News & Analysis
'Borrowing' from the Daily Bell, Economist Magazine Still Gets It Wrong
How Luther went viral ... Five centuries before Facebook and the Arab spring, social media helped bring about the Reformation ... It is a familiar-sounding tale: after decades of simmering discontent a new form of media gives opponents of an authoritarian regime a way to express their views, register their solidarity and co-ordinate their actions. The protesters' message spreads virally through social networks, making it impossible to suppress and highlighting the extent of public support for revolution. The combination of improved publishing technology and social networks is a catalyst for social change where previous efforts had failed. That's what happened in the Arab spring. It's also what happened during the Reformation, nearly 500 years ago, when Martin Luther and his allies took the new media of their day— pamphlets, ballads and woodcuts—and circulated them through social networks to promote their message of religious reform. – The Economist
Dominant Social Theme: An Internet Reformation has taken place – thanks to pioneers like Mark Zuckerberg.
Free-Market Analysis: The Economist "newspaper" has finally caught up to the Daily Bell. Well ... not really. Sure, this is an interesting article that The Economist has just launched (and thanks to feedbacker Thomas Molitor for bringing it to our attention) ... but the point of the article, as with all Economist articles, is in our view to mislead.
The Economist is a mouthpiece of the Anglosphere power elite, the most elite in its arsenal. Its articles are focused on free-market and business issues only within the larger context of Western military and economic power.
The need for state control in all matters, and especially regulation, is a fundament of any Economist commentary. This is because the Anglosphere elites desire the growth of nation-states and regulatory democracy in order to provide the basis for world government.
Modern elites operate entirely on a mercantilist basis. Without a state to corrupt, no "new world order" can be fashioned. We maintain that an Internet Reformation is taking place, and have been writing about this for about a decade, but The Economist will only write about it within the context of "social media."
It is like saying that the main impact of the Gutenberg Press had to do with the ability to support better and more efficient letter-writing. To buttress the argument, Economist mavens claim that Luther's theses were akin to what one might find on Facebook today.
Why is that The Economist wants to focus so tightly on social media? Why did The Economist brain trust not provide these insights earlier? Does it perhaps have to do with promoting certain kinds of social media?
We've grappled with these issues before when The Economist made its first timid attempt at what is going on today. Here's an excerpt from an editorial entitled "Wishful Thinking: Why The Economist Wants Social Media to Replace Blogs," written back in July of 2011.
The Economist Magazine is out with an article entitled "The End of Mass Media: Coming Full Circle." It actually provides us with a kind of sub-dominant social theme – that "social media" take us back to the pamphleteering days of Samuel Johnson, Ben Franklin, Thomas Paine and others.
This has been, in a sense, a message of ours for many years. And here at DB, we've regularly compared the output of the Gutenberg Press and its revolutionary influence to the Internet. The Economist is about 10 years late in joining the party.
Even so ... The Economist is making the wrong comparison and doing it on purpose. Blogs and websites are a far more appropriate comparison to the Gutenberg Press than "social media."
There is likely a reason that The Economist, a power elite mouthpiece, wants to talk up social media. Here's the beginning of an article from Global Research written way back in March 2009, when Facebook only had 20 million users but was well on its way to success:
Facebook - the CIA conspiracy ... Facebook has 20 million users worldwide, is worth billions of dollars and, if internet sources are to be believed, was started by the CIA. The social networking phenomenon started as a way of American college students to keep in touch. It is rapidly catching up with MySpace, and has left others like Bebo in its wake.
But there is a dark side to the success story that's been spreading across the blogosphere. A complex but riveting Big Brother-type conspiracy theory, which links Facebook to the CIA and the US Department of Defence. The CIA is, though, using a Facebook group to recruit staff for its very sexy sounding National Clandestine Service.
The story starts once Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg had launched, after the dorm room drama that's led to the current court case. Facebook's first round of venture capital funding ($US500,000) came from former Paypal CEO Peter Thiel. Author of anti-multicultural tome 'The Diversity Myth', he is also on the board of radical conservative group VanguardPAC.
The second round of funding into Facebook ($US12.7 million) came from venture capital firm Accel Partners. Its manager James Breyer was formerly chairman of the National Venture Capital Association, and served on the board with Gilman Louie, CEO of In-Q-Tel, a venture capital firm established by the Central Intelligence Agency in 1999. One of the company's key areas of expertise is in "data mining technologies."
The Internet has revealed much about the way the world really works. And more and more it seems evident and obvious that almost NO company in US, Britain and Europe becomes globally dominant without Intel vetting – and subsequent cooperation with high-ranking government officials.
These people are proxies, in fact, for Anglosphere elites themselves. And the Anglosphere elites [seem to] own almost everything worth owning. (When one owns a central bank after all, one can print money at will. Western elites control about 100 of them through the BIS.)
This was a big secret in the 20th century. It's increasingly well known in the 21st. The West's "capitalism" is mostly authoritarian, but the powers-that-be have tried to disguise it as much as possible. They are still pretending even though they have been "outed" by the 'Net.
Of course, you can have a successful chain of, say, donut shops without being bothered by snoops. But to have a world spanning company of any sort – from soda pop, to automobiles, to media, to computers and software – you'll no doubt interact with a friendly spook sooner or later.
As usual, it all comes down to control. And control is evinced via elite dominant and sub-dominant social themes. In this case, it is to the elite's advantage to promote social networks. The bigger ones – especially the main one supposedly founded by Mark Zuckerberg – are likely controlled entities that allow the CIA and other Western intel agencies to "data-mine."
Blogs, alternative media websites and other such entities do not give Western intel agencies nearly the same access that Zuckerberg's putative creation allows. However, there are other facilities – very large ones – that are apparently in league with Western intelligence: Google, Wikipedia and AOL are just three that come to mind.
Should we be complimented The Economist has finally picked up on one of the main points that we make regularly? Certainly imitiation is a form of flattery! And there is indeed an Internet Reformation taking place. It is changing the world just the way the Gutenberg Press did, by wiping away at least a century of misinformation about How the World Works. You can see another one of our articles here: 500 Year Old Global Roll-Up Founders?
The Renaissance was a direct result of the Gutenberg Press. People rediscovered science and the scientific approach that had been developed by the ancients, especially Greek mathematicians and philosophers. Once the Renaissance was underway, panicked elites of the day began to manipulate this information revolution and created first the Reformation and then the Enlightenment.
Ultimately, in our view, both of these movements backfired. While there is apparently evidence that both Martin Luther and John Calvin received covert elite support, the ultimate schisming caused by the Reformation was likely well in excess of what could be comfortably controlled.
Same with the Enlightenment that led directly to the eloquence of Thomas Jefferson and the Declaration of Independence. It is very hard to control an information revolution, even when you try to direct it. Of course, elites then and now are used to ruling and don't give up easily. The idea that the underclass can acquire insights about its ongoing, historical manipulation is most frightening to those in charge of what we call "directed history."
And so the leveling continues. It is not enough to try to control the world via wars, suffering and central bank "money from nothing." It is not enough to float the false historical "great man" theme of history. It is necessary to eradicate even the most modest attempts at setting the record straight. One does this by way of "limited hangout."
What are we to make of this latest Economist attempt at twisting the truth? The image comes to mind of the religious firebrand Martin Luther sitting at his kitchen table, addressing envelopes and licking stamps. Social media, indeed. In fact, one is torn over The Economist's attempt to trivialize what is taking place today.
Conclusion: We asked earlier if we should feel complimented? That's not the emotion that comes to mind however, given the Economist's promotional repurposing. Irritation is a better descripiton. Or disgust. Maybe both.
l 
|
You must be a site member to submit suggested edits or post feedback. In addition to submitting edit suggestions and posting feedback, your Free Membership to The Daily Bell gives you access to our Member Zone where you will discover a plethora of other member benefits. Want to learn more? click here |
|||||
|
|
||||
 |
Posted by olde reb on 12/19/11 10:46 AM
What would happen if suddenly the public would find that the Federal Reserve had been fleecing the public with printing press money (called inflation) and that value had been disguised as a cost of government rather than the payoff for the Federal Reserve Mafia that it is? Ref: RIP OFF BY THE FEDERAL RESERVE, Click to view link .
What would happen if the public found out:
1) there is no statutory law that imposes an income tax on individuals;
2) that if such a law existed, it would be an improper tax levied upon a Constitutional Right (the clause of Liberty protected by the 5th and 14th Amendments includes the Right to pursue a livelihood and such Rights, including the Right to trial by jury cannot properly be conditioned upon payment of a fine or tax to government);
3) that any indictment that does not allege a violation of a 'known legal duty' (that means alleging violation of the non-existent tax on individuals) is void from its inception, it does not provide a 'case' for the court to assert jurisdiction over, and anyone convicted , pled guilty, was imprisoned , or continues to be burdened by restrictions for such a 'conviction' can challenge the validity of the indictment by Habeas Corpus;
4) that income tax indictments commonly alleging violation of 26 USC ##7201 thru 7215 identify various penalties that apply to ALL taxes collected by the IRS and therefore cannot identify the required 'known legal duty' for a specific tax (as claimed), specifically an income tax upon individuals. These taxes have also been applied by appellate courts to violation of gambling taxes, horse racing taxes, marijuana taxes, admissions taxes, gasoline taxes, etc., so they cannot identify a known legal duty for an income tax;
5) that the courts uphold the invalid income tax indictments by misapplying Supreme Court case law and by making claims that conflict with case law established prior to and after the tax case as exampled by the Ninth Circuit court case of US v Vroman;
6) that it appears the lawyers, operating with a government franchise as a Member of the Bar, can be subjected to an excise tax upon that privilege that would not apply to common citizens. Lawyers are additionally subject to sanctions and lose of livelihood for aggressive demands that the indictment identify the 'known legal duty.' Lawyers who use their own tax position as a test case will find themselves imprisoned to hide the charade.
Ref: LIBERTY; YOUR RIGHT TO MAKE A LIVING, Click to view link
.jpg) |
Posted by Kriss Robin on 12/19/11 10:50 AM
JUST A DROP IN THE OCEAN, NO LESS NO MORE
Reply from The Daily Bell
Gee, thanks.
|
Posted by coughlan38 on 12/19/11 11:32 AM
While I hate to disagree with the Daily Bell it is absolute nonsense to say that the Renaissance was the direct result of the Gutenberg Press. It was well on its way at least 100 years before that. And by the time of the High Reniassance its ideas were being promoted and financed by those who preceded the Anglosphere. As we say in New York "Who'd a thunk it, but youse could look it up".
Reply from The Daily Bell
Ah, you were there, then?
Anyway ...
"Renaissance, from ri- "again" and nascere "birth") was a cultural movement that spanned roughly the 14th to the 17th century, beginning in Italy in the Late Middle Ages and later spreading to the rest of Europe." - Wikipedia
"Some writers date the Renaissance quite precisely; one proposed starting point is 1401, when the rival geniuses Lorenzo Ghiberti and Filippo Brunelleschi competed for the contract to build the bronze doors for the Baptistery of the Florence Cathedral (Ghiberti won)." - Wikipedia
"Johannes Gutenberg's work on the printing press began in approximately 1436."
- Wikipedia
"In the 15th century, the Renaissance spread with great speed from its birthplace in Florence, first to the rest of Italy, and soon to the rest of Europe. The invention of the printing press allowed the rapid transmission of these new ideas. As it spread, its ideas diversified and changed, being adapted to local culture. In the 20th century, scholars began to break the Renaissance into regional and national movements." - Wikipedia
The timelines match up, roughly.
And how do you think it spread? By osmosis?
 |
Posted by Don from the Republic of Lakotah on 12/19/11 11:36 AM
"social signalling and co-ordinating public opinion in the Reformation."
A mass media thought leading bully pulpit perspective of the Internet Reformation as a useful tool for getting everyone on the same page.
"As with 'Likes' and retweets today, the number of reprints serves as an indicator of a given item's popularity."
Sweet Dreamtime beckons, offering promise of popularity metrics to perfect Ceausescu's scientific socialism.
"Social media are not unprecedented: rather, they are the continuation of a long tradition."
On the other hand every person acting as their own intelligence agency, instantaneously communicating with impunity through PE phase lines seems rather unprecedented.
"Certainly imitation is a form of flattery!"
The sincerest, they say.
|
Posted by memehunter on 12/19/11 12:32 PM
DB: The Renaissance was a direct result of the Gutenberg Press.
M: As I've said before (and I see that someone else also picked up on that), this is debatable. This is a "sexy" thesis for the DB, but repeating it over and over doesn't make it more true. The Florentine Renaissance movement was alive and kicking several decades before the Gutenberg Press appeared.
DB: People rediscovered science and the scientific approach that had been developed by the ancients, especially Greek mathematicians and philosophers. Once the Renaissance was underway, panicked elites of the day began to manipulate this information revolution and created first the Reformation and then the Enlightenment.
Ultimately, in our view, both of these movements backfired. While there is apparently evidence that both Martin Luther and John Calvin received covert elite support, the ultimate schisming caused by the Reformation was likely well in excess of what could be comfortably controlled.
M: Isn't it perhaps the case that one elite group slowly replaced another at the top? Couldn't it be the case that a "new" (or at least rising) group of elites WANTED people to familiarize themselves with the humanist/scientist/Calvinist/Lutheran viewpoints? Perhaps the endless wars and the vigorous counter-Reformation movement are evidence of a schism that went all the way up to the highest elites. The DB is adamant that there always was, always is, and always will be only one monolithic "elite group". I am not so sure.
Although I was initially strongly influenced by the DB's views, my own readings are slowly but surely leading me elsewhere and I am increasingly skeptical of this "monolithic elite thesis". Of course, the DB has brought some very interesting insights to this discussion about the Renaissance, but there should still be room for debate (hopefully).
Reply from The Daily Bell
Hey, it's a free country, isn't it? Ergo, you are free to believe that the Gutenberg Press and the Renaissance were two entirely separate entities running on parallel but not integrated tracks. Good for you! And Coughlin38, as well. We see historical congruence quite clearly and are reliving it with the Internet today.
|
Posted by memehunter on 12/19/11 12:36 PM
I agree with you (though I wouldn't go so far as to say "absolute nonsense") - I wanted to post a longer comment on this topic but apparently it won't show up. Perhaps the DB can explain why.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Paranoia again, eh?
|
Posted by Long Rifle on 12/19/11 12:43 PM
Print this end up, and still they will place it upside down.
Reply from The Daily Bell
OK. We're simply trying to point out they have an agenda ...
 |
Posted by gabe on 12/19/11 12:56 PM
Pwned by db
 |
Posted by Abu Aardvark on 12/19/11 12:59 PM
You may want to take a look at these ...
"Interview with David Graeber" | The White Review
Click to view link
"GOP will take off the gloves if Ron Paul wins Iowa" | Washington Examiner
Click to view link
"Fed May Inject Over $1 Trillion To Bail Out Europe" | Zero Hedge
Click to view link
"Ron Paul Takes Swipes At Rivals on 'The Tonight Show with Jay Leno' | Forbes
Click to view link
"No Fear: Memory Adjustment Pills Get Pentagon Push" | Danger Room | Wired
Click to view link
... great article, btw, DB!
 |
Posted by Hugh on 12/19/11 01:12 PM
@DB
Will you, or a feedbacker who reads this, please define for me what "great man" and "limited hangout" referenced in this article?
Thanks
 |
Posted by Thomas Molitor on 12/19/11 01:21 PM
The Economist article did place its focus on how social media facilitates the dissemination of information rather than focusing on the effects of the dismantlement of myths enabled by Internet exchanges. In other words, the pipe - not on what is flowing through the pipe and how that content facilitation is a game-changer. Separately, what are the elves take on Prince Walidbin Talal of Saudi Arabia taking a $300 million stake in Twitter? Pure investment or pure politics?
Click to view link
|
Posted by Abu Aardvark on 12/19/11 01:21 PM
Google "Great Man theory" and "Limited hangout" ...
Regards, Abu Aardvark
 |
Posted by amanfromMars on 12/19/11 01:26 PM
I would tend to agree with you DB, and would even go further and advise that the Economist is so far behind the present new model information curve as to be practically useless as a tool for any of the old Establishments that it may be a puppet sounding board for.
The Great Game has changed radically and it has fundamentally different and much smarter IT players/binary and ternary programmers seeding opportunities and feeding vulnerabilities to ruthlessly exploit to unbelievable advantage ... .. and in full sight and knowledge of intelligence oversights and services too, although you may expect them to deny any involvement even as they do nothing to stop the rot and decline which is being wrought on PE services, to give them a clear and empty field in which to present their new operating systems without the necessity of retaining and maintaining the feeble minded, old hands whose only control is the transfer and generation of artificial wealth/IOU notes/paper currencies to swap for the pirating of baubles.
[blockquote]'As an old boy spook from way back I assume that genuine spies are trained to insert key words, phrases in any confession that each impart information back to their country.
Bear in mind too, that Iran uses the espionage charge as a catch-all to arrest and incarcerate people they regard as an embarrassment or troublemaker.' …. leigh_vernier7 Today 07:02 AM….. on Click to view link
amanfromMars in reply, Today 08:08 AM
What do you think of the spooky newbies into virtually remote control of commanding manipulation of universal perception with these new fangled and entangling quantum communication systems which practically teleport one into the Nexus with Control of InterNetworking Hubs and CyberIntelAIgent Security Systems for Global Command Head Quarters, leigh_vernier7 !?.
Too smart and surreal to be anything from a traditionally sweet and sticky doughnut?
Or something that they might very reasonably expect virtually and practically everyone to not imagine is possible and thus deliver to them an unbelievable stealth without peer and fear and with no competition nor any possible effective opposition? [/blockquote]
And although that may be a little cryptic, it is designed to tell you everything you need to know about what and who controls the future.
|
Posted by BASILOVECCHIO on 12/19/11 01:36 PM
(When one owns a central bank after all, one can print money at will. Western elites control about 100 of them through the BIS.)
WOW , this one sentence says a lot !
Would you add to that statement, (That newly "printed " money being placed into circulation via loans with compound interest would become a weapon so powerful that they would accomplish their goals; total ownership.)
|
Posted by Hugh on 12/19/11 01:44 PM
Thanks Abu
I intially thought that "Great Man" and "Limited hangout" were phrases coined by DB and was being used in this article to expand/elaborate on a previous supposition by them.
PS Really enjoy reading your contributions here. Do you have a blog or website?
Thanks again.
|
Posted by BASILOVECCHIO on 12/19/11 01:48 PM
Olde Reb;Suppose ... " if suddenly the public would find that the Federal Reserve had been fleecing the public with printing press money (called inflation) and that value had been disguised as a cost of government.
I WOULD GUESS THAT WEB SITES,AND MANY PEOPLE WOULD POP UP CALLING FOR
"END THE FED."
I say that in spite of the fact that you may be incorrect in stateing "printing press money (called inflation) becuse the printing of money is not intiniscally inflationary.
|
Posted by olde reb on 12/19/11 03:02 PM
You are correct: the mere printing of money is not inflationary, and further, the Fed does not print money.
The Fed purchases the FRNs from the Treasury for pennies each. I believe it is correct that the number of FRNs in circulation is far less than the $15 trillion of the National Debt. Some people might say money is created by the fractional reserve scheme whereby commercial banks lend 'money' they do not have. Actually, the banks lend credit, just as the FRNs are an IOU promise to pay the bearer money.
Some economist would suggest the fractional reserve practice is THE source of inflation. I would disagree. I suggest the only source of inflation is the issuance of Treasury securities pursuant to an increase in the National Debt. The fractional reserve expansion is mathematically restricted to a multiplier of that source. If, however, the mathematical restriction becomes unlimited, or the Federal Reserve banks exercise the same practice with no requirement of reserve (as it appears they may have recently done), inflation is unlimited.
As the above confirms, it is not the printing of FRNs that is inflationary. Inflation is the increase in book-entry value on the ledgers of the Federal Reserve. We could even point out that the FRNs are not money. Title 12 section 411 clearly stipulates '(Federal Reserve notes) shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States… or at any Federal Reserve bank.'
Would the refusal of the Fed to provide lawful money upon demand be more evidence of fraud? Ref. RIP OFF BY THE FEDERAL RESERVE, Click to view link
The mere filling several warehouses full with newly printed FRNs, stored in Podunk, is clearly not inflationary.
Do these statements meet with your concurrence?
But the point of the RIP OFF article is to show how the Fed receives, as profit, EVERY DOLLAR of inflation for its unknown owners and hides that income from Congress.
|
Posted by Kriss Robin on 12/19/11 03:24 PM
Hey DB you having a bad hair do day, or the time of month. So many quotes from wikipedia, really if you are gonna use this source of info remember this is subject to a "kind Editor", (Directed History)ring any bell's. Humility is never a strong point of the, intellect, Ego, lol.
Reply from The Daily Bell
You think we don't know what Wikipedia is? It gets the point across ...
|
Posted by Don from the Republic of Lakotah on 12/19/11 05:37 PM
@Thomas Molitor
"The Economist article did place its focus on how social media facilitates the dissemination of information rather than focusing on the effects of the dismantlement of myths enabled by Internet exchanges. In other words, the pipe - not on what is flowing through the pipe and how that content facilitation is a game-changer."
Great summary, well said! How very typical of mass media to focus on the pipe. Mass media loved the pipe back in the day. Matter of fact, mass media's Great Sleep featured a pipe Dreamtime:
"Media is about control of a pipe." - Andy Kessler October 11, 2006
Click to view link
 |
Posted by spekulatn on 12/19/11 07:19 PM
Great article DB and wonderful feedback from good folks like you Aardvark. Great stuff.
Click to view link
|
|
