- but don’t want to be held liable for it. They think they can wash their hands of resposibility afterwards, declaring vis major or putting the blame on russians, americans, climate change, whatever. Europe does not care on whom to stick the blame. Even a reversal of the earth’s magnetic field or a cometary impact would be welcome if it helped to explain away the impending failure of our monetary system.

Cosmic events, of course, are not within the sphere of influence for humans and there surely is not enough time to wait for the next appearance of a celestial body in 3000 years or so.

The reasons, why our keynesian and fiat money system is doomed to fail are diverse and quite complex. They don’t fit to the format of a single posting. People who have devoted some time to the study of fiat currencies are familiar with the reasons in general, although they might not agree on what has to be done.

So let me give you only a few bullet points: Zero interest rates don’t work in an inflationary system, because they expropriate the producers of surplus and hamper the accumulation of capital. If there are no profits and savings at all, surplus from economic activity cannot be used for new investment, not even a bad one. Not even for replacement purposes.

The same goes for old age security. It is a truism, that a pay-as-you-go-system will not work in an inverted (or impaired) demographic pyramide. This is obvious to everybody, who does not have a professional or ideologic agenda to the contrary. And those, who have engaged in pension plans and personal provisions for their old age are in fact expropriated by negative real interest rates. Their old savings are being slowly devalued  while the formation of new ones is discouraged intensely.

This is not so because of natural disasters or because of some shady political types. It is the result of a deliberate policy by our democratically elected politicians and the not so democratically elected policy makers in the corporative sphere and the central banks.

The very same people, who use to brag about the unprecedented wealth in industrialised societies, implying  that the accumulation of that mythical wealth has all been their doing. They certainly would be blamed, if it became clear, that big part of this wealth has already ceased to exist.

Those who think, this is a figment, should think twice. It is only logical. We are living in a system, in which debt functions as “money” and the assets of one group are liabilities of another. The creditors in this system are not only the Rothschilds and their like by the way. It is highly questionable, whether old money still holds most of its wealth (equity-wealth) in the form of paper assets – as financial institutions and pension funds still do.

Zero interest rates are tantamount to the devaluation of financial assets in the last consequence. These can lose their value suddenly or as a result of creeping “inflation”. In a zero interest rate environment – which by the way is not measured in a very trustworthy way – savings accounts or bonds may lose their value over a period of 20 or 30 years, unbeknownst to their holders. The final outcome rests the same.

Just ask an investment banker for the discounted cash flow valuation of a company which is up for sale. He or she will tell you that, if this enterprise does not sport yields (and cannot expect them in the future), it is not worth anything.

Today’s democratically elected politicians have to be in the know of the basics of our fiat money system and its weak spots at least since 2007/08. It would be quite implausible, if they insisted on not having known anything about the system’s inherent tendency to build up make-believe wealth.

A “little” war or some other major disruption, which crushes the debt pyramide on which our money system is built, would be immensely helpful. Throughout the course of history wars have caused not only painful losses of human life, but also wholesale destruction of material or immaterial wealth.

A war would be a perfect excuse – especially if the european politicians manage not to appear as guilty part. This might go a long way to explain their inconsistent, meandring behaviour, their tendency to pick up obviously manufactured information from one side while at the same time painting themselves as being balanced or even as angels of peace.

Postscriptum

The biggest benefits from a european war – or only from a disruption in bilateral trade and oil and gas deliveries  – would be derived by certain political and financial US elites: strategically, economically, energywise. Viewed in this way european politicians are nothing more than little helpers for warmongers on the other side of the pond.

But not even the US politicians want to be blamed for conducting a war. That’s why Barack Obama & Hillary Clinton have created a semiofficial doctrine called “leading from behind”, its date and location of birth being 2011 in Libya. Seems to be a euphemism to abet their vasalls to manage the war business on behalf of the empire.