Responding to Gary North
Far from dispelling anything claimed in our article, Gary North as a first hand witness corroborates major elite funding of Libertarianism.
Gary North’s main function in the Libertarian movement is to maintain internal party discipline. By lashing out at people opposing Austrian Economics’s many glaring failings, the more feeble minded multitude within Libertarianism are discouraged from asking too many difficult questions. After all, who wants to be called a crackpot by Gary North, right?
That’s why he opens his ‘rebuttal’ by trying to insult both me and Ellen Brown with “Let me say, before I begin, that the author of this article is the only person I have come across who could profitably study with Ellen Brown.”
He can rest assured. I have studied Brown and benefited immensely from it, like millions more. I always read her latest articles, providing insight into the dynamics of the banking industry and their minions. Here is her latest excellent piece of work, exploring some of the dynamics behind the Euro Crisis.
North at alia need this kind of juvenile stuff, because you can imagine the discomfort when people start messing up the jolly good time we’re all having together with questions like ‘are you sure Gold is not completely controlled?’, or ‘how about interest on the money supply, shouldn’t we be getting rid of that?’, or ‘why are we calling for deflation, hurting debtors, while everybody is drowning in debt and while we claim this is the problem?’.
Peter Schiff is another one of their gatekeepers. Just look at this video:
Does this remind you of anything? For instance how the MSM handle opposition? What has this got to do with dialogue and a fair exchange of ideas aimed at mutual growth?
This is just a hitpiece, trying to murder Brown by not letting her talk. Evading the issues, impolitely interrupting, scoring points instead of trying to understand what she’s actually saying.
Intellectual dishonesty is one of the hallmarks of the leaders of Libertarianism. How can it be otherwise? They have to claim Bankers hate Gold, otherwise nobody would buy their specie. They have to downplay the importance of interest on the money supply, otherwise nobody would be listening to them. They have to circumvent the deflation issue, because it makes them look so bad in the eyes of everybody who knows what they’re talking about. They have to blame the State and ignore the Money Power, otherwise they lose their sponsors.
So it is in this context that we should consider Gary North’s uncivilized and dishonest way of debating.
These issues show in his response to ‘Proof Libertarianism is an Illuminati Ploy‘ too.
North’s ‘detailed research’
Gary North is well known not only for his foul mouth, but also for his ‘detailed’ work. He has no problem writing 30 books about one.
I’m not going to go into all of that, because all this ‘meticulousness’ aims only to distract from the bottom line, which we will get to shortly.
But just for the fun of it, however, let me ask you this: spend 30 seconds on Google and try to find Otto Kahn’s quote that I provided in the article.
Here it is again: “You say that Marxism is the very antithesis of capitalism, which is equally sacred to us [The Money Power] It is precisely for this reason that they are direct opposites to one another, that they put into our hands the two poles of this planet and allow us to be its axis. These two contraries, like Bolshevism and ourselves, find their identity in the International.”
Otto Kahn, Investment Banker
Please tell me: did you succeed? Did you find the source? So how come Gary North and his meticulous research comes up with the conclusion ‘there is no source’?
Also funny to see North quote Volker’s biography. Yes, a really good Christian family, not? Well, perhaps this is the level of thinking in the circles that Gary North hangs out with, but where I come from we have a little problem with this fairy tale: The Money Power does not care about religion and Marrano Jews have been among those messing up our affairs for quite some time.
More worrying is North’s apparently rather shaky conceptual grasp of the dialectic. In his response he makes a number of remarks indicating he does not really get the point.
First he comes up with this: “Anyway, the author believes in Marx’s dialectic. This indicates a certain lack of perception on his part. The Marxian dialectic had some tough times back in 1991. You may have read about this. The Communist Party did the unforgivable. It committed suicide.“
Ahum? North is telling us Marxism is dead? Is he serious?
But then he comes up with this: “Austrian theory has about at much impact on mainstream economists as it had on Alan Greenspan, the bubble master.“
Well, as readers of this site know all too well: Alan Greenspan is actually a leading Austrian Economist. In his famous essay ‘Gold and Economic Freedom‘, published in Ayn Rand’s ‘Objectivist’ newsletter, Greenspan opened with:
“An almost hysterical antagonism toward the gold standard is one issue which unites statists of all persuasions. They seem to sense — perhaps more clearly and subtly than many consistent defenders of laissez-faire — that gold and economic freedom are inseparable, that the gold standard is an instrument of laissez-faire and that each implies and requires the other.“
And don’t think for a minute this was just youthful vice. Here’s the grand old man in 2007, explaining we need a Gold Standard:
So how can this be? Well, let’s ask Otto Kahn: “You say that Marxism is the very antithesis of capitalism, which is equally sacred to us [The Money Power] It is precisely for this reason that they are direct opposites to one another, that they put into our hands the two poles of this planet and allow us to be its axis“
Yes, Mr. North. Both opposites are owned by the same people. Your side is owned by the same people.
But these things are not important. What matters is this:
1. “Migchels: The Volker Fund would finance all the leading Austrian Economists and would have a substantial impact on the ‘Chicago School of Economics’, including Milton Friedman.
North: This is true. I even had a summer job there in 1963. It was the best salaried job I ever had. They paid me to read.”
2. “Migchels: Many readers may be surprised to learn the extent to which the Graduate Institute and then Mises himself in the years immediately after he came to United States were kept afloat financially through generous grants from the Rockefeller Foundation. In fact, for the first years of Mises’s life in the United States, before his appointment as a visiting professor in the Graduate School of Business Administration at New York University (NYU) in 1945, he was almost totally dependent on annual research grants from the Rockefeller Foundation.”
North: This is true.”
3. North: “Mises was without a job from 1940 to 1946. New York University never paid him a dime. Rothbard worked for very little salary for most of his academic career at a school that did not have an economics department, Brooklyn Polytechnic. Highly connected?”
The point was made in the article, that Mises didn’t need a job, because he was maintained by the Rockefeller Foundation and Volker Fund. North in his response acknowledges both points.
He tries to downplay it by stating “The Volker Fund under Luhnow paid a tiny staff middle-class wages. It did help fund Hayek and Mises, because the University of Chicago and NYU did not pay the two any money.“
We understand, of course, that the Volker Fund was not a UN type of bureaucracy. But we’re talking about a propaganda outlet here, disseminating ideas. One does not need a massive staff to equip libraries with books and manipulate the debate by having people like North and Rothbard read stuff, to use their conclusions to decide which ideas will be funded and promoted further.
North did nothing to dispel the notion of elite financing of Austrianism.
It’s just the usual dig at stupid Greenbackers, this author being so stupid he could actually learn from Ellen Brown. It’s just the usual downplaying of the facts.
The Volker Fund got a wonderful return on their 1963 investment paying North 500 bucks per month to read their drivel.
He has been promoting the same boring crap ever since.
In the mean time, I’m still awaiting a meticulously researched and detailed response to What Gary North is not telling you about Interest.