...
He is partly responsible for the US central bank leading to the Federal Reserve.
I am on the fence over this topic. On one hand he is good, on the other hand I disagree with the Federal Reserve.
He may have had good intentions and others hijacked the concept.
Quoting: -VonAmoR- I agree with you as well. He did contribute heavily to the creation of the central bank, modeling it after the same system in the UK.
I'm not sure that the Federalists from then could even imagine the enormity and intrusiveness of our current federal government.
Last two nations with out a central bank = Iran and North Korea.
Not even the US President is allowed in the Federal Reserve building. That I feel is contempt to US sovereignty.
I support Imperialism and am against Federalism. Federalism is like multiculturalism, it doesn't work too well in the long run.
A nation like China can have a leader run the Nation for 30+ years. Where as a US President can only max at 8 years.
Now, the US is only capable of 8 year plans or less. While the leader who is in power his entire life can act on a lifetime plan.
Which can provide stronger, more impacting results over the Nation they rule.
Thanks for this info, this is some good stuff. I had no idea that the only two countries left without a central bank was Iran and North Korea. That is epic, everyone needs to know that.
The president of the United States isn't allowed in the Federal Reserve building...
That's absurd!
I always felt that the one thing that could unify the citizens of the United States against this evil would be outing the Federal Reserve.
As far as Imperialism is concerned, I understand your position... but there would have to be a mechanism for citizens to remove such an imbedded leader in the case of civil rights abuse.
Interesting, thought provoking comments... thank you again!
People in power today would like us to believe a Monarch or some form of one person rule is wrong and dangerous.
Though I provide these points....
Mankind's greatest days of peace were under Monarch rule. Democracy is the government that starts more wars than any other government type...historically speaking.
In truth, every King or Queen that became oppressive was executed or exiled by the citizens. That was the balance of power. One person ruled as best they can. The people truly have the power.
The people grant power to the King. If the King gets out of control, the people take that power back and reinstate a new King.
An elected body of many individuals has a strong defense against citizen power take over. More people in power, the harder it is to remove them. Even more so when the true rulers keep in the shadows. All this does is prevent the citizen from acting on their rights of power balance.
If there is one person ruling and they are in the open, well known. Then the citizens can remove that person if they are pushed hard enough. Most of the time the guards and those loyal will protect the Ruler.
But as we are discussing, oppression strong enough can even turn the Rulers guards on them.
In a modern democracy, even the closest guards can't turn on them, as the power is held in multiple families, people.
It is very similar to male/female relationships. The man has true power over the female, physically. But, the female has true power of compassion over the male, emotionally.
The male grants power to the female to care for him. She in turn receives the benefit of protection. The female is the one in power 99% of the time. As the male allows it.
If the female becomes hyper-emotional, the male takes control of the situation and settles things down. When the issue is resolved, the male relaxes and the female returns to power.
Equally, if the female suffers from a faulty male, she leaves the group. Monogamous or polygamous. Polygamous relationships aren't easy and fail often. Polygamous government is a democracy, republic, etc...Monogamous government is monarch and other single focus of power governments.
The gentle but yet effective balance of power.
Ruler and Citizen. The two often live in harmony. Current socialist, democrats and even many republicans try to focus on the bad rulers of the past. But in reality, mankind's greatest era of peace was under monarch rule.
Democracy started in Russia
(more like gained serious momentum) , which is what removed the Tsar from power. Along with other powerful royal families around the world. Few remained to what is today....British, Saudi, and Chinese or Japanese royalty.
Anyways, this Democracy, the DUMA is what lead to Communism. Like a butterfly, Democracy is the Caterpillar which cocoons into Communism.
Which led to one of the largest acts of genocide in our history in Soviet Russia.
And now, where ever Democracy is started, the seeds of communism were planted.
Look to the past, every democracy ends up a social type government.
The Monarchy is one of the very few governments that remains stable over many lifetimes. Where is the greatest loyalty to your previous ruler? Lineage, children, family.
It is far more likely a child will continue some part of their parents legacy. Not always but far more often then the next President would. Most Presidents oppose the last Rulers agenda. This causes tremendous government weakness. The nation fails and is consumed by a social government.
In time, the Monarchs of the past will resurrect soon.
I am Romanov, grandson of Anastasia Nikolaevna Romanova (i know, long story...another time)
