Forthcoming from Gabby Press: America’s Final Revolution.
Our argument regarding American economic history is that there is a historical continuity about the power and privileges of the Ruling Class, which we describe as W. J. Cash’s thesis of the return to the plantation.
We argue that the creation of the Federal Reserve Bank, in 1913, fits into our historical economic continuity thesis. The members of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve are private wealthy citizens, who manage a private corporation, for the benefit of private banks, large corporations, and wealthy families.
This set of the Ruling Class has a social class awareness of their power and privileges gained under Madison’s rules that created a plutocracy.
Middle class and working class common citizens do not have a social class awareness of their own financial interests, and thus, the Ruling Class has no comparable competitor, or any other organized competitor political interest group, such as the Ruling Class’ American Bankers Association, to promote their group financial interests.
During the plunder and investment speculation phase of the U. S. economy, the Board of Governors are directly responsible for causing the economic conditions of inflation and easy credit by their manipulation of interest rates and bank reserve requirements.
Their poor economic decisions, over the past 110 years, have caused the economy to collapse, on a regular, periodic basis. After each collapse, the Board of Governors act to restore the banks and corporations to their former economic social status by bailing them out.
We apply the theory of public choice, of James Buchanan, to argue that the social welfare that the Board of Governors maximizes is the social welfare of the Ruling Class.
Our argument about the Board of Governors social welfare preferences are very easy to understand. All of them were born in the Northeast, all of them attended Ivy League colleges, and all of them were employed by private banks before their tenure at the Federal Reserve Bank.
All of them view the world and the U. S. economy from the perspective of doing what is good for the Ruling Class. Not one of them is an ordinary, middle class American citizen, and none of them were elected.
Our argument is not about who “owns” the Fed. Our argument follows the logic of Madison that the Ruling Class, back in 1787, had a coherent vision of themselves, called a social class consciousness.
Because of their social class consciousness, Madison ascribed to the natural aristocracy a social class moral characteristic of “virtue,” that meant that if the Ruling Class obtained disproportionate constitutional power, that their virtue would allow them to put the public’s interest above their own personal financial interests.
We argue that the Ruling Class does, in fact, have a coherent world perspective of themselves. Our argument is that the Ruling Class does not possess virtue, and that their decisions on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors reflect their social class preferences.
Further, we argue that middle class, and working class American citizens never developed a class consciousness of their own financial and political interests, which Madison had expected the common citizens to develop.
In the constitutional framework of the plutocracy, the only preferences that count are Ruling Class preferences, because they are the only social class in American history that has been organized politically to seek their preferences.