25 of 26 people found the following review helpful
Hard going but worth the effort,
This review is from: The Cash Nexus: Money and Politics in Modern History, 1700-2000 (Paperback)
The book's scope is much wider than its title would imply. The author analyzes why some regimes have been more successful than others during past 300 years. The book emphasizes importance of four institutions as the bases of financial strength (and long-term success) of the state:
- a tax-collecting bureaucracy
- a representative parliament
- a national debt
- a central bank
There is lot of intellectual gymnastics with figures and facts in the middle of the book that test your determination to go on. Those who persevere get rewarded with the interesting discussion in the end of the book about defense expenses as a insurance policy for the state and a need for a superpower policeman for the free world in order to make peace and prosperity to last.
Read and find out if you agree with the conclusions of the author.
Tracked by 1 customer
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-2 of 2 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 27 Apr 2011 17:40:15 BDT
C. W. Bradbury says:
Corrupt/parasitic banking is actually an age old phenomena. This can seen from the quote below:-
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
Thomas Jefferson, (Attributed)
3rd president of US (1743 - 1826)
As President Jefferson made clear, much of Western history is actually a record of this age-old struggle between small cabals and the mass populations within whom they are entrenched but secretively exploiting/misguiding for financial/political advantage. Bible scriptures speak of this 'demonic' influence in Revelations as 'the harlot riding the wild beast'. Hitler labelled this group the 'Jewish/Zionist Money Power' and left-wing parties today speak of 'International Corporate Capitalism'; but all are refering to the same malevolent influence. Those same manipulative 'money-changers' whom Christ drove from the Temple only at the cost of his own crucifixion. The unrestrained deprivations of this same usury-fuelled 'money power' ultimately bled the Roman Empire to destruction, caused untold misery during 'The Age of Kings' and now threatens to bring a similar fate down upon Western Civilization.
In reply to an earlier post on 13 Jul 2011 18:53:46 BDT
D. J. Andrews says:
This is a very strange comment, although Jefferson certianly did say "I sincerely believe, with you [John Taylor], that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies" in this letter (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?am
We must also be very careful in assuming that Jefferson, great man that he undoubtably was, is more capable than professional historians to understand what moves nations. It is also very difficult to put him in the same context as your bible referances, no doubt Jefferson believed in a creator; just not Jesus as the son of god.
Your thoughts after that are very confusing and unfortunatly reak of lazy thinking. When evaluating history it is probably better to stay away from the bible as a source text lest you end up with hyperbole of "the harlot riding the wild beast".
Hitler was, of course, wrong when he labelled Jews as the source of economic problems - the ministers preceeding him were more to blame for the fiscal problems of Germany in the late 1920's than "corrupt/parasitic banking".
I've never heard the phrase "International Corporate Capitalism" before and am not sure why it is capitalized (the ICC already being a corrupt cricket thing).
The Roman Empire fell because of military overstretch and rival empires copying its innovations, 'The Age of Kings' is a computer game and doesn't count - the Roman Empire was just as authoritarian as the feudal regimes that followed it.
It would be advisable to cut out the pseudoscientific conspiracy crap and start from the beggining.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›