Skip to content

Book Review: The Banking Swindle (Updated with Interview)

June 7, 2013
Kerry Bolton, the Banking Swindle

Left: Kerry Bolton

Kerry Bolton’s ‘the Banking Swindle’ is a brilliant expose of the fight against the Money Power in modern history. Not only does Bolton authoritatively compare a number of important financial systems of the past, he frames the debate of the twenties and thirties of the last century. In doing so, he connects us to our forebears and gives important clues on the way the struggle should be waged.

By Anthony Migchels for Henry Makow and Real Currencies

Kerry Bolton, Ph.D., Th.D., born in 1956, hails from New Zealand and is a prolific writer and political activist. He has written on the occult, mass immigration and the politics of the Right. The Right to Bolton is the original conservatism, based in God, Nation, Family and, most importantly, monetary reform. It seems, from a distance, that he is somewhat disenchanted with the Right because they have forgotten the all importance of the monetary issue.

Michael Hoffman faces the same problems: many ‘conservative’ groups and organizations consider his ‘Usury in Christendom’ anathema.

Bolton asked me to write a foreword for his book and this is an excellent opportunity to thank him for the invitation because I more than fully support this book. It’s a brilliant and timely effort for several reasons.

In the first place: it’s a short and fast paced read. Only 188 pages, including introduction, three forewords, and the index. Modern, accessible English, a spacious font so not very many words per page. It can be read in a couple of hours.

It starts with a short introduction of Modern History, rewritten to show how the bankers managed to conquer Europe via Holland and Britain. This serves as an excellent primer for those looking for a heads up on these fundamental issues in their reeducation.

He describes how the current financial system came to be and what problems it brings.

But where the book really takes off is his vivid description of the public discourse of the thirties in reaction to the Great Depression. It transpires that very concrete opposition to the financial system itself was universal throughout the industrialized nations. Social Credit activists were active throughout the west. The dominions saw major Social Credit movements. But also other financial systems were both promoted and, what is more, even implemented.

New Zealand, for instance, implemented financial policies that were very similar to those of Hitler’s Germany. A large scale social housing project financed with State Credit  solved 75% of unemployment during the Great Depression. This iconic project has disappeared in a memory hole. Canada also printed its own Government money from the mid thirties up to the early seventies. Here is an eye-opening account of the Canadian economy with Government money.

The level of public involvement in these discussions seem to have been huge. They were talking banking and monetary reform in pubs and on street corners, all over the West.

In Britain itself there were the ‘Green Shirts for Social Credit’, started by John Hargrave, who had met C.H. Douglas in 1923. The Green Shirts kicked off in 1930 and 1932 Hargrave realized that nothing could be done through Parliament and that a fully devoted agitation was necessary. Bolton:
“Hargrave advocated a militant campaign that would break the media blackout. The Green Shirts took to the streets on marches, behind drums and banners, held street corner meetings, and sold newspapers on the street, delivering the Social Credit message in a cogent manner. Facing the violent opposition of the Left, they were noted for their discipline in the face of provocation. They were also noted for throwing green painted bricks through the windows of banks and using the consequent court cases to publicize their views.”

Bolton analyzes the struggle for monetary reform in all major western nations, including Father Coughlin, who at his peak was followed by 40 million Americans, and Japan.

I must say that this comprehensive overview was actually eye opening for me. Such large scale agitation for- and implementation of real monetary reform on such a level, I never really realized what kind of trouble the Money Power faced back then.

It also shows that the system may not be quite so unassailable as it often looks. True, while today’s depression is probably not much less worse than 80 years ago, its consequences have been much milder. Millions of people actually starved or were close to starvation back then. However we may feel about the much dreaded well fare state, it has prevented that kind of mass suffering during this crunch. On the other hand: we can also be sure that this is a vital part of the Money Power’s calculations this time round. Because hunger is a powerful motivator and the usurers have learned to sedate us to the nastiest side effects of our hidden slavery.

the Banking Swindle

the Banking Swindle

Other Systems
Another interesting aspect of the book is its analysis of a number of financial systems that were either launched during times of economic hardship as a result of scarcity of money, or states that were simply not (yet) part of the banks’ control grid. For instance Czarist Russia, much hated by the Rothschilds for their intransigence. Russia was modernizing rapidly in the last decades before New York’s coup d’état in 1917. And it was financing this modernization without the usurers. This, undoubtedly, was the prime reason for the ‘revolution’.

Or how about the Greybacks? I never heard of them. Apparently they were actually real debt free notes, as opposed to the interest-bearing bonds backed Greenback, printed by the South to finance the war. As always, the money system in use is a great hint as to the nature of the real dynamics behind the scenes. I’m not well enough versed in US history to come to any conclusions, but Bolton makes a very plausible case that the Confederacy was a real rebellion and that they were cut off from bankster loans.

Just as the British inflated the Continental, George Washington’s debt free unit, the Union destroyed the Greyback through counterfeiting.

The Banking Swindle is in many respects an effort to reconnect the Right to its roots of opposition against the Money Power. Although, after reading the book, I understand why Bolton considers the classical populist resistance against Money Power the Right, in this day and age this Left-Right paradigm has been so utterly discredited that I wonder whether it is useful to cling to the notion of the Right. The Right today is associated with Capitalism and the Banking Swindle actually quite clearly describes how the anti-usury activists were clearly seen as a third way, next to the great Marxist-Capitalist dichotomy of the day.

Furthermore, conservatism itself is in many ways outdated. Exoteric Christianity is hardly acceptable to many very spiritually inclined people and its universalism makes it very difficult to cooperate with. As Wayne Walton puts it: religion divides, spirituality connects. New words are necessary for old truisms. Each new era needs its own paradigms. Not the underlying truths change, but the people looking at them do. Reconnecting to our roots and traditions does not mean reliving the past.

People in the Truth Movement are a pretty heterogeneous bunch. The kind of awareness that it represents and which is now influencing more and more people cannot be called ‘conservative’, even though personally I nowadays feel very connected to real conservatism.

But having said that: the real issue is how the Banking Swindle exposes both the scale and the nature of a truly international, diverse and very powerful monetary reform movement. Post war propaganda and guilt by association have labeled these movements as ‘fascist’, but many of them were not and fascism itself of course is ridiculously demonized. These movements have been discredited and marginalized and Bolton does a wonderful job of rehabilitating them and showing their profound importance.

This is exactly the kind of inspiration and insight we need to build on.

Robert Stark interviewed Bolton at Counter Currents.

Meet the real deal: Michael Hoffman on Usury in Christendom
Abraham Lincoln was indeed a Money Power Agent


  1. >>>>>I’m not well enough versed in US history to come to any conclusions, but Bolton makes a very plausible case that the Confederacy was a real rebellion and that they were cut off from bankster loans.

    please upgrade yourself as to what the Confederate notes were:
    the Confederate notes hyper inflated because every municipality was allowed to issue notes (they did what you and other groupies propose: turned every credit and credibility into notes; they did it to themselves, there was no need for outside interference)

    there are no “real” rebellions

    The South was NOT cut off loans, there were people in London who were willing to loan them money (from history both of you could have learned that after the war bonds of rebel States were repudiated); in fact London loaned as much or more to the South as to the North; actually, during the war it was the Frankfurt money power that purchased the bonds of the North, and this was the money power that took over the United States during Lincoln’s war, and after

    could start here with both of your’s upgrade:
    New York Times, September 20, 1865.
    “The London Times and the rebel cotton loan”

    (history is a cruel thing, it ruins your best constructed fantacy)
    the source of your finagled wisdom

    • Thanks a lot Name, I was wondering what you would make of it!

      • What i make of it (and what I made of it 2 years ago when read his article) that Bolton has this fetish for the South and white people; which would be good if it did not blind him (to facts and reality). He obviously was afraid to read the text of the Act which authorized the issue of ‘greybacks’, or even to read what is printed on the front and back of the greybacks.

        He is unwilling and afraid to face the fact and reality that England played the South like a fiddle: Davis & co was under the impression that the decision-makers in UK will support them; but when the South painted themselves into a corner and was no other way than to submit immediatelly or go down fighting, perfidious albion showed its true colours (my attempt to post this observation on Counter Currents somehow got lost in holding)

        the same method was used on Hitler to lure him into a two-front war; then the real colour was shown him (and the residents of Dresden)

        With his Pretty huge Diploma Bolton should do some diligence. It doesn’t require a PhD to look up the story of english loan to the South…………

        the same old question: what interested him in 1986 when he was 30 years old ? why no book back then?
        is there anything new in his book which has not been available for 50-100 years ?
        is there anything in his book that is the fruit of his own looking into the subject ? (and not just the regurgitation of the same old story)?

        The New York Times
        “The London Times and the Rebel Cotton Loan.”
        September 20, 1865, Wednesday

        On a certain occasion, years ago, the London Times was publicly charged with bribery.  It replied in a very powerful leader, that the allegation was an absurdity — that public confidence was the life of n public journal, and that no man of sense could believe that a newspaper worth its millions would sell its title to public confidence for hundreds or thousands.  The answer was accounted good.

        If wealth lifts an individual above venality, even without the aid of moral principle, there is no reason why it should not have that effect upon a newspaper.  The effect, indeed, ought to be all the greater, for a newspaper’s business prosperity is peculiarly involved in its good repute.

        Yet what are we to say of the revelation that among the holders of the Confederate Cotton Loan are the editor-in-chief of the London Times for ten thousand pounds, the city editor for fifteen thousand pounds, and its special Liverpool Confederate commentator–James Spence–for fifty thousand pounds.  The list in which these names are found comes from official quarters in Washington, and is there known to be absolutely authentic.

        It was said of Regnault St. Jean D’Angely, President of the French Institute, that “he had passed his life in going always to the assistance of the strongest.”  That, all the world knows, has ever been characteristic of the London Times.  Its epitaph will run in some such phrase.  It is easily enough understood why the that journal went for the Confederates in the early part of the rebellion.  It naturally took the side that, as it supposed, was sure to win.  In this, withal, it but followed the government which recognised the rebels as belligerents at the firing of the first gun.  It had public opinion, too, to sustain it from the start.  The main reason why the British mind so early committed itself against us was its assumption that the Confederacy must necessarily succeed.  This assumption was natural enough.  The rebellion, so suddenly enfolding full one-half of the settled territory of the Union, loomed up across the water, in immense proportions.  No such movement was ever seen in the Old World that did not sweep everything before it.  Even the largest standing armies had always been unavailing to stay a revolutionary torrent, when it had once fairly set in.  Almost as a matter of course, European judgments leaped to the conclusion that our government was fated, in view of the fact that it had so speedily lost all control of so large a part of its domain, and was besieged by a vast and exulting army of rebels at the very seat of its administration.  No throne could have sustained such a shock;  and we have never wondered at the European miscalculation that no popular government could stand it.  Europeans had seen much of the popular power to subvert, but nothing of the popular power to uphold.  They knew, and could know, nothing of the real strength of a government fixed in the affections of an intelligent people.  In the beginning they easily concluded that the chances were all against us;  and this opinion was legitimately enough confirmed by the reverses which at first almost uniformly attended our arms.  It being taken as a “foregone conclusion” that the rebellion must triumph sooner or later, we can make all allowance to the impatience of our prolonging what was deemed a useless war.  The fact that the London Times was against us, in the early period of the war, is in itself no indication of corrupt motives.  Its native bent would quite account for that single fact.

        But there has been more than this.  The Times was not content to forecast the success of the Confederacy, and to confirm the public mind of England in its favor, but throughout the war it displayed toward our govern-ment and our cause a peculiar intensity of malice.  It studiously, systematically and persistently sought to damage us.  In its editorial columns it indulged not so much in vituperation or positive misstatements, its in sly irony and covert sneering -the favorite modes of the most artistic detractors.  It practiced its consummate knack of affecting candor, and making it the insidious vehicle of the worst poison.  In its commercial columns our credit was continually disparaged, and that of the Confederacy magnified.  This was done with such success that the rebel loans easily found takers in England at an early day, and our own hardly found the smallest market there even up to the last struggle of the war.  But it was in the American correspondence of the Times that its determination to belie our cause was particularly manifested.  Its first correspondent, Dr. Russell, began by depicting our condition and prospects in the very darkest colors.  He, doubtless, believed what he wrote.  But gradually, as he penetrated the inner forces of the stupendous movements around him, and learned more of our social elements and our historic life, his opinions changed, and he finally declared in a letter, that the American Government was sure to succeed, if it put forth all its strength.  His recall quickly followed, and Charles Mackay was sent to succeed him — a man of not a tenth part of his talent, as an observer or describer, but who had an almost preternatural faculty of lying.  Mackay was kept here, doing the utmost in his line, till near the end of the war.  Lawley, another prodigy of the same sort, was kept at similar work in Richmond.  These worthies, between them, managed to keep the British mind completely deceived in regard to actual events here, and their real bearings.  Continnuing it without check for the long period they did, it seems certain that they were hired for that very purpose.

        It is impossible not to couple the fact of this persistent detraction and falsification of our cause with the possession by the principal manager and writers of the Times of these immense sums in Confederate securities.  How these individuals became owners of these cotton bonds–whether by bona fide purchase or by gift — we leave to conjecture.  But it is certain that even with the most charitable judgement the revelation carries disgrace.  The mere fact of acquiring such pecuniary stakes in the success of the rebellion, even without any antecedent bribery in the case, must have had all the practical effect of a bribe in perverting the judgment, debauching the conscience, and stimulating to a betrayal of the public trust.  It is not enough to say that no impartial joumalism could be capable of it.  No honest journalism could be guilty of it.

        • Well, there is a pretty extensive wiki entry on Bolton Name, so how ’bout some due diligence?

          Oh, all these ex commie bastards coming here to the West with their stoneage ‘I go into libraries and read books’ party line, whereas everything is only a few mouse clicks away.

          • >>>>how ’bout some due diligence
            i am not peddling books or fetish items, yet i was willing to read what is printed on the confederate treasury note, and what is commonly known about the loan the South took out in London
            ye were/are not willing to do diligence because that would ruin the fetish

            the question you are constantly afraid to answer: ‘why the fetish making?’

            even if i were an ex-communist (of course you have no idea what communism is), that would just mean that i upgraded myself; you, on the other hand, feverishly maintain yourself in stupor……

          • haha, no name, you got busted for not checking the easily available resources and because you show no mercy I just decided there was no problem in calling your simple humanity either!

          • Now you are just enforcing my point that you people have a serious problem understanding what others write
            Bolton and you are the ones who make up fantacies about the South, about Continentals &c….

    • By the way, I certainly do NOT suggest unlimited printing Name!

      • you do not comprehend this, but the credit system that you and others here advocate, in its end result is over printing
        every individual to print his own note based on his own credit; every village and town to print their own notes based on their credit

        this is what was put into practice in the South

        • bourchakoun permalink

          I don’t think anyone here proposes completely de-centralized printing by any agency and every kind of instant credit to every living human.

          By golly – it is no rocket science to start out conservative with supplemental demurrage currencies for free, instant interest-free mortgages based upon your income (if none – only the social credit one – so you’ve got a very humble pad deducted automatically from your social credit). All other forms of credit could be within mutual credit platforms which could basically work quite well on self-regulatory terms since in some instances – i.e. dumb consumer credits could be hard to come by or dumb investment credits would get no backing anyway.

          I remember Anthony proposing 100.000 $/Euro limit to credit for just being alive (would also mean at least social credit available) – that is a sum that could be repaid within one’s own lifetime even with social credit (without interest of course). But of course there would be highly inflationary tendencies for example in the real estate market.

          But on the other hand – you are all forgetting something – if money is free, technology is too and that is a complete game changer within a very short period of time. And if the political process is free so is the ability to correct errors and adjust systems as well – and not repeat the same “errors” again and again and lie constantly about the real reasons!


    >>>>>>actually eye opening for me

    Please acquaint yourself with Charles Coughlin’s views:

    Now I am tremendously pleased with the progress this country has achieved since it has dedicated itself to regulate its finances with gold as its basic money.

    More than that: I have that hope in the future to realize that since our nation is so well equipped with gold—possessing 47 per cent of the entire amount that exists in the commercial world today—I have that hope in the United States to foresee that by retaining gold as our basis of financial activities, we will be able to accomplish more in the next one hundred fifty years than was accomplished during the past one hundred fifty years provided that while we adhere to gold as our basis, we shall not forget the common standard of 1 to 2½ to 12 upon which gold or silver or any other kind of money must operate.

    Thus then, if gold happens to be valuated at $20.67 an ounce—that is not the gold standard. That valuation of gold is an accident that has no substantial relation whatsoever to the real standard of money.

    May I clarify that statement by using another example: A human being is defined as a rational animal. He is an animal with a body and with a soul that is capable of thinking. That is the standard. If he happens to be a Chinaman or a Frenchman or an American; if he happens to be 12 years old or 50 years old or 100 years old; if he happens to be 3 feet tall or 5 feet tall or 6 feet tall; or if he should weigh 100 or 130 or 190 pounds—these things are accidents. They do not constitute the standard of what a man is any more than the valuation of gold at $5.00 an ounce or $20.00 an ounce or 100.00 an ounce constitutes the gold standard.

    The word gold is only an adjective which describes the substantial thing called money. And the common standard of all capitalistic money must conform to the definition of 1 basic unit to 2½ spending units to 12 units of debt or of credit.

    Thus, my friends, when we behold the financial picture which confronts us today, what is the truth of the matter ? Are we adhering to the standard, or has it been set aside ? Is capitalism preserving itself when it so openly disregards the standard of its own money ?

    Here is the answer: We have 4½-billion units of gold money retained within our nation. We should have 11-billions of spending or currency units. We should have no more than 54-billion units of debt money. But instead we have in reality only 3-billions of spending money and 235-billions of the debt money instead of 54 billions. Somebody had upset the applecart! The debts are a fact. Christianity orders us to pay them. So does Law. So does the voice of civilization. Let us adjust the value of an ounce of gold to make possible the payment of these debts. Let us “regulate” the value of gold so that the formula of Capitalistic money can be restored 1 to 2½ to 12 !

    Thus, I am sure that this audience has sufficient intelligence to understand that those who are advocating most strenuously that we must not leave the gold standard are the very ones who have really forced us off the gold standard. Revaluating or normalizing the dollar is merely a sane attempt to restore the logical standard of money, without which capitalism cannot endure two years longer.

    And what is my suggestion ? First of all, let us return to the real standard of money by a process or revaluation or restoration or normalization, whatever word you care to use. The point is, let us return to the scientific standard of money without which unemployment will not cease, industry will remain crippled, and distress shall not depart from us, and revolution shall absolutely come among us.

    When this happens, blame not the Communists or the Socialists. Blame those who are impeding the restoration of the standard of money upon which capitalism can operate.

    • Interesting.

      Of course, with that kind of Gold in the US it SHOULD have been possible to make even a gold based currency work. The Venetians apparently pulled it off in their day.

      But clearly Coughlin (when writing this) had no problem with usury and was only interested in volume, which is quite typical of an American.

    • Larry permalink

      name789 – Your zany plan for a gold currency has never worked and this barbaric scheme should give way to an “engineered” system that is based on mathematical science.

      When you get time, I suggest that you read “A SCIENTIFIC EXPOSURE of the ERRORS IN OUR MONETARY SYSTEM” – Mary Hobart –

      Read the following Chapters:

      Chapter III, Financial fallacy of a metallic currency

      Chapter IV, Fallacy of intrinsic value in gold and silver

      Chapter V, Mathematical fallacy of interest

      • this is how Larry leech, the gold-bug, really feels about coin:–

        Submitted by DrKrbyLuv on Tue, 12/13/2011 – 11:50.

        Gold and silver coins would continue to be used to store wealth as they are now. And people would continue to buy gold and silver bars and bullion to store larger amounts of money

        Submitted by DrKrbyLuv on Tue, 12/13/2011 – 17:26.

        I mentioned earlier that I personally own precious metals to protect the value of my money.

        little sub-human
        you know full well that the only reason you know of Mary Hobart and her book is because i made it available online; not you, not one of your low-life heroes (Brown, Still) could tell you about the book because neither of ye have ever set foot in the library, neither of ye have ever done any browsing, work, research

        Keep in mind, always, that I have read more greenback books than all ye groupies and your charlatan heroes put together (which, sadly enough, makes me expert and authority on the subject, more so then all of ye put together);
        b) the only reason these greenback books are available online is because I (alone) was interested in the subject and looked up these books, prepared the e-text and uploaded them

        If you had the brain capacity to understand what you read, you would know that Mary Hobart is not your friend, her concept gives no support whatever to your groupy ideas; b) you would address you dumb and dumber question the Charles Caughlin, whom i quoted to demostrate what sort of suggestions he had

        • name789 – do the math… the U.S. has NO gold and it would have to borrow to use it for money. Then, it would need to borrow more to repay the interest. And again and again it would need to borrow more and more as the debt compounds.

          You may find many answers in history but do the math to figure out the debt trap.

          • moron– do the reading and comprehension

          • Bourchakoun permalink

            Hm – but what is your proposed system? Do you have it elaborated at your website in short?

            As far as I am concerned – almost all kinds of transparent interest free systems would make money-less systems a reality.

            In fact I even make the prediction, that if you keep a money system intact – sooner or later the concentration of power will begin even in the most transparent and open system. A system without money and sufficient technological advancement is on the other hand very hard to transform – first step would be to re-establish money itself!

            But what are your propositions?

          • the subject of this thread (of response) is:

            >>>>Please acquaint yourself with Charles Coughlin’s views

            Unlike groupies, i do not mistake myself for minister of finance.
            The subject (of central banking in the US) interests me, so i read a bunch of things in old records and newspapers; it is a hobby, to kill time; which resulted in me knowing more on the subject than these book-peddlers


  3. bourchakoun permalink

    Well – not surprising that there have been other examples in history just as there was the social credit – Freigeld – movement around Gesell’s time in France, Germany, Switzerland and Austria.

    There have been even demurrage currencies around the world and in history – mostly of course as a supplemental high-turnover currency. Most gold-bugs would be surprised to find out that gold and silver coins are when in heavy use demmurage-currencies, since coins tend to lose in weight due to the softness of the metals.

    But unfortunately they own history – even Name has only has access to incomplete archives. Carroll Quigley himself did not mention any dangerous opposition to the money power, since he had no problem with their rulership. Why should he focus on some real potentially dangerous political or financial oppostion facing them since he was all for it?

    It is in my opinion even more disheartening to learn about wide-scaled movements like in the 1920s-30s which even got media coverage and political empowerment back then. Now we may be able to create small alternative currencies which will be shut down when attempting to make them inter-exchangable with the official ones (Gelre a good example) or they can easily be destroyed from within whenever the money power ever desires by a myriad means.

    As I have stated again and again – I don’t think THEY see they have another choice instead of going to the bitter end with THE BIG PLAN. They are simply too much afraid that not only money will be liberated, but pretty much everything will become known over time – which is likely true – and then their very lives might be in danger.

    I agree that most of the people in the truth movements could live within each other’s systems, since they are of the live-and-let-live-crowd and would even see the merits of demurrage systems if tested out in some regions. But that is still not enough to make a change and in my opinion it never will in time. Though locally one might be able to create a worthwhile little paradise (until their battle-tanks come in that is.)

    • This not writing their own history and passing it on young ones is one of my beef with these book-peddlers and groupies; why they do not write down who they were and what they did?

      Huey Long had a large following, the majority of the citizens opposed joining the war in Europe; but the day after Pearl Harbor all that disappeared, an in came “rah, raw, rah;” “U.S.A. USA;” “off to war we go;” “damn the japanese,” damn the torpedoes (because people are a lot more willing to go march off to war than to sit down for 5 minutes and contemplate –logically, critically– what is going on)

      —these new atlantis organizers are very good at what they are doing

      Please download and listen and learn what happens to ‘patriotic’ etc. organizations and why they never get anywhere:

      • bourchakoun permalink

        Why always assume the worst from people? Sometimes you write a book because it is seems as the right time – and yes also because you think that there is a potential readership for it. There are plenty of quite well-off people active who are not in it for the money.

        And as far as the patriot radio goes – I have heard that they were funded by the CIA/NSA for several reasons. Why should they let go of that toy?
        As far as Oliver Revilo goes – he was problematic on several levels, though of course he might have spoken the truth on some issues.

        There was much more sane opposition by Norman Dodd back then, but that availed to nothing either, partly because Reese was such a blind baffoon. They really might have done some damage back then (though whether that would have ended in strange accidents and suicides of all parties concerned – we do not know).

        • so you agree with me that there is nothing new, nothing original, nothing that is the product of his (Bolton) looking into the subject, in the book ?

          Bolton does put forward a completely false concept regarding the South and the causes of the civil war. is it lack of knowledge? (in which case he should not have published his product because it causes more harm than good), or is he purposely putting forth a fetish item ?

          The point with the Revelo speech is: that there were many organizations, the Paul Reveres a large one, yet they all dissolved without a trace.
          a separate point would be –if one is willing to sit through the whole speech– that if white people are not willing to get themselves together they will become biological absoletes;
          antoher separate point would be: that the people who listened to Revelo, and to Caughlin, did it more for entertaining purposes than anything else –in 2013 every night 10million people listening to, discussing conspiracy……

          in 1892 1million people voted for James Weaver and the greenback party, but by 1902 they erased themselves from history and no one even knew they ever existed; not because the powers that be “own” history, but because the people do not write down, do not pass down their onw history

          Jonathan Duncan (1799-1865) was the foremost paper money advocate in England, yet, by the time he died he –and his books and pamphlets– were completely forgotten (so much so that his book is an actual rarity in England)………..

      • Larry permalink

        Thanks name789 for the interesting link to the “Revilo” speech.

      • bourchakoun permalink

        > (in which case he should not have published his product because it causes more harm than good), or is he purposely putting forth a fetish item ?>

        First – the more being published about the money issue the better, not that it usually avails to anything. It mattered not whether Dr. Andrew Saul, Dr. Abram Hoffer and even Dr. Cathcart (famous orthopedic surgeon as well as orthomolecular doctor) published books and scientific works on orthomolecular medicine and healed easily illnesses now deemed uncurable – and all without side-effects. They published easy guidelines for doctors around the world.

        So what? It availed to nothing because knowledge can be blocked at bottle-necks – media and top-level academia. Accusing the people of not being able to write down their own history is foolish, as most people are just barely surviving and the “alternative” intellectuals do collect works of history and sometimes publish their views. But that avails to nothing either, since it is not taught to millions of students world-wide.

        I agree with you that all major movements just like the current ones will wither into “conspiratainment” or be shut down with a more complete internet-kill switch and those few who will complain will be forgotten soon.

        However I do not agree that knowledge is easily let go by the people, since there are always those who carry on. It takes constant tremendous effort to uphold the power structure and also stifle any truly dangerous knowledge – divert it to safe harbors like libertarianism, find the cure for cancer in a better chemo or save electricity instead of revolutionlizing all fields and creating a better life for everyone.

        • >>>>>scientific works on orthomolecular medicine and healed easily illnesses now deemed uncurable
          as you say, these methods work

          Bolton’s false picture about the South does not work

          I am not “accusing” them, i simply make an observation

    The measures which hamilton deemed indispensable to the success of the new government, in addition to those authorized by the Constitution, consisted of
    First. A funding system upon the English plan, with authority to assume the separate debts of the States;
    <Second. A national bank; and,
    <Third. An unrestricted exercise by Congress of the power to raise money, and the employment of the national revenue in patronizing individual, class, and corporate interests, according to the plan described in his report, nominally on manufactures, but embracing an infinite variety of other concerns.
    He desired, in short, to make the Constitution a tablet of wax upon which each successive administration would be at liberty to impress its rescripts, to be promulgated as constitutional edicts.

    I have alluded to the reasons for my belief that it is placed by its position and by the law of its nature beyond the reach of that policy, and my firm conviction that it will secure to our people the blessings of republican govenment as long as it remains the predominat interest in the country. It can only be when the agriculturists abandon the implements and the field of their labor and become, with those who now assit them, shopkeepers, manufacturers, carriers, and traders, that the Republic will be brought in danger of the influences of the money power.

    The Irishman emigrates, and the Frenchman stays at home. The one hates his country — the other adores it. The Irishman is a serf and an outcast. The Frenchman is a slaveholder and a man. The South is naturally agricultural, and the farmer being most of the time in the midst of his growing crops, seeing the open operation of nature, his minds expands, he grows proud and ambititous of all around, and feels himself a man.

    Both Confederate Government and the people placed to much reliance upon foreign recognition and succors instead of relying entirely upon their own resources, and making preparations commensurate with the great interests involved, and the magnitude of the war when hostitlities first commenced.
    Early in the first year of the war Congress created a paper currency without imposing taxes to prevent its depreciation, nor were any assessed, proportionate to the expenses of the war, until 1863.
    They unwisely assumed that “Cotton is King,” and proposed to make this King coerce foreign intervention. fatal error.


    He rules the rulers !
    even the tyrant Tsar asks his permission before he goes to war
    The Turk, submissive to his royal might, by his consent has gracious leave to fight
    Whilst even Britannia makes her humblest bow before her Barings, not her barons, or on the Rothschilds suppliantly calls
    Begs of the Jew that he will kindly spare enough to put her trident in repair and pawns her diamonds while she humbly craves

    banks are his parlors, brokers are his lords
    bonds bills and mortgages his favorite books
    gold his food and coiners his cooks
    ledgers his records, stock reports his news
    merchants his yeomen, bondsmen his Jews

  5. Thanks for the book review. It is always great to discover new facets of the international banking cartel’s conquest of free people and nations.

  6. correct me if i am mistaken, but is this Kerry Bolton not a white racist ?
    does he not subscribe to the concept of one country one nation?
    to the concept of gene-pool ?
    why not he write a book on that subject ?

    why not mischling Makow write an article on the homogene nation state ? the one and only hope and solution
    (we already know that Migchels abhors the idea of kindred people living amongs themselves)


    God abhors a mongrel. In nature there is no place for a mixed-breed. The purest breeds, when they are interbred, produce mongrels. Breed a Shire stallion to a Thoroughbred mare, and you get a mongrel. Breed a pure specimen of greyhound to a pure specimen of bulldog, and you get mongrels. The purity of the original strains of blood seems only to increase the mongrelization that takes place when these strains are interbred or cross-bred.

    Consult the entire history of the human world in all past ages, and you will find that the world has ever belonged to the pure breed and has never belonged to the mongrel. I give you this as a challenge: Read up your history of the human race. Remember, Nature permits no mongrel to live—or, rather, Nature permits no mongrel to endure.

    There’s no use in your talking to me about the Greeks. There are not any Greeks. You are not a Greek. The Greeks died two thousand years ago, when they became mongrelized. Just because a lot of people talk the Greek language, does not make those people pure Greeks. Because a lot of people talk Italian, does not make them Roman. The Greeks were strong as long as they remained pure. They were possessed with power, achievement, culture, creativeness, individuality. When they mongrelized themselves by breeding with the slush of conquered races, they faded away, and have played nothing but a despicable part ever since in the world’s history. This is true of the Roman; this is true of the Lombards; this is true of the Phoenicians; this is true of the Chaldeans; this is true of the Egyptians; this is not true of the Gipsies, who have kept themselves pure. This is not true of the Chinese, it is not true of the Japanese, this is not true of the Germans, this is not true of the Anglo-Saxons. This is not true of the Yaquis of Mexico. It is true of the fifteen million mongrels of Mexico; it is true of the mongrels that inhabit the greater portion of the West Indies, and who inhabit South America and Central America from Cape Horn to the Rio Grande. This is true of the mongrelized Hindoos.

    Read up your history. It is all there on the shelves. And find me one case where you can breed a greyhound with a bulldog and get anything but a mongrel. Read up your history. You will find it all there on the shelves. And find me one race that has retained its power of civilization, culture, and creativeness, after it mongrelized itself. Read up your history, and try to find any remnant of a pure Roman race, of a pure Hindoo race.

  7. >>>>>>>>>>>>the Continental, George Washington’s debt free unit…..
    was, in reality –which, in your fantacy, you choose to ignore– was a promise to pay silver; an interest-free evidence of debt:
    “The Bearer is entitled to receive Eighty Spanish milled Dollars, or an equal Sum in Gold or Silver, according to a Resolution of Congress of the 14th January 1779.”
    the united states of North America
    Et in secula seculorum florescebit — and it will flourish through the ages

    —would any of ye gas-bags have the courage to read the text of the resolution which authorized the issue of continentals ?


    >>>>>He has written on the occult
    was Mr. Hargrave not occult ?

    John Hargrave

    Kibbo Kift began to become more militaristic in nature. John Hargrave set up a Legion of the Unemployed in Coventry in 1930, and furnished them with green shirts and berets. By 1932, the Kibbo Kift were also in the green uniform, until finally Hargrave disbanded the Kibbo Kift and the Legion and renamed them the Green Shirt Movement for Social Credit. The movement soon became part of the street politics of the 1930s, engaging in battles with both Oswald Mosley’s British Union of Fascists Blackshirts and the supporters of the Communist Party of Great Britain.

    Initially staying out of the electoral arena, Hargrave was impressed by the success of the Social Credit Party of Alberta, and reconstituted the Greenshirts as the Social Credit Party of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in 1935. Douglas opposed the entry of the movement into partisan politics. The party proved largely unsuccessful, and Hargrave soon travelled to Alberta, frustrated at the lack of progress that the Social Credit government there was making. He was appointed an economic adviser to the Government of Alberta, and was disowned by Douglas. He left Canada in 1936, returning to find the Social Credit Party in disarray after the Public Order Act 1936 banned the wearing of uniforms by non-military personnel.

  8. permalink

    hiya Anthony

    do you have a link to buy this book please?

    cheers eddie


  9. It would be interesting to hear comments concerning Bill Still’s documentary “The Secret of Oz”. He seems to make sense regarding monetary reform. Thank you.

  10. bill242 permalink

    interesting that Bill Still and Ellen Brown did not discuss the monetary reform movements of the 1930s, like Father Coughlin’s National Union for Social Justice.

  11. This book is an excellent refocus on history to explain why numerous atrocities happened. As soon as free credit came from a nation’s mandate, poof! the banking conspirators launch a war or scandal. The one caveat I have with this book is the blame it places (citing Max Weber) on the Reformation for the rise of capitalism. It is true at this time in history capitalism and Puritan work ethic emerge as a consequence from the split of Christendom into Catholic and Protestantism. What I can’t agree with is that a philosophical movement borne from the discovery and publication of the Bible led inexorably to capitalism and tireless work. It should be borne in mind that the Catholic Church is historically opposed to usury. When its hegemony was broken and the Protestant powers needed wartime monies to maintain foothold, then usury flooded into the breach—OUT OF WHICH came capitalism, forcing the populace to work endlessly for inextinguishable debt.

    • I’m not really sure you’re right about that latter point. For instance, many claim Calvin was actually Cohen and he was whitewashing Usury in his work. The calivinists ruled in the Dutch Republic and Britain and these two are the cradle of modern capitalism.

      The reformation can very much be seen in the light of weakening the Vatican’s grip on the economy by the money lenders.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. Hitler’s Finances and the Myth of Nazi Anti-Usury Activism | Real Currencies

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *