Society Must Never Be Cashless

Though I do not wish for this blog to collapse under the burden of an alternative current affair vent, so much has happened over the last few weeks, I cannot avoid commenting. There is the news about a larger than normal (whatever that is) outbreak of Ebola threatening to overtake mankind. Whereas HIV was created in error by growing a serum to fight Polio in the kidneys live chimpanzees and green monkeys, Ebola is a nasty CIA lab creation. Worryingly, the Washington Putz (Post) is already blaming the Russians for potential bio warfare. Jon Rappoport, a man I greatly respect, is of the opinion this is just one more of those silly “pandemic” hoaxes to enable the evil pharmaceutical cartel to place billions of dollars of rogue pre-emptive meds. This may be so and I guess it is a threat with sting. However, I cannot help imagining that a possible purpose of the FEMA concentration camps is materialising at the speed of light. One of the advantages of perpetually arguing the Holocaust nonsense is to deflect the real plight of the Jews (mostly Diaspora as well as many other nationals, including NAZI Germans). What they found in the Boer War, World War Two, Korea, Bosnia and probably all other wars since the 1900’s, is that by starving inmates couped up in the most depressing circumstances shattered the natural immune system. Therefore with “guards down” unheard of bugs made a comeback. Imagine if the FEMA camps with their razor wire, chains and armed guards were designated as Ebola breeding grounds. That should reduce the global population down to the magic five hundred million figure in no time,  even if Meyer’s Pleiadian channellings of optimum global 480,000,000 people was unattainable. Why does the Centre for Disease Control (CDC) own the patent for Ebola?

We know America is already a police state, but they assure me the policemen are sane, at least. But that’s trivial compared, say, to Israel versus Palestine, round 1482? I am heartened, as terrible as the situation is; the truth is coming out about the Middle East. The Australian mainstream media is more interested in baby Gammy; a story which has everything. The issue of surrogacy is discussed and what happens when the baby turns out wrong. Can the parent refuse to accept the loving bundle? As mentioned in previous posts, governing enterprises view offspring as property; nothing more, nothing less. From an administration perspective, the parent owns the child unless told otherwise. Ah, the power of civilisation. Our virtuous Judeo-centric Medias mentioned nothing (in lead articles) about the apparent age ratio of 2:1. She looks a nubile third world Asian twenty something and he is surely a proud first world fifty plus. A would be State PM made the error of cracking a joke when he was tired and emotionally challenged. His opposition at the time, we’ll call BC for fun, was so gay he gave homosexuals an inferiority complex. BC’s “wife” was the female equivalent from Asia (callme “sir”). JB, another fun acronym, had the affront of calling her a “mail order bride” in the youthful spirit of intoxication. That said, it turned out Gammy’s father had a much more interesting past to focus on.

I can only imagine his now adult “kids” had brought home chums in their adolescent stages which resulted in unforgivable horseplay with dad. There was also mention of a five year old girl, but I have yet to uncover any lucid and unbiased accounts of any of the long passed incidents. No matter, as the staged arch-villain was registered sex offender and, to the Judeo-centric Media, details are invariably irrelevant (less they muddy the “sales pitch”). Only a few months back, the same Medias were gloating of how a Downs Syndrome boy was accepted by a university. Does this mean that is no longer a disability? Given my special understanding of genetics, I am wondering whether Downs Syndrome is a sort of star child, but I feel sure I will explore this more diligently in a future post. I have nothing against the age difference or the mail order nature of the relationship. My wife is also third world Asian, though three months my senior, so it would be hypocritical to protest. However, in fairness to the mainstream Media, unusually, I absolutely applaud their treatment of these scoundrels. How anyone, in their right mind, could reject a surrogate child in any condition is unconscionable. It has also granted me the excuse to vent my great obsession, paedophilia, once again. Forgive me please.

The topic is cashless society, so here we go. Banks alone are not the cause of the problems for society. They are merely an instrument of commerce; money management systems. The issue is not the cash. It is the defining factors. For instance a society free of inheritance and importance would see the “value” of cash plummet. If money could only be used for worthy, regulated needs, why would it be the root of all evil? Is not the true root of all evil, competition? Dare I say competition should be reappraised as “competitive competition” or “cooperative competition”? There is the divide. The first step towards cooperation is ensuring the banking system is absolutely transparent. Then society must address the underlying problem, which is, and this may surprise some, that banks must manipulate the market in order to survive. Indeed, without strict regulation of profits, a ghost ledger mimicking every potential transaction, inflation is the only way out for the banking system. Agreed, the open robbery of the reserve banks needs to be addressed, but they are a small part of the problem. Money still goes round. Some become rich and others remain poor. A federal reserve ensures the money families are immortal (corporations are dead [men] speaking). Government, you must understand, was never there for the people. That is and always was nothing more than a sales pitch.

There is a way around this but the elite will shake in their beds at the very thought of my suggestions materialising. Simply, everyone is considered eminent and honourable. Thus a cleaner is as revered as surgeon or stock broker. Wages are identical. No matter the job, workers will receive precisely the same rate and accolade. If stock brokers wish to live like kings, then so too will dish washers. Additional incomes accumulated by elite families would be frozen. Any of their brethren not wanting to work under these terms would be institutionalised. This leads us to the argument that all those jobs that nobody wants to do, would remain undone. Not so, because under the new system, those families that hold the asset would be responsible for the world and it is they that would do all the jobs that nobody wants to do if there were no other volunteers. Their prestige would mean something and everyone would worship them as gods, though not overtly because accolade is now universal. The education system would have to change, radically. Instead of producing quantities of either brainwashed or disillusioned individuals to elevate elitism, peoples would be given life skills. Regardless of status and ability everyone would be conversant in basic tasks. Those without aptitude or desire would not fester until they could be released by the system, as is current, but would be gently massaged into productive value roles for society hard to access crevasses. As maturity and intelligence manifests in cycles, aged entries to skills training and development would be welcome and encouraged.

In light of the change of status of importance, attention might be devoted to what is productive. For instance there are many roles that might be considered productive now that were not or were overlooked before. Should every workplace have a clown or a jester so people can work with a chuckle or at least be happy? In addition, would not new society be desirous of musicians, artists and craftsmen of varying descriptions? These do not necessarily have to conform to the classical. There could be numerous fire eaters, contortionists, tattoo artists and so on mixed in with more traditional pursuits. Suddenly all those jobless people would vanish; as if by magic. Past criticisms of open real Communism systems is society would be stifled by crazy laws. In reality, though, the elite will fail to access perversions readily available via the current mass enslavement regime. Would the infamous Veronica Moser be motivated to eat faeces for precisely the same reward as, say, a busker or a shop assistant? She is not the only one filmed demonstrating this bizarre behaviour. Nevertheless she, of her time, was/is so special (enough to rate an entry in “Wikipedia” – maybe pulled now?) to those that admired her that she has become an icon of the scatology industry. In an open world, could anyone that does not oppress be persecuted? Communities comprising those interested in scatology are no less balanced than any other. All members may be viewed as repellent to outsiders however, without inside knowledge; most would appear and behave normally by normal standards.

Applying this “no benefit” concept would also potentially either eradicate or encourage paedophilia. There is a vain theory that children cannot tell the difference between good and bad. I will tell readers this is utter baloney. Given the choice of a plate of chocolate or a bowl of faeces every child, no matter what age (though perhaps unless named Veronica Moser), would opt for sweetness; allergies notwithstanding. If children were truly anti-sex, encounters would abruptly end after a simple trial. In times of greater tolerance, historically, data suggests that a relatively high percentage of children would be comfortable in gentle sexual role plays. Exceptional individuals might mimic adults in every way [within physical capabilities]. Taboos against sexual practices tend to be driven by inter-generational repression, fetishes for and against, biased views (analysis of individual reasoning is complex) and, most importantly, religion. I find it overwhelming that a predominantly atheist (if we are honest) West has so many sexual hang ups. In a future post I will discuss the importance and meaning of the old Atlantis (Anunaki) order – the rose and the [wooden] cross.

When I was growing up, my best friend’s dad was a policeman. No more than age ten or eleven at the time, he once told us of a sensational local murder. This was at a village where the worst offense had been an occasional drunk and disorderly public house ejection (in those days it took a lot to be “drunk”). There, out of the blue, had been a sensational, unsolved murder. After the press, apparently some ninety four community residents stepped forward to admit to the killing yet not one was guilty. He, my friend’s dad, told me they did it for different reasons; notoriety, depression or free food in jail. The list went on. It is no wonder I shudder at trials that purely rely on eye witness hearsay, er, testimony, sorry. Fortunately in the sixties there was better due diligence. I won’t go as far to say that policemen had integrity, but, at least, for the most part, they tried solve cases instead of manipulating mainstream Media against defenceless allegations. Given the choice between police fantasy and a defendant’s story, the prosecutor will win every time. It is no wonder Michael Jackson needed a thousand or more witnesses to issue fantasy statements, but, these days, dying is not enough. If Rolf Harris had similar resources law enforcement would be the laughing stock they should be. Those with the most cash [or resources] will buy the best verdict outcomes. It is no accident those that lost also ran out of money. My limited understanding of the hearings suggests that Rolf admitted to being sexually attracted to sexy teenage girls and that was the “evidence” of foul play. A jury of vipers convicted him for telling the truth and not for molesting women categorised as children. Time, money and fame are enough to corrupt memories if we reflect on our wise policeman’s account of deluded wannabe murderers. Harris’ conviction has set the precedent that men that recognise other men are “ripped” must be homosexual and ladies that use the term “sexy” when describing other women are lesbians. What of those that keep chickens or vegetable lovers?

Once again, there is no mafia, no potential for bribery, no opportunity for unfairness in this new social order. Educators know something they call tough love works. Tough love is when an individual is forced to experience something against their will. Indeed within very tight controls, this would be permissible as, many, including myself, have found a reluctant discovery tour to be more rewarding than the easy route. There is a tragic apex which is the cause of all current society problems. Parental control summarises the perennial issue. Taking the Christian parable, “The Prodigal Son” the rite of passage is everything. Discovery of the unknown should be given the highest commendation when pitched against controlled subservience to “order”. Those who have never consumed illicit drugs have no plausible right to discuss their collateral effect; positive or negatively. Yet, our governments and law makers are not guided by experience. Instead they dictate by selling [often] implausible concepts to the experienced. Those that do not consume drugs invariably do so out of fear of the unknown and no other reason. That is why mainstream education is undiluted dogma. Educators do not want students to discover. They want them to do as they are told turning out broken, aimless and mindless slaves for commerce. Forget about that social security safety net and other temporary nonsense measures. You are slaves that will work ‘til you drop.

In case hostile, would be, readers misconstrue the last paragraph, this blog does not endorse recreational drug use. We do not partake in social activities involving drug use. We are aware of reported dangers of drug use. However, we also acknowledge the right to choose. Murderers, the same hostile readers quip, should be given the right to choose? In effect they already have that right. Security and other armed forces welcome the psychotic madmen and, as discussed last post, those without the stomach can be amply aided by psychiatry’s mind bending drugs. These dangerous medications are issued to recruits needing a bit of tough love to make war peace. To my critics, you are right murder is the exception to the rule. There, I agree, no one should be given that choice. Please disband the military immediately and universally.

The topic is “society must never be cashless”. Alternative systems of government, such as UBUNTU, claim they aim for cashless societies. The desire is for the complete removal of cash and the total enslavement of all able bodied members of society. Society would perform through the result of integrated barter networks. Each network would project its own umbrella [or version] of comparative freedom. The problem with UBUNTU (governance, as opposed to “philology”) is, ultimately, it is no different to the existing system. Though, currently without power, it forbids prestige; its evolution will ensure limited prestige is permissible and this will progress to masonic circles defining a pecking order of authority. It will become another Marxist enterprise. So “cashless” does not mean “lacking enterprise”. The reason I picked the post title goes back to my discussions of how money was introduced and the great coup – feudalism. Indeed, prior to Roman civilisation people roamed free and money and assets were connected with the extended royal houses. It was only after the English medieval crusades, though, that a realistic template for global enslavement had been discovered. Our coup [d’etat] was a simple three stage affair. Good, gay, King Richard went to the orient because buggery was permitted there, at the time. While he was away bad King John proclaimed local “free” lands were his and the people could “bugger off” or pay taxes. However, the local “roughs”, Robin and his merry band, took on King John and “won”. This was marked by the Magna Carta treaty, which, I am told, gives “me”, an Englishman, my freedom. Bugger that! Satanic King Richard returned in his true form, lion claws drawn, and rewarded the local roughs by making them his “new aristocracy”. They, then, collected taxes from people, initially in the form of produce and they by way of geld. That is why an explosion of medieval coinage has been preserved as a testament to feudalism and how they buggered the people. Mind you, thinking back to Roman times and prior, trust me; it was usually a far better option to be a slave than having to fend for yourself out in the wild. Read the Biblical book of Genesis, carefully. Our present systems bank on effective commerce to encourage abject universal slavery. Homelessness is the greatest modern sin next to the “corruption” of children (mindless slaves-to-be).

For a long time now, conspiracy theorists have been predicting an electronic currency will be foisted on unsuspecting populations. What better way to adopt an absolute global standard than by collapsing financial systems and federalising the planet via the United Nations? Cash, ironically, has allowed those caught in the existing feudal system to disconnect from the banks. Though there is the provision for “anonymous” electronic cash chips or cards, first they will outlaw “their use to crime elements”. Once tight restriction, and proto-validation, is in place then only the privileged honourable or most gracious members of society will be able to legally use anonymous funds. This, of course, is necessary as there will always be a requirement for black ops. Mafia will also offer black market currencies at many multiples of their corresponding electronic values and a wibbly-wobbly exchange rate to those needing a “fix”. Ultimately this could be a CIA/NSA enterprise with global agencies of the likes of Hamas, Sinaloa Cartel, and the Russian Bratva and so on. Point men would also have access to the spoils; perks of the “job”, just as they do today. Premium assets would be protected, but the rest will be fodder; so nothing changes.

Politicians would, rightly in some ways, criticise my partisan stance. One of the reasons the Australia federal government is proposing to remove social security is the problem with moonlighting. We have significant Arab populations here and many voted in the current fascist regime because of perceived bribes. A failed Marxist-socialist Labour government mimicking Obama-ism also encouraged the exodus to the Liberal coalition. Australian populations, in general, would be surprised at how widespread moonlighting operations have become. For clarity, one that moonlights receives a cash money income on top of his or her social security. Now do you see where this is leading? Now do you see why society must never be cashless? The Arabs will come to realise that Australians do have a bottom line and abject poverty in support of corporate enterprise is not it. Immediately the social security safety net is removed, the new choice can only be abject poverty or death. The Australian government has just threatened civil war. No wonder their fearless leader, the crooked and corrupt Tony Abbott, opted for accommodation in police barracks. Has the Judeo-centric media got “cold feet”? It seems the reason Australian unemployment numbers have hit the roof in recent times, is most of the middle management positions traditionally occupied by the over fifties have been done away with. Now we have a glut of over-skilled, greatly experienced job seekers and positions fit for monkeys to welcome them. A cashless society would be Caesar’s final assault.


4 thoughts on “Society Must Never Be Cashless

    • Yes, I understand, but usurykills, your article tells me you are a slave that will never believe because you cannot break free of the proscribed paradigm.

      Money is a token which tries to enforce honesty. That system is deemed fair because to “lose” or “gain” (win) money is of greater importance than good or bad deeds. Indeed, by extension, money becomes “God” – i.e. payer wins. Money becomes de facto mediator in all disputes that are not “to the death”.

      There is no perfect ecconomy because by the very principle of trade, only those that make profits will survive in a system oiled by money. In order to make profits, sellers must opt for value-added (inflated) pricing or profit might be mitigated by “inflation”. However, as inflation “deflates” product values, eventually, everything is reduced to near zero value. By making profits, sellers effectively “cheat” the markets. Thus, the bigger the profits, the greater the cheats.

      The gold standard (they had a silver standard in the old world) was introduced to regulate trade. The problem was, as they were being “cheated”, nobody wanted to grant profits, so the only way profits could be extorted was via the introduction of tariffs. This needed to be offset against pirates and thriving black markets. Because “standards” place straight jackets on trade, the gold standard colapsed on numerous occasions, finally being done away with by population swells and a change in fiscal interests. The modern world has been inflamed by a high “value added services” requirement. This promotes an uncomfortable, and honestly unanswerable, question; who [has the right to] “sets” value?

      Interest in place of “fee based” banking is just another device to disguise profits. Even “fixed profits” bankers cheat their customers because they have inflated a value to incorporate profits. Therefore, the Federal Reserve, in part, is not the draconian concept that is presented by wannabe “fringe merchants”. However, in order to settle or level the accounts, the Federal Reserve bankers have cooked the books, because a physical standards based (gold, silver, glass beads, salt, whatever) system can’t work is a value added services environment. They also do not acclunt for profits unless infation is permitted. Money systems never have worked as they have always encouraged an arbitrary use of criminal forces to “win” the pot. A system based on respect requires everyone to indiscriminately love each other. What we “say” and what we “do” are two different worlds.

      That is the quandry.

  1. Pingback: Beliefs and UFO’s | ozziethinker

  2. Pingback: First HIV, then Ebollox, now Simpsons’ Coronavirus, What Next? | ozziethinker

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s