By Brandon Smith
People often ask me when they should begin to worry about agenda of the “global economic reset” and controlled demolition of the economy? If economic collapse is a process rather than an event, at what point in the process will we start to feel direct consequences? While crash conditions in economic fundamentals have indeed already begun starting in the final quarter of 2018, culminating in faltering housing and retail numbers as well as an inverted yield curve, the average person is only affected in a minor way. It’s true — even during the greatest of financial depressions, only a part of the population suffers while the rest live somewhat normally.
This “relativity” in crisis changes, though, when we start talking about a currency collapse. In the event that the primary mechanism for exchange becomes unstable, as in Weimar Germany in the 1920s or in Argentina in the early 2000s, the damage to the public is almost universal except for the elitist class. In the midst of stagflationary headwinds, many people could still live a comfortable life given they are willing to make some sacrifices. But, in the midst of a currency implosion, anyone who is ill prepared will have to face the pain.
As far as timing is concerned, we can make educated guesses according to the evidence, but there is no exact science to predicting when the globalists will pull the plug completely on economic life support. They will trigger a disaster when the timing most suits them. However, I do believe there are signals to watch for.
In the past I have said that when globalist criminals stop trying to hide their criminality — when they start to become brazen in their rhetoric and agenda, that is when it is time for people to worry. Why? Because when criminals act more confident it is usually because they think they have already gotten away with it. Their plans are almost complete.
Over the past year, the globalists have become absolutely brazen in flaunting their endgame for a single global currency system. Yes, it is time to be concerned. But there are people out there who will tell you that the notion is “farfetched.” They will tell you that it is “doom porn,” and they will tell you it is “conspiracy theory.”
The evidence says otherwise. The evidence says it is conspiracy fact.
Much of the argument against a one world currency hinges on the notion that the U.S. dollar is too entrenched to be replaced anytime soon. In terms of a deliberate collapse of the dollar, the concept is simply too much for some people to wrap their heads around. The dollar is the world reserve currency, how could it possibly come under threat?
King dollar bias is at its peak today, and the delusion that the dollar is some kind of untouchable and essential apparatus infects the economic world like a cancer. There are two kinds of people who argue that the dollar cannot be dethroned — those with an agenda who seek to keep the masses oblivious to the threat, and the useful idiots who have attached their egos to the fiat currency like it is some kind of national flag. Their arguments go a little something like this:
Fallacy #1: The globalists need the dollar to maintain power
This is patently untrue. The dollar is nothing, just like any other fiat currency system. It is a fabrication, a fantasy. Its value is an arbitrary product of manipulated forex markets. Its buying power has dwindled to a shadow of its former glory in the past century. The globalists have resided over the life and death of multiple reserve currencies, and the dollar is no different.
For people who make this claim, I suggest they consider the dominance of the British sterling in the early part of the 20th century. It was a world reserve as well as the petro-currency of the era. The world’s central banks held sterling as the majority of their balances and its liquidity was strong. Its role was crushed, though, when globalists used British treasury bond holdings in America and France as leverage and forced oil producing nations in the Middle East to drop the sterling’s petro-status.
The shift away from the sterling began in the late 1930s and was completed in the span of around five years when the Bretton Woods Conference established a kind of “shared reserve status” between the dollar and the sterling. The dollar took over quickly from this point on. When the dollar was decoupled completely from gold in 1971 under Richard Nixon and tied to oil through agreements with Saudi Arabia, the transformation was complete (I would also note that the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights basket was launched at the same time the gold standard was completely abandoned).
The idea that the international banking elites care about protecting any single currency is absurd. They create these currencies out of thin air, and they can kill them almost as easily as they bring them to life.
Fallacy #2: There is no other currency mechanism in the world that can take the dollar’s place
This fallacy relies on two assumptions — One, that no currency has the liquidity to match the dollar and fill the void in global trade if it were to fall. Two, the majority of reserves held in central banks around the world are denominated in dollars, therefore a replacement is unlikely because the world is “used to paying with dollars.”
First, liquidity is meaningless. Liquidity in any currency can be created on a whim. In fact, the Chinese have been ramping up the liquidity of the Yuan for the past 10 years. Trillions in Yuan have been conjured from nothing, which is a development I have warned about repeatedly along with the Yuan’s inclusion into the IMF’s SDR basket.
This is not to say I think the Yuan will replace the dollar as the world reserve, far from it. That honor will go to another mechanism entirely, which we will discuss in a moment. The point is, fiat currencies are not limited by their liquidity, they are only limited by the restrictions that central banks set upon them. If global central banks decide in unison that they will dump the dollar as the world reserve and use another currency, then that is exactly what will happen. Liquidity can be created with the push of a button.
When one accepts the fact that the Bank for International Settlements dictates and coordinates the policies of all major central banks, then the idea that they might all drop the dollar as the world reserve at the same time becomes less difficult to grasp.
Second, as mentioned above, the vast majority of central bank forex holdings used to be in sterling, and yet, the sterling was toppled, and the dollar became the world reserve very quickly.
Fallacy #3: The globalists already have total control through the dollar, so why would they change anything?
This argument generally comes from people who have no understanding of the psychology of economics and the psychology of power.
First and foremost, the federal reserve and the dollar are merely a franchise of a larger system; they are but one tentacle writhing from the body of the globalist vampire squid. In the pyramid of banking power, the Fed is an errand boy, a workhorse, that is all. At the top if the pyramid sits the major global institutions which control policy, including the IMF, the BIS, World Bank and the U.N.
While the U.S. government does have “veto power” within the IMF, the IMF has made it clear this power is ceremonial, and can be taken away at a moment’s notice. In reality it is the Fed that answers to the IMF and BIS, and the IMF and BIS answer to no one.
Even with control of national currencies, the globalists are not satisfied. What they want is global governance. They don’t just want the masses to go along with it, they want the masses to BEG for it. This is about an ascendance to world empire, and if you have read my essays on the globalists and narcissistic sociopathy, then you know that these people want to be treated like gods, or god-kings, much like the pharaohs of ancient Egypt. It is not enough for them to stay in the shadows; they want to be worshiped in the light of day.
But before global governance can be instilled as a necessity in the public psyche and the banking elites established as the benevolent rulers of the planet, several things must be accomplished. One of the first steps to global government would be global economic management and a single world currency. After this is achieved, global government would become much easier to sell to the public.
Beyond this, the idea that the globalists have “total control already” is nonsense. The big secret the establishment does not want you to know about is that elitist power hangs by a thin thread, and that thread is public inaction and distraction. The establishment spends trillions of dollars and thousands of man-hours developing propaganda and launching wars in order to keep the populace preoccupied exactly because their control is an illusion. All it would take is for a marginal percentage of people to wake up one day and suddenly decide to grab their torches and pitchforks (or maybe sniper rifles in a modern hypothetical scenario) and start snuffing out the tiny faction of elites in highest positions.
Their control would vanish, and they would be hiding in the deepest holes they could find. Sure, others could take their place, but why would they want to when making the attempt would be a potential death sentence?
The globalists want total centralization and the subjugation of every nation under one system because this would make their illusory power more concrete. If the masses see them as saviors, and every nation is disarmed, docile and dependent on a single global monetary framework, who is going to snuff them out then?
The agenda is out in the open
Dollar exceptionalists ignore reality, evidence as well as history in their blind faith defense of the currency. Controlling the reserve currency did not stop the globalists from centralizing further and dumping the pound sterling post-Bretton Woods in 1944. Why would it stop them from dumping the dollar today? The argument over whether or not the dollar can be sunk is, in the end, pointless, because the decision has already been made.
The ultimate goal of the globalists is openly admitted. As I have examined in numerous articles including ‘The Economic End Game Explained‘, the Rothschild owned magazine The Economist outlined the plan for a one world currency system 30 years ago in 1988.
This plan describes a shift starting in 2018, in which the U.S. economy will be diminished to make way for a new system, rooted in the IMF’s SDR basket. The article mentions that the SDR will not be the world currency, but a “bridge” to the world currency.
Skeptics will say “Ah, but 2018 has come and gone, and there is no global currency!” But these people have not been paying attention.
In my article ‘The globalist one world currency will be very similar to bitcoin’, published in 2017, I examined the suspicious origins of cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. I also warned that this technology was key to the death of privacy in trade and the very cashless society that globalists had been lusting after for years. My position — That blockchain and crypto ARE the foundation for the one world currency system.
My position was confirmed by the IMF itself in 2018. In multiple white papers and articles, the IMF calls for the creation of a new digital currency system that would be based on blockchain technology. It is possible that this global crypto mechanism already exists and is being traded on the crypto-market today. Or, it is being held at the IMF as they wait for the right moment to put it into action.
Last month the general manager of the BIS, Augustin Carsen, published a paper on ‘The Future Of Money And Payments.’ In it he calls for a cashless society driven by digital currency issued by central banks. He also suggests that digital accounts could be offered directly by central banks, bypassing normal corporate banks. Our friend Steven Guinness recently wrote an excellent article covering this.
The SDR’s role as a bridge is also being confirmed in the mainstream. In 2017, globalist Mohamed El-Erian called for the SDR to act as a one world currency system, and stated that this would be useful in combating “the rise of populism.”
This past week, former U.N. Under Secretary General Jose Antonio Ocampo published an essay calling for the IMF to fully fund itself using the SDR, and then issue the SDR as a global currency mechanism.
Skeptics and dollar cheerleaders should argue with global bankers on what can and cannot be done with the greenback, because it is the global banks that are stating, unequivocally, that they are about to replace the dollar with something else. How would they go about doing this? In many articles I have suggested that the best way to kill the dollar’s reserve status would be to kill its petro-status. This is part of what they did to the pound sterling when they made the dollar the world reserve, is it not?
It is perhaps no coincidence then that Saudi Arabia, the key to the dollar’s petro-currency dominance, is threatening to dump the dollar again at the same time that multiple globalist sources are calling for a new world currency system. If the U.S. government passes a bill exposing OPEC members to antitrust lawsuits, watch how quickly a monetary structure can disintegrate. And, watch how quickly the IMF and other globalist organizations swoop in to “save the day.”
