Tuesday, March 29, 2011 – by Staff Report
Two years ago, George Soros (left) said he wanted to reorganize the entire global economic system. In two short weeks, he is going to start – and no one seems to have noticed. On April 8, a group he's funded with $50 million is holding a major economic conference and Soros's goal for such an event is to "establish new international rules" and "reform the currency system." It's all according to a plan laid out in a Nov. 4, 2009, Soros op-ed calling for "a grand bargain that rearranges the entire financial order." – Media Research Center/Wall Street Journal
Dominant Social Theme: Soros, up to his old tricks. This leftist billionaire should just go home.
Free-Market Analysis: We'd realized last week (tipped off by a considerate feedbacker) just what George Soros was up to; but before we had a chance to write about it the Wall Street Journal blew the story open last night by picking up a Media Research Center article by Dan Gainor entitled "Unreported Soros Event Aims to Remake Entire Global Economy." We can safely say that Soros' planned new Bretton Woods Conference to build a new world currency, starting April 8, is unreported no more.
HOW it is reported however is a bit odd in our view. The article (excerpted above) is written with a conservative slant that makes it seem as if what George Soros has in mind is somehow a leftist attack on the American dollar. Nothing could be further from the truth but this is in fact the way that free-market reporting is increasingly offered in mainstream media. It is a kind of dominant social theme: "These socialists are undermining American values and traditions and must be stopped." Here's more on the Media Research Center itself from the Center's own website:
The mission of the Media Research Center, "America's Media Watchdog," is to bring balance to the news media. Leaders of America's conservative movement have long believed that within the national news media a strident liberal bias existed that influenced the public's understanding of critical issues. On October 1, 1987, a group of young determined conservatives set out to not only prove — through sound scientific research — that liberal bias in the media does exist and undermines traditional American values, but also to neutralize its impact on the American political scene. What they launched that fall is the now acclaimed — Media Research Center (MRC).
The problem with reporting on Soros from a left-wing angle is that Soros is not really "left wing" at all. He's an internationalist banker who wishes to create a one-world government (and currency). This sentiment is shared by other internationalist bankers that some might characterize as "right wing" or even "free-market oriented." It has little to do with "empowering workers" or creating socialist communitarianism.
The labels don't really matter. Soros may have a more statist and activist approach than some other billionaires, but this is a matter of degree not principle. So we would argue such labels like "leftist" distort what is really occurring and confuse people about how globalist plans are being implemented, and why. It's useful to analyze the article to see how this bias works.
The article begins by quoting literature explaining that Soros is bringing together "more than 200 academic, business and government policy thought leaders' to repeat the famed 1944 Bretton Woods gathering that helped create the World Bank and International Monetary Fund." Soros, the article claims, "wants a new 'multilateral system,' or an economic system where America isn't so dominant." The article also points out that Soros has been at this for a while, and that a 2009 editorial advocated "a new Bretton Woods conference, like the one that established the post-WWII international financial architecture." Speakers include:
• Paul Volcker [who] is chairman of President Obama's Economic Advisory Board. He wrote the forward for Soros's best-known book, 'The Alchemy of Finance' and praised Soros as "an enormously successful speculator" who wrote "with insight and passion" about the problems of globalization.
• Economist Jeffrey Sachs, director of The Earth Institute and longtime recipient of Soros charity cash. Sachs received $50 million from Soros for the U.N. Millennium Project, which he also directs. Sachs is world-renown for his liberal economics. In 2009, for example, he complained about low U.S. taxes, saying the "U.S. will have to raise taxes in order to pay for new spending initiatives, especially in the areas of sustainable energy, climate change, education, and relief for the poor."
• Soros friend Joseph E. Stiglitz, a former senior vice president and chief economist for the World Bank and Nobel Prize winner in Economics. Stiglitz shares similar views to Soros and has criticized free-market economists whom he calls "free market fundamentalists." Naturally, he's on the INET board and is a contributor to Project Syndicate.
Have no doubt about it, the article tells us, "This is a Soros event from top to bottom." Really? Paul Volcker's entire career has revolved around service not to Soros but to one of the 20th century's leading elitists, David Rockefeller, who surely helped place his protégé (Volcker) at the pinnacle of the American banking establishment when Volcker served as Federal Reserve Chairman in the late 1970s and early 1980s.
More recently Volcker headed up a UN Investigative task force that basically absolved the world body of very much wrongdoing in the so-called oil-for-food scandal. How did Volcker end up running the UN investigation? We would venture a guess that it has to do with his continuing ties to the Rockefellers and David Rockefeller in particular. David Rockefeller is very old now and travels in a wheel chair, but he was recently spotted in Chile and there seems no doubt that while the body is failing the mind still remains willing. At one point in his career Volcker served as Rockefeller's personal assistant.
It is simply perverse to try to build Soros up into some sort of Machiavellian puppet master orchestrating a new world order – and implying that Volcker is part of his coterie. Soros made a lot of money as an international speculator and seems to have a psychological need to continue to raise his profile on the world's largest economic and political stages. But the one-world conspiracy goes back at least 100 years in its modern incarnation and probably longer. Soros hasn't been alive that long. He's a Johnny-Come-Lately relatively speaking.
The article also tries to attribute the IMF-led effort to create a global currency using its SDRs to Soros. Gainor writes, "When Soros called for a new Bretton Woods in 2009, he wanted it to ‘reconstitute the International Monetary Fund,' and while he's at it, restructure the United Nations, too, boosting China and other countries at our expense." But in fact, these are all positions that the IMF has taken independently; and positions that have been discussed at great length by the G20. Soros is formally affiliated with neither group.
The article argues that Soros, as a committed leftist, is dedicated to undercutting America's power in the world in favor of multilateralism. "Soros emphasized that [his monetary concept] needs to be a global solution, making America one among many. ‘The rising powers must be present at the creation of this new system in order to ensure that they will be active supporters.' ... That's what this conference is all about – changing the global economy and the United States to make them acceptable to George Soros."
In fact, nothing that Soros is trying to accomplish is any different than what the IMF is trying to obtain as well and very publicly. A few months ago the IMF produced a substantial white paper explaining how SDRs could evolve into a true world currency with a global bond market, etc. Last year American Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner made news by endorsing the idea of such a global currency and indicated that America was willing to play a role in advancing such an effort.
Sure Soros has a role to play in this monetary drama. But the Anglo-American elite operating mostly out of the one-square-mile City of London is evidently and obviously behind this currency evolution. The IMF, Soros, Geithner – even nation-states like China – are instrumentalities not initiators.
The Hegelian Dialectic so beloved of the elite is getting a full workout. Soros is the designated leftist; Murdoch's media group will provide the "right wing" objections. The Gainor article itself, ironically, is part of the process of dialectical polarization. When the public is sufficiently convinced that there is a large controversy going on between various elite visionaries, there will be a sudden rapprochement – perhaps at Soros's new Bretton Woods conference.
At some point the two sides will likely enter into a "compromise." The compromise will not be anything large, but it will be a true "first step." Soros will pronounce himself satisfied that SDRs are on their way to becoming a real global currency. Those on the other side, perhaps standing with Murdoch, will announce that they too are satisfied. While the rudiments of a world currency have truly been laid, they will point out if they hadn't fought against Soros' plans that the damage could have been much worse.
A true world currency could have commenced, they will point out. We managed to stop it and preserve the God-given freedoms of the United States to produce its own currency regardless of international meddlers. But they will neglect to explain that their participation in the process has actually granted the process the legitimacy it needs. This is how the dialectic works. Those on both sides are constantly dissatisfied and even angry. Yet the process is intended to grind on nonetheless until it reaches the goal that the elites have designated.
Conclusion: We would venture to propose that the Gainor article has gone a long way to establishing a nascent dialectic and that therefore the elites may be serious now about creating a one-world currency via SDRs with the IMF as a "super" central bank. Ironically, by attacking such proposals so vehemently and linking them (untruthfully) to Soros alone, the article is laying the groundwork for the very agenda it claims to oppose.