Global Plutocracy 2020

Today we present some recent articles that shed light on the power structure that has ruled the Earth for 13,000 years and is still in power. Remember that only life begets life, so life has value and only labour creates, so labour has value. Soon you must accept that all of the private Central Banks be closed and eliminate all forms of currency. We strongly advise the creation of the first Planetary Council of Earth and the New State to be the sole holder of all assets upon Earth with the end of privatization. Embrace the New Global Communist Party Human Labour Value system.

Universal Labour Value

The New Global Communist Party will terminate all currency and Central Banks. The New Global Economy will be based on Actual Labour Value.

The formulae for Actual Labour Value is as follows:

Basic Labour Value BLV

Experience E

Risk R

Skill Level SK

Educational requirement ER

Stress Level SL

Actual Labour Value ALV

Hence to calculate BLV+E+R+SK+ER+SL= ALV


Confronting the Great American Myth

DAVID KORTEN                              FEB 1, 2019

We grow up in the United States proud of our nation’s historic role in leading humanity’s transition from monarchy to democracy. We rarely ask, however, whether the system we have truly fits the definition of democracy. Merriam-Webster defines democracy as “government by the people.” What we have in the United States more closely resembles the Merriam-Webster definition of plutocracy, “government by the wealthy.” A nation ruled by big money is not a democracy. The 2018 midterm elections inserted a wave of new political blood into Congress and many state houses—younger, more female, more racially and religiously diverse, less beholden to big money, and attuned to a strong public desire for change.

At the national level, the new representatives of a restless electorate encounter a system in political lockdown, at least until the next election. That makes this is a good time for a serious reality check on what will be required to achieve the democracy we thought we had and a future that truly works for everyone. In the United States, we grow up schooled in our national mythology: our nation was created as a democracy by brave founders, who crafted a constitution that initiated a global transition from monarchy, and who were driven by a vision that makes the United States a beacon of hope and possibility for the world. We are taught that our laws now and forever must hold to the founders’ original intent. We are not taught, and it is rarely mentioned, that the Constitution the founders crafted was designed to secure economic power for themselves, and that economic power has been the ultimate foundation of political power for all of human history. Political power ultimately resides with those who control our access to a means of living. When that access is controlled by the few, the result is plutocracy—a reality deeply embedded in both U.S. and world history.

The democratization of political power therefore depends on the democratization of economic power. The wealthy White men who stepped forward to lead the war for America’s independence from Britain put their lives and fortunes on the line. Their leadership liberated the original 13 colonies from British rule to birth a new and independent nation. It was not, however, a totally selfless act. In so doing, they also freed themselves from deference to and taxation by the British crown, while positioning themselves to subsequently write the rules by which the new nation would govern itself. They had no intention, however, of sacrificing the privilege that came from their ownership of lands stolen from Native Americans, slaves abducted from Africa, and other commercial, manufacturing, and financial assets that gave them their distinctive social, economic, and political power and privilege.

To the contrary, they wrote the new nation’s Constitution to secure the power and privilege of men like themselves, while securing it against expropriation by any among them who might aspire to be anointed king. By establishing elections of members of Congress and a president, they precluded a hereditary monarchy. But by limiting the vote to White male property owners like themselves, they stripped political power from all but those of their own race, gender, and class. The original Constitution thus affirmed slavery, secured the rights of property, and limited the vote to White male property owners. Voting rights for other Americans—women, Native Americans, Blacks, and those with no property, including Whites—came slowly and to this day remain to be fully secured. We could argue about whether the resulting government ever worked for more than a minority of America’s people. Clearly a substantial majority—including most White males—do not feel it is working for them today. In a 2018 Gallup poll on confidence in U.S. institutions, Congress—the branch of government that is supposed to best represent the will of the American people, and the branch with the power to impeach corrupt presidents and judges—came in rock bottom. Only 11 percent of those polled expressed “a great deal of confidence” or “quite a lot of confidence” in Congress.

It is surely no coincidence that Congress is also the branch of government most visibly corrupted by big money political donations and the revolving door between government service and lucrative careers in lobbying for the industries they are charged with regulating. A recent poll by the Pew Research Center, found that a strong majority of Americans, irrespective of political alignment, consider democratic ideals and values important and believe we fall far short in living up to them. Only 18 percent of Americans feel democracy is working “very well,” while 61 percent feel fundamental changes are needed in the design and structure of the American government. This includes the majority (68 percent) of Democrats and 50 percent of Republicans. Of those that Pew identified as least politically engaged, 71 percent support significant institutional change. These data help to explain why the U.S. ranks near the bottom among the world’s democracies in voter turnout.

In the 2016 presidential election, only 55.7 percent of Americans of voting age voted, compared to recent turnout rates of 85.8 percent in Sweden (2014) and 80.3 percent in Denmark (2015). The turnout in the 2018 U.S. midterm elections was 50.3 percent, the highest in a midterm since 1914 and up from 36.7 percent in 2014. But that’s still well below the all-time highest turnout rate in any federal election: 82.6 percent in 1876. Low turnout rates tend to reflect the mood of the country.

The more you feel the system is rigged and the more difficult that system makes it for you to vote, the less likely you are to try. We are not experiencing a failure of democracy. The failure we experience is the failure of the institutions of a plutocracy. Such a system, structured and managed to secure rule by the rich, is indifferent to the needs of the many. The unusual levels of voter and candidate enthusiasm displayed during the 2018 midterm elections showed the desire to clean up a deeply corrupted political system. But it will take far more than the modest proposals currently on the table to move beyond a two-party duopoly beholden to corporate money. My next column will look at what the transition to an authentic democracy will require.


Capitalism vs. Socialism Is a False Choice

DAVID KORTEN          FEB 7, 2019

Economic power is—and always has been—the foundation of political power. Those who control the peoples’ means of living rule. In a democracy, however, each person must have a voice in the control and management of the means of their living. That requires more than a vote expressing a preference for which establishment-vetted candidate will be in power for the next few years. My previous column, “Confronting the Great American Myth,” distinguished true democracy from government by the wealthy, a plutocracy. Contrary to popular belief, the U.S. Constitution was written by representatives of the new nation’s wealthy class to keep people like themselves in power. On Jan. 4, the newly elected Democratic majority in the U.S. House of Representatives introduced HR1, the For the People Act of 2019. Its aim is to make voting easier, reduce the influence of big money, and curtail gerrymandering. Even before it was introduced, the champions of having rich people rule were falsely characterizing it as an attack on the freedom of speech of ordinary Americans.

The provisions of HR1 represent an important step in a transition from the plutocracy we have to the democracy most Americans want. Unfortunately, political gridlock assures that HR1 has no chance of becoming law until at least after the 2020 election. Yet the popular yearning for democracy reflected in that bill makes this a propitious moment for a serious conversation about what a true democracy might look like and why it would be a good idea. We stand at an epic choice point for our nation and for humanity. The plutocracy now in place has put us on a path to self-extinction—a future with no winners, rich or poor. We must now seek a path that restores the health of Earth’s regenerative systems while securing equity, material sufficiency, peace, and spiritual abundance for all—exactly the opposite of the plutocrats’ drive to secure the power, privilege, and material excess for themselves. This makes democracy far more than just a good idea; it is now an imperative.

The power of plutocracy depends on keeping the people divided against each other along gender, racial, religious, or other fault lines. The goal is to divert our attention from themselves so that they can maintain their power and continue to amass wealth. Champions of plutocracy would also have us believe that we must choose between two options: capitalism (private ownership and management) or socialism (government ownership and management). They prefer we not notice that in their most familiar forms, both capitalism and socialism feature an undemocratic concentration of control over the means of living in the hands of the few. Democracy is essential for either to work effectively for the benefit of all. Plutocrats generally favor capitalism, because in the extreme form we now experience, it supports virtually unlimited concentrations of wealth and power. Its practitioners are also drawn by capitalism’s ideological claim that unregulated markets will assure that the presumed benefits of a growing economy will be shared by everyone, and so the rich need not bear any personal responsibility beyond maximizing their personal financial gain.

The critical economic and political question for humanity is not whether our means of living will be controlled by corporations or government, but whether control will be concentrated for the benefit of the few or dispersed, with benefits shared by everyone. Support for the needed economic transition can come from many places. Just as people are not necessarily racist because they are White or misogynistic because they are male, people do not necessarily become plutocrats just because they are rich. Many wealthy people work actively for economic and political democracy and support radical wealth redistribution, including through support of progressive taxation and significant taxing of inherited wealth. The political and economic democracy we seek cannot be easily characterized as either capitalist or socialist. It is a system of substantially self-reliant local economies composed of locally owned enterprises and community-secured safety nets with responsibilities shared by families, charities, and governments. Such a system facilitates self-organizing to create healthy, happy, and productive communities. In our complex and interconnected world, this system will require national and global institutions responsive to the people’s will and well-being to support cooperation and sharing among communities, but the real power will be dispersed locally. There would be ample room for competition among local communities to be the most beautiful, healthy, democratic, creative, and generous.

There is no place for colonizing the resources of others or for predatory corporations. These communities will most likely feature cooperative and family ownership of businesses. They will also recognize the rights of nature and their shared responsibility to care for the commons and to share its gifts. The rules of plutocracy evolved over thousands of years. We have far less time to come up with suitable rules for democratic alternatives. That search must quickly become a centerpiece of public discussion.


Use of currency is an illusion because of what currency (Capital) actually is : That which is worthless, yet presented and perceived as being valuable. It spawns privatization and greed manifested through class and ‘power over others’ being the form it eventually assumes -since when you permit a small minority of humans to own all of the wealth and the hoarding it breeds; only a power over others competition between them remains- to the detriment of the majority of you.

———————————————-

C.E.O.s have come to accept the president, in spite of his populist views and governance-by-Twitter style. Tax cuts and a record stock market speak volumes.

DAVOS, Switzerland — The last time President Trump arrived at the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting, his trip was treated with deep skepticism, if not disdain, by the business and political leaders who gather once a year in this ski town in the Swiss Alps. It was 2018 and even with his newly enacted tax cuts, his populist, antiglobalist rhetoric and Twitter outbursts were more than enough to make the event’s collection of plutocrats uneasy.

This time is likely to be different.

With the stock market at record highs, two trade deals announced and the possibility that Mr. Trump may be in office for another four years, there is an increasing sense that he will be accepted, if not embraced (although some attendees may roll their eyes behind his back) when he arrives on Tuesday, even as he faces an impeachment trial.

As anathema as it may be to some participants, Mr. Trump may be the new Davos Man.

The Davos forum, marking its 50th year, has always sought to foster a sense of multilateral unity. But Mr. Trump, along with his counterpart in Britain, Prime Minister Boris Johnson, is seemingly moving the world into a tariff based, decoupled universe, based on bilateral negotiations and diplomacy by tweet.

To the surprise of many Davos regulars, the economic results have yet to prove as disastrous as they expected — and, at least in the short term, have seemingly proven to be quite positive. (The long-term effects, of course, are still unknown.)

Even Mr. Trump’s most ardent detractors acknowledge that an acceptance of the president is settling in among the Davos crowd.

“We are all adjusting to his abnormal behavior,” said the investor Anthony Scaramucci, Mr. Trump’s onetime spokesman turned enemy who has been a Davos regular for over a decade and hosts a wine tasting party that has become a hot ticket for the boldfaced names. “The economic strength helps their cognitive dissonance,” he said.

Just last week, a lineup of some executives who will attend the Davos forum were in the audience at the White House when Mr. Trump signed the initial China trade deal. They more than politely applauded.

“Will you say, ‘Thank you, Mr. President’ at least? Huh?” Mr. Trump asked Mary Erdoes, the chief executive of JPMorgan’s asset and wealth management division and a Davos regular, along with Jamie Dimon, the bank’s C.E.O. “They just announced earnings, and they were incredible,” Mr. Trump said about JPMorgan. “They were very substantial. I made a lot of bankers look very good. But you’re doing a great job. Say hello to Jamie.”

Stephen Schwarzman, the co-founder of Blackstone, who often gets calls from global C.E.O.s seeking advice on how to manage relations with Mr. Trump because of his close relationship with him, said there has been a shift among the C-suite crowd.

“The attitude of the business community toward the Trump Administration appears quite positive,” said Mr. Schwarzman, who runs one of the world’s biggest investment funds. Among the reasons for the warm feelings, he said, are the strength of the economy, trade deals with China, Mexico and Canada, the tax bill and the elimination of regulations.

Still, if there is one topic expected to dominate the week here besides Mr. Trump himself, it will be an issue that he and the Davos community vehemently disagree about: climate change

Just last week, Satya Nadella, the chief executive of Microsoft — and a Davos participant — announced the company would be carbon negative by 2030, and by 2050 it would seek to remove all of the carbon it has ever emitted since its founding in 1975. The World Economic Forum itself announced the meeting would be carbon neutral after it bought carbon credits to offset carbon emission from the event.

Of course, Mr. Trump doesn’t believe in climate change and pulled out of the Paris Climate Agreement to the horror of most of the executives and attendees of Davos.

He is likely to hear criticism from activists like Greta Thunberg, the high school phenom who has become a global icon for the climate. And he may get some nudging from C.E.O.s, but, unlike the activists, they will be unlikely to confront him publicly out of fear that he might turn on them or their companies.

“The Davos crowd are well respected followers of fashion and love whomever is in power,” said Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, the senior associate dean at the Yale School of Management and an expert on corporate leadership. “They celebrate when the people are rich and powerful.”

Mr. Sonnenfeld pointed out that, despite the stock market run-up, only “12 percent anticipate economic conditions will improve over the next six months, up from just 4 percent in the third quarter,” according to the Conference Board’s most recent survey of chief executives.

While the business community has come to accept Mr. Trump — one executive described the view by saying “life is relative” — Mr. Sonnenfeld noted that a poll he conducted three weeks ago found that 56 percent of C.E.O.s favored the president’s impeachment and removal from office.

Mr. Trump may find himself flattered by the Davos audience. Whether it is genuine flattery or something else remains an open question. Whatever the answer, Mr. Scaramucci is convinced it is all self-interested: “The unspeakable truth is that C.E.O.s and their staff are horrified.”


Billionaires have nothing better to do these days than rule over you. You will see their horrid faces overseeing your Country Internment and they rely upon currency slavery and unending wars to maintain this with your co-operation. Only by being non-compliant can you destroy their countries. for none of these are yours. All humans are sovereign citizens of Earth, with the right to travel, live or work anyplace upon the surface of the Earth unhindered. To do this you must take back what has been stolen. Massive protests and strikes are encouraged. Stop paying all of your ‘bills’ (usury) since none of you owe anything.