I asked Anthony Migchels - Why is Usury Evil?
January 30, 2022
left, Anthony Migchels Currently the Masonic Jewish world central banking cartel creates money out of thin air in the form of a debt to itself. This has allowed them to control the world and inflict the covid hoax on mankind.
National governments don't need to incur debt and pay interest to filthy rich families for the privilege of using their own credit.
However I don't understand why money created by national governments should be interest-free.
I asked my esteemed friend Anthony Migchels to explain why usury is a sin.
Could you explain why the opportunity value of capital, and the risk entailed in lending it, should be interest free? Why would anyone lend money then?
---
Dutch national, Anthony Migchels is the founder of De Florijn, the first fully-fledged interest-free, privately operated currency in the World. His website is Real Currencies.
His reply-
"The problems with Usury are manifold, the main one being that allowing it absolutely 100% guarantees Plutocracy and scheming rich vipers buying media, politicians, scientists, paid for with the production of the masses, stolen with Usury.
Throughout history there have been innumerable cycles of entire populations getting enslaved with debt, followed by debt jubilees to prevent debtor revolts. The latest one we're witnessing now, the implosion of the current mega debt bubble, is simply their final, crowning achievement.
Jesus said that lending at interest was for the hard of heart, and obviously, having a gentle heart is central in Christianity. But try explaining that to Shylock, right?!
So what remains as the main argument, in my view, currently is that it is simply too easy to create credit interest-free. Here, I have a little vid showing it hands on, how easy it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrgw8fpfZLA&t=2sNote that ONLY the richest 10% gain from Usury. The 90% pay more interest than they receive. Remember: 40% of prices that we pay for goods and services we need are cost for capital passed on during production. So even with zero debts you're an interest-slave without even realizing it.
So, we shouldn't even be concerned with the 'rights' of the creditor ("why would I lend at interest?")
We are debt slaves. Interest slaves.
We should be wondering: "How do we get rid of this yoke?"
That's the question for the masses!
We don't want to pay!
And we don't need to, because we have all we need to create all credit at close to zero cost, and THAT is in the interest of the People, and obedience to the Law.
------------Part Two
There is no risk: there is collateral. Current banking has close to zero risk. It's just a marketing line by the creditors 'oh, think of the risks we're taking!!" Meanwhile, all the housing stock of the West has been pledged to them through mortgages. Same with Government debt. They managed to foist income tax on supposedly 'free' men, to guarantee the usury on the national debts being payable.After the failure of Usury prohibition, there was quite a while that it was 'either interest OR collateral'. Also, when men of good will work together, they can pool their savings, and provide mutual credit AND mutual guarantees.
And again: it's the line of the creditor. We don't care about creditors. We're debt slaves. the 90% who are getting crushed by the debt, and especially the interest on it.
Creditors, with the landlords, can go find a job. Let these parasites make themselves useful for a change. We're done with their unaffordable idleness. Every man must contribute, and sweat to provide for his family.
So:
- It guarantees that we will end up with a few scumbags owning everything (which is exactly what we have now)
- Leads to mass poverty and very long working hours (in the medieval era a man worked 15 weeks per year (!!!! think about it!) to feed his family)
- Very sternly forbidden in scripture (the apocalypse of Peter: "And into another place near by, saturated with filth, they throw men and women up to their knees. These are they who lent money and took usury."
- We can clearly identify what went wrong where in history (see the article 'Why do we have Usury?')
- AND we have several ways of creating all the credit we need at close to zero cost.
Case closed.We can't afford half measures against the Bank Henry. You know like few others what they have inflicted. And Usury is the essence of banking. That's what banking is: lending at interest.
And it's not just about the problem, it's also about the opportunity. This is how we would live without Usury:
My reply- "Usury is totally immoral, taking without producing anything."
Tony, this is nonsense. The lender produced the money. As long as that lender ultimately is the national government, and not some private cartel, it is necessary to charge interest. You did not explain why anyone would lend otherwise.
Money is a commodity. It has a price. The lender will choose someone who pays interest over someone who does not. Millions of retirees live off interest. Do you want them to starve?
--
Related-- Makow- Banking System is Responsible for Our Enslavement
Also by Anthony Migchels -- Covid is Cover for a Financial Crisis
----------------------------------------------------Ending Debt and Usury Would Save Mankind
---------------------------------------------------- We Face the Mother of All Depressions
First Comment from CK
Lending money at interest is not a crime (unless the rate is exorbitant, typically over 12-18% in most states). If someone earned the money, they deserve a return. Gain and loss. If you lose (the use of your money by letting someone else use it), you should gain (they should repay the money plus interest). Of course, family and friends shouldn't be charged interest, but if you want to remain on friendly terms, it's probably best not to lend them money in the first place. I have seen money destroy many good relationships.
True usury is the issuance of sovereign money from nothing, then charging interest for a piece of paper. That's "money for nothing and your chicks for free".
There is no virtue in the fake money central banking scheme where governments are conned into paying interest to get money to use for vote buying.
The alternative to this financial disaster of central banking is on your site. There's an excellent article about Edison and Ford wanting to finance the Muscles Shoals dam by spending the money into existence to build a useful project that GENERATED real returns, not endless interest payments.
https://www.henrymakow.com/2018/11/thomas-edison-exposed-central-banking.html
True usury is the issuance of sovereign money from nothing, then charging interest for a piece of paper. That's "money for nothing and your chicks for free".
There is no virtue in the fake money central banking scheme where governments are conned into paying interest to get money to use for vote buying.
The alternative to this financial disaster of central banking is on your site. There's an excellent article about Edison and Ford wanting to finance the Muscles Shoals dam by spending the money into existence to build a useful project that GENERATED real returns, not endless interest payments.
https://www.henrymakow.com/2018/11/thomas-edison-exposed-central-banking.html
Doug P said (January 30, 2022):
Doug Plumb
3:20 PM (2 hours ago)
to Henry
It's difficult to imagine the change, where a young couple starting out would not borrow money for a house but buy the materials gradually as they worked and build it on the weekends while living at a relatives house. This would require dependence on family and people do not typically lend money to family or let them live rent-free to get a start because MONEY IS SACRED to people. Money is worth more than anything in our current culture.
We could evolve to such a system slowly, starting with national banks who lend money at interest and use that interest to pay the taxes. Gradually national governments could reach the point where they are no longer lending money for cars and houses because people could depend on families - functional ones created by a well-educated populace. National banks could maintain a money supply by hiring people for infrastructure work - ie roads, hydro, etc the kinds of things that require very long-term planning.
People are not well enough educated in the truest sense, to create a functional supportive family. You may be able to ask a friend to help you fix your car or find your cat, but to ask for money is to sin in the most serious way. You must go to a bank.
In short, it's a good idea, but the people are too dysfunctional to adapt a co-operative system that works for them.
People would have more money than they need and would therefore invest in startups to help people create independent small business.
All of this creates another problem: the technological state requires planning and control to remain a technological state. If a state is not technological, a technological one would take it over.