• Print

 

Passive vs Non-passive Money - Raging Inferno Analogy

By Marc Gauvin (c) 5/09/2021

Reproduction expressly granted provided attribution and original link are given.

 

 

"While both share common knowledge, the problem of building a passive system is not the same as that of cancelling or containing the dynamics of an existing non-passive system."

 

You have a raging fire, you know the cause of the fire and how to put it out. You also know that the world would be better without the fire. So, do you:

 

1) Put out the fire or:

2) Build a model of a world without a fire amidst the fire to convince people of the virtues of a world without the menace of a raging inferno?

 

Remember, that while you're building the model, the fire continues to rage unabated and if you manage to build a semblance of a fire free model along side it, you still have the same problem you had at the onset of having to put out the now greater raging inferno. So, how does building a fire free model impact the fire?

 

What is it that prevents people from facing the raging fire head on from the onset? If all the undeniable proofs that a fire is not a good idea and how it can be put out easily, doesn't convince them to put it out, how will producing a fire free model amidst the now bigger and more daunting fire somehow convince them to put out the inferno?

 

What is a fire free model? Can it exist within a raging inferno or must it be created in isolation of any fire? Who can afford to create such a cocoon in which to exemplify fire free life? Will that experience be exclusive to a small number or as common place as life in the midst of a raging inferno? What does the project of building a fire free model teach us about putting out a fire, beyond preventing fire?

 

The truth is that if we have the knowledge to build a fire free model, we must understand fire enough to know how to put it out in the first place, right? So why would we choose to build a fire free model in the midst of a raging fire instead of directly putting out the fire? The answer is we either don't have a clue about fires or we are somehow suicidal.

 

The parallel between our current money system and the above raging fire analogy lies in recognising that both are unstable non-passive systems. As such and given the conditions, both share the same boundless dynamics converting what they touch into fuel for their boundless propagation, which is why both are highly contagious. Therefore, building a passive model is only possible in isolation of any non-passive system. Which means that building a passive model without first cancelling the non-passive system is a chimera, as it does nothing to address the propagation of the non-passive system.

 

While both share common knowledge, the problem of building a passive system is not the same as that of cancelling or containing the dynamics of an existing non-passive system.

 

Let's then get our priorities straight, do we want to directly deal with the raging money system and make it passive or are we going to let it continue while we unsuccessfully try to build a stable model amidst its boundless and incessant contagiousness?

 

The really sad thing is, that given some basic knowledge most all can learn, dealing with the raging money system is far easier than those without that knowledge can imagine and certainly far more relevant than any other action we can take. 

Support the MSTA Resolutions.


 



Break out of  "The Money PSYOP" and give your kids

a future they can be proud of you for by supporting the MSTA