May 6, 2025 • 68 mins
GUEST: Anton ChaitkinBOOK: Who We Are: America's Fight for Universal Progress, from Franklin to Kennedy: Volume II - 1830s to 1890sLINK: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0F4KN1LWB?utm_source=substack...Charles Moscowitz LIVEWebsite: https://charlesmoscowitz.comMoscowitz Author Page:https://www.amazon.com/.../Charles.../author/B00BFLX7S0Buy Me a Coffee, Join me for Coffee: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/moscowitz
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
What's all right. Welcome aboard everyone. Charles Moskowitz here. Anton
Shakin is my guest. He is the author of Who
We Are, America's Fight for Universal Progress from Franklin to Kennedy.
This is volume two of his book eighteen thirties to
eighteen nineties. He's also the author of Treason in America,
(00:22):
which I read many years ago. And Tom, thanks for
joining me today.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
Thank you, Charles. It's wonderful to be with you. And
it's a very auspicious time, a lot of real crisis
in what we're going to do as a.
Speaker 1 (00:37):
Nation, indeed, and I want to see if we can
define that a bit and perhaps take a look at
some of the philosophical aspects of the Trump administration and
what President Trump calls the Golden Years of America. And
it's my general understanding that much of what he seems
(00:59):
to be at indicating is in line, I think, with
your particular philosophy, in that you seem to promote what
has been called the American system, going back to Alexander
Hamilton and Henry Clay and John Quincy Adams and several
(01:20):
presidents before the Civil War and then after the Civil War.
You might say other presidents have embraced elements of it,
and I mean it looks to me like Trump. Well,
we can talk about what that is. But am I
on board with saying that President Trump is a move
in the direction of the American system as you describe it.
Speaker 2 (01:42):
In some respects that's true. I think let's start with
the fact that his campaign for the presidency caused a
panic among the Transatlantic establishment, the elite that has governed
the country, especially since the death of Kennedy. He said,
(02:06):
We're going to have normal relations with Russia, and we're
going to banish the idea, the spell of free trade
and the de industrialization of the country that went with
the free trade regime. He also did some other things
in the direction with other aspects of that same filthy
(02:31):
transformation they pulled on our country, going against radical environmentalism
and certain aspects of the woke problem. But this starts
getting into the culture wars, which are largely not useful.
(02:51):
But what has to be understood on the free trade
and the idea of rebuilding the United States. We have
to carry out some very large scale construction in the
United States, and it has to be done with in
(03:13):
cooperation with other countries at the same time as we're
protecting our own workers, our own manufacturing. If you look
at the people that actually industrialized our country in the
first phase with Henry Clay, John Quincy Adams before the
Civil War, and second phase during and after the Civil War,
(03:35):
especially eighteen seventies. The people who did this the Lincoln
Abraham Lincoln, his political partner and economist Henry Carey, and
the people around the Pennsylvania Railroad. These are the people
that built the steel the steel industry from scratch. They
sponsored the edison and the electrical industry. They built most
(03:58):
of the railroads. This was all done with federal initiatives,
and that involves the direction of credit from the federal
vantage point and involves modernization by having new industries today
that would be high speed rail, it would be a
(04:19):
major federal initiative on a space program, that would be
nuclear fission and fusion. But these kind of things were
done with a spirit of universal progress. Very important that is,
we aided other countries to defy the imperial system of
the time. We rose as a nation with high tariffs
(04:44):
and with our mission of improvement of our own people,
and we were aiding other countries Germany, Russia, Japan. We
tried to do it with China to defy the British
imperial system that had rules against countries advancing like that
(05:05):
ever since Lord Shelburne in the seventeen eighties when they
imposed this idea of free trade and that no other
country would be allowed to follow England's footsteps in getting
an industrial revolution. So this is a real showdown that
(05:25):
was going on at various times between the American Republic
led by the nationalists read by the economic nationalists, and
the imperial faction which included some financiers that included the
slave owners in our country, but it was London centered.
So those are the two sides throughout our history. And
(05:47):
so Trump just to finish up here. Trump to be successful,
he would have to level with the American people as
far as he understands it, to say, what is the problem,
what is the establishment? How have we changed as a
country since the death of Kennedy? How has our mission
(06:09):
changed from this kind of progress? What are China and
Russia doing in other countries? What are they trying to do?
We could participate with them and build our country as
the leader of the whole process. And this is very
different from what is being discussed now. You have to
(06:31):
get the history of this or you're really not going
to make it well.
Speaker 1 (06:36):
It seems like what we're talking about here, the American system,
which was more formally recognized during the time of Henry Clay,
who actually wrote a book called the American System, really
started with America's revolution against the British occupation. The British
when they try to impose this international order, they had
(06:58):
mercantilism which basically allowed manufacturing to only exist in England,
and that we would ship raw materials and it would
keep us in a sort of a quasi plantation condition.
And that the founding fathers on all sides rejected that,
and they began a process of industrialization. They rejected the
(07:20):
Bank of England control over our currency. They wanted to
have their own national what they call the Continental Script,
which the British tried to destroy through counterfeiting but didn't,
and that they wanted sovereignty and independence. That's right, and
that the national system was very well expressed by first
(07:44):
by Hamilton and Washington and then later by the American system,
in that we were building domestic infrastructure in the form
back then of canals, ports and an other means and
highways into state as a means of connecting the country
and creating a sense of national cohesion. And also tariffs
(08:08):
as opposed to direct taxation, which basically was a tax
on imports as opposed to a tax on American income.
And President Trump has done a brilliant job I think
of sticking to this plan. He has actually said, for example,
with tariffs, that he hopes to not replace, but reduce
(08:30):
the role of the irs, to be replaced by an
external revenue service, and that there would actually be financial
incentives and rebates to Americans who are creating and who
are producing and generating and accumulating income in the form
of tax reductions. He's also talked about infrastructure. I don't
(08:55):
know if yet he's really gone with any major infrastructure projects,
but that's seems to be his his orientation as a
builder and as an industrial not industrialist, but as a
real estate a mogul. And he's taking on this internationalist
(09:15):
world order mentality that's basically grifting off the rest of us,
that basically makes money from debt and that makes money
from deficit spending and then selling us back our money
at interest, and he's instead going toward a production economy.
He's rejecting Wall Street and is replacing it with Main Street,
(09:38):
as I heard Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessont actually
state in an interview recently. And I think that we
need to make sure that this concept is articulated clearly
so that the American people can understand what we are
going through, which is a major I don't want to
(09:59):
use the word revolution in a way, it's a counter revolution, uh,
in not only in our economy, but also in our
politics and in our culture.
Speaker 2 (10:09):
So let's but let's look at a couple of problems
and a couple of things that need to have a
much deeper understanding, deeper dialogue in the national conversation. First
of all, you have the two parties. This is a
nasty setup that we've unfortunately had ever since the beginning
(10:29):
in different forms. So the Democrats, UH in this latest
several decades have been anti industrial. There's this radical environmentalism,
various other forms of of UH, you know, killing off
the future. Republicans have been dominated by the UH, the
(10:54):
Austrian school which has the which is a branch of imperialism,
which is under the under the international imperial idea, no
country should be allowed to protect to interfere with the market.
Now that contradicts the the idea of of tariff protection.
(11:18):
In this case, what they're talking about is uh uh
budget cuts, savage budget cuts, when what's required is to
differentiate between government that is playing an essential role as
the scientific center for the country, as a as a spur,
(11:41):
as an organizer of projects, not to own it. It's
not socialism, but the for example, the the space program
and other other initiatives, the the certainly high speed rail,
all of that would have to be federal and you
have to you have to see how this was done
in the past. This is not a matter of spending
yourself into oblivion. This is the opposite. When you invest
(12:06):
in these kinds of infrastructure projects and you're directing credit,
when the federal government directs credit, then you have a
blossoming of production in the country that cuts down inflation.
That's the way you that's the way you get out
(12:26):
of the debt problem. The debt problem is not just
the national debt, it's the whole deficit in our country,
in our population as well as in our whole national
economic life. So first of all, you have to can
get rid of this idea that you're going to solve
(12:47):
the debt with budget cuts. This is a nasty import
from the British and the Austrian you know, Habsburgs and
so forth. The second thing is how relation of wars
to progress. Every president that and every leader of our
(13:08):
country that.
Speaker 3 (13:10):
Uh, that was a a an initiator of new industries,
and that promoted the the the tariff system, Henry Clay,
Abraham Lincoln later on uh of Franklin Delan or Roosevelt.
Speaker 2 (13:28):
Uh. Really these are all people with the same point
of view as nationalists. Roosevelt really had reciprocal tariffs and
trade deals. It's really the same thing. It's the same idea.
So they were for universal progress. They they they saw
and criticized directly. Uh, the imperial system that that had
(13:54):
war all the time. Remember that the law want to
have a so called free trade and banning each nation
from protecting its own new manufacturing so that they can't
rise and become a power. But they also have wars, insurrections,
(14:18):
color revolutions. This began with the British Lord Shelburne and
Bentham and others in England sending anarchists into France to
have this to destroy the French Revolution, make it destroy
France so they would not rise. This is a model
(14:38):
for the color revolutions of the past, you know, period
since FDR, particularly since Kennedy. So what we would have
to do. And I think Trump would like to have
peace in the Middle East and in Ukraine, but we
don't have peace in either place. We don't really have
a ceasefire either way. We would have to really we
(15:00):
have a national, a deep national discussion about who are
the warmongers, where does this come from? And I think
we need new religious leadership as well. I think the
religions have failed and we need those religious sections of
our world, different world religions, Christianity, Judaism, and the other religions.
(15:23):
They have to succeed. We need to restore the idea,
the image, the idea of man in God's image. We
don't have that now we must have that. And that's
the way to begin to talk about why the United
States has to be a promoter of progress and not
a killer of mankind. With the sanctions, the wars, the
(15:45):
color revolutions, that's all British imperialism. Why should we keep
doing it, you know we should. We should concentrate on
building up American power and reaching out with a hand
of friendship to the other great nations. Every country in
this world has the same interests every nation and every people.
(16:06):
Terrorists are created by war and instability. They're crazy people.
Some of them are on drugs, like the Isis people.
But every nation, including China, including Russia, including Iran, even
North Korea, every country has same basic needs to have
(16:29):
industrial progress, scientific progress, and American influence that would change
whatever is wrong in any of these countries. Would be
most powerful if we build up our country at the
same time as we extend the hand of friendship, and
we have to back away from nuclear war. At the
(16:51):
same time, we have to have confidence. I think that
that Russia and China would have more confidence and in
the United States if they saw that we were committed
to a massive industrialization and infrastructure building program in our
own country, it would show that we were strong and
(17:15):
going towards more strength, instead of so weak that we
would rely on nuclear weapons. In other words, that the
possibility of cooperation.
Speaker 1 (17:29):
Indeed, and in a way it is if we are
who we are, we would we would set an example
for the rest of the world, which is of course
the title of Anton Jakin's book Who We Are America's
Fight for Universal Progress. Anton, You've covered a bunch of
areas here. As far as the area of the budget cuts,
(17:54):
I think that there has to be budget cuts because
a lot of this money is going into these international
grifting example of USAID, I mean it was used as
a slush fund to fund the internationalists, and a lot
of that money filtered its way back into the pockets
of corrupt left wing politicians. The Department of Education could
(18:19):
be gotten rid of it's three hundred and twenty billion
dollars a year, and it does nothing to actually educate
a child. Maybe they could have a couple of minor
things they do good. I mean, maybe it's worth maybe
at most of billion dollars that could be absorbed by
other agencies. It's like, these things are draining our treasury
(18:42):
and they're not productive. They're not creating anything either tangible
or spiritual for that matter, that benefits our American way
of life. And so I think that those things have
to be cut. The fraud has to be rung out
of the social security system, where we now find out
that people over one hundred and ten billions of dollars
(19:04):
going out to them. I mean, that's fraud. This used
to be called good government. Now, of course, the keying
elon musk Car because he wants to do this, you know,
the things like right unemployment benefits, all of this stuff
is filled and that has increased usually in the last
four years under Biden. Money to Ukraine, that's another scam.
(19:27):
I mean, you talk about perpetual war for perpetual peace,
which was the name of Harry Elma Barnes's book, and
it was a brilliant book. Of course, he'd be denounced
later as an anti Semite, which is not true. But
he was a real pain for this internationalist Anglo American
establishment that we're talking about. But since Wilson and since
(19:48):
World War One, the policy of this country has been
to perpetuate international wars for alleged for international peace. And
it's been a horrible human rights problem. It's destroyed the
lives of tens of millions of people, it's cost huge treasure.
(20:09):
And I think that Trump is the peace candidate. He
wants to get out of these wars all over the
world that we're doing nothing but exacerbating by involving ourselves
in them. And as far as the spiritual peace, yeah,
I mean, you know, the whole rotten internationalist entity has
(20:31):
usurped the you know, and taken out the spiritual component
of all of our major religions. I think that is
part of what Cecil Rhodes talked about in his Anglo
American Establishment. I mean it was actually Carol Quigley, the
professor at Georgetown University, who blew the whistle on this.
(20:52):
How the Roads Group, the Roads Around Table and all
of those groups in the turn of the twentieth century
developed this international order that isn't actually creating anything. It
is imperial. I mean, the British are a part of it.
The city of London is part of it, the city
of Washington is a part of it. Maybe even the
Vatican might be a part of it. But they've got
(21:13):
their tentacles in all of the capitals of the world.
They are not producing anything but war and division and there,
you know, they have a deep state, as President Trump
accurately calls it, that operates through secret societies, that operates
through clandestine means to control the narrative, to control.
Speaker 2 (21:35):
The be careful about you know, you're you're an optimist
with the American system, so you don't want to You
don't want people to be blackpilled, which means they think everything,
everything is rigged against us and we can never do anything.
Speaker 1 (21:49):
No, no, I am anop.
Speaker 2 (21:51):
I agree with that. Now, Look, can I go back
to the budget? Sure? I think it's important. Obviously you
have to. You have to differentiate between useful and useless
or or harmful elements of a national budget. So NASA
(22:11):
and traffic control things and other essential functions. The Agriculture
Department in its heyday revolutionized in a good way American
farming and made us That was part of our industrial progress.
But take the Department of Education. I think that the
(22:32):
discussion about this, if you start with a critique of
the federal department, we're really missing the issue. I don't
think the issue is really about what's woke or the
imposition of nonsense from the federal level, although that is
(22:53):
going on. I think the real issue is that there
that the education in the United States today is near
zero in terms of public schools and in colleges as well.
I mean, forget the colleges for a moment, but what
what you have. The way to approach this is to say,
(23:16):
how would we get back to or or create a
powerful and modern educational system that would bring up the literacy,
the effectiveness, the thinking level, the skill level of and
the this including the spiritual level of our younger generation
(23:38):
and not lose them, but turn them into a workforce
and a citizenry that that can think, that can work,
and that is independent. And I think that you have
to you have to put the two elements together. First
of all, when you set up modern industries, high speed trains,
(24:01):
a nuclear fission, nuclear fusion, the space program, science centers,
essential water projects to move water large scale and get
fresh water where it's needed. That may be involved channeling
water and may involve desalination. When you do this kind
(24:22):
of as a as a kind of overall outlook that
you're going to create a future where our energy use are,
throughput of energy are are, our industrial power goes up
by orders of magnitude to when you're doing that, then
(24:45):
you also have to support the population at the same time.
Part of that is education. Part of that is going
to involve spending money. It's going to involve unemployment, insurance,
it's going to involve dealing with the drug problem. You're
not going to do it the way we did in
the past. You have to attack the offshore banking system
(25:06):
to get at the people that launder the money for
the cartels. We already know about that. Senator has gone
into that in depth twenty twelve. But is take put
education into this kind of an initiative that we must
have to really reindustrialize the country. It can't be done
just with tariffs. You have to have this kind of
(25:28):
vision and it needs federal and presidential leadership. So education
would be an essential component of that, the equivalent of apprenticeships,
all kinds of entries for people that are already skilled
as leaders, people that are becoming skilled as leaders and
(25:50):
as gaining skills, people with no skills, people with that
who are illiterate. And that's a very large number of people.
I think it's not really counted right. A lot of
what is counted as childhood mental problems are really a
matter of not being connected to a to a productive society.
(26:12):
And if you have a father and a mother and
a family with several children, and they're able to make
a high income and they have a stable community and
there's employment in exciting modern jobs, for example, engineering that
excites the kids to get into something good for their future.
(26:37):
That kind of a family and that kind of community.
A nation gives you a chance to have a spiritual life.
That's different than a country that is that is disintegrating.
A society is disintegrating industrially in terms of these for
(26:59):
all these wars and so forth. So you have to
put the education into this context. Do we need all
these children? Do we need this younger generation? We have
to set in motion the kind of progress where we
are going to depend vitally depend on this generation to
(27:23):
be the workforce and to be knowledgeable. That's how you
get good education. You have to put it together with
our mission, and I believe that we have to cooperate
with the other countries to do it, and that includes
people that we call our adversaries, like Russia and China.
Speaker 1 (27:39):
Yes, I agree with that. Just to use education as
a template by which we could look at a cross
section of issues in this country, I would suggest that
a nationalized education system is not the way to go,
only because our nationalized education system has been so thoroughly
(28:02):
infiltrated by the internationalists, by the imperialists, going way back.
It's not something that happened recently, be goes. I mean,
my dear friend, the late doctor Samuel L. Blumenfeld, wrote
a whole shelf of books on this topic. He was
a regular guest of Mind. We did hundreds of hours
of programming together, and he talks about how the importance
(28:23):
of phonics as a way to actually learn how to
read the English language, and how that has been replaced
by what they call the change agents with look say,
methods that create dyslexia and create learning disorders and ultimately
various social ills.
Speaker 2 (28:41):
Mathematics to the new math it.
Speaker 1 (28:44):
I mean, it's not just that even if you practically
every subject now I'm studying right now college level history
and sociology, and it's been completely infiltrated by critical race
theory and other Marxist programs that are destructive to people
because it creates division and it's it's based on false ideas.
(29:06):
So because of that, I think that education in this
country has to be local. It has to be under
the control of local school boards who are elected by
parents who have children in the school who have a
staken it, and the school board members themselves should also
be parents or have had children who graduated from the
(29:28):
public schools, and that they should have absolute ability to
choose the curriculum. And if they have that, they're going
to choose the curriculum that actually does the job of
educating their children, and they're not going to be likely
infiltrated by this international order. Now, if some of them
want that, fine, they'll have it and they'll suffer. But
(29:51):
it all right.
Speaker 2 (29:53):
I mean, I think I think that this is where
the problem of of going into our past and seeing
how we how we had progress in the past, and
this is this is this book, right, this is happened
in the nineteenth century. So if the local parents were
(30:17):
to choose between their more conservative uh curriculum and the
woke nonsense that's offered to them, they would have nothing
to offer to the students. There's nothing there. The point
is that you have to get you have to get
back to a society that's that has a mission of progress.
(30:44):
The word progressive, of course, has been subverted, like right,
you were talking. Lincoln was a progressive nationalist UH. People
running the Pennsylvania Railroad, Fatteus Stevens, other people in who
who fought for the rights of black people as well
as building up the United States. So think about this
(31:08):
issue of the races now in the United States. Supposing
that you simply say, let's have and I agree that
education should be controlled by local school boards and so forth,
that's what it was in the past. That's to me,
that's almost a side issue. You have to have political, social,
(31:31):
and philosophical initiatives on a national level that are aimed
at getting a majority involved in what is for the
interests of a great majority of the people. That includes
really everybody. But you could have a huge majority behind candidacies.
(31:54):
I mean talking about eighty seventy eighty percent population behind
people that really had the kind of economic progress initiatives
that we're talking about. So compare Martin Luther King's point
of view to woke commentary on race. Don't do it
(32:17):
from the standpoint simply of criticizing critical race theory. What
was he What was Martin Luther King's idea about economic progress? Well,
I would say two things that are very striking. Number one,
you have to raise the the income, the the job qualifications,
(32:41):
and every every other aspect, housing and everything else for
the poorest people in the country. And number two, he said,
our country has to be having constant industrial progress, the
South has to be industrialized. He went over to Ghana
and met with the president there, Kwame and Kruma, the
(33:02):
great African nationalist who was really emulating America's progress and
much of what he did and and Martin Luther King
pointed to the fact that they were going to industrialize
and electrify their com their country with a dam that
was built with Kennedy. Actually it was built later with
(33:22):
Kennedy's help UH to elect bring electricity for industrialization of
West Africa. So Martin Luther King understood that you can't
leave people in backwardness and that this requires a national
idea of progress with national leadership. At the same time,
(33:44):
you have to protect people from racial discrimination and from
oppression of various times. If you have police brutality, look
to the federal government and see if local police departments
are being militarized. What's that. Don't be pursuing things, either
on a woke direction or some other direction, that are
(34:07):
going to divide people on the basis of race. Look
to those things that will unite the population for progress
for the whole community. Right people in general, black and
white and other communities in the United States. The best
people oppose the culture they want to have. They want
(34:30):
to have beautiful culture, they want to have classical music,
they want to have good things for their children. These
are and so if there is a national leadership that
says we have to elevate the people of the United
States in many respects, we've become a failed society under
(34:52):
this oppression of the Anglo American, this Transatlantic clique of globalists.
We failed in so many ways. Hundreds of thousands people
are dying of suicide and of drug overdoses. And so
the country can be united around a serious movement for
(35:17):
reindustrialization on a twenty first century basis. It doesn't just
mean opening up old factories, but you have to This
is going to be a tremendous fight, and people have
to be able to look back. If you want to
be a new Abraham Lincoln or a new FDR, the
way to do it is to seriously inquire into how
(35:38):
we made progress and united our people before and report
that back to the people. It's different from either the
Democrats or Republicans. It's better America set the standard for
world progress, and we helped other countries to do it directly.
I don't just.
Speaker 1 (35:57):
Mean that into the world to make America great again.
It's the it's the mega movement, which I think has become.
Speaker 2 (36:08):
War who are who are?
Speaker 1 (36:10):
And it's become powerful enough that I think that the
the kind of what what President Trump calls the fake media,
which is, you know, they've been so discredited and they're
so controlled by this international apparatus that now you have,
they've been delegitimized and because of media, like what we're
doing right now, uh, you know, it's sort of supplanted
(36:33):
that because anyone can do media now, and you have
somebody like Tucker Carlson who has a much bigger audience
than than the three major networks after he was fired
from them, and others who are you know, Joe Rogan.
I mean, these people have huge Steve Bannon, another incredible podcaster.
He has something like I don't know, it's well over
(36:55):
one hundred million downloads. It's much bigger than the old rotten,
you know, internationalist networks. And I think that that is
why this country is starting to win. The program that
we're looking at right now with tariffs, which basically is
a it puts the un stays in a position of
(37:15):
bargaining with foreign countries and having reciprocal tarifts which work
for both sides as opposed to this exploitative system where
our factories and our industries have been stripped away by
foreign countries dumping products on the market and using slave labor,
that we are now in a position we're using whatever
(37:36):
leverage we have left to try to level the field
for America with the hope that maybe we can recover
some of our industrial base which has been stripped away
since Nafter and GAT and some of these other agreements
have sold out our economic sovereignty. And so I just
(37:58):
hope that we can get a grip on that and
realize that the Trump people know exactly what they're doing.
I think they've been planning this for a number of years.
Now that they're back in power, they are doing exactly
what they said they would do. And you know, it's
going to be very difficult and bewildering for some people
for a while, but it's it is. You have to
(38:21):
take a little bit of a longer view and realize
that it's going to work. Now as far as the
cultural elements are concerned, I think it's a great thing
to see President Trump cutting funding to Harvard, for example.
Speaker 2 (38:35):
But he's doing it for the wrong reasons. He's doing
it for the wrong reasons. Reason in our history. But
what's what's the problem with Harvard.
Speaker 1 (38:47):
They they have a curriculum that includes racism and anti semitism.
I mean, I think that the president, every president has
the option because they were elected to represent certain ideals
of where they're going to be spending on national funds.
And you know, in the past, Harvard would get funds
because they were promoting things like critical ways theory. Not
(39:10):
to push that obbeylist, but you know, you know whatever,
you know, sex change operations or children or whatever they
were doing, so they would get the money. But now
with President Trump elected, he represents the people that elected him.
Speaker 2 (39:23):
There's hugion about this. Think let's look at Harvard. Look
at Harvard. What would Harvard's role be. Let's start with this.
What would that that college's role be in a program
for the rebirth of American industry and the raising of
(39:46):
the wage levels and American cooperation with other countries in
a positive way. What would their role be? They would
be in a frenzy and they would be turmoil tremendously
because they are. They're one of the centers of globalism
in the United States that goes all the way back
to the early nineteenth and even the eighteenth century when
(40:09):
they were on a lot of the people of the
Boston Brahmins were on the Tory side, and then later
the Federalists and so forth. Okay, so Harvard has been
a center of the anti national or anti nationalist philosophy
(40:32):
in the country and very closely tied to the British.
Now they have programs at Harvard or the discussion from
the Republican Party is that Harvard has programs that are
(40:53):
these false programs to actually divide people on the basis
of race and claiming to take the side of blacks
when they don't really right. And then they then they
say they don't have a program to do that for
Jewish people. That's a confusion. That's a total confusion. The
(41:20):
problem is that the United States Trump wants to I
believe wants to end the war in the Middle East. Indeed,
and and so what why are America? Here's here's my
my take. And I think this reflects the way Franklin Roosevelt,
John Kennedy, Lincoln, even going back to Washington, would have
(41:44):
would have looked at the current problem in the Middle East,
and that is that the nations of the Middle East,
Arab nations, and and and Iran, which is not Arab,
and some of the other countries around Israel have a
destiny in modern society to rise as powerful nations. They're
(42:08):
very intelligent people and they have suffered colonialism for a
long time. The Jewish people came largely from Europe and
represented a high level of culture and intelligence, but they
were Israel was developed in the Cold War era, and
(42:29):
it was set up on a basis of agreeing to
condoning hostility between Israel and its neighbors. Now I think
that the way and this has led to Israel feeling
(42:49):
that it needs to defend itself by essentially murdering all
the other people around it. And this is whose fault
is this? The problem has to be approached with how
you would solve the problem, and I believe that you
have to have the United States and other world powers,
(43:10):
including Russia, including China, including some of the large countries
in Europe, maybe Japan, India, many other countries perhaps, but
the large powers have to get together and say that
the war in the Middle East, the war in the
(43:31):
Holy Land is a threat to the world and has
to be shut down. Now the real I'll tell you,
I'll report to you. I've done a lot of inquiry
about this that the American people who are confused about
(43:52):
this whole thing, Jewish, critical Christians, whatever, they have a
knee jerk reaction is saying that if you, if you
propose to literally shut the war down, which could be
done by the Great Powers intervening, where you say we're
gonna we're gonna absolutely prohibit any attacks from either side
(44:14):
as we start to sort out how the two countries
could go forward, they say, the Palestinians and the Israelis.
You get a knee jerk reaction from some people saying,
if you want to shut the war down, then you're
letting you're letting the terrorists. You're not going to get
(44:35):
the hostages back, You're letting the terrorists win. To me,
that's insane. What is revenge? First of all, start with revenge.
Revenge is first degree murder of your own children, first
degree because you know in advance that when you take
(44:56):
revenge on other people, they're gonna come back and kill
your children. You know you already know that it's gone
on for seventy five years right there. This cycle has
to be shut down. What will then happen in Israel?
I think the people in Israel will decide that. But
right now the globalists in the United States and Britain
(45:20):
have sent the bombs there to carry on this war.
Maybe there was some funny business between NN, Yahoo and Hamas,
I don't know, to try to prevent the other people,
you know, the other Palestinians, from getting in there. But
we've got to shut this war down. We can't have
(45:41):
this war. We should have had Jerusalem as the great
center of holiness for the Christian, Jewish and Muslim religion
and other religions. It's revered what our monotheism, and then
great things that came from that are are revered by
(46:03):
people all over the world. So this has to be
made into a zone of peace. Now. There have been
proposals both from Franklin Roosevelt and from John Kennedy, very
serious proposals and from Kennedy real in depth proposals for
desalination and other and that was nuclear desalination that he
(46:26):
changed the whole International agency to do this. Joint projects
between Israel and the Arabs to get fresh water, to
get industries built up on the basis of the new
energy and the fresh water. That's the approach you have
to take. You cannot allow this war to continue. You
have to shut it down. And I think Trump wants
(46:48):
to do that. But I would say it's a mistake
to say the Trump people want to do such and such.
Do you mean Trump and his immediate circle of friends?
Do you mean all the people in the administration. There's
neo cons there's globalists, there's people that have particular approaches
(47:13):
which are not America's interests, and I think we share
this interest with every other country on this planet, and
so we have to have calm as well as progress.
You have to be able to approach these issues calmly,
(47:36):
without shouting, without attacks. That's why when I wrote two
volumes so far of this book on America's the Core
Strategic History Who We Are? That's a thousand pages that's
not between the two volumes, many pages of pictures, so
it's not all just you know, HeartShare, But this is
(48:02):
new material. We're going to need much more work like
this to get into our history, to show how we
were both powerful and humane at the same time. You
can't have one without the other, you know.
Speaker 1 (48:19):
I mean, I'm just going to reflect just a little
bit on the Israeli Arab conflict and that I think that,
like all conflicts, you know, there's an internationalization of what
should be a local conflict, and that that has not
augured well for anybody, for either side, because you've got
internationalists and arms dealers and everyone's making money on it,
(48:42):
and there's an interest in keeping conflict going, and that
sometimes it's best to kind of bring the fight we're
local to the actual people who suffer as a result
of it. As far as the Israelis go, I think
that the general consensus in Israel, in glutes all sides
of the political spectrum, is that they have tried to
(49:05):
have peace with the non Jewish Palestinian Arabs, and that
that goes way back.
Speaker 2 (49:12):
It's not new.
Speaker 1 (49:13):
It goes to the time of the founding of the independence.
It goes back to nineteen twenty when the British started
to agitate and create conflict between the two. When you're
hit Herbert Samuel, who.
Speaker 2 (49:25):
Was I saw that in person, by the way, did you? Yes?
I was in Israel for about a year and a half.
That's where I learned Hebrew, and an Ulpin didn't do
too well in Hebrew school. Okay, when I was about
twenty twenty one, twenty two, I was there and I
went to this I was on a kibbutz and they're
(49:48):
the one of the old timers. The lady told me
that she had seen at the time of the Independence War,
the British gave the keys to the local police station's
arsenal to the kibbutzniks there to the Jews, and they
gave the same keys to the Arabs.
Speaker 1 (50:11):
That's that's how Britain ruled their empire for centuries. They
created a divide and conquer and they would pity side
against the other so they could rule the world from
this little tiny island off the coast of Europe.
Speaker 2 (50:24):
But let me I'd like to introduce an element that
people have to think, I believe, really have to think
about and search their souls. That is what's America's role here,
there's night within America. I want to bring up. My father,
Jacob Jakin, was the legal council and strategist for the
(50:47):
American Jewish Congress boycott against Nazi Germany in the early
nineteen thirties, and that was to try to bring down
Hitler when he first started and they knew that he
was he was out to kill off or to destroy
the Jews as well as to go for a war.
(51:07):
And that's the war part of it especially was what
the this and the Anglo American bankers wanted. My father
as part of the boycott, Jacob Jakins sued Wall Street
companies that were promoting Hitler with with debts. This was
(51:29):
this was primarily people connected with Morgan and the Brown Brothers,
Harriman Bank.
Speaker 1 (51:35):
Yeah, the group and uh, you know I talk about
about American bankers. You're familiar with the work of Anthony Sutton, right.
Speaker 2 (51:47):
I am introduced some new elements into that when when
I took off from what my father was doing and
and the these companies were. For example, there was a
there were several industrial companies and shipping companies jointly owned
by the Nazi government and Wall Street bankers, like the
(52:08):
North Grimin Lloyd shipping company. My father sued them to
force them to pay debts to American bondholders and stop
essentially funding Hitler. Hitler had decreed that those companies shouldn't
pay their debts on bonds to American bondholders. Money should
go to the Nazi government, and these New York bankers
(52:28):
were for that. This gang, this is the core of
the globalists in the United States, and this is the
gang that set up the situation of warfare and prevented
anything from replacing. We didn't have a powerful program for
(52:53):
peace in the Middle East coming from here. That's not
going to be solved between Israel and its neighbors. They
can't solve it by themselves. This is a world issue
and they can't simply look to themselves to solve this problem.
For one thing, all the armaments are coming from the
(53:13):
outside and everyone, all these countries and people are proxies
in one way or another. So we have to look
at our at what is best in our background. That's
not the Wall Street Morgan establishment. That's not the City
of London, that's not the imperialists, that's the Americans, the
(53:37):
American Republic. Remember Lincoln was the founder of the Republican Party.
And Fbr's Democratic Party is different from you know, the
Biden Democratic Party. So this is our background is as
the world's developer and peacemaker, and and that means that
(53:59):
weiate things like the creation of electricity, the space program,
all these things. We were the ones who facilitated steel
mills all over the world and the protectionism to go
with it. That's who America is, That's who we are,
and we could, and we can, and we must, I believe,
(54:22):
have a powerful change of policy to say that this
war seventy five years long must now be brought to
an end. We cannot allow it to go any further.
There are many reasons that can be given why it
should go on for centuries more. All of them, I think,
(54:44):
are really something that is fostered by these gangsters over us.
Speaker 1 (54:54):
No, I mean, I think that the sort of the
Islamic gangs who are running the countries that are at
war with Israel, in combine and combination with not only
the international left but also the international establishment, they're anti Israel.
They always have been anti Israel for two reasons. I think. Firstly,
(55:16):
because Israel is very nationalist and very capitalist in its orientation.
It is very fiercely insistent on the nation state and
the sovereignty, of the importance of sovereignty. And secondly, because
is those Jewish And what I mean by that is
that the Israeli people, regardless of the level of belief
(55:40):
or observance, they believe in God. They don't believe in
the state as well. Yeah, but I think that in
a sense, even subconsciously, most of them do, and that
there's this idea that there's some big, greater purpose and
greater cause of their existence and simply operating in the
town up a world, and that the establishment despises that
(56:04):
and they fear that, particularly the left.
Speaker 2 (56:06):
That's true in in in a certain way. That's very important.
But I would like to focus back on Americans. Okay,
look at look at what's happened to the United States
since the the Anglo American establishment. These globalists are uh,
took down our industry. Uh. People think that there's been
(56:32):
a movement away from going to church or synagogue, that
that whereas some of the people went into fundamentalism. Fundamentalist
Christians may be fundamentalist Jews. But but I think that
the the issue is a little bit different. I don't
(56:53):
think that you have simply a trend to atheism because people,
you know, learned about evolution or some other thing. I
think that the religions of the world, every religion in
the world, in this culture affected by this globalism. The
(57:16):
religions have failed to focus and to refresh the focus
on man's being a child of God. What is man?
That's really the issue. Do we have a divine destiny?
Do we have? Are we all made of one blood? Yes,
(57:41):
there's the eighth Psalm of David is wonderful. From that standpoint,
we are given dominion over the world by God, and
we are a little bit lower than the angels, and
it says who we are. That's another sense that I
have in my mind when I write about our past,
(58:04):
our economic strategy, and our national strategy. But it's also
who we are as human beings in relationship to God.
And so I think that this sense is very much
connected to the mission of the society. If the mission
(58:26):
of society is you know, consumerism based on imported goods,
factories are closing, we have all the wars, we have violence,
we have you know, what might be called materialism without
good living standards. So you have the worst of both worlds.
(58:51):
But the spiritual nature of the country is lost if
we're not a productive and progressive society. If we're not
if we don't have the mission that reflects this deep
sense of what it means to be a human beings
as a child of God, and all people on this
(59:14):
planet were created with that same difference from animals. You know,
it's funny. Lincoln had a profound sense of this difference
between man and animals. Man human beings work like animals work,
ants or beavers, but we change our work with creativity,
(59:34):
with invention, and so we rise. And that is the essence,
the spark of man's different from animals. Teddy Roosevelt had
a different idea of the difference. His idea was, you
go with a shotgun or a huge caliber rifle and
you shoot really big animals if you can, and that
(59:56):
shows that man is the master over the animals. And
there's the dif for gen man and animals. That's that's
the idea of a three year old. Unfortunately heavily armed.
Speaker 1 (01:00:07):
So they say that he was almost They said that
he had the mentality of a child. And there's other
people that that knew him. And then look, Thomas Jefferson
expressed it in the Declaration of Independence. Were endowed by
our creator, which is God. That's right. Another word with rights.
In other words, rights don't come from the divine right
(01:00:29):
of the king, well, from the idol, as the Bible
talked about, it comes from the Great Sovereign who gives
a grant of sovereignty to the to us as images
of God, and that every human being, every man and
does the Bible does say men and women were created
in his image. I think that Jefferson drew from that
(01:00:51):
when he put those words into the Declaration of Independence,
and that has been the philosophy of our creed, I
mean ever since. It's a recognition of some basic truths,
and that it is a break. That's what made the
American Revolution so profound and such a worldwide event because
it was the first time that there was a break
(01:01:11):
between this idea that rights are granted as privileges to
a supine population by these enlightened rulers that were almost
like children looking to a parent. Instead, we are sovereign,
and we give the government a limited grant to protect
those sovereign rights. But since we're reaching toward the end
(01:01:34):
of the show, and it's been a really fascinating conversation, Anton,
hope to have you back, love to have you on regularly,
but I want to bring up a hot button issue
before we wrap it up, and that is the business
of central banking and federal reserve in the case of
(01:01:54):
the United States. I have many minds on the topic.
It's a complicated topic. It seems to me to be
one of those debates that runs through American history. The
central banks do not seem to, in my opinion, have
the interests of America at heart, although they have come
(01:02:15):
through at different times in our history. I mean, Jefferson,
who was against the bank, nevertheless went to the bank
when he wanted to do the Louisiana purchase because he
needed credit raised quickly, and so he eventually recognized the
importance of a central bank. But the problem with it
is that it is a cartel of bankers and industrialists
(01:02:37):
who are not necessarily American, who very well may be
a part of this very Anglo American establishment we're talking about.
And I wonder if there isn't a more constitutional way
or to either have a direct issuance of currency or
some kind of a separate banking entity, but yet one
(01:02:58):
that is under the auspices of our elected officials.
Speaker 2 (01:03:02):
The Bank of the United States, as you know, this
first and second banks created by Hamilton and then recreated
in the eighteen twenties eighteen sixteen, the Bank of the
United States was not a central bank in the sense
that we have with the Federal Reserve. In the Bank
of England was it was for national purposes, which is
(01:03:24):
not the case with the central banks. They serve the unfortunately,
they serve the purposes of this globalist clique and imperialism.
And I think that one way to really understand this
rather than have a theory about central banking. That's fine,
but look at I'm studying now the career of a
(01:03:45):
man named Montagute Norman.
Speaker 1 (01:03:48):
Oh, yeah, of England.
Speaker 2 (01:03:50):
He was the head of the pro Hitler faction in England,
and he was saying that helped me. He was completely insane,
that's right. He promoted fascism all throughout his career. He
was a governor of the Bank of England for twenty
four years. He was also, in a sense the head
of American central banking, except when FDR exercised power against
(01:04:16):
him and had his own man at the FED. But
he manti you. Norman worked through Ben Strong in New
York City and the Morgan Bank firm. And the fact
is that that Bank of England, with insane anti human
objectives that was the leader and the dictator of the
(01:04:41):
world's set of central banks. There is no such thing
as central banking in one country. National bank is different,
and every country has the right to control their own
currency and their own bank system. And the government has
(01:05:02):
to have control over credit in the sense of gently
directing credit to productive purposes. This is not a dictatorship,
this is not socialism. We have to be able to
defend our right to rise. And that means that the
international cartel of central banks and of control over trade,
(01:05:26):
we have the right to interfere with that. And so
this is a deep issue. I have a chapter in
this second volume which just came out. Chapter four is
Lincoln versus the Money Power, and it goes into the
fight over the greenbacks. We have the right to issue
our own money and it's not going to be inflationary
(01:05:50):
if we have at the same time the program for
the upshift of our whole country to the most modern
industry in the world. New industry is bringing more energy
and more power to to through the through the work
of each person. So this this is the way that
you actually defeat inflation, and and it's it's also how
(01:06:13):
you get as you industrialize In that way, you make
the citizenry more independent. A skilled person will not put
up with so called authorities. You know, you mentioned the
divine right of kings. What about these unelected authorities that
are all over the place in our in our modern
so called system of government. That's not our system. Our
(01:06:35):
constitution is our system. These authorities should not have any power.
We should not bow to them. Some people who think
of themselves as conservative, you know, religionists, say bow to
the authorities. God put them in place. No, I believe
that's that's almost like Satan saying I have the right
(01:06:58):
to rule the world, God put me in place. Ridiculous.
We I mean, I think elected are elected. People are
put there at the sufferance of the people. If they
do right to help us rise as of people, then
then we we will keep them in office.
Speaker 1 (01:07:14):
Of the respect. But I mean, I think the Bible
answers that in the story of Esther when right when
Hayman goes out, Moechai, you have to bow, Mordechai says,
I don't bow to anyone but God, I will not.
And that's in motion that whole story.
Speaker 2 (01:07:32):
That's right, that's the American attitude.
Speaker 1 (01:07:35):
Absolutely so Anton, let my listeners and viewers know where
they can get your excellent book and where they can
do you have a website, you legs to share or
anything else you le well.
Speaker 2 (01:07:47):
I'm on. You can buy the book volume one and
volume two. Volume one is the from the seventeen fifties
to the eighteen fifties. Volume two is eighteenth already stating eyes.
They're both on Amazon. We'll soon have a kindle edition
of the second volume. We have it kindle and paperback
(01:08:07):
for the first volume. And I have a subscription website
Anton Shakin dot substack dot com. I have a Anton's substack.
You can look it up that way. I couched things
most almost every Monday morning. So I need hit people's
help to do this. We've got to be able to
(01:08:28):
look in our past and become great again by what
we did at our best, which was on behalf of mankind.
Speaker 1 (01:08:36):
Really, Oh, you're doing God's work, and Anton Shakin, I
want to thank you very much for joining me today
as always, and I really appreciate it. And God will
keep up the good work.
Speaker 2 (01:08:47):
Thank you very much, Charles for this opportunity.
Speaker 1 (01:08:50):
All right, take care. Thank you,
What's all right. Welcome aboard everyone. Charles Moskowitz here. Anton
Shakin is my guest. He is the author of Who
We Are, America's Fight for Universal Progress from Franklin to Kennedy.
This is volume two of his book eighteen thirties to
eighteen nineties. He's also the author of Treason in America,
(00:22):
which I read many years ago. And Tom, thanks for
joining me today.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
Thank you, Charles. It's wonderful to be with you. And
it's a very auspicious time, a lot of real crisis
in what we're going to do as a.
Speaker 1 (00:37):
Nation, indeed, and I want to see if we can
define that a bit and perhaps take a look at
some of the philosophical aspects of the Trump administration and
what President Trump calls the Golden Years of America. And
it's my general understanding that much of what he seems
(00:59):
to be at indicating is in line, I think, with
your particular philosophy, in that you seem to promote what
has been called the American system, going back to Alexander
Hamilton and Henry Clay and John Quincy Adams and several
(01:20):
presidents before the Civil War and then after the Civil War.
You might say other presidents have embraced elements of it,
and I mean it looks to me like Trump. Well,
we can talk about what that is. But am I
on board with saying that President Trump is a move
in the direction of the American system as you describe it.
Speaker 2 (01:42):
In some respects that's true. I think let's start with
the fact that his campaign for the presidency caused a
panic among the Transatlantic establishment, the elite that has governed
the country, especially since the death of Kennedy. He said,
(02:06):
We're going to have normal relations with Russia, and we're
going to banish the idea, the spell of free trade
and the de industrialization of the country that went with
the free trade regime. He also did some other things
in the direction with other aspects of that same filthy
(02:31):
transformation they pulled on our country, going against radical environmentalism
and certain aspects of the woke problem. But this starts
getting into the culture wars, which are largely not useful.
(02:51):
But what has to be understood on the free trade
and the idea of rebuilding the United States. We have
to carry out some very large scale construction in the
United States, and it has to be done with in
(03:13):
cooperation with other countries at the same time as we're
protecting our own workers, our own manufacturing. If you look
at the people that actually industrialized our country in the
first phase with Henry Clay, John Quincy Adams before the
Civil War, and second phase during and after the Civil War,
(03:35):
especially eighteen seventies. The people who did this the Lincoln
Abraham Lincoln, his political partner and economist Henry Carey, and
the people around the Pennsylvania Railroad. These are the people
that built the steel the steel industry from scratch. They
sponsored the edison and the electrical industry. They built most
(03:58):
of the railroads. This was all done with federal initiatives,
and that involves the direction of credit from the federal
vantage point and involves modernization by having new industries today
that would be high speed rail, it would be a
(04:19):
major federal initiative on a space program, that would be
nuclear fission and fusion. But these kind of things were
done with a spirit of universal progress. Very important that is,
we aided other countries to defy the imperial system of
the time. We rose as a nation with high tariffs
(04:44):
and with our mission of improvement of our own people,
and we were aiding other countries Germany, Russia, Japan. We
tried to do it with China to defy the British
imperial system that had rules against countries advancing like that
(05:05):
ever since Lord Shelburne in the seventeen eighties when they
imposed this idea of free trade and that no other
country would be allowed to follow England's footsteps in getting
an industrial revolution. So this is a real showdown that
(05:25):
was going on at various times between the American Republic
led by the nationalists read by the economic nationalists, and
the imperial faction which included some financiers that included the
slave owners in our country, but it was London centered.
So those are the two sides throughout our history. And
(05:47):
so Trump just to finish up here. Trump to be successful,
he would have to level with the American people as
far as he understands it, to say, what is the problem,
what is the establishment? How have we changed as a
country since the death of Kennedy? How has our mission
(06:09):
changed from this kind of progress? What are China and
Russia doing in other countries? What are they trying to do?
We could participate with them and build our country as
the leader of the whole process. And this is very
different from what is being discussed now. You have to
(06:31):
get the history of this or you're really not going
to make it well.
Speaker 1 (06:36):
It seems like what we're talking about here, the American system,
which was more formally recognized during the time of Henry Clay,
who actually wrote a book called the American System, really
started with America's revolution against the British occupation. The British
when they try to impose this international order, they had
(06:58):
mercantilism which basically allowed manufacturing to only exist in England,
and that we would ship raw materials and it would
keep us in a sort of a quasi plantation condition.
And that the founding fathers on all sides rejected that,
and they began a process of industrialization. They rejected the
(07:20):
Bank of England control over our currency. They wanted to
have their own national what they call the Continental Script,
which the British tried to destroy through counterfeiting but didn't,
and that they wanted sovereignty and independence. That's right, and
that the national system was very well expressed by first
(07:44):
by Hamilton and Washington and then later by the American system,
in that we were building domestic infrastructure in the form
back then of canals, ports and an other means and
highways into state as a means of connecting the country
and creating a sense of national cohesion. And also tariffs
(08:08):
as opposed to direct taxation, which basically was a tax
on imports as opposed to a tax on American income.
And President Trump has done a brilliant job I think
of sticking to this plan. He has actually said, for example,
with tariffs, that he hopes to not replace, but reduce
(08:30):
the role of the irs, to be replaced by an
external revenue service, and that there would actually be financial
incentives and rebates to Americans who are creating and who
are producing and generating and accumulating income in the form
of tax reductions. He's also talked about infrastructure. I don't
(08:55):
know if yet he's really gone with any major infrastructure projects,
but that's seems to be his his orientation as a
builder and as an industrial not industrialist, but as a
real estate a mogul. And he's taking on this internationalist
(09:15):
world order mentality that's basically grifting off the rest of us,
that basically makes money from debt and that makes money
from deficit spending and then selling us back our money
at interest, and he's instead going toward a production economy.
He's rejecting Wall Street and is replacing it with Main Street,
(09:38):
as I heard Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessont actually
state in an interview recently. And I think that we
need to make sure that this concept is articulated clearly
so that the American people can understand what we are
going through, which is a major I don't want to
(09:59):
use the word revolution in a way, it's a counter revolution, uh,
in not only in our economy, but also in our
politics and in our culture.
Speaker 2 (10:09):
So let's but let's look at a couple of problems
and a couple of things that need to have a
much deeper understanding, deeper dialogue in the national conversation. First
of all, you have the two parties. This is a
nasty setup that we've unfortunately had ever since the beginning
(10:29):
in different forms. So the Democrats, UH in this latest
several decades have been anti industrial. There's this radical environmentalism,
various other forms of of UH, you know, killing off
the future. Republicans have been dominated by the UH, the
(10:54):
Austrian school which has the which is a branch of imperialism,
which is under the under the international imperial idea, no
country should be allowed to protect to interfere with the market.
Now that contradicts the the idea of of tariff protection.
(11:18):
In this case, what they're talking about is uh uh
budget cuts, savage budget cuts, when what's required is to
differentiate between government that is playing an essential role as
the scientific center for the country, as a as a spur,
(11:41):
as an organizer of projects, not to own it. It's
not socialism, but the for example, the the space program
and other other initiatives, the the certainly high speed rail,
all of that would have to be federal and you
have to you have to see how this was done
in the past. This is not a matter of spending
yourself into oblivion. This is the opposite. When you invest
(12:06):
in these kinds of infrastructure projects and you're directing credit,
when the federal government directs credit, then you have a
blossoming of production in the country that cuts down inflation.
That's the way you that's the way you get out
(12:26):
of the debt problem. The debt problem is not just
the national debt, it's the whole deficit in our country,
in our population as well as in our whole national
economic life. So first of all, you have to can
get rid of this idea that you're going to solve
(12:47):
the debt with budget cuts. This is a nasty import
from the British and the Austrian you know, Habsburgs and
so forth. The second thing is how relation of wars
to progress. Every president that and every leader of our
(13:08):
country that.
Speaker 3 (13:10):
Uh, that was a a an initiator of new industries,
and that promoted the the the tariff system, Henry Clay,
Abraham Lincoln later on uh of Franklin Delan or Roosevelt.
Speaker 2 (13:28):
Uh. Really these are all people with the same point
of view as nationalists. Roosevelt really had reciprocal tariffs and
trade deals. It's really the same thing. It's the same idea.
So they were for universal progress. They they they saw
and criticized directly. Uh, the imperial system that that had
(13:54):
war all the time. Remember that the law want to
have a so called free trade and banning each nation
from protecting its own new manufacturing so that they can't
rise and become a power. But they also have wars, insurrections,
(14:18):
color revolutions. This began with the British Lord Shelburne and
Bentham and others in England sending anarchists into France to
have this to destroy the French Revolution, make it destroy
France so they would not rise. This is a model
(14:38):
for the color revolutions of the past, you know, period
since FDR, particularly since Kennedy. So what we would have
to do. And I think Trump would like to have
peace in the Middle East and in Ukraine, but we
don't have peace in either place. We don't really have
a ceasefire either way. We would have to really we
(15:00):
have a national, a deep national discussion about who are
the warmongers, where does this come from? And I think
we need new religious leadership as well. I think the
religions have failed and we need those religious sections of
our world, different world religions, Christianity, Judaism, and the other religions.
(15:23):
They have to succeed. We need to restore the idea,
the image, the idea of man in God's image. We
don't have that now we must have that. And that's
the way to begin to talk about why the United
States has to be a promoter of progress and not
a killer of mankind. With the sanctions, the wars, the
(15:45):
color revolutions, that's all British imperialism. Why should we keep
doing it, you know we should. We should concentrate on
building up American power and reaching out with a hand
of friendship to the other great nations. Every country in
this world has the same interests every nation and every people.
(16:06):
Terrorists are created by war and instability. They're crazy people.
Some of them are on drugs, like the Isis people.
But every nation, including China, including Russia, including Iran, even
North Korea, every country has same basic needs to have
(16:29):
industrial progress, scientific progress, and American influence that would change
whatever is wrong in any of these countries. Would be
most powerful if we build up our country at the
same time as we extend the hand of friendship, and
we have to back away from nuclear war. At the
(16:51):
same time, we have to have confidence. I think that
that Russia and China would have more confidence and in
the United States if they saw that we were committed
to a massive industrialization and infrastructure building program in our
own country, it would show that we were strong and
(17:15):
going towards more strength, instead of so weak that we
would rely on nuclear weapons. In other words, that the
possibility of cooperation.
Speaker 1 (17:29):
Indeed, and in a way it is if we are
who we are, we would we would set an example
for the rest of the world, which is of course
the title of Anton Jakin's book Who We Are America's
Fight for Universal Progress. Anton, You've covered a bunch of
areas here. As far as the area of the budget cuts,
(17:54):
I think that there has to be budget cuts because
a lot of this money is going into these international
grifting example of USAID, I mean it was used as
a slush fund to fund the internationalists, and a lot
of that money filtered its way back into the pockets
of corrupt left wing politicians. The Department of Education could
(18:19):
be gotten rid of it's three hundred and twenty billion
dollars a year, and it does nothing to actually educate
a child. Maybe they could have a couple of minor
things they do good. I mean, maybe it's worth maybe
at most of billion dollars that could be absorbed by
other agencies. It's like, these things are draining our treasury
(18:42):
and they're not productive. They're not creating anything either tangible
or spiritual for that matter, that benefits our American way
of life. And so I think that those things have
to be cut. The fraud has to be rung out
of the social security system, where we now find out
that people over one hundred and ten billions of dollars
(19:04):
going out to them. I mean, that's fraud. This used
to be called good government. Now, of course, the keying
elon musk Car because he wants to do this, you know,
the things like right unemployment benefits, all of this stuff
is filled and that has increased usually in the last
four years under Biden. Money to Ukraine, that's another scam.
(19:27):
I mean, you talk about perpetual war for perpetual peace,
which was the name of Harry Elma Barnes's book, and
it was a brilliant book. Of course, he'd be denounced
later as an anti Semite, which is not true. But
he was a real pain for this internationalist Anglo American
establishment that we're talking about. But since Wilson and since
(19:48):
World War One, the policy of this country has been
to perpetuate international wars for alleged for international peace. And
it's been a horrible human rights problem. It's destroyed the
lives of tens of millions of people, it's cost huge treasure.
(20:09):
And I think that Trump is the peace candidate. He
wants to get out of these wars all over the
world that we're doing nothing but exacerbating by involving ourselves
in them. And as far as the spiritual peace, yeah,
I mean, you know, the whole rotten internationalist entity has
(20:31):
usurped the you know, and taken out the spiritual component
of all of our major religions. I think that is
part of what Cecil Rhodes talked about in his Anglo
American Establishment. I mean it was actually Carol Quigley, the
professor at Georgetown University, who blew the whistle on this.
(20:52):
How the Roads Group, the Roads Around Table and all
of those groups in the turn of the twentieth century
developed this international order that isn't actually creating anything. It
is imperial. I mean, the British are a part of it.
The city of London is part of it, the city
of Washington is a part of it. Maybe even the
Vatican might be a part of it. But they've got
(21:13):
their tentacles in all of the capitals of the world.
They are not producing anything but war and division and there,
you know, they have a deep state, as President Trump
accurately calls it, that operates through secret societies, that operates
through clandestine means to control the narrative, to control.
Speaker 2 (21:35):
The be careful about you know, you're you're an optimist
with the American system, so you don't want to You
don't want people to be blackpilled, which means they think everything,
everything is rigged against us and we can never do anything.
Speaker 1 (21:49):
No, no, I am anop.
Speaker 2 (21:51):
I agree with that. Now, Look, can I go back
to the budget? Sure? I think it's important. Obviously you
have to. You have to differentiate between useful and useless
or or harmful elements of a national budget. So NASA
(22:11):
and traffic control things and other essential functions. The Agriculture
Department in its heyday revolutionized in a good way American
farming and made us That was part of our industrial progress.
But take the Department of Education. I think that the
(22:32):
discussion about this, if you start with a critique of
the federal department, we're really missing the issue. I don't
think the issue is really about what's woke or the
imposition of nonsense from the federal level, although that is
(22:53):
going on. I think the real issue is that there
that the education in the United States today is near
zero in terms of public schools and in colleges as well.
I mean, forget the colleges for a moment, but what
what you have. The way to approach this is to say,
(23:16):
how would we get back to or or create a
powerful and modern educational system that would bring up the literacy,
the effectiveness, the thinking level, the skill level of and
the this including the spiritual level of our younger generation
(23:38):
and not lose them, but turn them into a workforce
and a citizenry that that can think, that can work,
and that is independent. And I think that you have
to you have to put the two elements together. First
of all, when you set up modern industries, high speed trains,
(24:01):
a nuclear fission, nuclear fusion, the space program, science centers,
essential water projects to move water large scale and get
fresh water where it's needed. That may be involved channeling
water and may involve desalination. When you do this kind
(24:22):
of as a as a kind of overall outlook that
you're going to create a future where our energy use are,
throughput of energy are are, our industrial power goes up
by orders of magnitude to when you're doing that, then
(24:45):
you also have to support the population at the same time.
Part of that is education. Part of that is going
to involve spending money. It's going to involve unemployment, insurance,
it's going to involve dealing with the drug problem. You're
not going to do it the way we did in
the past. You have to attack the offshore banking system
(25:06):
to get at the people that launder the money for
the cartels. We already know about that. Senator has gone
into that in depth twenty twelve. But is take put
education into this kind of an initiative that we must
have to really reindustrialize the country. It can't be done
just with tariffs. You have to have this kind of
(25:28):
vision and it needs federal and presidential leadership. So education
would be an essential component of that, the equivalent of apprenticeships,
all kinds of entries for people that are already skilled
as leaders, people that are becoming skilled as leaders and
(25:50):
as gaining skills, people with no skills, people with that
who are illiterate. And that's a very large number of people.
I think it's not really counted right. A lot of
what is counted as childhood mental problems are really a
matter of not being connected to a to a productive society.
(26:12):
And if you have a father and a mother and
a family with several children, and they're able to make
a high income and they have a stable community and
there's employment in exciting modern jobs, for example, engineering that
excites the kids to get into something good for their future.
(26:37):
That kind of a family and that kind of community.
A nation gives you a chance to have a spiritual life.
That's different than a country that is that is disintegrating.
A society is disintegrating industrially in terms of these for
(26:59):
all these wars and so forth. So you have to
put the education into this context. Do we need all
these children? Do we need this younger generation? We have
to set in motion the kind of progress where we
are going to depend vitally depend on this generation to
(27:23):
be the workforce and to be knowledgeable. That's how you
get good education. You have to put it together with
our mission, and I believe that we have to cooperate
with the other countries to do it, and that includes
people that we call our adversaries, like Russia and China.
Speaker 1 (27:39):
Yes, I agree with that. Just to use education as
a template by which we could look at a cross
section of issues in this country, I would suggest that
a nationalized education system is not the way to go,
only because our nationalized education system has been so thoroughly
(28:02):
infiltrated by the internationalists, by the imperialists, going way back.
It's not something that happened recently, be goes. I mean,
my dear friend, the late doctor Samuel L. Blumenfeld, wrote
a whole shelf of books on this topic. He was
a regular guest of Mind. We did hundreds of hours
of programming together, and he talks about how the importance
(28:23):
of phonics as a way to actually learn how to
read the English language, and how that has been replaced
by what they call the change agents with look say,
methods that create dyslexia and create learning disorders and ultimately
various social ills.
Speaker 2 (28:41):
Mathematics to the new math it.
Speaker 1 (28:44):
I mean, it's not just that even if you practically
every subject now I'm studying right now college level history
and sociology, and it's been completely infiltrated by critical race
theory and other Marxist programs that are destructive to people
because it creates division and it's it's based on false ideas.
(29:06):
So because of that, I think that education in this
country has to be local. It has to be under
the control of local school boards who are elected by
parents who have children in the school who have a
staken it, and the school board members themselves should also
be parents or have had children who graduated from the
(29:28):
public schools, and that they should have absolute ability to
choose the curriculum. And if they have that, they're going
to choose the curriculum that actually does the job of
educating their children, and they're not going to be likely
infiltrated by this international order. Now, if some of them
want that, fine, they'll have it and they'll suffer. But
(29:51):
it all right.
Speaker 2 (29:53):
I mean, I think I think that this is where
the problem of of going into our past and seeing
how we how we had progress in the past, and
this is this is this book, right, this is happened
in the nineteenth century. So if the local parents were
(30:17):
to choose between their more conservative uh curriculum and the
woke nonsense that's offered to them, they would have nothing
to offer to the students. There's nothing there. The point
is that you have to get you have to get
back to a society that's that has a mission of progress.
(30:44):
The word progressive, of course, has been subverted, like right,
you were talking. Lincoln was a progressive nationalist UH. People
running the Pennsylvania Railroad, Fatteus Stevens, other people in who
who fought for the rights of black people as well
as building up the United States. So think about this
(31:08):
issue of the races now in the United States. Supposing
that you simply say, let's have and I agree that
education should be controlled by local school boards and so forth,
that's what it was in the past. That's to me,
that's almost a side issue. You have to have political, social,
(31:31):
and philosophical initiatives on a national level that are aimed
at getting a majority involved in what is for the
interests of a great majority of the people. That includes
really everybody. But you could have a huge majority behind candidacies.
(31:54):
I mean talking about eighty seventy eighty percent population behind
people that really had the kind of economic progress initiatives
that we're talking about. So compare Martin Luther King's point
of view to woke commentary on race. Don't do it
(32:17):
from the standpoint simply of criticizing critical race theory. What
was he What was Martin Luther King's idea about economic progress? Well,
I would say two things that are very striking. Number one,
you have to raise the the income, the the job qualifications,
(32:41):
and every every other aspect, housing and everything else for
the poorest people in the country. And number two, he said,
our country has to be having constant industrial progress, the
South has to be industrialized. He went over to Ghana
and met with the president there, Kwame and Kruma, the
(33:02):
great African nationalist who was really emulating America's progress and
much of what he did and and Martin Luther King
pointed to the fact that they were going to industrialize
and electrify their com their country with a dam that
was built with Kennedy. Actually it was built later with
(33:22):
Kennedy's help UH to elect bring electricity for industrialization of
West Africa. So Martin Luther King understood that you can't
leave people in backwardness and that this requires a national
idea of progress with national leadership. At the same time,
(33:44):
you have to protect people from racial discrimination and from
oppression of various times. If you have police brutality, look
to the federal government and see if local police departments
are being militarized. What's that. Don't be pursuing things, either
on a woke direction or some other direction, that are
(34:07):
going to divide people on the basis of race. Look
to those things that will unite the population for progress
for the whole community. Right people in general, black and
white and other communities in the United States. The best
people oppose the culture they want to have. They want
(34:30):
to have beautiful culture, they want to have classical music,
they want to have good things for their children. These
are and so if there is a national leadership that
says we have to elevate the people of the United
States in many respects, we've become a failed society under
(34:52):
this oppression of the Anglo American, this Transatlantic clique of globalists.
We failed in so many ways. Hundreds of thousands people
are dying of suicide and of drug overdoses. And so
the country can be united around a serious movement for
(35:17):
reindustrialization on a twenty first century basis. It doesn't just
mean opening up old factories, but you have to This
is going to be a tremendous fight, and people have
to be able to look back. If you want to
be a new Abraham Lincoln or a new FDR, the
way to do it is to seriously inquire into how
(35:38):
we made progress and united our people before and report
that back to the people. It's different from either the
Democrats or Republicans. It's better America set the standard for
world progress, and we helped other countries to do it directly.
I don't just.
Speaker 1 (35:57):
Mean that into the world to make America great again.
It's the it's the mega movement, which I think has become.
Speaker 2 (36:08):
War who are who are?
Speaker 1 (36:10):
And it's become powerful enough that I think that the
the kind of what what President Trump calls the fake media,
which is, you know, they've been so discredited and they're
so controlled by this international apparatus that now you have,
they've been delegitimized and because of media, like what we're
doing right now, uh, you know, it's sort of supplanted
(36:33):
that because anyone can do media now, and you have
somebody like Tucker Carlson who has a much bigger audience
than than the three major networks after he was fired
from them, and others who are you know, Joe Rogan.
I mean, these people have huge Steve Bannon, another incredible podcaster.
He has something like I don't know, it's well over
(36:55):
one hundred million downloads. It's much bigger than the old rotten,
you know, internationalist networks. And I think that that is
why this country is starting to win. The program that
we're looking at right now with tariffs, which basically is
a it puts the un stays in a position of
(37:15):
bargaining with foreign countries and having reciprocal tarifts which work
for both sides as opposed to this exploitative system where
our factories and our industries have been stripped away by
foreign countries dumping products on the market and using slave labor,
that we are now in a position we're using whatever
(37:36):
leverage we have left to try to level the field
for America with the hope that maybe we can recover
some of our industrial base which has been stripped away
since Nafter and GAT and some of these other agreements
have sold out our economic sovereignty. And so I just
(37:58):
hope that we can get a grip on that and
realize that the Trump people know exactly what they're doing.
I think they've been planning this for a number of years.
Now that they're back in power, they are doing exactly
what they said they would do. And you know, it's
going to be very difficult and bewildering for some people
for a while, but it's it is. You have to
(38:21):
take a little bit of a longer view and realize
that it's going to work. Now as far as the
cultural elements are concerned, I think it's a great thing
to see President Trump cutting funding to Harvard, for example.
Speaker 2 (38:35):
But he's doing it for the wrong reasons. He's doing
it for the wrong reasons. Reason in our history. But
what's what's the problem with Harvard.
Speaker 1 (38:47):
They they have a curriculum that includes racism and anti semitism.
I mean, I think that the president, every president has
the option because they were elected to represent certain ideals
of where they're going to be spending on national funds.
And you know, in the past, Harvard would get funds
because they were promoting things like critical ways theory. Not
(39:10):
to push that obbeylist, but you know, you know whatever,
you know, sex change operations or children or whatever they
were doing, so they would get the money. But now
with President Trump elected, he represents the people that elected him.
Speaker 2 (39:23):
There's hugion about this. Think let's look at Harvard. Look
at Harvard. What would Harvard's role be. Let's start with this.
What would that that college's role be in a program
for the rebirth of American industry and the raising of
(39:46):
the wage levels and American cooperation with other countries in
a positive way. What would their role be? They would
be in a frenzy and they would be turmoil tremendously
because they are. They're one of the centers of globalism
in the United States that goes all the way back
to the early nineteenth and even the eighteenth century when
(40:09):
they were on a lot of the people of the
Boston Brahmins were on the Tory side, and then later
the Federalists and so forth. Okay, so Harvard has been
a center of the anti national or anti nationalist philosophy
(40:32):
in the country and very closely tied to the British.
Now they have programs at Harvard or the discussion from
the Republican Party is that Harvard has programs that are
(40:53):
these false programs to actually divide people on the basis
of race and claiming to take the side of blacks
when they don't really right. And then they then they
say they don't have a program to do that for
Jewish people. That's a confusion. That's a total confusion. The
(41:20):
problem is that the United States Trump wants to I
believe wants to end the war in the Middle East. Indeed,
and and so what why are America? Here's here's my
my take. And I think this reflects the way Franklin Roosevelt,
John Kennedy, Lincoln, even going back to Washington, would have
(41:44):
would have looked at the current problem in the Middle East,
and that is that the nations of the Middle East,
Arab nations, and and and Iran, which is not Arab,
and some of the other countries around Israel have a
destiny in modern society to rise as powerful nations. They're
(42:08):
very intelligent people and they have suffered colonialism for a
long time. The Jewish people came largely from Europe and
represented a high level of culture and intelligence, but they
were Israel was developed in the Cold War era, and
(42:29):
it was set up on a basis of agreeing to
condoning hostility between Israel and its neighbors. Now I think
that the way and this has led to Israel feeling
(42:49):
that it needs to defend itself by essentially murdering all
the other people around it. And this is whose fault
is this? The problem has to be approached with how
you would solve the problem, and I believe that you
have to have the United States and other world powers,
(43:10):
including Russia, including China, including some of the large countries
in Europe, maybe Japan, India, many other countries perhaps, but
the large powers have to get together and say that
the war in the Middle East, the war in the
(43:31):
Holy Land is a threat to the world and has
to be shut down. Now the real I'll tell you,
I'll report to you. I've done a lot of inquiry
about this that the American people who are confused about
(43:52):
this whole thing, Jewish, critical Christians, whatever, they have a
knee jerk reaction is saying that if you, if you
propose to literally shut the war down, which could be
done by the Great Powers intervening, where you say we're
gonna we're gonna absolutely prohibit any attacks from either side
(44:14):
as we start to sort out how the two countries
could go forward, they say, the Palestinians and the Israelis.
You get a knee jerk reaction from some people saying,
if you want to shut the war down, then you're
letting you're letting the terrorists. You're not going to get
(44:35):
the hostages back, You're letting the terrorists win. To me,
that's insane. What is revenge? First of all, start with revenge.
Revenge is first degree murder of your own children, first
degree because you know in advance that when you take
(44:56):
revenge on other people, they're gonna come back and kill
your children. You know you already know that it's gone
on for seventy five years right there. This cycle has
to be shut down. What will then happen in Israel?
I think the people in Israel will decide that. But
right now the globalists in the United States and Britain
(45:20):
have sent the bombs there to carry on this war.
Maybe there was some funny business between NN, Yahoo and Hamas,
I don't know, to try to prevent the other people,
you know, the other Palestinians, from getting in there. But
we've got to shut this war down. We can't have
(45:41):
this war. We should have had Jerusalem as the great
center of holiness for the Christian, Jewish and Muslim religion
and other religions. It's revered what our monotheism, and then
great things that came from that are are revered by
(46:03):
people all over the world. So this has to be
made into a zone of peace. Now. There have been
proposals both from Franklin Roosevelt and from John Kennedy, very
serious proposals and from Kennedy real in depth proposals for
desalination and other and that was nuclear desalination that he
(46:26):
changed the whole International agency to do this. Joint projects
between Israel and the Arabs to get fresh water, to
get industries built up on the basis of the new
energy and the fresh water. That's the approach you have
to take. You cannot allow this war to continue. You
have to shut it down. And I think Trump wants
(46:48):
to do that. But I would say it's a mistake
to say the Trump people want to do such and such.
Do you mean Trump and his immediate circle of friends?
Do you mean all the people in the administration. There's
neo cons there's globalists, there's people that have particular approaches
(47:13):
which are not America's interests, and I think we share
this interest with every other country on this planet, and
so we have to have calm as well as progress.
You have to be able to approach these issues calmly,
(47:36):
without shouting, without attacks. That's why when I wrote two
volumes so far of this book on America's the Core
Strategic History Who We Are? That's a thousand pages that's
not between the two volumes, many pages of pictures, so
it's not all just you know, HeartShare, But this is
(48:02):
new material. We're going to need much more work like
this to get into our history, to show how we
were both powerful and humane at the same time. You
can't have one without the other, you know.
Speaker 1 (48:19):
I mean, I'm just going to reflect just a little
bit on the Israeli Arab conflict and that I think that,
like all conflicts, you know, there's an internationalization of what
should be a local conflict, and that that has not
augured well for anybody, for either side, because you've got
internationalists and arms dealers and everyone's making money on it,
(48:42):
and there's an interest in keeping conflict going, and that
sometimes it's best to kind of bring the fight we're
local to the actual people who suffer as a result
of it. As far as the Israelis go, I think
that the general consensus in Israel, in glutes all sides
of the political spectrum, is that they have tried to
(49:05):
have peace with the non Jewish Palestinian Arabs, and that
that goes way back.
Speaker 2 (49:12):
It's not new.
Speaker 1 (49:13):
It goes to the time of the founding of the independence.
It goes back to nineteen twenty when the British started
to agitate and create conflict between the two. When you're
hit Herbert Samuel, who.
Speaker 2 (49:25):
Was I saw that in person, by the way, did you? Yes?
I was in Israel for about a year and a half.
That's where I learned Hebrew, and an Ulpin didn't do
too well in Hebrew school. Okay, when I was about
twenty twenty one, twenty two, I was there and I
went to this I was on a kibbutz and they're
(49:48):
the one of the old timers. The lady told me
that she had seen at the time of the Independence War,
the British gave the keys to the local police station's
arsenal to the kibbutzniks there to the Jews, and they
gave the same keys to the Arabs.
Speaker 1 (50:11):
That's that's how Britain ruled their empire for centuries. They
created a divide and conquer and they would pity side
against the other so they could rule the world from
this little tiny island off the coast of Europe.
Speaker 2 (50:24):
But let me I'd like to introduce an element that
people have to think, I believe, really have to think
about and search their souls. That is what's America's role here,
there's night within America. I want to bring up. My father,
Jacob Jakin, was the legal council and strategist for the
(50:47):
American Jewish Congress boycott against Nazi Germany in the early
nineteen thirties, and that was to try to bring down
Hitler when he first started and they knew that he
was he was out to kill off or to destroy
the Jews as well as to go for a war.
(51:07):
And that's the war part of it especially was what
the this and the Anglo American bankers wanted. My father
as part of the boycott, Jacob Jakins sued Wall Street
companies that were promoting Hitler with with debts. This was
(51:29):
this was primarily people connected with Morgan and the Brown Brothers,
Harriman Bank.
Speaker 1 (51:35):
Yeah, the group and uh, you know I talk about
about American bankers. You're familiar with the work of Anthony Sutton, right.
Speaker 2 (51:47):
I am introduced some new elements into that when when
I took off from what my father was doing and
and the these companies were. For example, there was a
there were several industrial companies and shipping companies jointly owned
by the Nazi government and Wall Street bankers, like the
(52:08):
North Grimin Lloyd shipping company. My father sued them to
force them to pay debts to American bondholders and stop
essentially funding Hitler. Hitler had decreed that those companies shouldn't
pay their debts on bonds to American bondholders. Money should
go to the Nazi government, and these New York bankers
(52:28):
were for that. This gang, this is the core of
the globalists in the United States, and this is the
gang that set up the situation of warfare and prevented
anything from replacing. We didn't have a powerful program for
(52:53):
peace in the Middle East coming from here. That's not
going to be solved between Israel and its neighbors. They
can't solve it by themselves. This is a world issue
and they can't simply look to themselves to solve this problem.
For one thing, all the armaments are coming from the
(53:13):
outside and everyone, all these countries and people are proxies
in one way or another. So we have to look
at our at what is best in our background. That's
not the Wall Street Morgan establishment. That's not the City
of London, that's not the imperialists, that's the Americans, the
(53:37):
American Republic. Remember Lincoln was the founder of the Republican Party.
And Fbr's Democratic Party is different from you know, the
Biden Democratic Party. So this is our background is as
the world's developer and peacemaker, and and that means that
(53:59):
weiate things like the creation of electricity, the space program,
all these things. We were the ones who facilitated steel
mills all over the world and the protectionism to go
with it. That's who America is, That's who we are,
and we could, and we can, and we must, I believe,
(54:22):
have a powerful change of policy to say that this
war seventy five years long must now be brought to
an end. We cannot allow it to go any further.
There are many reasons that can be given why it
should go on for centuries more. All of them, I think,
(54:44):
are really something that is fostered by these gangsters over us.
Speaker 1 (54:54):
No, I mean, I think that the sort of the
Islamic gangs who are running the countries that are at
war with Israel, in combine and combination with not only
the international left but also the international establishment, they're anti Israel.
They always have been anti Israel for two reasons. I think. Firstly,
(55:16):
because Israel is very nationalist and very capitalist in its orientation.
It is very fiercely insistent on the nation state and
the sovereignty, of the importance of sovereignty. And secondly, because
is those Jewish And what I mean by that is
that the Israeli people, regardless of the level of belief
(55:40):
or observance, they believe in God. They don't believe in
the state as well. Yeah, but I think that in
a sense, even subconsciously, most of them do, and that
there's this idea that there's some big, greater purpose and
greater cause of their existence and simply operating in the
town up a world, and that the establishment despises that
(56:04):
and they fear that, particularly the left.
Speaker 2 (56:06):
That's true in in in a certain way. That's very important.
But I would like to focus back on Americans. Okay,
look at look at what's happened to the United States
since the the Anglo American establishment. These globalists are uh,
took down our industry. Uh. People think that there's been
(56:32):
a movement away from going to church or synagogue, that
that whereas some of the people went into fundamentalism. Fundamentalist
Christians may be fundamentalist Jews. But but I think that
the the issue is a little bit different. I don't
(56:53):
think that you have simply a trend to atheism because people,
you know, learned about evolution or some other thing. I
think that the religions of the world, every religion in
the world, in this culture affected by this globalism. The
(57:16):
religions have failed to focus and to refresh the focus
on man's being a child of God. What is man?
That's really the issue. Do we have a divine destiny?
Do we have? Are we all made of one blood? Yes,
(57:41):
there's the eighth Psalm of David is wonderful. From that standpoint,
we are given dominion over the world by God, and
we are a little bit lower than the angels, and
it says who we are. That's another sense that I
have in my mind when I write about our past,
(58:04):
our economic strategy, and our national strategy. But it's also
who we are as human beings in relationship to God.
And so I think that this sense is very much
connected to the mission of the society. If the mission
(58:26):
of society is you know, consumerism based on imported goods,
factories are closing, we have all the wars, we have violence,
we have you know, what might be called materialism without
good living standards. So you have the worst of both worlds.
(58:51):
But the spiritual nature of the country is lost if
we're not a productive and progressive society. If we're not
if we don't have the mission that reflects this deep
sense of what it means to be a human beings
as a child of God, and all people on this
(59:14):
planet were created with that same difference from animals. You know,
it's funny. Lincoln had a profound sense of this difference
between man and animals. Man human beings work like animals work,
ants or beavers, but we change our work with creativity,
(59:34):
with invention, and so we rise. And that is the essence,
the spark of man's different from animals. Teddy Roosevelt had
a different idea of the difference. His idea was, you
go with a shotgun or a huge caliber rifle and
you shoot really big animals if you can, and that
(59:56):
shows that man is the master over the animals. And
there's the dif for gen man and animals. That's that's
the idea of a three year old. Unfortunately heavily armed.
Speaker 1 (01:00:07):
So they say that he was almost They said that
he had the mentality of a child. And there's other
people that that knew him. And then look, Thomas Jefferson
expressed it in the Declaration of Independence. Were endowed by
our creator, which is God. That's right. Another word with rights.
In other words, rights don't come from the divine right
(01:00:29):
of the king, well, from the idol, as the Bible
talked about, it comes from the Great Sovereign who gives
a grant of sovereignty to the to us as images
of God, and that every human being, every man and
does the Bible does say men and women were created
in his image. I think that Jefferson drew from that
(01:00:51):
when he put those words into the Declaration of Independence,
and that has been the philosophy of our creed, I
mean ever since. It's a recognition of some basic truths,
and that it is a break. That's what made the
American Revolution so profound and such a worldwide event because
it was the first time that there was a break
(01:01:11):
between this idea that rights are granted as privileges to
a supine population by these enlightened rulers that were almost
like children looking to a parent. Instead, we are sovereign,
and we give the government a limited grant to protect
those sovereign rights. But since we're reaching toward the end
(01:01:34):
of the show, and it's been a really fascinating conversation, Anton,
hope to have you back, love to have you on regularly,
but I want to bring up a hot button issue
before we wrap it up, and that is the business
of central banking and federal reserve in the case of
(01:01:54):
the United States. I have many minds on the topic.
It's a complicated topic. It seems to me to be
one of those debates that runs through American history. The
central banks do not seem to, in my opinion, have
the interests of America at heart, although they have come
(01:02:15):
through at different times in our history. I mean, Jefferson,
who was against the bank, nevertheless went to the bank
when he wanted to do the Louisiana purchase because he
needed credit raised quickly, and so he eventually recognized the
importance of a central bank. But the problem with it
is that it is a cartel of bankers and industrialists
(01:02:37):
who are not necessarily American, who very well may be
a part of this very Anglo American establishment we're talking about.
And I wonder if there isn't a more constitutional way
or to either have a direct issuance of currency or
some kind of a separate banking entity, but yet one
(01:02:58):
that is under the auspices of our elected officials.
Speaker 2 (01:03:02):
The Bank of the United States, as you know, this
first and second banks created by Hamilton and then recreated
in the eighteen twenties eighteen sixteen, the Bank of the
United States was not a central bank in the sense
that we have with the Federal Reserve. In the Bank
of England was it was for national purposes, which is
(01:03:24):
not the case with the central banks. They serve the unfortunately,
they serve the purposes of this globalist clique and imperialism.
And I think that one way to really understand this
rather than have a theory about central banking. That's fine,
but look at I'm studying now the career of a
(01:03:45):
man named Montagute Norman.
Speaker 1 (01:03:48):
Oh, yeah, of England.
Speaker 2 (01:03:50):
He was the head of the pro Hitler faction in England,
and he was saying that helped me. He was completely insane,
that's right. He promoted fascism all throughout his career. He
was a governor of the Bank of England for twenty
four years. He was also, in a sense the head
of American central banking, except when FDR exercised power against
(01:04:16):
him and had his own man at the FED. But
he manti you. Norman worked through Ben Strong in New
York City and the Morgan Bank firm. And the fact
is that that Bank of England, with insane anti human
objectives that was the leader and the dictator of the
(01:04:41):
world's set of central banks. There is no such thing
as central banking in one country. National bank is different,
and every country has the right to control their own
currency and their own bank system. And the government has
(01:05:02):
to have control over credit in the sense of gently
directing credit to productive purposes. This is not a dictatorship,
this is not socialism. We have to be able to
defend our right to rise. And that means that the
international cartel of central banks and of control over trade,
(01:05:26):
we have the right to interfere with that. And so
this is a deep issue. I have a chapter in
this second volume which just came out. Chapter four is
Lincoln versus the Money Power, and it goes into the
fight over the greenbacks. We have the right to issue
our own money and it's not going to be inflationary
(01:05:50):
if we have at the same time the program for
the upshift of our whole country to the most modern
industry in the world. New industry is bringing more energy
and more power to to through the through the work
of each person. So this this is the way that
you actually defeat inflation, and and it's it's also how
(01:06:13):
you get as you industrialize In that way, you make
the citizenry more independent. A skilled person will not put
up with so called authorities. You know, you mentioned the
divine right of kings. What about these unelected authorities that
are all over the place in our in our modern
so called system of government. That's not our system. Our
(01:06:35):
constitution is our system. These authorities should not have any power.
We should not bow to them. Some people who think
of themselves as conservative, you know, religionists, say bow to
the authorities. God put them in place. No, I believe
that's that's almost like Satan saying I have the right
(01:06:58):
to rule the world, God put me in place. Ridiculous.
We I mean, I think elected are elected. People are
put there at the sufferance of the people. If they
do right to help us rise as of people, then
then we we will keep them in office.
Speaker 1 (01:07:14):
Of the respect. But I mean, I think the Bible
answers that in the story of Esther when right when
Hayman goes out, Moechai, you have to bow, Mordechai says,
I don't bow to anyone but God, I will not.
And that's in motion that whole story.
Speaker 2 (01:07:32):
That's right, that's the American attitude.
Speaker 1 (01:07:35):
Absolutely so Anton, let my listeners and viewers know where
they can get your excellent book and where they can
do you have a website, you legs to share or
anything else you le well.
Speaker 2 (01:07:47):
I'm on. You can buy the book volume one and
volume two. Volume one is the from the seventeen fifties
to the eighteen fifties. Volume two is eighteenth already stating eyes.
They're both on Amazon. We'll soon have a kindle edition
of the second volume. We have it kindle and paperback
(01:08:07):
for the first volume. And I have a subscription website
Anton Shakin dot substack dot com. I have a Anton's substack.
You can look it up that way. I couched things
most almost every Monday morning. So I need hit people's
help to do this. We've got to be able to
(01:08:28):
look in our past and become great again by what
we did at our best, which was on behalf of mankind.
Speaker 1 (01:08:36):
Really, Oh, you're doing God's work, and Anton Shakin, I
want to thank you very much for joining me today
as always, and I really appreciate it. And God will
keep up the good work.
Speaker 2 (01:08:47):
Thank you very much, Charles for this opportunity.
Speaker 1 (01:08:50):
All right, take care. Thank you,
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.