Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
Support Our Annual Fund Drive! CounterPunch is entirely supported by our readers. Your donations pay for our small staff, tiny office, writers, designers, techies, bandwidth and servers. We don’t owe anything to advertisers, foundations, one-percenters or political parties. You are our only safety net. Please make a tax-deductible donation today.
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Of Dominance Transient and Eternal

by STEPHEN MARTIN

I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world – no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men. – Woodrow Wilson

The title this small article is based on a work by a Nobel Prize winner for Literature. It is a work which, somewhat curiously, has been unpublished in the Western World – but more upon this subject later in context of Government by opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men as President Wilson put it in the quote above.

As President Wilson put it in the quote above, ‘I am a most unhappy man’. The cause of unhappiness in these small quarters is the ruination not just of a country, but of many countries in the Western World.

In the almost one hundred years since Woodrow Wilson wrote concerning the ruination of the United States of America it is the case that the system of credit has become even more concentrated, and there have been at least two major Economic Depressions and countless wars, including two on such a scale as to be designated ‘World War’.

We are indeed in a war as these words are written – and it is primarily a war concerning control of the system of credit as a further transfer of resources to a small group of ‘men’ as would so have their dominance realized?

The small group of dominant men of which President Wilson wrote so prescient has grown even more dominant in the last hundred years, much as their opinion and duress has been elaborated upon Geopolitically in the course of their living ‘together’ with the Citizenry or mere subjects of the Nations which they dominate?

One hundred years ago the small group of dominant men was referred to as ‘The Money Trust’; today ‘we’, sense of Zamyatin as opposed to ‘The People’ are not permitted to be so ‘articulate’ or perspicacious in referring to the division between the 99% and 1% -and this lack of articulation and perspicacity in sense of disseminated opinion by mainstream media is an expression of the ‘dominance’ of which President Wilson wrote of almost one hundred years ago?

The dominance of the small group of ‘men’ as President Wilson elected to refer to, and here these small quarters are inclined to be more polemical in that the term ‘Stateless Bastards’ is considered more apposite apropos of ‘Globalization’ as a dominance and the subjugation of nation State to system of credit’ by a small minority – ‘bastards’ because they have no legitimate relationship to ‘Man’ thru their abrogation of Humanity itself, and ‘Stateless’ in as much as they have no loyalty to anything but profit and care not for any concept of ‘Nation’ as entails ‘Sovereignty’ in context of what amounts to idiosyncratic deviation determined by ‘The People’ as a denial of their dominance and the Democratic right to dissent; their dominance remaining one of system of credit control as a euphemism for ‘usury’ at the ‘apex’ where there is ‘control and issue of currency’?

Such the ‘system of credit’, indeed?

It is at such juncture that there must be recourse to referral to the Nobel Prize winner for Literature in 1970 and the ‘somewhat curious reality’ of what can be contended his greatest work being unpublished in the English language. Most people associate Alexandr Solzenhitsyn with ‘One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich’ or ‘The Gulag Archipelago’- they do not associate him, alas, with his work entitled ‘Two Hundred Years Together’. This is a somewhat curious reality as per the Alexander Conan Doyle story ‘The Adventure of Silver Blaze’; whereby the dog which did nothing in the night time provides Sherlock Holmes with the clue requisite to solve the crime?

That is to say, an absence can be as revealing as a plenitude when it comes to dominance – and crime?

Apropos of same, the proposition by Voltaire, given the territory we are about to enter, demands detail, to wit:

To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize

For now we are to step in to the exercise of thought by way of speculation and conjecture concerning opinion, as a ‘CounterPunch’ indeed against Hegemony as a form of dominance – and this is the ‘joy’ of it, is it not, which only Democracy can enshrine as per a written Constitution or Amendment to same – and which denies ‘rule over’ sense of the proposition above?

For heuristic purposes as rhetorical device, the statement made by President Wilson almost one hundred years ago demands an ‘ontological dig’ which reaches to the point of the Eighteenth Century concerning the concept of ‘dominant ‘men’’; as in:

Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes it’s laws

The fact is that what led to President Wilson’s unhappiness was a realization that ‘The Federal Reserve’ represented, and continues to represent, alas, but aspect of the dominance of a small group of dominant ‘men’ as a ‘Money Trust’ concerning the ruination of a country as a Democracy? One writes ‘but aspect of’ in as much as there is an intimacy expressive of dominance which details the small number as rules ‘Wall St.’ in as much as there is same ‘Government’ exercised from what in ‘Little Britain’ is referred to as ‘The Square Mile’?

The ruination of so many countries has been by way of the cause of ‘system of credit’, epitomised ontologically in the Nineteenth Century concerning the money so applied as made from War as ‘Waterloo’ represented.

The same ‘Money Trust’ as profited from the defeat of Napoleon ‘progressed’ as to such realization of war being a most profitable racket towards the ruination of many a formerly Sovereign Nation, most notably of which included the ‘United States of America’, dominance over which attained in 1913; sense of the ‘system of credit’?

There may very well be some ‘diversity’ as to ‘religion’ concerning the small group of dominant men of which President Wilson wrote; but there is no doubt that foremost amongst such diversity is the faith which such as Rothschild professed concerning ‘dominance’? As per ‘The Talmud’ and Zionism, as per President Wilson, Voltaire and Alexandr Solzenihisyn this is not something which ‘we’ are to be permitted to contemplate, let alone debate if we are to maintain credibility – such the issue and control of ‘currency’?

Not to forget the concentration of ‘system of credit’, such the extrapolation.

The fact remains that underlying the’ illumination’ of control of the system of credit is a disproportionate representation by way of dominance of ‘man’ over men, to point not only of the tragedy of ruination of Democracy and the commensurate impoverishment of the majority; and that such ruination is evident today in the war as waged by a few as dominant as corruptive of ‘Humanity’. The eternal truth of the question ‘What does it profit a man?’ is explicate in the USA today, as the dominance of which President Wilson wrote of concerning ‘The Gulf of Mexico’, ‘Fukishima’ and ‘War by proxy’ in Syria as threatens Nuclear Armageddon.

The choice of ‘fission’ over ‘fusion’ as entailing the demise of Democracy was shaped long ago, such the relativity, by a small minority of a group of men as dominant to point of ruination; accordantly what President Wilson wrote of as ruination of a Country has been expanded such the lust for ‘dominance’ as to entail the ruination of the World?

The remaining question, as to ‘Religion’ which is as the ‘elephant in the room’, and as can not so much underline as undermine ‘morality’ concept of ‘Politics’ as ‘moral economics’, is as to inevitability, sense of ‘Fate’?

Can the dominance of a small group of ‘men’ express the greed and avarice of Satan to point of ‘Ecocide’?

That they could express ‘unwitting’ in same sense as President Wilson?

Can the ‘One Hundred Years Together of the USA’ become as of the ‘Two Hundred Years Together’ of Russia?

Is this a question we are soon to discover the answer of?

Stephen Martin can be reached at: stephenmarti@yahoo.com

Stephen Martin can be reached at: stephenmarti@yahoo.com

More articles by:

2016 Fund Drive
Smart. Fierce. Uncompromised. Support CounterPunch Now!

  • cp-store
  • donate paypal

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

Weekend Edition
September 30, 2016
Friday - Sunday
Henry Giroux
Thinking Dangerously in the Age of Normalized Ignorance
Stanley L. Cohen
Israel and Academic Freedom: a Closed Book
Paul Craig Roberts – Michael Hudson
Can Russia Learn From Brazil’s Fate? 
Andrew Levine
A Putrid Election: the Horserace as Farce
Mike Whitney
The Biggest Heist in Human History
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: the Sick Blue Line
Vijay Prashad
In a Hall of Mirrors: Fear and Dislike at the Polls
Alexander Cockburn
The Man Who Built Clinton World
John Wight
Who Will Save Us From America?
W. T. Whitney
When Women’s Lives Don’t Matter
Jeremy Brecher
Dakota Access Pipeline and the Future of American Labor
Binoy Kampmark
Pictures Left Incomplete: MH17 and the Joint Investigation Team
Andrew Kahn
Nader Gave Us Bush? Hillary Could Give Us Trump
Steve Horn
Obama Weakens Endangered Species Act
Dave Lindorff
US Propaganda Campaign to Demonize Russia in Full Gear over One-Sided Dutch/Aussie Report on Flight 17 Downing
John W. Whitehead
Uncomfortable Truths You Won’t Hear From the Presidential Candidates
Ramzy Baroud
Shimon Peres: Israel’s Nuclear Man
Brandon Jordan
The Battle for Mercosur
Murray Dobbin
A Globalization Wake-Up Call
Jesse Ventura
Corrupted Science: the DEA and Marijuana
Andrew Sullivan
The Democratic Plot to Privatize Social Security
Daniel Borgstrom
On the Streets of Oakland, Expressing Solidarity with Charlotte
Marjorie Cohn
President Obama: ‘Patron’ of the Israeli Occupation
Norman Pollack
The “Self-Hating” Jew: A Critique
David Rosen
The Living Body & the Ecological Crisis
W. T. Whitney
When Women’s Lives Don’t Matter
Richard W. Behan
Hillary Clinton and Our Moribund Democracy
Joseph Natoli
Thoughtcrimes and Stupidspeak: Our Assault Against Words
Ron Jacobs
A Cycle of Death Underscored by Greed and a Lust for Power
Kim Nicolini
Long Drive Home
Art Martin
The Matrix Around the Next Bend: Facebook, Augmented Reality and the Podification of the Populace
Andre Vltchek
Failures of the Western Left
Laura Finley
Presidential Debate Recommendations
José Negroni
Mass Firings on Broadway Lead Singers to Push Back
Leticia Cortez
Entering the Historical Dissonance Surrounding Desafinados
Robert J. Burrowes
Gandhi: ‘My Life is My Message’
Charles R. Larson
Queen Lear? Deborah Levy’s “Hot Milk”
September 29, 2016
Robert Fisk
The Butcher of Qana: Shimon Peres Was No Peacemaker
James Rose
Politics in the Echo Chamber: How Trump Becomes President
Russell Mokhiber
The Corporate Vice Grip on the Presidential Debates
Daniel Kato
Rethinking the Race over Race: What Clinton Should do Now About ‘Super-Predators’
Peter Certo
Clinton’s Awkward Stumbles on Trade
Fran Shor
Demonizing the Green Party Vote
Rev. William Alberts
Trump’s Road Rage to the White House
Luke O'Brien
Because We Couldn’t Have Sanders, You’ll Get Trump
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail
[i]
[i]
[i]
[i]