• EMBED A VIDEO (Optional):
  https://solari.com/ireland-to-mandate-cash-acceptance-before-the-cashless-creep-takes-hold/

The post Ireland to Mandate Cash Acceptance—Before the “Cashless Creep” Takes Hold first appeared on W G Publishing.

Lindbergh writes as a legislator deeply enmeshed in the congressional struggle over currency reform. His personal involvement in the “Money Trust Investigation” forms the experiential foundation of his argument. The opening chapters situate his critique in the Progressive Era battle against entrenched privilege. He recounts attempts to unseat Speaker Joseph Cannon, oppose the Taft administration’s reciprocity measures, and resist Woodrow Wilson’s alignment with Allied finance during the early years of World War I. From this perspective, the book becomes both a historical document and a polemic—an insider’s record of the alliance between Wall Street’s speculative interests and national politics.

The Economic Mechanism of Manipulation

Lindbergh defines the “Money Trust” as a man-made power that regulates credit and currency for private advantage. The book outlines how, despite relatively stable supply and demand for goods, market prices fluctuate several times a day, revealing an artificial system controlled by “manipulators” rather than natural conditions. The core of this argument rests on data. By 1912, 28,995 banks operated in the United States, holding over seventeen billion dollars in individual deposits while costing the public more than a billion dollars a year to maintain. These banks, he asserts, generate profit through a process of pyramided credit—expanding loans twenty-four times beyond their actual cash base and diverting the resulting profits upward through interest, dividends, and speculative gains.

Structure and Hierarchy of Banking Power

The book dissects the legal stratification of the banking system into three classes: non-reserve, reserve, and central reserve banks located in New York, Chicago, and St. Louis. Lindbergh traces how the statutory reserve requirement, designed for stability, instead siphons liquidity from Main Street. Non-reserve banks must hold fifteen percent reserves, but are permitted to deposit three-fifths of these in reserve city banks, which in turn deposit half of their own reserves in central reserve cities. The cascade concentrates control of the nation’s money supply within a few institutions. In 1912, six New York banks—the First National, Chase National, Hanover National, National Bank of Commerce, National City, and National Park—held over $839 million in deposits against only $73 million in capital, an eleven-fold leverage that made them, in Lindbergh’s phrase, the “nests from which the Wall Streeters gather the people’s deposits.”

The Political Economy of Credit

Lindbergh’s central claim is that the people supply both the funds and the productive energy that support credit, yet bankers monopolize its use. The depositor receives minimal interest on savings, while the same funds, multiplied through book credits, sustain a vast speculative structure of stocks and bonds approaching fifty billion dollars. Against this figure, the total cash in reporting banks in 1912 stood at just under $1.6 billion. The result is a financial superstructure where dividends and compounded interest perpetually drain value from labor and production into the hands of those who control the circulation of credit.

Legislative Capture and the Money Trust Investigation

The book narrates how Lindbergh’s resolution to investigate the Money Trust was initially buried through congressional procedure. Committees packed with bankers and their attorneys replaced independent inquiry with managed exposure. He describes secret caucuses, manipulated press coverage, and the selection of a Wall Street lawyer to direct the official investigation — all orchestrated to protect financial interests. Through this narrative, Lindbergh exposes the integration of economic and political machinery: banks finance industry, industry finances parties, and parties legislate for the banks.

The Social Consequences of Financial Centralization

Beyond structural analysis, Lindbergh presents the human dimension of monetary exploitation. He observes that while America’s natural resources — its rivers, plains, and minerals — constitute a divine abundance, the people labor under perpetual debt. The energy of millions of workers, farmers, and producers becomes collateral for speculative gain. He argues that the system taxes “our life necessities more than all other things combined,” reducing the worker’s share of productivity even as industrial efficiency multiplies output. The book connects this economic imbalance to social unrest and to the erosion of civic independence.

The False Sanctity of Gold and the Illusion of Capital

In a section addressed “To the Joker,” Lindbergh personifies gold as a deceitful idol that blinds its worshippers. The symbol of wealth, he contends, masks the real process by which energy and production are transformed into instruments of debt. Gold, in his argument, is not wealth but a medium of control—an emblem of the human tendency to mistake representation for substance. This reflection anticipates later populist critiques of the gold standard and foreshadows twentieth-century debates over fiat currency and public credit.

Reform Through Public Control of Credit

Lindbergh’s proposed remedy rejects both the existing banking hierarchy and piecemeal regulation. He envisions a national credit system under public ownership, where the power to issue and manage currency belongs to the people through their government rather than to private corporations. Such reform, he claims, would transform the banker from a master of commerce into its servant. The aim is not the destruction of banking as an institution but the restoration of its public function: to serve exchange rather than to govern it.

The Great Conspiracy of The House of Morgan Exposed Explainer

The Duke Report

·

01:13

Read full story

The Broader Program: Industrial and Political Relations

Banking and Currency and the Money Trust form the first part of a planned trilogy. The second volume, to address industrial relations, and the third, political relations, would extend the same logic of democratization to labor and governance. Lindbergh interprets economic reform as inseparable from political reform; without monetary independence, self-government remains nominal. The concentration of credit power, he argues, enables the same minority to dominate industry and dictate policy, producing a cycle of dependency that undermines republican institutions.

Rhetoric of Awakening and Collective Agency

Throughout the text, Lindbergh calls for civic awakening rather than revolt. He insists that individuals operate within systems they did not design and therefore must act collectively to change them. His tone, both analytical and exhortative, moves from diagnosis to appeal: the people must “become the masters of the world” by reclaiming the credit that their labor sustains. This assertion fuses economic literacy with moral responsibility. Knowledge of monetary function becomes a civic duty, and ignorance a form of complicity.

Historical Resonance and Continuing Relevance

The book’s publication coincided with the creation of the Federal Reserve System, which Lindbergh denounced as a further consolidation of private power under the guise of reform. His warnings anticipated later critiques of central banking as a mechanism for stabilizing profits rather than markets. His empirical detailing—the ratios of reserves to deposits, the enumeration of bank classes, the tracing of capital flows from rural depositors to urban financiers—provides a quantitative anatomy of early twentieth-century finance. The structure he exposed persisted in evolved form throughout the century: concentration of credit, systemic leverage, and policy capture by financial elites.

The Moral Architecture of Economic Freedom

Lindbergh grounds his economic argument in ethical principles. Labor, he asserts, creates value; credit should amplify that value for collective prosperity, not convert it into instruments of dependence. The legitimate purpose of banking is to facilitate exchange and support production. When it becomes a mechanism for speculation, it transforms a social utility into a private weapon. The book closes its early chapters by linking reform to human dignity: only when credit serves production rather than domination will civilization fulfill its moral promise.

Legacy and Interpretation

Banking and Currency and the Money Trust remains a foundational text of American monetary populism. Its language combines legislative precision with prophetic urgency. Lindbergh’s insistence on structural reform — public control of credit, transparency in monetary issuance, and the subordination of finance to democratic authority — resonates with later reform movements from the New Deal to contemporary debates over financial regulation. The book’s specificity — its enumeration of bank capital, its citation of deposit ratios, its attention to congressional procedure—distinguishes it from abstract populist rhetoric. It operates as both documentation and indictment, a ledger of the nation’s financial conscience.

In Lindbergh’s architecture of reform, knowledge functions as liberation. The citizen who understands the mechanism of credit recognizes his own power as its source. The restoration of that power constitutes, for him, the unfinished project of democracy.

Thanks to the generosity of my readers, all my articles are available for free access. Independent journalism, however, requires time and investment. If you found value in this article or any others, please consider sharing or even becoming a paid subscriber, who benefits by joining the conversation in the comments. I want you to know that your support is always gratefully received and will never be forgotten. Please buy me a coffee or as many as you wish.

• EMBED A VIDEO (Optional):
  https://thedukereport.substack.com/p/banking-and-currency-and-the-money?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=519432&post_id=179771238&utm_campaign=email-play-on-substack&utm_content=watch_now_button&r=x8pv&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

The post Banking and Currency and the Money Trust Explainer first appeared on W G Publishing.

Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more

Watch now

Money and the Conspiracy of Evil

ConspiracyCon 2002

The Duke Report Nov 22

READ IN APP

Eustace Mullins’ Money and the Conspiracy of Evil, produced by Anthony J. Hilder and presented at ConspiracyCon 2002, confronts the audience with a polemical deconstruction of institutional authority and its perceived betrayal of American citizens.

Eustace Mullins: A Biographical Profile in Resistance

Eustace Mullins frames his life’s work through encounters with systemic opposition. Introduced by Anthony Hilder as the only person ever fired from the Library of Congress, Mullins credits his intellectual formation to Ezra Pound, whom he describes as his mentor and a political prisoner held without trial for 13.5 years. Mullins emphasizes his personal surveillance under the FBI, recounting multiple detentions and conflicts during air travel—including confrontations over a can of shaving cream misconstrued as a bomb. These episodes, far from deterring him, become emblems of his resistance.

Mullins builds his self-narrative on foundational betrayals: institutional, legal, and political. He connects his blacklisting and personal targeting to a broader campaign of enforced ignorance by corporate media, law enforcement, and state institutions. He presents this persecution not as isolated misconduct but as a coordinated strategy to suppress dissent.

The Federal Reserve: Syndicate, Not System

Mullins labels the Federal Reserve a criminal syndicate. He argues that it operates without reserves, federal oversight, or systemic legitimacy. In his words, it constitutes a privately controlled cartel with the sole objective of enriching its founders through fiat currency manipulation. The names he associates with its origin—Paul Warburg, Rothschild interests, and linked banking dynasties—anchor his narrative in a historical critique of concentrated financial power.

He asserts that his seminal book, Secrets of the Federal Reserve, was commissioned by Ezra Pound to expose the system’s hidden ownership and political leverage. Mullins defines this act of publication as a form of insurgency, weaponized information against a concealed aristocracy of money.

Health as a Commodity: Pharmaceutical and Medical Cartels

Through his book Murder by Injection, Mullins extends the conspiracy into public health, describing medicine as a rigged industry run by chemical-pharmaceutical conglomerates with roots in IG Farben. He alleges that the medical establishment profits from disease rather than pursuing cures. Cancer, in his formulation, serves as a primary economic driver in this system, with supposed natural cures actively suppressed.

He introduces the concept of iatrogenic illness — physician-induced disease — as a statistical reality and personal threat. Mullins describes medical malpractice not as error but as institutionalized experimentation and biological control. He supports this claim by referencing personal lawsuits against medical practitioners whom he accuses of attempting to kill him under the guise of treatment.

Israeli Influence: The Fifth Column Claim

Mullins proposes that American governance has been co-opted by an “Israeli fifth column.” He names figures like Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, and William Kristol, attributing to them exclusive loyalty to Israel. He states that this group directs U.S. foreign and domestic policy, subordinating American interests to those of the Israeli state. He criticizes President George W. Bush for public affirmations of defense toward Israel rather than the United States, arguing this reversal signals the hijacking of the executive branch.

The notion of a fifth column becomes the keystone of Mullins’ geopolitical argument: a hostile infiltration that controls Congress, the media, the military, and intelligence apparatus through ideological alignment and financial influence. This internal control, he argues, renders democratic participation and civic advocacy impotent.

Media and Narrative Control

Mullins devotes considerable time to condemning mainstream media. He accuses anchors like Dan Rather and networks like CBS of deliberately misinforming the public. He characterizes journalism as institutional propaganda structured to distract and pacify, functioning not as a watchdog but as a suppressive arm of state conspiracy.

He details specific instances where his appearances were undermined by smear campaigns, including being labeled antisemitic without evidence or recourse. He critiques these campaigns as ad hominem tactics designed to invalidate his research without confronting its substance.

The Cold War, Soviet Union, and War Profiteering

Mullins argues that the Cold War was a “$5 trillion hoax,” engineered to justify military expansion and covertly fund Israel’s military dominance. He states that the Soviet Union was economically dependent on Western financing — specifically from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the Bank of England — suggesting that American taxpayers funded both the enemy and their own militarization.

He describes the Cold War as theater, a distraction to maintain domestic fear and foreign aggression, with the actual policy objective centered on funneling wealth and weapons into geopolitical allies, particularly Israel. He attributes Soviet power not to internal strength but to externally supplied capital and ideological manipulation.

The Role of Ezra Pound and the Origins of Fascism

Mullins portrays Ezra Pound as a martyr whose fascist sympathies masked a deeper project of intellectual resistance. He explains that Pound commissioned his research on the Federal Reserve to establish a record of institutional fraud. Mullins believes that Pound’s incarceration in a mental hospital was a political act of silencing rather than a response to criminality or insanity.

By tethering his career to Pound, Mullins frames himself within a lineage of persecuted truth-tellers. He elevates Pound from poet to strategist, from propagandist to philosopher, and positions his own writing as the logical extension of that legacy.

World Wars as Economic Conspiracies

Mullins advances the claim that both World Wars emerged from British economic decline and jealousy toward German industrial superiority. He argues that the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand served as a pretext, but the motive was economic domination. He attributes the rise of Nazism to financing from British-controlled banks, particularly those associated with the Rothschild family and the Bank of England.

He asserts that key financiers of Hitler’s regime were protected after the war, while symbolic scapegoats were prosecuted at Nuremberg. IG Farben executives, whose company he associates with the Rockefeller interests and Rothschild syndicates, become the central example of this selective justice.

Homeland Security and the Construction of Fear

Mullins describes post-9/11 security policies as an internal war against the American populace. He ridicules the Transportation Security Administration’s behavior, framing airport screenings as theater and domination rituals. He likens these measures to totalitarian intimidation, asserting they create a psychological condition of helplessness and submission.

He connects the absence of 9/11 investigations to governmental complicity, stating that controlled demolition brought down the towers and that the Pentagon explosion lacked any trace of an airplane. He supports these claims by referencing military experts like General Partin, whose suppressed testimony challenges the official narrative of Oklahoma City and 9/11.

Legal System as a Mechanism of Repression

Mullins characterizes the U.S. judiciary as rigged. He recounts multiple lawsuits, including a $100 million suit against the Anti-Defamation League, dismissed without consideration. He describes judges as ideological operatives rather than arbiters of law, emphasizing their affiliations with Masonic and oil-related institutions.

He points to the breakup of the AT&T system by Judge Harold Greene as an act of economic sabotage, intended to downgrade U.S. infrastructure to match Soviet inefficiency. He attributes this decision to diplomatic pressure and systemic rot.

Education as Propaganda and Intellectual Cowardice

Mullins argues that American universities are designed to prevent learning. He describes professors as careerist cowards, indoctrinated and unwilling to challenge orthodoxy. He recounts his own experience at Washington and Lee University as bereft of intellectual stimulation, contrasting this with his time under Ezra Pound’s guidance.

He concludes that the true educational institutions in America are not schools but networks of resistance: individual thinkers operating outside formal structures, risking ostracism to preserve national integrity.

Conclusion

Eustace Mullins’ Money and the Conspiracy of Evil presents a sustained, totalizing indictment of American political, financial, and medical institutions. Through personal testimony, historical narration, and conspiratorial synthesis, Mullins offers an expansive theory of elite collusion and citizen subjugation. The lecture functions as a radical call to resistance, grounded in a belief that truth is the foundation of freedom and that silence is complicity.

• EMBED A VIDEO (Optional):
  https://thedukereport.substack.com/p/money-and-the-conspiracy-of-evil?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=519432&post_id=179610561&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=x8pv&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

The post Money and the Conspiracy of Evil first appeared on W G Publishing.

part 2

https://x.com/henri_fjord/status/1987487486134886690

part 3

https://x.com/henri_fjord/status/1987487625046028557

part 4

https://x.com/henri_fjord/status/1987487761960673663

• EMBED A VIDEO (Optional):
  https://x.com/henri_fjord/status/1987487313551904906

The post They Designed a System You Can Never Escape first appeared on W G Publishing.

Thanks to the generosity of my readers, all my articles are available for free access. Independent journalism, however, requires time and investment. If you found value in this article or any others, please consider sharing or even becoming a paid subscriber, who benefits by joining the conversation in the comments. I want you to know that your support is always gratefully received and will never be forgotten. Please buy me a coffee or as many as you wish.

• EMBED A VIDEO (Optional):
  https://thedukereport.substack.com/p/a-history-of-central-banking-explainer?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=519432&post_id=178115182&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=x8pv&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

The post A History of Central Banking Explainer first appeared on W G Publishing.

 by Ellen Brown

There has been considerable discussion in recent years about reforming, modifying, or even abolishing the Federal Reserve. Proposals range from ending its independence, to integrating its functions into the U.S. Treasury Department, to dismantling it and returning monetary policy to direct congressional or Treasury oversight. 

The Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act (H.R. 1846 and S. 869, 119th Congress, 2025-2026), introduced by Rep. Thomas Massie in the House and Sen. Mike Lee in the Senate on March 4, 2025, calls for abolishing the Fed’s Board of Governors and regional banks within one year of enactment, liquidating Fed assets and transferring net proceeds to the Treasury. It echoes earlier efforts like Ron Paul’s 1999 bill to “end the Fed”, but the odds of its passing are slim.

Less radical are proposals to curb the independence of the Federal Reserve. Former Fed governor Kevin Warsh is considered one of five finalists to take over as chairman after Jerome Powell. In a July 17 CNBC interview, he called for sweeping changes in how the central bank conducts business, and suggested a policy alliance with the Treasury Department. 

Substantial precedent exists for that approach, both in the United States and abroad. In the 1930s and 1940s, before the Fed officially became “independent,” it worked with the federal government to fund the most productive period in our country’s history. More on that shortly.  

The Werner Findings: Fed Independence Is Correlated with Economic Decline

In a Sept. 1 Substack post titled “Fed Faces Biggest Direct Challenge by a President Since JFK – and This Is a Good Thing”, UK Prof. Richard Werner cited multiple studies showing that central bank independence not only does not reduce inflation but can actually harm economic performance. He wrote:

The published consensus is that there is no evidence that more independent central banks deliver lower inflation and better macroeconomic performance. In fact, more independent central banks deliver worse results: lower growth, greater inequality, higher unemployment. Considering the 1970s and 2020s we must also say: higher inflation.

Werner referenced a 1993 paper by Alesina and Summers that claimed to show a correlation between independence and low inflation. But later analyses revealed that the data was cherry-picked and the methodology was flawed. Werner also pointed to the European Central Bank (ECB), one of the most independent in the world, which has reigned during a period of extended stagnation and deflation in much of the Eurozone. He suggests that the notion that independence is a universal ideal is a Western invention, often used to shield monetary policy from democratic accountability.

The Fed’s Historical Errors

The Federal Reserve’s track record, like the ECB’s, is less than pristine. In a 2002 speech honoring Milton Friedman, then-Fed Chair Ben Bernanke famously admitted, “Regarding the Great Depression … we did it. We’re very sorry. … We won’t do it again.” 

Bernanke was referring to the Fed’s failure to act as lender of last resort during the banking panics of the early 1930s. Instead of expanding liquidity, the Fed tightened it. Its goal was to curb excessive stock market speculation, but reducing the money supply raised borrowing costs and triggered a contraction that cascaded globally. The result was a decade of mass unemployment, deflation, and social upheaval.

The Fed Was Not Independent During the Great Depression and World War II

Following the monetary contraction that triggered the Great Depression, the Fed shifted course in 1932, pegging interest at very low rates to support banking liquidity and boost economic development. Large public projects were funded and directed through the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC), a federal agency established by Pres. Hoover to save the failing banks. 

The RFC was greatly expanded under the New Deal to fund public works, agriculture, and housing. By 1941 it had injected over $10 billion into the economy, a sizable sum at the time. During WWII, the RFC transformed into a war production engine, financing synthetic rubber plants, aircraft factories, and shipyards, and establishing subsidiaries like the Defense Plant Corporation to accelerate industrial output. By the war’s end, the RFC had disbursed more than $35 billion, catalyzing both economic recovery and military victory.

During its existence between 1932 and 1957, the RFC authorized over $50 billion in loans and commitments, with significant portions directed toward self-liquidating infrastructure projects like bridges, dams, and utilities repaid through tolls or fees, along with factories and other emerging industries. It raised funds by issuing bonds, most of which were bought by the Treasury; but the Treasury also issued bonds, some of which were bought by the Fed. These Fed purchases were modest in the 1930s but were greatly expanded in the 1940s, when the United States was running deficits exceeding 40% of GDP funded largely by Treasury-issued debt. To support the war effort, the Fed committed to maintaining a very low interest rate on short-term Treasury bills, something it did by engaging in “direct debt monetization” – it bought large amounts of government securities with new reserves. This was later described in Fed papers as an early form of quantitative easing.

By 1945, the U.S. had full employment and rising wages; and infrastructure investment surged postwar, with returning veterans trained as engineers and builders. The Fed’s collaboration with the Treasury enabled economic development, technological innovation and full employment. 

The Ideological Breakthrough that Mobilized the Economy 

“America’s response to World War II was the most extraordinary mobilization of an idle economy in the history of the world,” wrote Doris Kearns Goodwin in her 1992 article “The Way We Won”:

Historians, economists, and politicians have long wondered why this remarkable social and economic mobilization of latent human and physical resources required a war. The answer, I think, is partly ideological. World War II provided the ideological breakthrough that finally allowed the U.S. government to surmount the Great Depression. Despite the New Deal, even President Roosevelt had been constrained from intervening massively enough to stimulate a full recovery. By 1938 he had lost his working majority in Congress, and a conservative coalition was back, stifling the New Deal programs. When the economy had begun to bounce back, FDR pulled back on government spending to balance the budget, which contributed to the recession of 1938. The war was like a wave coming over that conservative coalition; the old ideological constraints collapsed and government outlays powered a recovery.

Fed holdings of Treasury securities rose from $2.25 billion at the end of 1941 to $24.26 billion at the end of 1945 (a $22 billion increase), while total Treasury indebtedness grew from $58 billion to $276 billion (a $218 billion increase). That means the Fed absorbed about 10% of the expansion of the federal debt to finance war deficits. 

If the Fed did that today, it could purchase about $3.8 trillion of the $37.89 trillion federal debt, more than enough to pay the interest on it ($1.16 trillion) and close the federal deficit ($1.775 trillion). It could, but the economy would need to grow in tandem to avoid price inflation. More on that shortly. 

The Fed Did Not Officially Become Independent Until 1951

Inflation was held to modest levels during World War II, and the economy boomed. But to support the war effort, the Fed’s commitment to buying large amounts of government securities with new reserves (basically QE) increased the money supply, and this increase was blamed for a surge in price inflation after the war. It was not the only reason prices went up. There were also major supply shortages – from global supply bulk bottlenecks, industrial retooling (e.g. turning auto industries that had been turned into airplane factories back into auto factories), labor strikes, and a surge in pent-up demand after the war. 

But postwar inflation was the trigger for relieving the Fed of the federal mandate that it keep interest rates low by buying federal securities, and this was achieved in a 1951 Treasury-Fed Accord giving the Fed its independence. The Accord was not a law but was just a joint statement issued by the Treasury and the Fed after oral negotiations, but it did give the Fed independent control of interest rates and the money supply. 

The Fed became independent of public control, but the Accord opened the door for Wall Street control of its operations for the benefit of the banks – particularly the largest banks. Bank mergers and consolidations in the 1950s and 1960s created “Too Big to Fail” institutions  including J.P. Morgan Chase and Citibank. Wall Street influence culminated in the 1999 repeal of major portions of the Glass-Steagall Act, formally fusing investment and commercial banking. Speculative bubbles and systemic risk then led to the financial crises of 2007-09 and the bailout of the Too Big to Fail banks, leaving the victims to bear the losses. See Nomi Prins, All the Presidents’ Bankers.

GDP Growth, Not Fed Independence, Curbed Postwar Inflation

The Consumer Price Index did stabilize after World War II, but it was not due to an independent Fed raising interest rates. It was the result of major productivity gains that drove up GDP, lowering the debt to GDP ratio to sustainable levels. Technological advances to meet war demands transformed domestic manufacturing; women joined the workforce; soldiers trained in the military brought new engineering skills; and the G.I. Bill provided low-cost higher education and affordable housing for returning veterans.

This GDP growth was greatly aided by RFC funding, with the help of the Treasury and the Fed. A 2025 Yale study showed that U.S. infrastructure as a share of GDP peaked in the 1940s–60s, then declined steadily. Productivity gains from infrastructure were highest during periods of federal investment, not austerity. Meta-analyses confirm that public infrastructure investment boosts private sector productivity, especially when targeted toward transportation, energy, and digital systems. 

China’s Central Bank: Liquidity for Development, Not Speculation

Today, a number of central banks are not independent but align their policies with their national governments’. The leading and most successful example is China, the chief economic competitor of the United States. The People’s Bank of China (PBOC) operates under the State Council, aligning credit creation with the government’s five-year plans. Through policy banks including the China Development Bank, the PBOC channels liquidity into infrastructure, energy, and industrial development. 

In 2024, the PBOC and Finance Ministry held their first joint meeting to align treasury bond issuance with monetary policy, with fiscal and monetary tools synchronized to support national development goals. According to the State Council, “The two authorities will coordinate development and security, strengthen policy synergy, maintain the stable development of the bond market, and provide a sound environment for the central bank’s treasury bond trading in its open market operations.” 

The PBOC also engaged in massive sovereign money printing over the 28 year period from 1996 to 2024, increasing the national money supply by more than 5300% — from 5.84 billion to 314 billion Chinese yuan. Details are in my earlier article here. 

The PBOC Collaborates with the China Development Bank in Funding Productive Investment

Like the RFC during the New Deal and World War II, the China Development Bank (CDB) plays a pivotal role in coordinating and executing long-term infrastructure funding for China. With over $2.6 trillion in assets, CDB is larger than the World Bank, the European Investment Bank, and Germany’s KfW combined. In collaboration with the PBOC, it provides capital for large infrastructure projects such as railways, energy grids, and green technology. In 2025, CDB increased loan support for logistics, housing, and ecological restoration, including a ¥185 billion boost to leading regional economies. 

The Chinese model has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty and built unprecedented infrastructure. Rather than the sort of speculative finance that profited from the Fed’s 2007-09 QE, the CDB and PBOC target liquidity for productive expansion aligned with national priorities. This joint mechanism allows China to issue new bonds for specific purposes — transport, housing, manufacturing — and to have them absorbed by the central bank with newly created currency. CDB then executes the plan by deploying the funds. Supply rises with demand, stabilizing prices.

Other Non-Independent Central Banks

Other central banks operating in coordination with their governments today include the Reserve Bank of India, which has limited independence and works closely with the Ministry of Finance; the Central Bank of Russia, which is state-aligned and supports national development goals; and the central banks of many African nations, which coordinate with their ministries of finance to support infrastructure and agriculture.

This has also been true of a number of central banks historically. Besides the U.S. Fed itself, notable examples include the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, the Reserve Bank of New Zealand, and the Bank of Canada, all of which funded substantial development in their early years either by direct money issuance or by money issued as bank credit without full reserve backing. Those early experiments in “sovereign” money creation deserve a separate article, but in the meantime if interested you can read about them in my book The Public Bank Solution. 

The lesson of these precedents is that when government-issued money is spent on productive assets – roads, factories, energy grids and the like – supply expands along with demand and prices remain stable.

Can the United States Generate the Necessary Supply? 

The U.S. government also has the sovereign capacity to issue money directly, provided that real productivity rises in tandem with monetary expansion to maintain stable price levels. But is that possible today? The current economic landscape shows signs of recession and systemic strain, yet the stock market continues to soar. Why? Much of the momentum is fueled by investor optimism around artificial intelligence (AI), which is seen as a transformative engine of future productivity. 

Hopefully those visions will manifest, but to compete with China’s rapid development, we also need a national development bank similar to the CDB. A dedicated development bank can ensure that credit creation is funneled into productive endeavors rather than speculative bubbles, and it can finance long-term, large-scale projects that are beyond the reach of private capital.

A bill for a national infrastructure bank on the Hamiltonian model, HR5356: The National Infrastructure Bank Act of 2025, is currently before Congress and has 42 cosponsors. Like the RFC and the early 20th century banks of Australia, New Zealand and Canada, it can provide off-budget financing for a wide range of urgently needed infrastructure projects without tapping the federal budget. For more information, see NIBCoalition.com.

Conclusion: Print to Build, Not to Bail

Printing money is not inherently inflationary. It depends on what the money is used for. If it funds speculation, it inflates bubbles. If it funds production, it builds prosperity. The vaunted independence of the Fed is not a constitutional mandate but is a political choice. As Prof. Werner wrote in an October 10 Substack post:

Given the facts of the credit creation process and the powers of central bankers, we know that whenever we see a country in recession, this is a policy-decision by the central planners, because the tools are available to quickly exit any recession and deliver high growth and prosperity for all.

History shows that sovereign money creation can be a tool for public good when wielded wisely. It is time to reclaim that tool, not to serve the banks and speculative investment but to serve the public and the productive economy. 

…

This article was first posted as an original to ScheerPost.com. Ellen Brown is an attorney, founder of the Public Banking Institute, and author of thirteen books including Web of Debt, The Public Bank Solution, and Banking on the People: Democratizing Money in the Digital Age. Her 400+ blog articles are posted at EllenBrown.com.

• EMBED A VIDEO (Optional):
  https://nexusnewsfeed.com/article/geopolitics/how-a-fed-overhaul-could-eliminate-the-federal-debt-crisis-part-ii-curbing-fed-independence/

The post How a Fed overhaul could eliminate the Federal Debt crisis, Part II: Curbing Fed Independence first appeared on W G Publishing.

• EMBED A VIDEO (Optional):
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_e_OTqHw6k

The post The System Trap: How Money Came to Rule the World first appeared on W G Publishing.

• Can the U.S. Dollar, Canadian Dollar, or Euro really die?
• The story of the Silver Denarius and the illusion of “safe money”
• What a bank collapse looks like in real life
• The Black Death of 1347 and its economic shock
• What happened during the Silicon Valley Bank collapse in 2023
• The reality of Argentina’s current inflation crisis
• The one thing that always survives when money fails
• Prepping tips: what you can do today to prepare for a currency collapse

Most people think “it can’t happen here,” but this isn’t theory; these are lessons from history, and they may matter more today than ever before. Do you think the U.S. Dollar, Canadian Dollar, or even Euro could collapse in our lifetime? Share your thoughts in the comments.

• EMBED A VIDEO (Optional):

The post When Money Dies: Only This Survives first appeared on W G Publishing.

Governments around the world are no longer content to regulate crypto—they’re starting to hunt it. If you’re still using traceable chains without a confidential layer, you’ve basically volunteered to be the canary in the cage when the state decides it doesn’t like your transaction history.

In Canada, the RCMP just pulled off the largest crypto seizure in the country’s history—over $56 million—shutting down TradeOgre, a privacy-focused exchange, in the process. The official excuse? Failing to register and obscuring client identities. In plain terms: it let people move money without the government’s permission. That was the real crime. The seizure didn’t happen after some act of violence or harm—it happened because the state couldn’t see everything. That’s where we are now.

Meanwhile, in Vietnam, the government is deactivating over 86 million bank accounts unless users submit to biometric ID systems. No scan, no money. This isn’t some rogue state—this is the global template. Tie identity to finance, tie finance to obedience. Miss a deadline or resist the terms, and your funds vanish. The system doesn’t care who you are—it cares that you’re compliant.

Both stories point to the same thing: the infrastructure of financial control is no longer theoretical. It’s active. And you don’t have to be a criminal to get caught up in it. Just be inconvenient. Donate to the wrong cause. Question the wrong narrative. Or try to remain anonymous in a world where anonymity is now treated like a red flag. The state doesn’t need a conviction to take your assets. All it needs is a justification—and in 2025, “too private” is justification enough.

This is why privacy coins like Zano matter more than ever. Zano isn’t a hype token. It’s a defensive weapon. Every transaction is private by default. There’s no public ledger for bureaucrats to trace. No exchange with a backdoor. No choke point to seize. And when you combine it with the Confidential Layer—a decentralized tool for bridging over assets like Bitcoin—you gain something that state power hates: plausible deniability and untraceable autonomy.

People still holding funds on public blockchains need to understand the risk. If your BTC is sitting on-chain without cover, it’s not freedom—it’s evidence. The tools exist to bridge into private chains right now. Not someday. Not after the next bill passes. Now. Waiting for regulation to “clarify” privacy is like waiting for the wolves to explain how the sheep should defend themselves.

This isn’t about hiding wrongdoing. It’s about shielding peace. It’s about making sure your ability to donate, transact, and dissent doesn’t depend on the goodwill of a government that doesn’t know you and doesn’t care. Financial privacy isn’t a crime—it’s a cornerstone of human dignity.

• EMBED A VIDEO (Optional):
  http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/384931-2025-09-26-the-state-just-robbed-an-entire-crypto-exchange-in-broad.htm?From=News

The post The State Just Robbed an Entire Crypto Exchange in Broad Daylight–Is Your Wallet Next? first appeared on W G Publishing.

• EMBED A VIDEO (Optional):

The post Who Is the Wizard Bank of Oz with Nick Hudson | Ep #35 first appeared on W G Publishing.