Smear Ron Paul
by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.: Media
Tell People: Government Your Friend, Ron Paul Your Enemy
Paul, Beck, and the World Bank have the same monetary reform policy?
Red Pill Radio. (I have no idea what Glenn Becks proposal
for monetary reform is, so Ill stick to Ron Paul and the World
Bank.) This is like asking, Why did the Germans and the Russians
cooperate so well during the Battle of Stalingrad?
says Robert Zoellick [of the World Bank] favors gold money
just like Ron Paul. This is laughable. Just because someone
utters the word gold does not mean he favors the classical
gold standard, or indeed any kind of gold standard. What Zoellick
said was, The system should also consider employing gold as
an international reference point of market expectations about inflation,
deflation and future currency values.
This is an
opaque statement, to say the least. At most, it could be referring
to an extremely attenuated, sort-of, ultra-minimal gold standard,
analogous perhaps to Bretton Woods (in which gold did not circulate
among the general public at all, but could be acquired by foreign
central banks in exchange for U.S. dollars), but not an actual gold
coin standard, which the worlds central banks have precisely
zero reason to support (it being a merciless restraint on their
ability to inflate).
clarified his remarks to make clear he did not support any kind
of gold standard whatever, so there isnt a long list of excuses
for pretending he supports of all things! Ron Pauls
monetary policy. Zoellick explains, Gold is now being used,
being viewed, as an alternative monetary asset. This is not the
same as a gold standard [emphasis added]. Gold has become a
reference point because holders of money see weak or uncertain growth
prospects in all currencies other than the renminbi, and the renminbi
is not free for exchange. So in relative terms, gold is appealing
to people who ask where should I put my money.
important to understand what terms mean when discussing monetary
theory and policy, and particularly when youre on the verge
of drawing a ludicrous comparison between a supporter of a free-market
money on the one hand and a supporter of a centrally managed money
on the other. Just because someone says gold doesnt
mean he supports the classical gold standard, which is what Ron
Paul has supported in the past in some of his writings. Greenbackers
(who support a fiat money issued directly by politicians via the
U.S. Treasury rather than via the Federal Reserve) have been unwilling
to draw these distinctions.
There are numerous
phony gold standards out there, I might add. The gold
price rule is one. Here the gold price is used as a signal for central
banks as they formulate monetary policy. A falling gold price, say
advocates of such a system, means monetary policy is too tight;
a rising gold price means its too loose. It should be obvious
that this system, in which once again gold does not actually circulate
as money among the public, has nothing in common with the classical
gold standard. But Im fairly confident the Greenbackers, hearing
the word gold, would say it, too, is just like
The irony of
all this is that Ron Paul is not even calling for a gold standard,
though he has advocated one in the past. What he is actually calling
for is a free market in money, in which we do not need to trust
governments to stay faithful to some standard. Ron Paul
favors the Misesian/Hayekian solution of permitting the market to
determine what the people wish to use as media of exchange. Unlike
the Greenbackers, he would not empower the police to enforce a monopoly
system by which everyone would be obligated to transact only in
green pieces of paper issued by Harry Reid and John McCain.
At the end
of the blog post we read: The Rothschilds gold solution
is NOT real monetary reform. Again with the whole the
banking interests around the world are clamoring for a gold standard
routine! If it were true that the most influential bankers wanted
a gold standard, wouldnt we already have one? Arent
the Greenbackers always insisting (often with good reason, to be
sure) that the banking establishment is extremely influential? Then
why has it failed so miserably to establish the gold standard it
The blog post
also contains a reference to Ellen Brown, whose Web
of Debt is a central text in the Greenbacker canon. Unfortunately
for them, Gary North has exploded it completely. Strewn with historical
and theoretical errors, including fake quotations no serious researcher
would have used, the book has been utterly destroyed. See
I have never
seen so thorough a demolition of anything. Browns attempts
to defend herself only make things worse, as Norths responses
to her responses make abundantly clear.
I may as well
quote one. Here is North responding to Browns response to
his first historical criticism of her book:
her first point in response to my criticism of a bogus quote from
Sir Josiah Stamp. Here
is my article.
is her response.
1. A bogus
quote from Sir Josiah Stamp on the Bank of England
is what I wrote, giving an endnote for reference: He is
quoted as saying in a talk at the University of Texas in 1927:
[etc.] (p 2) He IS quoted as saying that, by many people.
Google gives 68,000 results.
simply incredible. I proved that there is no evidence for the
existence of her supposed speech by Stamp. I pointed to the Wikipedia
entry on Stamp. Here, we learn this: Said to be from an
informal talk at the University of Texas in the 1920s, but as
yet unverified. But this does not matter to Ellen Brown.
What matters to her is that she quoted someone who had not verified
it a 1995 article in an obscure magazine. What matters
is that 68,000 Google hits posted by an innumerable army of crackpot
Greenbackers quoted it.
not scholarship. This is putting the shuck on the rubes. Her readers
are the rubes.
is the Greenbackers #1 scholar. The movement is intellectually
To sum up:
there is a difference of opinion between Greenbackers and people
who believe in free-market money. To the extent that the two sides
intend to engage each other, they should do so in a spirit of honesty
and charity. It is inane to pretend Ron Paul and the World Bank
agree on monetary policy. I mean, really.
with permission from TomWoods.com.
E. Woods, Jr. [send him
his website], a senior fellow of the Ludwig von Mises
Institute, is the author of eleven books, most recently Rollback:
Repealing Big Government Before the Coming Fiscal Collapse and
How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century, as well
as the New York Times bestsellers Meltdown:
A Free-Market Look at Why the Stock Market Collapsed, the Economy
Tanked, and Government Bailouts Will Make Things Worse and
Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. He is
also the editor of five other books, including the just-released
on the Road to Serfdom.
© 2011 Thomas
Best of Thomas Woods