May 152012
 May 15, 2012  Posted by at 2:59 pm Finance

Let me say right off the bat that I have quoted/referenced the work of Telegraph-columnist Ambrose-Evans Pritchard quite a few times in the past, and I will continue to do so as long as he provides genuine insights into what’s happening in Europe. That being said, the man really goes off the deep end in his latest article. It starts off as an article about the potential costs to Germany and France (i.e., German and French banks, i.e. German and French taxpayers) if Greece were to exit the Eurozone, as estimated by the IESG School of Management in Lille, France.

I am very skeptical of such guesstimates by obviously conflicted institutions in the first place, as they usually amount to little more than propaganda designed to keep the Europeans in shackles to their bankers out of fear of the alternative. Doesn’t sound much different than what the Mafia would do, does it? Nevertheless, I will give these guys the benefit of the doubt and assume their estimates are somewhat accurate (€66.4bn losses for France and €89.8bn for Germany), because that’s really irrelevant for the purposes of this commentary.There is no doubt that the economic and sociopolitical costs of Greek exit will be severe (yet incalculable).

Now , with that out of the way, I’m just going to skip right on over to the particularly horrendous conclusions reached by Ambrose after he looked at these potential costs:

Appetiser cost of Greek exit is €155bn for Germany, France: trillions for meat course


This nonsense can of course be stopped in ten minutes if the EU:


1) announces that it will equip itself with a real central bank (a lender of last resort) that takes all risk of sovereign default off the table — with conviction and overwhelming force, with no ifs and buts, and no ambushes from the Bundesbank.


2) announces EMU debt-pooling, fiscal union, a joint EMU budget and tax system, and an EMU government as a counterpart for the enhanced the ECB.


Yes, this means rewriting the German constitution, and in effect means the abolition of Germany as a functioning sovereign nation.


My sympathies to the German people. This is what your leaders got you into (without asking permission). It was the elemental implication of monetary union.


We at the Telegraph screamed from rooftops in the early 1990s that EMU was a destroyer of nation states, and democracies. So did the brave German professors. Nobody would listen.


My guess is that German citizens will not accept this implication. If so, we are all stuffed.

Fortunately, Ambrose’ guess about the German citizens is probably right (and we are not “all stuffed”), but that does not excuse him from serving as a shill for the centralized elites who want to eliminate national sovereignty and literally enslave the masses through economic and political institutions (i.e. to a much greater extent than they are already enslaved). First, a “real” central bank that takes “all risk of sovereign default off the table”, such as the Fed, is the absolute worst outcome for the European people.

Everyone should know by now that the Fed is the quintessence of private banking interests taking over complete control of a society’s civil institutions through opaque, unaccountable monetary policy. As regular TAE commenter TheTrivium4TW likes to say, the Fed is the harbinger of “debt-dollar Tyranny” with a capital “T”. Why would any of the common European folk across the Continent want to emulate that Tyranny in their own societies, through the ECB? They wouldn’t – only the elite bankers and corporate execs who comprise the 1% would. That’s why Ambrose is being a huge shill here.

Similarly, a fiscal union with “debt-pooling”, joint budgets and tax systems would amount to the ultimate centralization of power/wealth/control in a few private and malicious interests. This fact should be self-evident by now, and especially when considering the next sentence written by Ambrose: “Yes, this means rewriting the German constitution, and in effect means the abolition of Germany as a functioning sovereign nation.” Yes, I realize that this isn’t the first time Ambrose has made such foolish remarks/implications, but now he is really taking this shit too far and in very dangerous directions.

Ambrose is allegedly of the mind that there is NOTHING worse than a break-up of the EU, so therefore the Europeans must now relinquish their sovereignty and their freedoms to elite bankers, politicians and bureaucrats for all of eternity. He admits that the Germans were placed into this position “without their permission”, but then goes on to argue that they must accept their “fate” anyway. He also seems to think that his initial outcries against the EMU now justify his reckless suggestions to take the experiment to its logical extreme, which is, in fact, very EXTREME.

Please don’t listen to this nonsense from Ambrose. He is wrong, wrong, wrong – a million times over. There are other alternatives to full-fledged subjugation and destitution for the European people, and no one is saying that these alternatives will not come at a heavy cost. They will be very costly to the European people, but they will also be COSTLY for the malicious European bankers and politicians who have forced everyone else into this dreadful situation. What was that phrase from Patrick Henry that we Americans like to quote so much when referencing the need for revolution against Tyranny? Oh yes… “Give me Liberty, or give me Death!”

Home Forums Please Don’t Listen to Ambrose

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • Author
  • #8531

    Let me say right off the bat that I have quoted/referenced the work of Telegraph-columnist Ambrose-Evans Pritchard quite a few times in the past, and
    [See the full post at: Please Don’t Listen to Ambrose]

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.