Bitcoin as Conditioner: Rolling Out One World Currency

Forget its price trajectory and the rest of the prescribed hype for a second.  *Why* is Bitcoin a ‘thing’, who said so, when, and what for?  Was it genuinely a product of simple private sector ingenuity during a time of maximum need?  OR, based on the many Establishment-linked constituencies trading, investing or imminently, regulating it, is it a ‘test balloon’ or ‘beta test’ for a much wider, older elite plan for global monetary revision?  In this episode of Money and Fear, we’ll look at Bitcoin, cryptocurrencies and the blockchain from much more nuanced political, historical and philosophical perspectives than sell-side, hyped-up evangelists, or even Bitcoin’s standard critics, are used to considering.  We’ll weigh Bitcoin against periodic appeals from Establishment sources for a ‘one world currency’.  Runaway price movements will be observed against historical “Tulip Bulb Manias” and philosophical considerations regarding “money” will be reconsidered.  Do not miss this one-of-a-kind show to find out what this relatively recent monetary “phenom” is supposed to even mean!

*Follow us here at Newsbud Twitter

**Subscribe here at BFP-Newsbud YouTube Channel

Watch Episode Preview

Watch Members Only Full Episode Here

***Subscribing Members must be logged in to see the full video





Featured Video MP3 Audio Clip

***Subscribing Members must be logged in to listen to the audio


Show Notes

HOW TO MAKE A MINT: THE CRYPTOGRAPHY OF ANONYMOUS ELECTRONIC CASH, NSA research document, 1996

Is Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies the result of a government experiment imagined 12 years before Satoshi white paper?

Bitcoin Prehistory

Milton Friedman Predicts Bitcoin In 1999

One world, one money – The Economist Magazine, 1998

Get Ready For A World Currency – The Economist Magazine, 1988

Crypto currencies are mirroring pre-crash banking systems – An ideological dispute over future scale has led to a breakaway version of bitcoin

Digital currencies like bitcoin aren’t real – fund warns investors

Why a Bitcoin Hard Fork Is Unlikely to Faze Investors

Fedcoin: The U.S. Will Issue E-Currency That You Will Use

The IMF and cryptocurrency

BIS Report: DLT ‘Promising’ But ‘A Long Way Off’

The Initial Bitcoin White Paper, October 2008

Text #1:  The Reign of Quantity & the Signs of the Times, by René Guénon

 Text #2:  Men Among the Ruins, by Julius Evola

 *For additional footnotes and links refer to the Newsbud article link above

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING and/or DONATING.

Comments

  1. Craig Toth says:

    Good episode Pye, always observe responsibly & remain vigilant.

  2. Sarah J Travagline says:

    https://youtu.be/sG3Ju8AhCKM
    Here is so more information about the possible future of bitcoin. I think you will find very interesting.

  3. Karrol Steeves says:

    Pyle, you might find this video by Lynette Zang, a financial analyst with ITM Trading on the role of the SDR and crypto currency interesting. She released it yesterday. I found it stunning in it’s implications. https://youtu.be/SYPsygSHnAs

  4. Karrol Steeves says:

    Pye, (sorry for the misspell courtesy of spell check) The video Sarah posted is a follow up interview which is very interesting also which was spurred by the video I posted.

  5. Michael Naaden says:

    hmmm…maybe Peter Shiff isn’t completely wrong about bitcoin after all.

  6. victor friese says:

    This is something I have wondered about for a long time. I am glad you are covering it.

  7. John Phillips says:

    Excellent job Pye! I find it interesting that people who otherwise would reject a purely electronic money system are willing to support and pump-up bitcoin. I find it interesting that folks like James Corbett who otherwise rejects fiat currency claims bitcoin is an alternative.

    I see it as Pye does. We are being conditioned to accept this crap.

    Simple answer….play by your own rules and not theirs. If you are following, you are definitely not leading.
    Best Regards

  8. Decred is the future. Watch Out.

  9. Thank you all for your kind, thoughtful comments!

  10. FYI,

    The following link does not connect to the document listed:

    Text #2: Men Among the Ruins, by Julius Evola

  11. Russell Linz says:

    The Internet was created by U.S. Government Intel agencies as a way to massively influence information and disseminate disinformation. The reason I know Bitcoin ( created by a mysterious inventor) and other crypt o currencies are a planned program is the fact they are allowed to exist. The whole end the Fed ruse was a sham designed to take us to the next level of Global Government. Excellent video well researched and presented in a concise and understandable manner.

  12. Lennart Mogren says:

    Beg to differ. Not that I am certain, but I think that Pyle made a mistake by omitting an analysis of the blockchain. A bit lazy in my opinion. Someone in the comments referred to James Corbett. Corbett is critical and intelligent. Being critical is not enough. Saying that Ethereum is a Bitcoin competitor is plain wrong. Ethereum is programming platform on the blockchain. The implications of this technology is hard to intellectually grasp and the easy way out is to just dismiss it.

    Lynette Zang (ITM Trading’s Chief Market Analyst) and Peter Schiff (of schiffgold.com) both are have personal agendas to favor precious metals and express contempt for cryptos in the same vein. They both sell gold and silver.

    I think time will tell and meanwhile we have to make up our own minds. Contempt is not helpful.

    • Bas Spliet says:

      Agreed. I think bitcoin is not a black-and-white case, just like gold or silver isn’t. Aren’t the majority of bitcoin users people who have taken a conscious step away from centralised fiat currency? If so, then I would hope that they move onto alternatives if (or once?) bitcoin is increasingly being taken over by a centralised regime? Anyways, the most important thing is to remain vigilant. I’d like to see Pye’s recommendations on which kind of money he thinks is best.

      • @ Lennart, Bas & William: I purposefully researched, wrote & spoke around said points you’ve each made, and they’re evident in some of the source material hyperlinked above, especially the paper on cryptos written in 1996 by NSA folk.

        Gold & silver have been, are, and will remain eternal core money. You don’t see foreign / domestic central banks compiling cryptocurrencies as Tier 1 capital; you do see them hoarding gold. Bitcoin/cryptos are a purposeful distraction away from them while arranging global monetary consolidation.

        The show’s less than 20 minutes long, yet could’ve gone on further in a technical capacity for backing what I and many others say. You should ask yourselves why, if the blockchain is so genuinely ‘government proof’, that there is such a sweeping Establishment-backed push to appropriate & regulate offerings on it. Don’t just rely upon all the crypto-blockchain hype & ‘marketing’ as technologically sacrosanct; look at things from nuanced political, historical & philosophical perspectives.

        Re my inclusion of René Guénon in said piece: I clearly didn’t – and couldn’t – do him justice in such a short mention, yet the Traditionalist views he, Evola & others expressed aren’t to be discarded as “ravings of earlier men”. I can assure you that the 0.00000001% are hardly divorced from esoteric or Hermetic practices with regard to how they eventually design said exoteric technological designs. That was an invitation to investigate, if anything.

        @ Orenda Review: http://cakravartin.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/julius-evola-men-among-the-ruins.pdf

        • Andreas Hedqvist says:

          I think your episode was well balanced and presented. Remember that it is impossible to please everyone on a subject like this one. People have their own biases, notions and suspicions which to them are obviously important but whether they are objective or not is another matter. A lot of crypto enthusiasts became quite angry at Lynette Zang’s interviews on the subject when she equated cryptos with a trojan horse concocted by the powers that be.

          There is a difference between wealth preservation and economic prosperity. An economy of very wealthy individuals but lacking transactions (velocity of circulating currency) will quickly stagnate and implode. An economy of relative poor individuals with a vibrant and highly active transactions will quickly gain in added value and benefit everyone, that is what an economy is – activity. If cryptos in the near future can help facilitate economic activity in areas presently lacking traditional economic infrastructure it may prove to be a tremendous way to empower individuals and eventually emerging economies. This should not be forgotten when discussing this because it is not all about preserving wealth.

          • Thank you Andreas, and indeed, the plan is to empower through new global digital and monetary means. The latent, gradual introduction of cryptocurrencies and the deeper blockchain are meant to ultimately pave the way for entirely re-energizing the globe economically, and overlap with seemingly separate efforts by governments & central banks to do away with physical cash in places like India, Thailand, South Korea, Sweden & elsewhere.

            Only said wider efforts are, ultimately, meant to augment the powers of said wealthy, who clearly need routine cyclical economic reinventions and recharged activities for the relative poor in order to retain their status.

            Ultimately, these linked macro-monetary ‘trends’ are meant to synthesize and consolidate collective human energy in an unprecedented fashion. Hence my deference to Guénon and Evola in said piece.

        • William Wanklyn says:

          I am sorry if I piqued you with my comment about ravings, and I cannot know what is in the minds of those very few at the pinnacle of global power. I would not be surprised about any strange and wonderful practices they may have.

          I do agree they are intent on preserving and even augmenting their hold on all of us. I choose to believe that cryto currencies have sprung from the deep well of the human psyche and have taken them by surprise. In the past, the very wealthy, the “goldsmiths” have been able to corner the market for gold, manipulate its value and use their wealth in order to push states into debt slavery to them. The rise of cryto currency takes this power away from them.

    • John Phillips says:

      It was I, John Phillips, who dared to question the Corbett, not “someone” as you mention.

      Bitcoin was created out of thin air, has no foundation what-so-ever and can be manipulated as with the “dollar.” Note the “split” performed on the coin last week. Corbett and others who are profiting from the coin’s climb are quiet about it as they go to the bank, but as with all Ponzi schemes, those who bought in late are taking it in the shorts.

      If you believe that you can rely on any form of money, including gold and silver, then you’re not thinking. If the crap ever hits the fan; salt, flour, grains, coffee, food and ammo will be the commodities of choice.

      I respect James Corbett’s work a great deal; however, on some topics (bitcoin and climate change) he leaves me wondering what his agenda really is. Keep thinking…stop believing.
      Best Regards
      John

      • Andreas Hedqvist says:

        Keep questioning everything, that’s healthy and constructive. James Corbett is an open critical thinker and investigates and presents topics in an excellent way, I’m very grateful for the service he provides. The simple fact that we are discussing this topic now and disagreeing on aspects is precisely what pushes all of our understanding and views forward. We can’t say anything with absolute certainty as to the purpose of intent or origin of cryptocurrencies but arguing about pros and cons is how we should deal with it. Stay flexible and inquisitive, don’t take too firm a position on anything before you’re absolutely sure.

  13. William Wanklyn says:

    I believe Pyle has it wrong here, on a number of levels, the most obvious being that bitcoin is being encouraged by the powers that be as a fore runner (but it already is) to a one world currency.

    The bitcoin/fiat exchange system is being systematically choked by the banks and the governments in the western world. I use XXXXaCX. They have been cut off from Canadian banking in the past and now bank with a small credit union in XX. Trying to send money to the exchange from a mainstream bank is like pulling teeth. So if ((they)) want us to use it, why are they making it as difficult as possible?

    Point 2. The blockchain as envisaged by Satoshi is decentralised and not controllable by a centralised entity. ((They)) cannot manipulate it. It requires global consensus. Bitcoin is the anti-globalist global currency.

    Point 3. Pointing to a philospher 80 years ago to claim knowledge of the conspiracy you see today is magical thinking. I am afraid I have no time for that. I agree we can find roots in history for our current state of affairs, but there is no determinism in the ravings of earlier men.

    Finally, I can only say that despite the jack boot of the state on our necks, we are moving to crypto.

  14. Karrol Steeves says:

    Yes Lynette Zang sells precious metals for a living but the documentation she presents in you presentation is compelling and deserves a deeper look. Here is her follow up presentation from yesterday: https://youtu.be/PCQKNvsIQxE

  15. Andreas Hedqvist says:

    Another nice episode by Pye on an important subject. Many speculate on the origin and true intention behind the creation of Bitcoin and the distributed ledger technology, so called blockchain. It’s all interesting but since it is a non centralized, open source and completely voluntary technology I personally think it has a more benevolent than malevolent foundation. The main reason why I believe in cryptocurrencies is the lack of central control and this is probably why national governments are only very reluctantly allowing them since they represent a threat to central banks and government control.

    There are two very different schools of thought on what currency is or should represent – one is that it is a measure of debt – the other that it represents work. Today the entire world revolves around the first definition which is also centrally controlled and manipulated and if you haven’t watched Mike Maloney’s series on money (especially episode 4 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFDe5kUUyT0&list=PLE88E9ICdiphYjJkeeLL2O09eJoC8r7Dc&index=4) I recommend that you do. Bitcoin and many other cryptocurrencies are not created through debt issuance and this is why they are different. It really doesn’t matter that they don’t represent something physical or tangible because as long as they can be reliably used (even trustlessly) to transfer wealth (capacity to perform work) this is all that matters. Bitcoin can be traced and tracked by anyone who wants to so the notion that this is a terrorist/criminal vehicle is pure nonsense and cash is much more preferred by these groups. For anyone who wants to be completely anonymous it is quite simple to exchange open cryptos such as Bitcoin into i.e. Verge, Cloakcoin or Monero and all of these follow Bitcoin’s principle of non centralized control.

    Cryptocurrencies or coins should not be viewed as simple a new medium of exchange because they are much more than that. Ethereum opened this up with their smart contract design, Salt will open up a new trustless lending system and Populous will remove long bureaucratic legal processes for title transfers, mergers etc. One area where cryptos have not yet found a way it seems is in the financial markets’ derivatives business which in itself is telling more about these markets today than of cryptocurrencies. The problem seems to be how to make any viable business in this realm while not obscuring the open and transparent design of cryptocurrencies. I see this as proof of cryptos being superior to current fiat currencies but only time will tell if this is true. Tom Lee’s Bitcoin price prediction of $55k is interesting only as long as the US Dollar is used as a comparative measure and the question is not if but when most people switch perception away from fiats.

    • Thanks again for your words, Andreas.

      “Bitcoin and many other cryptocurrencies are not created through debt issuance and this is why they are different. It really doesn’t matter that they don’t represent something physical or tangible because as long as they can be reliably used (even trustlessly) to transfer wealth (capacity to perform work) this is all that matters.”

      Cryptocurrencies are nonetheless fiat, ultimately *because* they are not directly linked to something authentically physical or tangible, like finite gold and/or silver, which the 0.0001% prefer to hoard for themselves globally. Those who truly understand the eternal monetary sanctity of gold will discern this relatively recent – yet tellingly very rapidly, globally sweeping – digital “money” trend.

      The wider, systematic ‘assigned trust’ mechanism by which cryptocurrencies are undergoing a collective ‘switching of perception’ amongst the masses is ultimately no different than the one by which the US Dollar assumed & retained global reserve status. Only the USD’s days are numbered, and the very long-term thinking said elite know this. Hence their decades-long plans for its digital, trackable, fully auditable replacement.

      http://www.investopedia.com/news/imf-blockchain-banks-invest-cryptocurrency-blockchain/

      http://www.bis.org/cpmi/publ/d137.pdf

  16. Lennart Mogren says:

    “The concept of decentralisation applied to the human communication of value.”
    https://youtu.be/l1si5ZWLgy0
    Helps to understand what’s hard to wrap one’s head around.

Speak Your Mind