 1871, after Prussia defeated Napoleon III. The wheels were then put in motion to transform the Bank of Prussia into the Reichsbank in the year 1875.

The renowned American author on management, Peter F. Drucker, says that, “the rise of large scale organization ... occurred simultaneously — around 1870 — in two places. In North America the transcontinental railroad emerged as a managerial problem. On the continent of Europe, the ‘universal bank’ ...” This “universal bank” was the Reichsbank. And the story of the collision of these two “large scale organizations” is the story that we will encounter from now on (till the end of this Book) as the end of the History of Money.
But, before we get into this tale of the “end of money” let us review once more our thesis of the choice of the North German people that brings on that “end.”

The “Choice”

From immemorial time the people conducting their business on the Baltic Sea have made every decision, in theory, on the basis of what they felt that their GOOD FAITH in Jesus Christ demanded. Those people conducting that business called the organization that coordinated their activities, “the Hansa.”

In the mid-1300’s the headquarters of the Hansa was shifted from an island in the middle of the Baltic Sea to cities on its southwest shoreline, the north coast of medieval Germany, or the “Holy Roman Empire,” as it was known.

The Hansa was the “superstructure” over the Gild System in the North Sea/Baltic Sea area.

Innovations in the section of the Gild System that is called “banking,” which innovations are called “Capitalism,” then the development of states becoming gilds as “central banks,” then finally paper money, were all developments that were adopted by England with phenomenal successes by the 1700’s. After the independence of the U.S.A. the Southern Big Slavery Party succeeded in SECULARIZING the business procedures of Northern Europe, even though those procedures are based on “good FAITH.”

These two things in combination, the success of England with those developments and their secularization by the Slavery Party, caused France to adopt these two things in a changeover that was called, “the French Revolution.”

Nearly the whole world began going over to these two things in combination and a building pressure started within the state controlling North Germany to join into this changeover.

This changeover was to remove Jesus Christ from the way that the people of the North Germany area had from time immemorial held his worship as the centermost thing in their lives. The strength of this changeover was a shock to the people of North Germany, beside seeming very “dirty” in its inspiration by American Slavery.

On the other hand they had to establish a central bank to compete in the modern world.

There was a most spirited attempt to break through the clouds of mystery obscuring the origins of North Germany’s folkways. One of these, by Hegel, proclaimed a belief that mankind would eventually somehow fight its way through to enjoy Jesus in the circumstances of the FREEDOM that both He spoke of and which WERE the results of the business procedures of North Germany, based upon Good Faith in him by its people and which procedures, alone, were the objects at issue, of this great changeover. An element in this proclaimed belief was the role that the Gild System would play, in this “fighting a way through.” And, although the Gild System had already disappeared over most of Europe, and would soon also disappear in Prussia, the idea of this “struggling through” to the ideal freedom was corrupted into Socialism. The spirited attempt to break through the cloud of mystery bore little other fruit. North Germany had to join in step with the rest of the world. Their choice was to:

1. Expunge Jesus Christ from the heart of their national life and practice it in the future in a secularized fashion,
2. Break through the cloud of mystery to scientifically show how the Slavers of the U.S.A., who started the secularization, were wrong, or
3. Establish a central bank upon the basis of the old, beat-up, blood-stained lie that the Roman Caesars had the right to rule over every aspect of the business procedures of a people bearing faith in the Son of God.

Of course they couldn’t bring themselves to such a heathen point as the first required.

They weren’t able to do the second, hard as some tried.

So, they chose the third.

The choice having been made, it was then incumbent upon them to make it work.


Making “It” Work

The Prussians organized all of the old Holy Roman Empire (Medieval Germany) except the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg, Switzerland and those parts of that old Empire that were still ruled directly by the family (the Hapsburgs) that had ruled all of that old Empire indirectly, into their new Empire. The Holy Roman Empire had been the “First Reich”; this Prussian-run Empire was the “Second Reich,” and Hitler’s regime, established after the Second Reich had lost the First World War, was the “Third Reich.”

They were able to do this after winning a short war against the Hapsburgs and their Austria and then by defeating Napoleon Ill’s France in the Franco-Prussian War.

They had great resources to put into the service directed by the Second Reich’s new creature of a Reichsbank. That bank would be so big that, along with the great transcontinental railroad of the U.S.A., it would be the beginning of the “large scale organizations” that lead modern industry.

“What would its goal be?”

The same as that of the transcontinental railroad of the U.S.A.

“What was that?”

The conquest of China.

The Conquest Of China

Put yourself in the place of a North German businessman in the year 1870.

Your country, after being beaten to the bottom of things in a war that began 250 years ago, was FINALLY back in the “lead” again.

250 years earlier the Hansa’s fleet was the world’s largest. North Germany at that time had been the center of business for Northern Europe.

After being out of the picture for 250 years, struggling to put its life back into an operable order, things had changed. And now, tiny England had the largest fleet in the world. “What had they done with it?” Conquered the second most populous country on Earth and made themselves extremely rich by directing the businesses inside of that conquest.

As a North German businessman of 1870 you might say, “We could build up a bigger fleet than England again; but then, what would we do with it?”

The answer with a conversation partner with only a little imagination might be obvious.

“Conquer the most populous country in the world and make ourselves rich by directing the businesses inside of that conquest!”

There was a very obvious difficulty in doing this, though, and of course our hypothetical but imaginative German businessmen knew this only too well.

There was no way that Germany could exert a controlling influence on the Atlantic Ocean. England was supreme there. It had taken that control during the 1700’s and driven its competitors for that control off of the water. The financial catastrophe that France experienced upon losing that control was the reason for the French Revolution. Napoleon had tried to block the English Navy out of the Mediterranean, build up France’s naval power there, dig the Suez canal, get a French Navy into a well-supplied situation in the Indian Ocean (where it had a chance to compete with the British Navy on somewhat equal terms for control over the commerce of the Asiatic countries) and just ignore the Atlantic Ocean. This failed with Napoleon’s naval defeat at Trafalgar.

Recently, Napoleon’s “nephew,” the Emperor Napoleon III, had just succeeded in digging the Suez Canal. But, with his recent defeat by Prussia, France was in no position to undertake grand designs; and Britain took over control of the Suez Canal from France.

So, for Germany to launch any grand design it would have to ignore both the Atlantic AND the Mediterranean-Suez route.

“What was there left?” Well, they really didn’t have to use that much imagination. The ever-inventive British were pushing the model of the plan (that the Germans would eventually adopt) in the U.S.A., with the recent winners of the American Civil War.

Why The American Civil War

The money interests in the American North and in the South had conducted a “cold war” from the very beginning of the country for a position of dominance within the U.S.A., for their respective Economies. This became “hot” as these two Economies — one based upon free-holder agriculture, the other based on slavery agriculture — competed for the control of the territory through which a transcontinental railroad could be laid to the Pacific coast ports in California.

A Southern president had sent Southern generals to Mexico City to conquer Mexico so that the South could annex the north half of Mexico, introduce its slavery variety of agricultural economy there and therewith finance the building of a railroad through that territory to the California ports. This plan was vehemently fought against by Northern leaders in Congress. They lost in Congress, but while the Southern generals were straining to win “this most unrighteous war” (in the words in Congress of the former Northerner President, John Quincy Adams) in Mexico, Northern sea captains sailed around Cape Horn, took the prize, California, and promptly made it a “free” state. The fury of the leaders of the South’s Economy at this loss continued to build until they eventually started the Civil War over it.

The Eastern Pacific Ports

The Northern sea captains, on the other hand, lost no time in showing why these California ports were so strategic to the world’s economy. They immediately outfitted a fleet in San Francisco Bay and sailed westward to force their supremacy over the economy of Japan.

The Japanese were aghast. For centuries the “foreign devils” had been coming to grasp at control over their economy; but they had had to come all of the way across the Atlantic, then Indian, then Pacific Oceans. Now here was a strong fleet of the foreign devils come directly from the eastern shore of the Japanese’s “own” ocean, the Pacific. The Japanese almost immediately divided Japan up into Germanic shires, wards and communes (following the model that France instituted in the French Revolution) and erected a modern European paper-money economy over that base that, eventually, was a carbon copy of the way the North Germans established their Second Reich.

However, Japan was only the “appetizer.” The “real meal” was the subjugation of the entire economy of China, with its hundreds of millions of hard-working people, to the economy of some “lucky” country of these European foreign devils. The British were intent that they were going to be those “lucky” ones, again, as they had been in India, so they had the Bank of England provide the money to finance (and control) the American transcontinental railroads to the Pacific. This was one of the two first large-scale organizations to dominate modem industry.

The Other Large-scale Organization

The other large-scale organization was, of course (as had been said), the Reichsbank.

What was its plan?”

It would build a transcontinental railroad from Berlin south through the Second Reich, then south through the territory of its ally, the Autro-Hungarian Empire, and then on through the territory of a new asset that it had acquired to the southeast, the old, crumbling Turkish Empire, where that railroad would terminate at a portion the Persian Gulf. There they would be able to build a German Navy that could dominate the Indian Ocean, far away from Britain’s North Sea control of the Atlantic. From there they could take over China.

And, since there was no foreseeable reason to wait, they immediately began the takeover of Chiachou Harbor, at the base of the Shantung Peninsula (present-day Tsingtao), from which point, the military key to China, they would be able to conquer China. (It was from this point that Japan, after declaring war on Germany during the First World War and annexing Chiachou to Japan, eventually conquered most of China during the 193 0’s and 1940’s.)

Protest

This typically most-thoroughly thought out German plan began to work “like clockwork.” The competitors of Germany, with their comparatively smaller “large-scale organizations,” their central banks managing the activity of their money, could only protest and hope that something would go wrong with the German plan and then try some other hasty grand design that could take the advantage away from Germany should that something happen.

The dismayed French, smarting from their recent defeat by Prussia in the Franco-Prussian War, had to try anything. They landed on the concept of sending virtually all of their export capital in the years between their defeat in that war and the beginning of the First World War, that is between 1871 and 1914, to Russia. The primary use of these funds there was to finance the building of a transcontinental railroad across Siberia to a terminus at the tip of the Dairen Peninsula, at Port Arthur, which is directly across the Yellow Sea from the Shantung Peninsula (the two peninsulas “closing off” the access from Peking to the rest of the Yellow Sea and to the open Pacific).

England tried the hasty and, as circumstances came to prove, silly move of trying to build a port for themselves on the north tip of the Shantung Peninsula, just across the Yellow Sea from Port Arthur, at Wei Hai Wei. It was such a “disastrously” expensive and wasteful project, to try to carve out a tenable British position there, that the opposition party in Parliament called the place, “Woe, Woe, Woe.”

The Roadblock

In the way of this meticulously conceived plan for the takeover of China by Germany and the subsequent dominance that would mean for the Reichsbank’s paper money, there was only one real roadblock.

Either the Second Reich or its “allies,” the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the Turkish Empire, held sovereignty over almost all of the territory where track needed to be laid for a profitable and feasible rail route for the “Berlin to Baghdad Railroad.” That was the name of the project that was the heart of the Reichsbank’s “large-scale” plan. They held sovereignty over ALMOST all of that territory. The tiny segment of territory needed to lay that track, over which they did not hold sovereignty, was that segment going through the small Kingdom of Serbia.

After the First World War Serbia was rewarded for its part in stopping this large-scale plan by being expanded to become Yugoslavia.

You may recall, from earlier in these Books, that the Drin River of Yugoslavia was the dividing line between the Latin-speaking west half and the Greek-speaking east half of the Roman Empire. In modern times the people living on both sides of this river speak the same language; but those on the west side write that language with the Latin Alphabet and belong to the Roman Catholic Church while those on the east side write that language with the Greek Alphabet and belong to the Greek Orthodox Church: the church which in those days looked for military protection from the leaders of the Russian Empire.

Russia had suffered a massive setback when it lost the Russo-Japanese War in 1905. At a tremendous expense of French export capital and Russian labor the Trans-Siberian Railroad had been built from Europe across Asia to Port Arthur. It was a long “straw” with which the French and the Russians had been planning to suck the cream off of the top of the “milk bucket” of the Economy of China. In winning that war the Japanese had effectively “tied a knot” in the end of that straw. The French were furious. The Russians were furious. But, the Russians’ fury was approaching desperation.

Russia was nearly devoid of the business talent needed to make and lead the “largescale” business “organizations” that were taking over the world. There was almost no capability in Russia that was able, on its own, to create the capital needed for “large-scale” undertakings.

Its own attempt at something of that nature had resulted in the Japanese easily sealing off their eastern approach to important economic advantages in the Pacific. Now, to the south, the smoothly-running plan of Germany was turning a weak Turkey (that couldn’t effectively keep it from access to the world’s commerce through the seas to the south) into a very significant puppet state of the Second Reich that was “walling up” that access most effectively.

When Serbia appealed to the Russian Empire to keep Austria-Hungary from absorbing it, after a Serbian killed the heir of the Austrian Kaiser, Russia acted out of desperation to stop the economic development of the Berlin to Baghdad Railroad that was walling up “the tunnel at the end of which was its last hope.” It mobilized its Army along the frontier it shared with Austria-Hungary. But, its clumsy mobilization plan called for a simultaneous mobilization along its border with the Second Reich, which was a “casus belli”; and the First World War began.

The War

The line-up in the War was no surprise: it was the builders of the Berlin to Baghdad Railroad, that is, those who would benefit from it, against all of those who wouldn’t.

The U.S.A., of course, wouldn’t benefit from it. It was a junior partner of the Bank of England in the alternative, or the other, “large-scale organization” for the conquest of China, the transcontinental railroads of the U.S.A. It was only a matter of time before they got into the war on the side of the people who buttered their bread.

The Federal Reserve System

The almost incomprehensible ignorance of all of the citizens of the U.S.A. as to the origin of the business procedure that they use, that they enthusiastically call, “The Free Enterprise System,” is dealt with in the next book.

This ignorance is explained in part by the relatively tremendous geographical distance separating them from the more recent historical headquarters of that origin in North Germany.

But, just as the North Germans had trouble with the idea of adopting a post-French-Revolution central bank, because of the anti-Christian agnosticism that they felt that brought to them, in the light of their background, so the people of the U.S.A. had defended themselves from letting their money become a “mindless wildness” by two provisions in the document of its “Constitution.”

One was the provision that, “No State shall … make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts ...” How the U.S. Congress, that has NO authority except that which comes from that document, is able to make any paper money a “tender in payment of debt” is an unexplained clinging to some hope that the origin of the business procedures of the North German Hansa will somehow bail them out; or else their action is a “mindless wildness” already.

The other defense against mindless wildness running the U.S. Economy was the provision in the Constitution that made the U.S. Senate the body representing the accumulated economic wisdom of the legislatures of the various states. It did this by making senators the very economically responsible direct representatives of those legislatures, rather than just another body of representatives of the economically skill-less “man on the street” — such as the character of the House of Representatives allowed it to be. These old “representatives-of-legislatures” senators, with all of the vast store of economic wisdom and experience which they possessed, would never have voted for the establishment of the mindless wildness that the Federal Reserve System proved itself to be almost immediately after it was founded. And, those Americans who were intent on leading the competition from their “large-scale” organization, against that of the Reichsbank, knew that — although they probably couldn’t have conceived of the mindl
ess wildness that the Reichsbank would become when it came upon difficult times, especially so when it was in its death throes.

Mindless Wildness

Former U.S. Vice President Nelson Aldrich Rockefeller’s “other grandfather” was Senator Nelson Aldrich. Aldrich was the political agent of that former Vice President’s more famous grandfather, John D. Rockefeller, Sr. Headed by Aldrich in the Senate, the American people were manipulated to believe that their old tried and true Senate had become “un-democratic” — that all senators should be the direct representatives of the perhaps economically skill-less masses, rather than of the combined economic experience of the state legislatures, as the “Founding Fathers” had provided. That made sense to the comparatively less economically skillful man on the street who supported the ratification of the 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution on May 31, 1913.

As soon as the Senate was thus cut off from its previous base of economic wisdom. Nelson Aldrich pushed through the passage of the Federal Reserve Act, which was signed into law on December 23, 1913.

This Act, coupled with the authority made available to the Federal Reserve System by his other brainchild, the 16th Amendment, that was ratified on February 25, 1913, issued in the era of America’s mindless wildness with the concept of money.

At the end of the Civil War the U.S. National Debt was 3 billion dollars. This had been reduced to but 1 billion over the nearly 50-year period intervening up until that time when the Federal Reserve/central bank took over the management of U.S. money. In the first six years of its existence that figure shot up to 21 billion. In 1982 it is at the 1 trillion dollar level and careening toward the brink of totally mindless wildness.



The Liberty Bond Drives

The 21 billion dollar National Debt that the Federal Reserve made possible was the result of acceptances by the U.S. Treasury of $21,435,370,600.00 subscribed to during the five, war “liberty-bond” drives of 1917, 1918 and 1919.

It was calculated that the total net war expenditures, by both sides, during the First World War amounted to $210,935,000,000.00. That is about ten times the amounts raised by the Liberty Bond Drives. Those Drives, however, were so much different from every other source of income spent by the warring parties that they are identifiable as the entities that are apparently going to be the destruction of the concept of money.

Each of the warring parties, of course, taxed its citizens to their limit in order to pay for the war. The U.S.A., also, through the use of its recent hastily acquired theory relative to income taxes on corporations, paid about 1/3 of its costs incurred in waging the war by taxes.

All of the warring nations seemed to have used every stratagem that they could think of to raise the funds that they needed to survive. They borrowed huge amounts from whomever they could. (If one will only remember that these dollar figures are from the days when gold sold for $20.60 an ounce one can see, from this single point of view, that that money was worth 20 times as much as money in 1982, when gold seems to bounce around a sales price of somewhere in the vicinity of $400.00 an ounce).

The U.S.A. passed the 100,000,000 population mark in 1917. That $21,000,000,000, therefore, was $210.00 from every man woman and child in the country. Using only the gold inflation rate, of twenty to one, that would have been a loan by every soul in the U.S.A. to the U.S. Government of about $4,200.00, $16,800.00 from the average family of four or $420,000,000,000.00 from everyone.

This 21 billion dollars was integral to the basis of the standard of living of the American public.

Going out to get that basis of that standard of living were the financial leaders of the U.S.A. now become the heirs of the founders of Babel in an ultimately current sense. And, they were out there “playing for keeps” with “the big boys.” One has to remember, though, that they were very inexperienced.

They were going to go out and “make a DEAL” with the American people, a “good deal” for those people. They were going to borrow all of that money from them, INVEST it, and then pay it back in ten years with a substantial, tax-exempt interest.

The “end of money” now raises its head when the very inexperienced American people were being directly approached by these big dealers without benefit of their traditional protectors, the representatives-of-legislatures senators, which the founding fathers had provided to protect them from shysters. In their innocence, they were being told that they were being asked to invest their savings and were being assured that they would be repaid with interest. They were being given these assurances by the most well-know Americans, movie stars etc., that they had ever heard of. “What were they to do?” They “invested” their savings. Their straight-forward belief that they would be paid back is what is at this time ruining the concept of money.

An old-fashioned representative-of-a-legislature senator would have applied old-fashioned shyster-protection routines. He would have asked questions like: “What makes you so sure that you are going to be able to pay them back in ten years?” “Where do you plan to get this 420 billion plus interest from?” “Certainly not for 1920’s scale corporate income taxes?” “And besides, what do you mean INVEST in a war?” “You don’t INVEST in a WAR. A WAR is a TOTAL GAMBLE! Everybody loses. You build explosives, send them over ‘the pond’; they go ‘pop’; and there the basis of the U.S.A’s standard of living goes ‘pop.’”

Unfortunately the old-fashioned senators were no more; they had been shorn from their base of power by the shysters involved. However, if one or two of them had still been around and could have pressured an answer out of the shysters that ran those Liberty Bond Drives, the answer that they might have gotten may have been something like this:

“Listen, our dollars aren’t coming in at the beginning of this contest. The War is nearly three years old and both sides are approaching financial exhaustion — with the Central Powers in the middle, the Russian Empire on the Eastern Front and Britain and France on the Western Front. However, the Russians are done. They are spending $47 million per day (remember to multiply that by 20) and are nearing collapse. Now, if they collapse there will be no more Eastern Front. With no more Eastern Front the Germans will be able to turn all of their attention on just Britain and France. And, since the Reichsbank is far stronger than both the Bank of England and the Banque de la France put together, the Reichsbank will win. “So, the Bank of England and the Banque de la France have made us a FABULOUS DEAL, if only we act immediately, build an ‘Arsenal of Democracy,’ and ship ammunitions manufactured from about 1/2 of the proceeds from the Liberty Bond Drives to the Russian Empire.” The answer from the Senator: “
What do you mean ‘Arsenal of Democracy’? You mean an arsenal for the continued senseless slaughter of helpless Christian people.”

“Shhh. We know. But, we aren’t going to tell the American people. We are going to send the munitions made from about $6 billion to Britain and those made from about S4 billion to France. Neither of them will use any of it but will re-ship it up around Norway to Murmansk, on the Arctic Ocean, and, from there, supply Russia to keep up an Eastern Front. The beautiful thing about this arrangement is that the Bank of England and the Banque de la France GUARANTEE the repayment of every dime.”

“What collateral do they have?” the crusty old-time senator would have asked.

“Oh, this is beautiful; their collateral! The Banque de la France has built the entire Trans-Siberian Railroad. As a matter of fact nearly all of the export capital from France for almost the last 50 years has gone to the Russian Empire. Of course the Russian Empire has had to go into ‘receivership’ because of war expenses so the Banque de la France is PUTTING UP NEARLY EVERYTHING INDUSTRIAL IN THE WHOLE RUSSIAN EMPIRE AS THE PRIMARY PIECE OF COLLATERAL FOR THIS DEAL. “ISN’T THAT FABULOUS?” Beside that we are getting a second mortgage on the war-bankrupted British and French colonial empires.”

The Reichsbank’s Life Insurance

Of course there were no more old-fashioned senators to ask these questions, so the U.S.A. loaned half of the monetary basis of its standard of living through Britain and France to the teetering Russian Empire.

In spite of that infusion the Russian Empire still lost the War. The U.S. reaction was swift. The second half of the standard of living of the U.S.A. was shipped to the Western Front to win the War and also to stop Germany from stealing the collateral for the first half. Good money thrown away after bad.

At this point the Reichsbank had to take out a little life insurance.

There was no way that their Western Front was going to hold up against this powerful late onslaught from the U.S. Economy. The U.S. Economy had declared war on Germany. Germany would have to destroy that Economy if it was to survive.

To “take out this life insurance” the Reichsbank took advantage of the services of one of the most total traitors of his native land that is known to History: Vladimir Ilyich Lenin.

The Reichsbank’s emissaries approached Lenin in his exile in Switzerland and asked him if he would betray the people of his native land to their mortal enemies if the price was right. Lenin said, “Sure.”

The Reichsbank said, “We will send you through Germany in a special, private railway car to Sweden. You will cross from Sweden to Finland, meeting others there. From there you will proceed to Finland Station in St. Petersburg. There you will proclaim Russia’s Communist Revolution. Your message is simple. If the Russian people agree not to pay the Yankees back their 9.5 billion dollars plus the astronomical interest on that loan and make that their official government policy, the German Government will make peace with such a Russian government. Also, tell them that if they don’t do it we will tell the German Army to start slaughtering them, and we’ll start with you.”

Lenin went to Russia and proclaimed his Revolution.

He set up a government that really had only one doctrine: “Don’t pay the Yankees back.”

To their everlasting discredit the Russian people went along with this defrauding of the U.S. bondholders, long after Germany’s threat was no more. Their moral turpitude at not repaying the people who had saved their lives at the moment of their despair is enormous.

Today if one travels in Russia the people there delight in pointing out the brooding stone monuments which they have built to the mystique that they have created around Lenin, which mystique is the only thing approaching worship that they now carry on.

Nearly as much as they love saying what reverence they all have for Lenin, they love to “bellyache” about the 20 million Russians that were slaughtered by the German Army in the Second World War. It seems to be beyond them to comprehend that if it hadn’t been for Lenin’s treason with their First World War enemy, there could have been no Second War and no 20 million Russians killed because of him.

When Lenin’s Bolsheviks proclaimed their bright, new message, that they weren’t going to pay the Yankees back, the American big dealers said, “But, you’ve got to pay us back. We have to pay the American people back with interest in 1929. We will have a huge Depression in our country in 1929 if you don’t pay us back.” The Bolsheviks, and what was surprising, such a large number of the previously apparently decent Russian people, said, “We have been totally flattened by this War. We will have a Depression here for a hundred years if we try to pay you, so we are just going to steal all of the Frenchmen’s property, your collateral, and start thinking about ‘Old Number One.’ Besides, Communism says that we are doing the right thing.”

American politicians, in general, don’t seem to have anything particularly terrible against Socialists. Socialists who think that their brand of Socialism excuses them from paying back solemn obligations to the U.S. Government, that is to say Bolsheviks, have been an anathema from the beginning.

1929 came. The American big dealers and their Federal Reserve System had no funds to pay back an expecting American people. They weren’t going to get paid back, full faith on their part that they would be paid back, or not. The American securities market collapsed. The U.S. Economy crashed. The Reichsbank’s life insurance policy had paid off.

Immediately the Reichsbank had a non-discharged German soldier, retained by the German Army on its rolls after the First World War, Adolf Hitler, put Germany back into the position it had been in before the U.S. Economy had stepped in to stop the Reichsbank in its conduct of World War One. World War Two was only a continuation of World War One after a twenty year interval, thanks to the Reichsbank’s life insurance policy: V. I. Lenin and his Communist Party. And, one part of that continuation was the slaughter of 20,000,000 of Lenin’s admirers, thanks, more than to any other man, much more than to Adolf Hitler, to V.I. Lenin.



(to be continued)

THE UNITED ORDER

Introduction

All of that portion of the Nordic Race that preserved down through time some vestige of its ancient Gild System preserved thereby their sense that to be, in “order,” was to be, “united.”

From that which we have touched upon, so far, about the Gild System, it is history that the object of that unity was unity of the individual gildsman to Christ. That was the “universal value” that produced the “common sense of order,” that we speak of in the Lesson on, “The Story of Our Law.”

The subject of this Chapter is the concept of, “value.”

Any “organization” of people, to the extent that it is an organization, is people who somehow or other were “organized” upon a shared concept as to “value.”

Thinking, again, historically, the shared concept of value, upon which the historic Gild System functioned, was the concept of the individual Gildsman’s “unity” with Christ and therethrough unity with all of the rest of the Gild System, conceived of as, the “body” of the Son of God.

“How did a Gildsman become a Gildsman?”

By his “Oath.”

The VALUE upon which the Gild System of our forefathers functioned was the value of a man’s OATH.

Of course, here, we do not ignore the Ynglinga Saga’s narrative of how the person from whom Nordics got the word, “God,” was the founder of their Gild System, and that his personal name was, Oath. Nor will we ignore the “value” that the entire world is “organized” (or should that word be “disorganized”) upon today, which is the AKSIJNS, which is the “looking to ONE’S OWN,” covered previously. [In Modern German, “my own”, ”thine own,” and “one’s own” is, “mein,” “dein” and “sein.” In Modern Dutch, “my own” is still “mijn” and in earlier Dutch spelling “one’s own” was, “sijn.”]

The greatest “Kontor,” or “factory center,” or “industrial site,” of the Hansa, during the Crusades era, was the Flemish town of Brugge. After the Crusades this principal industrial headquarters was moved to Antwerp, still in the Dutch-speaking area of the Netherlands. When the Dutch-speaking leadership of the Hansa, and, therefore, of the Gild System, generally, moved their headquarters again, this time from Antwerp to Amsterdam, thus forming the “United Provinces of the Netherlands,” in their Protestant-”republican” efforts to escape the Catholic-monarchist domination of the House of Spain, this value of the Gild System, of the Gildsman being “united” to Christ, was, of course, the shared value of the people resulting in their new republic’s name, “The ‘United’ Provinces.”

The exact same motivation is working upon the exact same shared concept of value when, as this Dutch versus Spanish/Protestant versus Catholic struggle burst into the Thirty Years War on the European Continent, and the English Civil War on the island of Britain, the fellow travelers of that Dutch-speaking leadership of the Hansa, the English Puritans of the Colonies of New England, banded themselves together by, “The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual League of the UNITED Colonies of New England.”

The exact same motivation, working upon that exact same shared concept of value, worked again, as the sons of those earlier Puritans of New England, in a new struggle with Britain’s monarchy, and in imitation of that earlier, “The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual League of the UNITED Colonies of New England,” now wrote, “The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union of the UNITED States of America.”


A New Value

There are TWO “ORGANIZATIONS” of people which have called themselves, “The UNITED States of America.”

The primary military officer of the “First” of these two organizations was George Washington. Its first President was “John Hanson.” The first president of the SECOND organization was George Washington.

And, this “first” organization was very successful as an organization. It successfully organized for, fought, and won the Revolutionary War. That is, it successfully drove the forces of the British Monarchy, to the south of Canada, off of the Continent, and forced the British Monarchy to relinquish any claim, which it might have felt it had, to all of that part of the Continent below Canada from the Atlantic coastline to the Mississippi River.

However, a terrible thing had happened in Europe between the times that the Puritans had “united” themselves, during the Thirty Years War, and the time that their children “united” themselves in this first organization, to conduct war against the British Monarchy.

As Catholicism began its wars against Protestantism, the Gild System of the Nordic Race, with its erstwhile Hanseatic Leadership, began to die.

In its place a most startlingly sinister, alternative “leadership” emerged. It is that “sick” union of the Greek concept of the “state” with a development of that Nordic concept of the Gild System, of which we have spoken at length in earlier Books of this Course: “Central” Banks.

With the “retreat,” in England, after the conclusion of the English Civil War, of the traditional champions of Gild System rights there — the Puritans — these “startlingly sinister” people, of whom we have spoken, made enough of an inroad into English life to found their “Bank of England.”

The “moral chaos” resulting in English life, because of that particular founding, would not be particularly noticeable by just watching the way London’s people, for example, walked along the streets. Any change in that could almost be imperceptible. But a dulling change in the heart of English life started then that threatens, ever thereafter, to become totally so.

This “secularizing” took its toll in New England, as well, under the dulling dominance of that Central Bank, between the two times that the people of New England rose to unite themselves around the traditional value of their fathers.

When the first organization, named the United States of America, united to drive out the troops of the King of England from North America, they simultaneously drove out the Bank of England, with its, now, “paper” “pound.”

This first organization, in New England, with life there dulled and secularized, as it had been, since the intrusion of that most sinister force in English life, was not able to successfully unite around that traditional uniting value of their fathers, once the Revolutionary War had been won, by that uniting value.

Shays’ Rebellion threatened to become a war of wide-spread chaos in Bank-of-England-paper-pound-less New England. Apparently, entirely for the exigencies of Slavery, as we have recounted at length before, Slavery Interests suggested to the writers of “The Articles of Confederation ... ,” who had thereby organized the first organization, called, the United States of America, that they “up-grade” the organization. This would be done by getting down on paper the ENTIRE understanding of the English-speaking people, as to the values upon which they are organized. The English word used to express that thought is, “Constitution.” This up-grading therefore would be “Articles of Constitution.” With that done, then, there would at last be some “workable” basis for a replacement to the paper pound of the Bank of England.

Seemingly “chafing” at the secularizing “pall” now descending over Christian life, therefore not being able to mouth much logic about “God,” anymore, but still getting in words like, “blessings,” whenever they could, the Puritanical authors of the new US Constitution “Crafted,” with their words, “AN” understanding of the American people of the values upon which they were organized.

And, in this new, dull, monetarized, secularized Age, of such an insanity as, a “paper” “pound of sterling silver,” these authors at least got back to the “beginnings” of Money, sweeping away millenniums of the insanities associated with Money (as told in “The History of Money”), and specified items in the direction of sanity, rather than of those insanities.

The reasoning given for getting together to organize this second organization called, “The United States of America,” was the threat that the monetary “chaos” causing Shays’ Rebellion would become more general and destroy the first organization. Going in the opposite direction of the insanities that characterized the History of Money, the authors of the Constitution proposed to the American People the direction of sanity which was: US Constitution Article I, Section 10, Paragraph 1 — “No State shall make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts,” with the machinery that the First Congress should pass “the Coinage Act,” of April 2, 1792, specifying that a US “DOLLAR” is 27.46 “grains” of pure Gold then exchangeable for 371.25 “grains” of pure Silver.

This, then, was the “new value,” that the second organization to call itself, “The United States of America,” was organized upon, when the American People, the “people” of’ that first organization said, “We, the People of the United States of America, in order to form a more perfect Union ... ,” as they ratified the US Constitution and thereby accepted this new value as their shared concept of value, upon which they organized the Second Organization. This Second Organization, then, was formed by them, the owners in fee simple of the portions of the Continent quitted by the British Monarchy, as the “shareholders” of the Continent, in the exact way that the shareholders of a business corporation unite to form it.

The History of the “New Value”

The Government of the United States really didn’t “mess” much with the lives of its people, all of the way from the ratification of the US Constitution down into the first years of the 1900’s, when the simultaneous efforts to draw that Government into a Central Bank relationship and into the “World War” both succeeded.

Prior to that time, one of the principal tasks of the Government, that actually brought it into the everyday lives of the people of the USA, was to mint gold and silver coins for their use.

This changed at the First World War.

The “Public Employees,” (using that term as the name for all of the individuals in Government employment who, one way or another, perpetrated the following; and that is almost 100%) at that time “borrowed” approximately ONE BILLION OUNCES (preferring to use a more absolute rather than an arbitrary term — “ounces” are weights, “What are ‘dollars’ nowaday?”) OF GOLD from the “Public Employers” and squandered it in the most hideous of wastes.

We say, “Public Employees” and “Public Employers.” If we dwell on that idea for a moment, looking at the “relationship” from a number of angles, one of which might be, “the Government Employees” relative “the Government Employers,” we ask ourselves, “What exactly was the DEAL with this BILLION OUNCES OF GOLD?”

Nothing out of the ordinary. The employees of numerous “ordinary companies,” very regularly, “borrow” money from the company’s “employers,” its “owners,” its “stockholders.” These employees BIND themselves to a specific plan to repay their employers, and these employees are held tightly liable and accountable for following that Plan. Now, if those employees make a deal with some unwary soul, OUTSIDE of their company’s corporation, and those employees do not perform, they have only “a LIMITED liability,” to those outsiders, maybe getting off “free” from any obligation, maybe shunting off to their employers, their owners, their stockholders, the ultimate liability for their mistaken deeds. HOWEVER, those employees have no such device to protect them from the “in-house” arrangements that we have spoken of. The in-house arrangements, the “loans” which a company’s employees go and arrange to “borrow,” “for a while,” from the company’s owners, its stockholders, are very “direct,” as opposed to being indirect, with non-owners. Should employees fail to perform the plan to repay these, their direct employers, the OWNERS of their company, of course there is nothing to protect them, from the fury of these direct owners, in punishing them.

Now, of course, when the public employees of the United States of America squandered that BILLION ounces of gold, in the hideous waste mentioned, they had absolutely no way to pay it back. The public employees of the United States of America had gone before the OWNERS of the United States of America to present a plan for those owners, the employers of those employees, to be repaid their LOAN of their ONE BILLION OUNCES OF GOLD, that those employers had made to those employees, who needed to BORROW it from them, “for a while.” Of course when their plan failed all that they had, before they would have to come to grips with paying that billion ounces of gold back to the owners, was that “while.” They had that while to come up with, a “Second Plan,” to meet their responsibilities, to the owners of the United States of America, to pay them back. “And, what was the SECOND PLAN, of the public employees to meet their obligation that they had imposed upon themselves, to pay back to their employers this BILLION OUNCES OF GOLD, which they had approached them for, negotiated with them for, and, finally, covenanted with them for, to borrow for a while?” Before we come to that Second Plan, this is an opportune moment to mention something.

The Current “Patriot Movement” in the United States of America

Very slowly, after the First World War, there began to rise, in the public consciousness, a movement that today is called by its adherents, “The Patriot Movement.”

It renewed itself with a vengeance after the Second World War, but did not really begin to blossom, into large numbers of persons involved, until the 1980’s. To my delight, the writings orienting people to the Worldwide Interlingual Telecommunications Utility also seem to be enthusiastically accepted among these large numbers of people.

Although this current Patriot Movement was begun, after the First World War, by a brilliant monograph, written by one of the greatest industrialists who ever lived, a beloved American “Folk Hero,” by practically all measures, it has seemed that nearly all of the leaders who have ventured to try to “articulate” — for these swiftly growing numbers of the aggravated owners of the United States of America, so currently frustrated by the doings of the public employees here, in relation to them and to all of the other public employers — a single “cry” venting, in part at least, the aggravated frustration of these people, have not fared well in doing that.

As I have suggested, I have in recent years had ample occasion, to meet with the leadership of these numbers and with the rank and file enough to articulate that “cry.” It wouldn’t, of course, vent all of the frustration at the current doings of public employees, relative their employers, in this Country, nor would it articulate the entire program that they would like to see done. But, I can say that it would “feel” comfortable in the mouths of those with whom I have met, and it would very definitely be an explosively spontaneous outburst from all for an opener. And that Cry is: “GIVE THAT GOLD BACK TO US NOW!”

That definitely articulates the aggravated frustration, with public employees, of the now swiftly growing numbers swelling the ranks of the American Patriot Movement. For an opener, they cry with one voice at public employees, “GIVE US BACK THAT ONE BILLION OUNCES OF GOLD, RIGHT NOW!!”

Now let’s examine the “Second Plan” of the public employees.

The “Second Plan” of the Public Employees

With their “while,” that they had on their hands, after they had squandered on the hideous waste, mentioned, the one billion ounces of gold that they had borrowed, for a little while, from their public employers, the public employees of the United States of America came up with a “Second Plan,” to meet those “responsibilities,” that they had taken upon themselves, to make the repayment that they had covenanted to, under the first plan.

This Second Plan was for the Public Employees to declare “War” on the Public Employers. They decreed that, at gun-point, the armed employees of the US Government would go into the homes of the public employers, throughout the entire land, and steal their gold from them, putting resistors in Prison, maybe even shooting them. That was the Second Plan.

They reasoned, “If we make it against the law for the American People to have any gold, then they can’t take any action against us for not now having any gold to give them back their one billion ounces of gold.” They had the audacity to say, in the Congressional Record, “WE suspended the US Constitution.”

They did far more than that.

They inaugurated a Public Employees’ Revolution against the Public Employers.

By the specification of terms in the US Constitution, “Treason” is defined as “levying war” against the People of the United States, “taking up arms” against them. This is exactly what they did.

More than that the ENTIRE REASON, given at the time, for organizing this Second Organization to be called, “The United States of America,” was for the People of the First Organization to agree upon a common shared value. That shared value was, specifically, “GOLD COINS.” This was more than Treason. This was War by the Public Employees against the precise reason the Public Employers organized the Second Organization that employed them.

The punishment for Treason is death. No “due process.” Traitors are “summarily” executed, on sight.

Yet, the Public Employees “grabbing their tiger by the tail,” pushed this Second Plan’s further points, that, “From now on the Public Employees will start BOSSING around the Public Employers.”

That last quote articulates, almost 100%, the scope of the aggravated frustration of the current Patriot Movement in the USA.

Public Employees started their Second Plan hunting down Americans who were “hoarding gold.” In another country, set up as this one is, it was the essence of none of a public employee’s business how much “gold” any public employer had, if it was a “hoard,” in the public employee’s eye or not. In another country, set up like this one is, the tongue of the public employee, daring to say that word, “hoard,” in that context, might even have been cut from the head that had the treason to say it.

In this country, on the other hand, its public employers have developed today a nearly explosive aggravated frustration against its public employees.

The aggravation and frustration of this stand-off arises from the attempts of these employees to rule the employers by a “jazzy” propaganda of falsehoods. For example, they said, “EUROPE won’t pay AMERICA back the gold that AMERICA loaned them.” The point is that “AMERICA” DIDN’T loan “Europe” anything; America’s public employees did. The whole point is that those public employees have to pay the American people back the loan they borrowed from them. Whom THEY loaned it to, or if they threw it into the sea, after they once got it, is beside the point.

Let’s say that the Cry, “GIVE US BACK OUR BILLION OUNCES OF GOLD, RIGHT NOW!” somehow took effect.

Let’s say that the Public Employees of the United States of America, somehow, came up with that ONE BILLION OUNCES OF GOLD and restored it to the American families it had been borrowed from, even with interest, in GOLD.

Then, let’s say, that someone took up the chant, against those public employees, “NOW PAY US BACK THE RELIGIOUS COLLECTION, THE “AKSIJNS,” THAT YOU, IN YOUR IGNORANCE OF LAW, HAVE BEEN SWINDLING FROM US, SINCE 1943!”

And, then, let’s say, that that Cry became general.

And, then, let’s say, that someone cried, “WHY END AT 1943, MAKE THEM GIVE IT BACK ...” and then there would be some discussion as people went constantly further back in time until someone said ... “YEAH, MAKE THEM GIVE IT ALL BACK, ALL OF THE WAY BACK TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT, IN 1791!”

That is the end of “government” on this earth, of the type that has existed since the days when “money” began, in the days of Lydia, at the time of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, as recounted in, “The History of Money.”

In introducing this Course a quotation was made from J. Reuben Clark Jr., widely considered to be the foremost living expert on the US Constitution since before the First World War until his death in 1961.

When he forewarned, in 1937, of the coming of a Second World War. he indicated that when the ultimately irresponsible methods planned to pay for it, eventually the Personal Income Tax levied in the USA, from 1943, became known as being just that, there would come a Second Great Depression in this country and throughout the world, so much worse than the First Great Depression that it would “be ... a chaos which will ... threaten the very existence of government, of property, of human rights, of liberty, even of the family itself.

He said that this would happen to Mankind, “in the existing state of mind.” Let’s see if that “state of mind” can’t be changed.

The “Good” Side

What we have talked about, so far, in this Chapter, is the “bad” side of our issue, the “down” side.

We will now talk of the “good” side. We will attempt to go from the “ridiculous” to the “sublime.”

A few years ago a man named John Naisbitt wrote a book named, “Megatrends.” His firm had been analyzing a variety of trends in American life, for US industrial customers, by searching hundreds of daily newspapers, for their content, that showed these trends. “Megatrends” became a #1 best-seller for years. It told us some wonderful things.

It said that today only 3% of the American people are involved in agriculture, 12% in traditional manufacturing, and that 2/3 of the American people either produce or process information. The good news is that even if the worst people in the world got control of America’s farms and factories they still couldn’t control us at our work places.

America has been discovered, its land cleared and planted, its housing, factories, buildings and roads built, and its transportation set in motion therein. Now we have come down to the point where, with nothing else even coming in a close second, the main product which Americans and the rest of the world wants from us is the information: “How is this done, that has been done in America?”

Naisbitt and his wife have written a sequel to “Megatrends” called “Re-inventing the Corporation.” (The Worldwide Interlingual Telecommunications Utility, THOT, very heartily recommends the study of each of these two books for those who wish to advance the cause of the Utility.) In this latter book the authors give their answer to that question, “How is this done?”

They say that in the Information Age the new “capital” is people who know how to think, not cash, buildings, equipment nor markets. If you have the former, in this Information age, you can get the latter.

“Old Learning” is worthless today.

“Middle management” is being replaced by computers.

So much of what we, as people living in an industrialized land, used to think of as indispensable for doing business, anymore is not that; often it is not even needed at all, in these new circumstances, where the power to think right has become EVERYTHING.

The old way to employ, be employed, train for employment, show up for employment, these things have disappeared from, the new race for the top, in the Information Industry.

These books, as will our own reason, given the new circumstances, spell out much of the spectrum of what is not needed anymore.

“What is needed?”

In the first place, Loyalty. Silicon Valley’s history seems to be the history of the quintessence of Disloyalty. One gets a job, finds out the secrets of how some people are making a living off of some information, quits, changes things just enough to be legal, and goes into competition.

Loyalty is the crying need of Information Age Industry.

To create loyalty Information companies have had to go to what we call, “the Treasure of the Human side of American Industry.” That treasure is the next chapter of this volume.

Here let us just say that shortly after the turn of the Century, at the instigation of Andrew Carnegie, but with the heartfelt support of Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, the Wright Brothers and some 500 of the “founding fathers of America’s Industry,” a study was done to systematize the answer to the question asked above in relation to the creation of America’s Industry, “How is this done?”

They did what they did, then, as a reaction to the sick financial interests of Europe (of whom we spoke earlier) who, at that time, were making it their business to take over control of the “mentality,” at least, of the American people. As it was, they, so to speak, had to “bury their treasure,” in that age when they wrote. However, with the world now asking for the heart of America’s Information Industry the would-be leaders of that Industry are now ready to “dig it up.”

We will get to the substance of this treasure in the next chapter.

That chapter contains information that is “pivotal,” in the proposal that we are putting forward, here, as to how Americans, and the whole world with them, should they choose, may Work Together By The Law. The reason that it is pivotal, we feel, is that we take this treasure, this “diamond” (that, for me, was the commencement of the information so far systematized in this Course, as well as of the Human Language Information that it supports), and put it in its true “setting.” That “setting” is the Gild System of the forefathers of the founding fathers of America’s Industry.

The two chapters following this next one, in turn, are a recounting of the essentials of the historic Gild System and then our proposal for a new American Gild System, that answers the void existing today, both as regards loyalty in American Information-age Industry, specifically, and as regards legality as per international operation of the Worldwide Interlingual Telecommunications Utility, in a most general way.

So, America has had a treasure available to it throughout this century. It is the treasure of information of the founding fathers of America’s Industry as to how it may be ideally run, “ideally,” as contrasted to the “sordid” fashion that they could see being instituted by the European banking interests, starting their takeover of what these founding fathers had created. Throughout this century the American people have not found the way to escape this sordidity. Now, thank Goodness not in a panic to avoid the result of that sordidity, as recounted at the beginning of this chapter and in the last one, but totally because of the WHOLESOME demand by American Information Industry workers, who need something GENUINE enough to be loyal to, the American Information Industry has, at long last, commenced an earnest digging to make that treasure its own.

When they find it they will see it fitting perfectly (as a missing diamond into its former featured place in a “crown”) into the crown of the system that the Nordic Race had always used to work together, before the demise of the Hansa and the simultaneous advent of central banking.

Now to say some very big things.

The Hansa, and Gild System with it, had an ideal of “order” wherein everyone therein was “united” to Jesus Christ and therethrough to one another in the Nordic-Race-wide organization for working together, conceptualized as the Lord’s “body.”

As told so far in this Course, the death of that Race-wide organization for “working together by the Law” began at the beginning of what is called the “Middle Ages,” by the “Apostasy” of the Nordic Race from its erstwhile operating value, the value of the individual gildman’s Oath, to the “mirage” value of the races to their south and east, or “money.” The actual death, itself, came at the end of the “Middle Ages,” when that organization was finally replaced by that mirage: central banking.

A Worldwide Interlingual Telecommunications Utility, functioning physically as General Sarnoff planned it, and legally, in the form of a world-wide New Gild System or Hansa, would be able to serve Mankind “thousands” of times better than any actual, practical services ever instituted by Central Banking.

“That’s a big thing to say, and it requires a lot of ‘belief’ to believe it!”

That is true. However, it is not as though we must start from scratch.



Joseph Smith’s Business Plan

Joseph Smith’s successor, Brigham Young, beginning in the year 1874, commenced the operation of some 220 “united orders” in the communities or portions of communities of Utah, and of the States around it. If some of these, per se, were not successful, others were and highly so. At the very least they had permitted the “bootstrap financing” of the basis of an independent intermountain economy, coordinated by the “Zion’s Central Board of Trade” commenced by Brigham Young’s successor.

I feel that it was principally to preclude the emergence of such a non-manipulable, independent economy, such as this, that powers in the East harassed the capable leaders of this emerging economy to the point where many of its operations came to a halt.

Some did not. The great sugar beet industry came from it, as did the ideas, at least, later followed, to build US Steel’s operations in Utah. There were other enduring successes of the beginning of this process by Brigham Young, such as the ZCMI department stores, canal companies, temples, schools etc.

As the result of this effort of Brigham Young, begun in 1874, there were established, in Salt Lake City, a “Tailors’ United Order” and a “Tanners’ United Order” that “were just a continuation of the English Guild System.”

Most of these “United Orders,” begun by Brigham Young, were “modest” duplications of the “Orders” begun by Joseph Smith, in Ohio and in Western Missouri, in the early 1830’s. Compared to Brigham Young’s later “United Orders,” these early ones were not modest. The one in Missouri was to become, the New Jerusalem (similar to Old York and New York, Old Orleans and New Orleans), seen, by John the Beloved, to be “12,000 furlongs” (1,500 miles) on a side.

In the eyes of many social economists Joseph Smith’s, “Order of Heaven,” “Order of (the city of) Enoch (that was ‘translated’),” “Order of Consecration and Stewardship,” was nearly entirely “novel” and “Mormon” in its origin. However, the essence of its operation, is exactly that of the Gild System, precisely the same as that followed to this day, ceremonially at least, in the government of the ancient one-square-mile city within the medieval walls of London.


(to be continued)

The First Gilds

The First Gilds were the brotherhoods of the men of the Nordic Race who “banded” themselves together to address a specific segment of information that was worthwhile, in pursuit of the Goal of all Law, as given to the Nordic Race by the One they called, “God,” at the time of His visit to them, at Lake “LAW,” near modern Stockholm, Sweden.

Let’s get down to the bedrock of the customs of the Nordic Race, with an investigation of that visit.

The Customs Given By God At Lake LAW

“The Oath” told the people that He had given His “eye” (His “mind’s eye”) to His Father in exchange for wisdom. All of the customs of the Nordic Race are encompassed in the men of that Race giving their “eye” to the Son of God, in the specific ceremony of the individual man giving what has thereafter been called his “oath.” When that individual, then, gives his “Oath,” that is what has always made him, “Free.”

All of the customs of the Nordic Race, all based upon their “Freedom,” come from this specific Oath, taken by the individual, that makes him “Free.” Let’s get down to bedrock relative to this Nordic concept of “Freedom.”

The Nordic Godhead is the “Father,” the “Son” and the Holy Ghost (respectively Thor, Oathen and Two). The first is the literal spirit father of the “spirits” of all humans. The second is the father of the “minds” of all who freely give him their minds, by giving him their mind’s eye. The third, who does not have a body at present, is the father of their “bodies.” In the ancient Viking artwork the first and second will be drawn with “red” bodies, showing that they are, at present, possessed of perfect flesh. The third will be represented “blue,” showing that, at present, he does not have a body of flesh. These three Persons, for whom the Nordic Race was told, by “the Oath,” to name “Thurs-day,” “Wednes-day” and “Tues-day,” however, are often accompanied by a smaller female figure, of the female that links the bodies of these three. She is the female named “Free” in Snorri’s Sagas. She is a physical descendant of the Third of these, received the everlasting seed of the First, and bore from it His Only Be
gotten Son, the Second. She is not a member of the “Godhead,” but her everlasting role therewith is given by “the Oath” as He had the day following Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday named for her, “Fri-day.” (Note the interesting fact that the name for her day, in contrast to that of all other days, is not given in the possessive case, as in “Thur’s-day.”)

(Another aside that shows the distinction between the three in question, and any one else, is the custom that “the Oath” established in Nordic “counting.” He had people say, “Wun” (or “one”), which is his name. Scandinavians call him “On.” Slavics say “odin” for “one.” “Two” is admitted by all as, “Tue.” And, the idea of “Three” being “Thur-ee” is seen in “thir-teen,” “thir-ty” and-’’thir-d.”)

These things being said, there is NO inclusion of Free in the Godhead of Nordics, much as the approach to placement of her counterpart, in the Roman counterfeit of Nordic Customs, there, might be interpreted to show.

However, as far as the concept of the relationship between the Godhead and all others of Mankind goes, her identity reigns, as the word, “free.”

When Oathen (“the Oath” in Norse) was born of “Free” his mind’s eye saw no “sin.” When one of the physical sons of Tue gave his mind, by giving his mind’s eye, to “the Oath,” he is “born” as the son of Oathen. With his mind’s eye fixed upon Oathen he may live as sin-free a life as this Father of his Mind. To the extent he thus “holds” to “his Oath,” he is FREE.

Twelve of his brothers, skilled in the particular worthwhile information to which the individual man pledged himself, when taking his Oath, in imitation of the original twelve of “the Oath,” to whom He committed all judgment of His “children,” decide by their unanimity whether or not the individual has held to his Oath or loses his Freedom.

In that, one has the entirety of the Customs of the Nordic Race, the general practice of which is the evidence of their worldwide acceptance as LAW.

Now let’s follow the life of a typical Gildsman in relation to these Customs in the Hansa of the First Millennium A.D.

The Specific Customs of the First Gilds

Let’s say that our man is born in the “Sock,” the “Seek,” or “Tenship,” or “Parish,” or “Commune” of “Odinsvi Socken” in Sweden in the year 300 A.D. (The name means “Oathen’s Temple Lot Parish,” is still called that today, and is the birthplace of a man whom I know.)

When the child of whom we talk learns to speak he will learn of the visit of the Oath to the Nordic Race, over 200 years before. Every “Son-day” (that is what the name has always been in Scandinavia, “Son of God Day”) he will go to the church building (the “kyrka”) with his family and the neighbors of his “Seek.” There they will sing in the way He and his “song-smiths” taught them, and learn His LAW. In doing this they will solemnly eat “meat” (all “food” is still called “meat” in Scandinavia) and drink “mead,” in their communal effort to mentally seek His guidance to help them learn His LAW. Once he eats that meat and drinks that mead, in that township, he is eligible to become “free,” but the ACT that makes him “free” is still far in the future.

That “meat” and “mead” will have, been “withheld” from the diet of parishioners. Those ‘parishioners are merely observing the customs which they saw their parents do, as those parents saw their parents do, etc., back to the time of the Visit at Lake Law when they were told to do so by “the Oath.”

Everybody who does “seek” the “sake” of the Law, then, “looks to his Own” and “withholds” that meat and mead from his diet, at the request of the leadership of the commune, to be used as the elements of the communion.

He learns from early youth that the Oath hung upon the tree of Life and poured His soul out till death, to see His seed. “And, who were His seed?” “Those who look to Him, as He looks to His Father.”

When the Oath came to Lake Law and gave His Law, to all men, through the Ephraimic nations, called, “Teutons” or Germanics, it was but one word: “Look!,” a pronunciation that is preserved for us still in the phrase, “Wed-lock” in English, meaning “Woden’s Law.” In Finnish the word for “Law” is still, “Lock-ee,” a cognate of this word, that is pronounced, “Log,” in Swedish, and that is mutated by the Danish pronunciation of that original word, that leaves off the final “-g, of the Swedish pronunciation, which pronunciation was spelled, “Law,” in English.

“Law” is simply “Look!” meaning, “Look to the Son of God with your mind’s eye!” “What is the ‘purpose,’ then of all Law; if one so ‘seeks,’ what is the ‘sake’ of that seeking?” “You’ll live forever.”

The “Law” is “Look!” The Sake of Law, its purpose is: “You’ll live forever.”

As this child in Sweden, of 300 A.D., approaches the age of accountability for his acts, he finds how all of the Customs that he learns are merely an expansion of those few basic thoughts which he has learned. They include such diverse things as: the Yuletide, Easter, burials with gravestones, counting, reading, writing, singing etc.

He learns that if a man is heroic he “holds” to seeking the face of God: in German a “hero” is a “holder,” “ein Held.” In Finnish a “seek” or “township,” at the weekly meetings whereof one learns all of these Customs, of “holding to seeking the face of the Lord,” is still called a “holder.”

Among the Angles, Saxons and Danes one learns that all that one acquires in this life, through the ministration on that person by the Holy Ghost, made possible by one being born again, as a son of God, by beginning to Look to the Son of God, is one’s “FREEHOLD.” That is his Life, Liberty and all of his Properties. No one may take that Freehold from him, except the council of twelve who judge by unanimity those in the group of townships to which his belongs.

Then, at the age of accountability, he is “dipped” under water, to emphasize that now he must begin consciously looking to God, in order to be “born again,” so that the Holy Ghost may continuously minister upon him, to teach him all things.

Youth In The First Gilds

After being dipped under the water at the median age, of childhood (as was King Harold Fairhair, as told in his Saga), and after having hands laid on his head, to give him the godly gift of the Holy Ghost (in a manner similar to that incident when the Oath laid his hands on the heads of the original Twelve in Asia City, as told at the beginning of the Ynglinga Saga) the child looks forward to the next incident in his life, that will mark the beginning of the final part of his boyhood, at the end of which he may become a “Free Man.”

That next incident is when he becomes a formal “Learner,” called an “apprentice” in the Middle Gilds, in England, which word came from the Norman French for, a “learner.”

The Oath had said, “For this is my work and my glory to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.” “How may a man on this Earth help the Oath bring about eternal life for Mankind?” He may teach the “Guthspjal,” to all whom he meets, and in everything which he does, in imitation of the Lord to whom he looks.

“What of ‘immortality’?”

“Immortality” means “un-dying-ness.” “Mortality” means “dying-ness.” The Lord commands all of his followers to mount their every effort to help Him, with every bit of the time and talent that comes to them, in His constant struggle against the “dyingness” of Mankind.

“How can one do that?”

The Oath taught his people, at his visit with them, the basics which they need to understand in order to save Mankind from its “dying-ness.” These are the skills and crafts that would thereafter make of them the “industrialized” people of the world, in contrast to all others, who are the “non-industrialized.”

Reading and writing in beech or book wood, in the alphabetic runes that the Oath had taught them, are general to all of these skills and crafts; but for a Nordic youth to follow the Oath in His work, of opposing the “dying-ness” of mankind, that youth must pick one of the particular craft skills taught to his people by God and become proficient in it.

So the “Lore” or Learning to which he is exposed is all calculated to help him look to the Lord so strongly that he will see what it is that the Lord would have him do with one of these particular craft skills.

When the youth believes that he has found it, perhaps in association with a blessing pronounced upon him by one of the “Patriarchs of the Human Race” (see the chapter after next), associated with his people, he chooses that craft skill that is to be his life’s work. Then the selection process begins with his father, his father’s brothers, his father’s cousins etc., to find for him the best man now knowledgeable in that craft skill to teach it to him so that he may attain for himself that goal for his life’s work that he has seen.

Apprenticeship

The young man wishes to live in God’s law, Woden’s Lock, Wed-lock, so at this time, during his apprenticeship he is helped to meet the young ladies of his and neighboring communities.

These communities were founded with the view to help him be successful in life, so he is helped to meet the other apprentices from his and the neighboring communities, whose work he might emulate, or with whom he would wish to work, in the future.

This all happens against the backdrop of lively folkdances, in beautiful folk costumes, to the beautiful music of early Europe, set in the setting of that most beautiful land crowned with the beautiful chalet-type architecture and Gothic-cathedral-type church buildings from which the buildings of North Europe originate.

All of these activities are facilitated by the fact that this apprenticeship is coordinated at the level just higher than that of the commune. That is, at the “county” level, to use American words. That which opens up all of this scope of activity to all of these youth is the fact that they had all begun to take the communion in their communes, at an early age, and none of them had been ex-communi-cated, from so doing. But this new, expanded, level of activity for them, at the “county” level, is to help them prepare from the great, solemn event near in their futures now, their FREEDOM.

Freedom

A young man in Sweden, in 300 A.D., would get his Freedom at the Temple or “Hof” of which the “shire,” in which his county is included, is the district served thereby.

It may be that he is “wed” very near to this time when he receives his Freedom. Certain it is that he would not be able to enter the temple, nor be “wed,” nor more have successfully fulfilled all of the requirements of his Apprenticeship, had he not been at least outwardly, observably faithful to the promises made every time he had taken the communion, ever since the first time he took the communion in his home commune. But now, having so been faithful, and having completed the requirements of his Apprenticeship, he may now enter the Temple, yet a youth, but emerge therefrom, a “Free” man.

“What it is that he does therein that makes him a ‘Free’ man?”

Toward the end of the temple ceremony he makes his “Oath.”

“What is that?”

He tells Almighty God how, with all ability available to him, he will use the craft skill, which he has learned, for that part of the work of the Lord, which the looking to the Lord, which he began in his early youth, has shown him is that which the Lord wishes him to do.

This is a happy, joyous time, beside being a solemn one. And, after the young man has made this Oath, he is FREE.

One’s Worklife

Listening to the words of the young man’s Oath, as those words are spoken in solemnity in the Temple, are men from the “lodge” (the “commune”) where the young man will at least begin his worklife. They are the witnesses to what he has said. Their witness thereof can be of enormous value to him and his community. For if he, indeed, produces, as he has promised God that he would, it can be expected that, barring an unforeseen misfortune, his life’s work, that he described in his Oath, will become a reality.

If a man produces $200,000.00 worth of goods and services per year, as so many do today in the USA; and if a man does so for 50 years; the production of his lifetime is $10,000,000.00. The product of a group of 1,000,000 men so doing (and there are a number of cities and almost every state in the USA with that many working men in them) is TEN TRILLION DOLLARS. With that amount, at their disposal, it could be thought by some that a group such as that would be getting themselves into a position where they could “take over the direction of the Economy of the World.” And that amount is at their disposal, to the extent that they know that the oath of each individual, to so produce, will be fulfilled. This is the secret of the control of the World’s Economy, by the Customs of the Nordic Race.)


The Energy Behind The Customs That Are Law

With this “secret” now said, we have before us, on paper, the burden of International Law. It is merely that an individual man of the Nordic Race makes an Oath, in the Temple, that he will perform in the specified manner alluded to above, in relation to one of those craft skills taught to the Nordic Race by God, during His visit to them. That Oath makes him “Free,” and he remains Free as long as he holds to the faithful performance of that Oath.

Multiply that Oath by all of the individual men of the Nordic Race, from the Rhine River to the Ural Mountains, from the line of the Danube River, Black Sea and Caucasus Mountains north to the Arctic Ocean, in the great “Key Reich,” or Church, of the Oath, and include all of the individual persons living in that area, for over three centuries, from the start of the Christian Era, and you have the Energy behind the Customs of the Nordic Race that have made them the International Law of the Earth.


MIDDLE GILDS

We will speak of two groups of Gilds, affiliated with the 1100-1700 A.D. Hansa, before we come to our proposal of a Hansa to successfully operate upon the Customs of these First and Middle Gilds, to extend, according to International Law, the Services of the Worldwide Interlingual Telecommunications Utility to all of the people of the World.

The first groups will be the beginnings of the Livery Companies of London, at the beginning of Legal Memory, around the year 1200 A.D.; and the second will be those Free Men who founded many of the Townships of New England during the 1600’s.

London, 1200 A.D.

The Customs of the Bury of London ― (Let’s use the word “bury,” as in, “Bury St. Edmunds” or, “Canter-bury,” because that is what we are dealing with here, rather than the Greco-Roman concept of a, “city”) in 1200 A.D., soon to be so protected by the Magna Carta that they would continue in effect till our day ― seem not, in many ways, to be altered from the state we have just considered them to have been in, in the Sweden of 300 A.D., home still, at that time, to many of the forefathers of those who would become the people who established England.

This situation was such that a few years later, when the Pope was shown a copy of the Magna Carta, his recorded reaction was: “What, do the Barons of England endeavor to dethrone a king, who has taken the cross, who is under the protection of the holy see; do they endeavor to take the dominions of the Roman Church and give them to others?”

“Who were these ‘others’?”

The Magna Carta starts out, “In the first place the English Church shall be FREE.”

“What does that mean?”

It means (as the Magna Carta says next) “It shall have ITS LAW intact.” As was mentioned before, this, “its Law.” of “the English CHURCH,” is our, “Common Law of England.” It is because of the holy Magna Carta that the government of England, without an Aristotelian Monarchy (as is the government of the United States of America) is the government of the ancient Church of “the Oath.” It and its faithful are these “others,” of whom the Pope complains, as receiving, from the Barons, the dominions of the “Roman Church,” which Barons took them away from it through the warfare preceding the Magna Carta.

So, though much said, in that English Church, of 1200 A.D., would be said in the Old Italian language of the Roman Church, thus hopelessly confusing millions of people, in relation to the origin of Freedom, for centuries to come, still the Organization of the People of the island Kingdom of England remained remarkably the same as the original Church of the “Oath” of their forefathers on the continent.

So, “parish life” remained much the same, in 1200, in London, as it had been in 300 in Sweden. “County” life also was still much the same. “County” is “ward,” in the Bury of London. And, it is presumed that the Temple of the Bury of London “shire,” wherein all apprentices took their oaths, was “The Temple” wherein the Gild of Barristers still do.


“The Inns of Hope”

As we will see, in the chapter that is the second after the next one, Old Learning, as it is currently being “stuffed down the throats” of modern people in the USA, from the Library of Congress Classification Schedules on down, is not being so “stuffed” by chance. The people “stuffing” this idea, who control all banks, virtually the entirety of the modern communications media of newspapers, magazines, book publishers, school textbook publishers, radio stations, television stations, etc., are led by a group of “philosopher kings,” who take their organization straight from the pages of Plato’s “Republic,” and use the exclusive resources of Greco-Roman Statecraft to control the minds of Mankind, through the banks and media just specified.

They are the only roadblock to the establishment of a Worldwide Interlingual Telecommunications Utility. However, as this Course has pointed out the details, through their contact with the Church of the Nordic Peoples, this group of “philosopher kings” has come to the limit of perpetuating its mind control scheme for Mankind through the instrumentality of attempting to control the “Law” of that Church of the Nordic Race.

That Law has been preserved in its pristine purity best in England. That Law has been taught and studied continuously there, through the centuries, at the Temple of London. There are four “Law universities” located either in (two are in) or near (two are at the location of an older Temple) the Temple. The professors of these four “Inns of Temple” control the ancient, “ethnic” “jury-trial-by-twelve-men-juries” industry of England. They say who gets in, who gets out, and who gets disciplined; and, they have nothing to do with the State (the Greco-Roman Statecraft State) nor have they ever had. They are a GILD: the Gild of “Barristers” or Lawyers.

In many ways these law universities, or this Gild, have been the group of learned people who have fought mentally for the ancestral Law of the English-speaking people, against that group inimical to them, of Aristotle’s philosopher-kings, attempting, through modern times, to control the minds of Mankind through Central Banks. This was definitely the case during the American Revolution, with Americans employing, as we have shown, the works of William Blackstone, written at the Inn of Middle Temple, used by Samuel Adams, to throw back into the faces of Britain’s Monarchy, proceeding at the advice of its Central Bank of England, their logic, to take away from the American people the ownership of the North American continent, secured by their forefathers on the basis of the most solemn assurance known to the Common Law of England, for retention of one’s land by one’s posterity forever.

It was decided, about ten years ago, by the developers of the Multi-lingual Word Processor (that currently instantaneously machine-translates 85% of the work of a human translator) that it would be the organization of these “Inns of Temple,” of London, through which all such developers would pool their efforts, to mentally fight against the group of “philosopher-kings,” currently trying to enslave the world through Aristotelianism, and to bring to Mankind the freeing influence of Worldwide Interlingual Telecommunications.

That decision resulted in the success the Multi-lingual Word-processor has enjoyed so far.

“Temple” is an “Old Italian” word, for the shed in which Romans placed their realistic statue-idols that they groveled before. The indigenous Teutonic word for, “temple,” is, “hof.” The word, “hof,” in Modern German, is, “hope.” The name of the organization organized to do mental battle for the success of the Worldwide Interlingual Telecommunications Utility is, “The Inns of Hope.” A sketch of its operation will be given in the final segments of this chapter.

However, it might be well to broach here, at this point, a matter of highest importance. As will be seen, in the chapter after next, the group of Plato’s philosopher kings, who control the world’s central banks, at present, find the “genius” of the success they have found, to date, in the fact that they, who exercise a power of absolute dictatorship over a numerous “constituency” around the world today, are themselves subject to a single absolute dictator, of the minds of all of that constituency, including them, who is over them.

This group of philosopher kings is self-perpetuating, in that they determine who the next absolute dictator of the minds of the constituency shall be; and he, in turn, appoints members to the group, all the expenses of which, of course, have been borne by those in the unquestioning constituency for centuries.

“Does the Church of the Oath, the organization of which has been preserved, in a pristine purity, in England, offer us free people a dynamic proposal for a mental leadership (as a counterpoise to this would-be dictator of the minds of all men and his close retinue of “philosopher kings”) that could effectively lead the Inns of Hope, in its mental battle to establish a Worldwide Interlingual Telecommunications Utility?” Yes, it does. And, at the same time, the Customary Law of England, its unwritten Law, will give us information on certain “gaps” in the written Constitution of the USA, that at present are being used to destroy the freedom of the posterity of its writers.

Leadership For New Learning

This is a brief look, again, at those first three “Articles” of the US Constitution.

“Article One” describes the Legislature. It says that direct taxes, as representation in the house of the legislature that may originate tax legislation, shall be decided by a decennial census of the States. This had worked, in practice, up to the time of the Civil War and has managed to remain, in theory, till today.

“Article Two” deals with the Executive Branch of the US National Government. And, if the theory therein is adequate, the control of this branch has been corrupted, from functioning as it is supposed to, since the time of the third president under the Constitution.

Let’s look at the problem through a perspective. The “freeholders” of England are the “shareholders” of that island kingdom. They elect its “board of directors” which hires its chief executive officer and fires him. It might be said, with justification, that this is the origin and model of the American business corporation.

The “board of directors,” of the US Government, was supposed to be its two houses of the Congress, acting together. They are empowered to “fire” the president.

However, since the US President was also to be the “Head of State,” in the USA, as was the Monarch in Britain, as well as the “Head of Government,” as is its Prime Minister, it seemed beneath the dignity of the office to have the same board of directors both “hire” and “fire” him.

Therefore, the expedient was hit upon for the American people to temporarily create, just for the event, a “special board of directors,” that would just, “hire,” the best chief executive officer that they, in their wisdom, could find. They would just be a “chief executive officer employment agency,” to use the abilities they had, in business, to find the man best able to preside over the business of the Government.

The third president ruined that by the device of, a “political party,” that went behind the backs of the people, to get a chief executive elected solely for his “political” connections, rather than for his ability as a leader in business.

But to the point, if these first two articles have met with grief, in relation to practice, if not even with theory, this last article is bankrupt in theory.

It gives all of the Judicial power in the US National Government to a “Supreme Court” and to “such ... Courts” “inferior” to it as may be established, but then it says nothing about what that Court should be. “Should there be only one judge in that Court, a few, many, thousands?” It doesn’t say. Merely by happenchance there has turned out to be nine justices in the Supreme Court. When FDR found these slow to implement his socialisms, he got the idea to “pack” it with many more. Only the fury of the American people, at his audacity, schooled the caution that had him let it stay at nine.

“And, what is that court of nine men?” It is a special “committee,” of “cancellers,” voting by majority rule. “Why call them ‘cancellers,’ the rulers of Roman Law?” Because that which they deal exclusively in, is the “-doxy,” the “opinions,” the “correct hunches,” that are all that Roman Law is. They deal solely in such “opinions.”

If, after being through Old and New Learning, as we have been, it rankles one to see our holy, ancestral Common Law of England manipulated by a committee of “cancellers,” such as only Roman Law is controlled by in England (there, the high administrator of Common Law is the Lord Chief Justice, part of whose name, at least, one of the American cancellers bears), one might burst out, in a fury of Anglo-Saxon rage or frustration, “Why, that committee of cancellors is no ‘court’; there is no ‘jury’!” And, of course, that is most true.

“What is the ‘supreme court,’ to use the words of the US Constitution, of England?”

The simple answer to that question is practically always obfuscated by the misleading reply: “The House of Lords.”

It is NOT the House of Lords.

Cheaters then reply to that, “Well, then, it is the ‘Law Lords’ (those whose peerage found them earlier active as holders of high law offices in England: Lord High Chancellor, Lord Chief Justice, Attorney General, Solicitor General, etc.) of the House of Lords.” That too is a lie.

The SUPREME COURT of England is only seen, nowadays, at the trial of a peer for his peerage. I believe it has only met once or twice in this century. One time, very early in the century, was to try Lord Bertrand Russell, for his peerage, in relation to the atheism which he propounded, that was found offensive by the House of Lords.

(One can see a mockery of this Supreme Court in action, in the movie “Kind Hearts and Coronets,” starring Alee Guinness, when the serial murderer therein is brought to trial for his peerage after becoming Lord D’ Ascoyne.)

The composition of that Court is most instructive.

Normally the high leader over all Law in England is the Lord High “Canceller” of England, whose office came to England with William the Conqueror, which bore with it the gift, from the Pope, of the Great Seal of England, whereby, thereafter, he would be able to cancel the sins of all of the people of England, by Roman Law. The word “canceller,” of course, is Old Italian, both in concept and origin. When the real SUPREME COURT of England, its SUPREME JURY, meets, however, something of beautiful ancient significance happens. The Cancellor, in all of his Satanic present possession of this world’s power, is obliged to vacate the seat, from which he presides over the House of Lords, and quit the proceedings, which, from now on, will be pure English Law — with no influence of Rome’s Counterfeiting.

“Who enters in his place?” The Lord High Keeper of the Way of Life of the English People. “Keeper,” is “guard” or “ward.” The ancient Teutonic word for a “pathway” is, “stig.” It is the, “Stig-ward” or, “the Lord High Steward of England.”

The Inns in London, the school for the preservation of the Law of England, each have, for each Inn, a leader whose title came from one of the functions of the Temple, during the Crusades, when it was the chief fortress in Britain of the Knights called, the Knights Templar. If each Inn were considered as a separate gild, as each of the wards of London is, and the leaders, from each Inn, were gathering, as a supreme jury of New Learning, much as the Aldermen of London’s wards gather as the city council of London, under the presidency of the Lord Mayor, an institution for the mental defense of Freedom, constructed specifically in opposition to the current threat from Old Learning enslavement, would be complete, with the leadership over such a “Supreme Jury” supplied by a, “Steward,” of New Learning.

There has been a great volume written, to date, on the concept of this new Inns of Hope, presided over by a Supreme Jury, composed of the leaders of each “Inn,” from each of the segments established for New Learning by the developers of the Multi-lingual Word-processor, with these, in turn led by, a Steward of New Learning.

We will address that volume but briefly later in this chapter after we discuss the Gilds of New England.


The Gilds of New England

When Civil War erupted in England, in the 1640’s, the people of the Colonies of New England united themselves together, forever, with, “The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual League of the United Colonies of New England.”

Therein they stated as our reason for coming here: “Whereas we all came into these parts of America with one and the same end and aim, namely, to advance the kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ and TO ENJOY THE LIBERTIES OF THE GOSPEL IN PURITY ...”

We call them, “Puritans,” for their desire, to the man, to enjoy, in “purity,” these “liberties of the Gospel,” — come straight down to this day from the visit, of “Guth,” (Icelandic for “God”) to their fathers, at Lake Law, to give them His, Everlasting “Guth-spjal” (Icelandic for “Gospel”).

That the enemies of these, “Liberties of the Gospel,” or “Gospel Rights,” today, insist on calling them, “civil liberties” or “civil rights,” is of no matter to us. We are concerned with how, in the light of the Magna Carta and of all of the practices of their forefathers that they could find information on, they went about securing for themselves and their posterity, forever, the enjoyment of the “Liberties of the Gospel in purity.” We will see how they did that when their detractors began pestering them, during the English Civil War, for their logic, for the way that they set up New England, and consequently the USA. They gave their explanation in the “Cambridge Confession,” drawn up by the Puritan Ministers of New England, at Cambridge, Massachusetts. The circumstances of these events are well reported in the book “The Creeds and Platforms of Congregationalism,” (1893) by Williston Walker.

But, before studying that logic, let’s take but one look, in review, at the way that they set up New England.

The concept of a New England “Commonwealth,” such as the six States of that region have called themselves, is that of an English Shire. The “Bury” Government of London is also set up along the same lines, so we can compare them.

In both London and Massachusetts the controlling government has divided itself, into a number of communes or parishes or Townships, with an intermediate level of government in between the controlling government and the township level, which is for the administration of traditional English justice, through a twelve-man jury.

It is in the setting up of the Townships of New England that we find all of the wealth of information that will, at last, allow the posterity of these people to use their most heart-felt beliefs to form the Gild System, proposed in a subsequent segment of this Chapter, capable of taking the Services of the Worldwide Interlingual Telecommunications Utility to everyone on earth.

The Logic

The controlling governments of both Massachusetts and Connecticut had a purpose, as must all English-language business corporations. As was mentioned, in the last book, the purpose of Connecticut, almost word-for-word that of Massachusetts was: “... as their good life and orderly conversation, may win and invite the natives of the country to the knowledge and obedience of the only true God and Savior of mankind and (to) the Christian faith, which in ... the adventurers free profession is the only and principal end of this Plantation.”

To establish a Township, in early Massachusetts and Connecticut, those doing so had to proceed entirely according to that single purpose.

At this point it might be well to review pages 11 through 17, of New Learning Book III. Near the bottom of page 17, therein, we saw the basic persuasion of the English-speaking people in relation to their Law, throughout the ages. The Magna Carta says: “In the first place the English Church shall be free ... (which meant) ... it shall have its law intact ... (which meant) ... IT SHALL CONTINUE TO HAVE FREEDOM OF ELECTIONS WHICH ARE CONSIDERED MOST IMPORTANT AND NECESSARY TO THE ENGLISH CHURCH.’’ Elections were critical, as we read on those pages, in the traditional formation of an English Commune, because the people, who form the “church,” during the ceremony physically on the ground of the new Township, who do so by saying something like, “I will live the Gospel,” NEED to ELECT the “preacher,” whose blessing makes “the elements of the communion,” into that, which it was still necessary, at that date, for a man to partake of, in order that he would be eligible to make his OATH, to the controlling council
of the Colony, who were responsible to attend to the carrying out of its Christian missionary purpose, just given, which OATH, thus taken, made him FREE.

“What logic did our dear New England founders have for this essence of LAW, that its holders VOTE, when their detractors assailed them into committing themselves to what they did in, ‘the Cambridge Confession’?” It was, “You can’t get away from this, that Jesus Christ, Himself, established elections as the way his Church is to be run.” They quoted a passage from the book of, “The Acts of the Apostles,” wherein a Congregation of the Saints, of the Primitive Church, “chose,” from among themselves, leaders etc. That concept, from the Bible, of “selecting,” loomed enormous in Puritan thinking, becoming the name for the elected leaders of New England Townships: the “SELECTMEN.”

It is everlastingly true that Jesus Christ, Himself, established Elections, as the way that His Church is to be run. And, thank Goodness for that tiny quote in “the Acts,” that gave the skinny bit of logic, to the establishment of Gild Life in America, that that quote gave to it.

And, as barraged by Old Learning as that dear logic has been, as given throughout New Learning Book III, our forefathers established lawfully organized life on the North American Continent as, Gild Life, the Gild Life of “The English-speaking Farmers’ Gild of the North American Continent,” perhaps; but, it is GILD LIFE, just the same.

“So what?”

So, people who form themselves into “good faith” English-language Gilds are the only people who are lawfully organized on the North American Continent. All others, organized by some hare-brained idea of Roman Law, are living in an intellectual chaos, which threatens to become a swiftly approaching physical one, more and more so, with each passing day.

I think that the enemies of the American people, who control nearly all of their communications media at present, ask each other frequently, “What is the appetite of the people of the USA for nonsense?” Apparently the answer with which they assure one another is, “It is absolutely insatiable.”

If that is true for some or many, it is not true for all.

There are great numbers of them who cling to the truths given by God Himself to their Forefathers at Lake Law, over 1900 years ago, in a more determined manner than they cling to Life itself.

It is solely for these that this concluding segment of this Chapter is written. For the others, who have no hope for themselves, who have abandoned all of the treasures given to them through their fathers by God Himself, in preference for some mirage offered to them by some scheme based upon Socrates’ diabolical dialogue, perhaps their loved ones, who have not so given up hope, in these gifts straight from God, continue to cling to hope for them, in their behalf. “This is so good and beautiful, but don’t they suppose that some day, quickly, the Almighty will visit his vengeance on them for ruining or trying to ruin his work?”

“However that may be …”

This last segment is written, as this whole Course has been, over the last twenty years, since I took the Napoleon Hill Course, for those Americans who have clung to their God-given right of choice, who wish to live by it, would die for it, and are interested to see how the very fact of their clinging to this essence of America makes them into the Gild that is the only Lawful Organization in North America, to see how it functions to keep them safe and prosperous and the whole world of like-minded people, with them, through the services of the Worldwide Interlingual Telecommunications Utility, regardless of how forces from outside of the USA assail it, or how those, whom these truths find GUILTY of betrayal and who are therefore outlaw or outside of its structure, are, none-the-less, powerless to bring about the downfall or destruction of our beloved USA, this beautiful heritage received through our forefathers straight down through the last 19 centuries: our GILD.


THE G(U)ILD OF AMERICA

Organized Townships

In every State in the USA, where the Townships are “organized,” meaning, in legal jargon, that they have Townmeetings, I feel that it is of the most absolute necessity “that every right-thinking person living therein attend those meetings, demand that they be conducted by the ancient rules of procedure only, and fight, with all resources at one’s disposal, to exclude “political parties” from all interference with that procedure. Once that is done such right-thinking people ought to urge all of their neighbors, therein, with the morality of Emerson: to as complete a “self-reliance” as possible, in their personal “home production and storage,” for example, and to personal “ingenuity” in carrying that out.

This is the principal technology that the world wishes to know about, from the Americans, which created the successes of their fathers, which in turn, in the consummate, created the great success America has been. They are not in the least interested in how to grab control over others by dirty, sneaky tricks. They have had that in super¬abundance all around them.

So, it is from the point of view of the thoughts that the people of the world would like to have Americans export to them, through the Worldwide Interlingual Telecommunications Utility, that I bring up the concept, concerning Americans who live in Organized Townships making their lives as self-sustaining as possible, in their own homes and neighborhoods, that this primary suggestion that is made can be expanded on its merits into two critical though opposite directions.

The first is that when the monetary economy of Germany disappeared, in the winter of 1923, when the monstrous international bankers sent its monetary unit down to ONE TRILLIONTH of its normal value, the only organizations able to jump into the breech and save Germans from starving and freezing, in chaos, were the Townmeetings of its organized Townships. That’s the “downside.”

The “upside” is that Old Learning is dead. With the advent of the voice writer, the Roman Alphabet and Arabic Numbers (old “reading, writing and -rithmetic”) are meaningless. The capacity of all computers could be advanced if not for the bottlenecks of such non-phonetic alphabets as the current one and the poorly adaptable current numbering system. Furthermore the present non-phonetic alphabet, used for English, is the primary difficulty making it so hard for voice writers to function in English.

Beside all of that, the authors of “Megatrends” and its sequel tell us that the very existence of current schools fights against our industrial progress today, rather than aiding it in any way. In “Reinventing the Corporation,” “Megatrends” sequel, we find that the ONLY value in an Economy, where over 2/3 of the people produce or process information, is an environment that frees children’s minds, spurring them on to “self-reliance” and “personal initiative.” If the intimidating environment, of big, mean people, hustling them through halls, to the sound of alarm bells, ever did have the redeeming grace of preparing them for the rigors of conveyor belt or factory life, it has hardly any at all today, where hardly anybody, percentage-wise, is employed that way anymore.

The only need in education today is that which gets the imagination of children, on their “own” initiative and in self-reliant ways, to pursue the acquisition of worthwhile information. “What does that?” Hardly talk of the spooky influence that was held, by superstition, to make all of the stars spin around the Earth every day. Children are children. They are interested to see ground prepared for sowing. They like to see a seed sprout, grow into a plant, and bear its fruit itself. They get excited about picking that fruit and become ecstatic about gaining a grasp over the way that product is prepared into the food which they eat.

A child, given anything like normality, loves his home and is intrigued to be able to involve him or herself in the process of maintaining or repairing those things which are, in it, responsible for bringing to that child the services of that structure and place that, in their composite, are, “home,” to the child.

There is nothing to educate children to, away from their homes, that comes anywhere near these experiences, particularly in this Age. Language can be taught by New Learning, in the home, to the extent that the child can learn more about it in one day that formerly available from eight years of attendance at a grammar school, the justification of yesterday for taking the children of this country from their homes.

With satellite television there are at present over a hundred, soon to be thousands of television channels available. Enough to spur the mind of the child with just about any worthwhile information presently available.

“Wonder if people do not live in organized Townships, thus removing them from this heart of English-speaking guarantees for the survival of English-speaking neighborhood life, based upon the legally organized self-sufficiency of a neighborhood?”

It is a matter of life and death that they be organized. See Germany in November of 1923. Nearly every state in the Union, except some pre-Revolution Southern States and Texas are divided into Unorganized Townships. In many of these States the State Legislature is required, by its Constitution, to provide, by enabling legislation, for Township Organization. In cases where this has been done, organize. In cases where this has not been done, force those who are required to do it, to do it, by any means. In the few cases remaining, such as for Texas etc., the work is harder but has to be pushed hard.

Counties

Counties are meaningless to a free people, except in relation to the fact that they may take oaths, in their townships, or among its members, in relation to what one has decided he or she will do. A county is only a place where a jury meets, to judge people in relation to their free oaths. Confer the county governments of some New England States where that is still, in some senses, true. Such monstrosities as county commissions, where the county commissioners, totally against every constraint of traditional English-speaking life, both make laws, as the county’s legislature, and enforce them, as the county’s executive branch, are, happily, unknown there.

Again, only with functioning organized Townships, wherein free men give their Oaths of what they have chosen for themselves to do, to EARN their freedom among the people of the Township, is there any reason for a county to exist in the first place, that reason being to provide a Jury to judge the free men, who have taken those oaths, as to their performance.

States
A US “State” is required to function, at the same time that a township or county begins to function, because it is the district that provides the “temple,” wherein the oath maker, in early Northern Europe (and as is still done in London) made his oath (in good measure for the benefit of those of his “lodge” or Township who accompanied him).

The early “State” government of Connecticut provided for the men who made oaths therein, to become its Freemen, the “temple” of the overall purpose of Connecticut, only in view of which purpose did all of those oaths that were made have any significance.

Only then, in circumstances so arranged, can there be a US “State” of free men. Only then does a legislature of such a State have any rationale at all for an existence among free people. Given the circumstances that are stated, then a legislature, with a House of Representatives from every Township, with the judges of each county seated with them, are in a position to listen to those in the State who are best acquainted with its purpose, to deliberate about how that purpose may be best defended, or aided to prosper, as the case may be.

That is what a State is for. It provides the “temple” of a worthwhile purpose. It is only in relationship to such a worthwhile purpose that there can be such a things as oaths that relate to it. Without that there are no oaths, no freedoms, therefore no citizenship, rights and so on. This is America’s challenge at this time: Purpose, and that on the State level. There is no lawful government nor, more, even organization, or reason for it, above this level, until that requirement of purpose is established at that level.

When Votan, the Lord Jesus Christ, appeared to the forefathers of the Native Americans here in America, he told them that ... “it is wisdom in the Father that they (a great nation of people come from over the ocean) should be established in this land, and be set up as a free people by the power of the Father ...”

He told them that if this great nation repented then they, with the descendants of those Native American peoples (perhaps 3/4 of Latin America is of Native American blood), would cooperate to show the whole world how to live and prosper together in a great civilization. If they would not repent, however, he said: “Then shall ye, who are a remnant of the house of Jacob, go forth among them; and ye shall be in the midst of them who shall be many; and ye shall be among them as a lion among the beasts of the forest, and as a young lion among the flocks of sheep, who, if he goeth through both treadeth down and teareth in pieces, and none can deliver.”

The typical woman in the USA today produces 1.9 offspring. That does not even replace her and her mate in this land of somewhat in excess of 200 million people. The birth rate of the predominantly Native American People to our south is a population explosion. Latin America should reach a population of about 500 million by the year 2000, a little over 13 years from now. If interviewed 1/3 of those people say that they want to move. Of those, 90% want to come here. That means that in 13 years, with no catastrophes, they could, perhaps, come close to the number of the people here, with twice as many more near. North America has almost been an “Anglo Saxon island,” with the Pacific Ocean to the west, the Arctic to the north, the Atlantic to the east and the Gulf of Mexico to much of the south, but not all. There the US border with Latin America is 1500 miles of mostly unpopulated desert wasteland, over which millions of people can and do pass undetected, in ever shorter periods of time.

America is in trouble on many fronts. The free people here need to unite themselves together well and soon. “Around what?” America’s PURPOSE. “What is that?” “Are you a free person?” Yes. “What then is your PURPOSE?” It all ultimately depends upon that.”

A Functioning American Gild

Let’s take the example of an American child, born to parents living in a functioning organized Township, who have the ability to raise him as follows:

They have enough land around their home to significantly pursue a program of self-sufficiency in home production and storage. Maybe the family has a few sheep which they shear, then clean the wool, make that into yarn, thread, cloth and finally garments. Perhaps, in addition to this, the child has seen, on one of hundreds of TV channels, a program that showed the development of the electronic computer, from the beginnings of the craft skills of the weavers gilds of North European peoples, to the automation of weaving, with the Industrial Revolution in England, that used punch cards, on rolls, to automatically weave patterns, to the first mechanical computers, used to compute the US Census, around the turn of the century, with a further development of such punch cards, to electronic computers using such punch cards, to current computers. He begins getting motivating career ideas.

The child has numbers of worthwhile things that he, spontaneously, wishes to study and pursue. “How do his parents help him to pick his ‘Major Definite Purpose in Life,’ to use Napoleon Hill’s words?” They contact the one of the Inns of Hope that specializes in such things. It contacts a business which presents the child with all of the variety of aids it has to get the child to most meaningfully design a career for himself, that both conceptualizes and pursues his Major Definite Purpose.



(to be continued)

Liberty_Agent wrote:There is nothing wrong with true communism. The family is structured communistically. Having a society with some mutualist tendences, such as, say, a farm that is owned by the "commons" or a mutual aid business is a brilliant idea and should be implemented in America. The problem is that Karl Marx's "communism" isn't really communism, that's the biggest deception of all time. True intellectuals (who Marx ripped off and slandered) like Bakunin and Proudhon knew that Marx was really just promoting state socialism where the bankers could easily exploit the system. Not communism and not freedom.

:ymapplause:

A corporation if structured by Deuteronomy principles, bottom-up (seeking virtue), is True Communism. When we are at work, the company property is shared.

I come to borrow the stapler on your desk and you admit that there is no problem in sharing the stapler, it is company property anyway (consecrated), and we are both engaged in the purpose of the company, so the use of the stapler by either of us, regardless of who's desk it sets upon is justified.

The principle of stewardship reserves the use of certain property to the steward, for the unique purpose of that steward. The steward maintains his stewardship over his part of his company by exercising his vote. The steward in a company has stock in his company, as evidence of his contribution and ownership in and for the purpose of his company.

The only thing keeping the LDS People from living and working together by True Communism is the fact that they engage in their work lives under Babylonian Controls (top-down structure). Once they learn to no longer worship by the arm of flesh in their work life, then we can have Zion, and live and work together by True Communism in our work places.

God Bless,
Darren