“Rothschilds - Fact Or Disinformation To Protect The Guilty?”

By Michael Krieger: Regular Liberty Blitzkrieg readers will be aware that I very much enjoy reading the opinions of Martin Armstrong, a man with such an interesting and unique life story, I won’t even attempt to do it justice here. Not only have his major “macro turn dates” impressed me all the way back to my prior career on Wall Street, he doggedly refuses to limit his thinking to any type of narrow minded, dogmatic viewpoint, no matter what genre of viewpoint that may be. While I disagree with him on several issues, he tends to see the realities of the macro world around us from a perspective quite similar to my own. He doesn’t try to make world events fit into a predetermined viewpoint, but rather tries to look at each distinct global event or emerging meme with as little bias as possible.
Within the anti-establishment world in which I proudly reside, many people look for simplistic narratives. Ironically, these narratives are often as silly and narrow-minded as those who pledge allegiance to the fraudulent Republican or Democratic parties. For some, it’s the Jews. If you don’t think the Jews run the world and are the root of all evil, you must be a CIA shill or “working for them.” For others, it’s the Arabs or Muslims, and so on and so forth. Another bizarre obsession is this notion that a small group of families hiding in the shadows hold all the real money and power on earth, and that these are the ones actually ordering the billionaires around. The family most often named as the kingpins of this pyramid are the Rothschilds.


The world is a strange place, and I don’t claim to know anything but an infinitesimally small fraction of what there is to know. While I certainly won’t rule out the possibility that there are some extraordinarily rich people who stay behind the scenes and exert tremendous influence, my response is: Who cares?
As Eleanor Roosevelt eloquently noted:

“Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.”

I agree 100% with the above quote. People who obsess about getting rid of specific people, or groups of people, as the answer to systemic problems aren’t thinking big enough. Slavery was an idea and an institution that existed in human civilization from the beginning. It was only after bloody conflicts and an evolution in consciousness, that humanity agreed it was unacceptable. You could’ve chopped to bits slave-master after slave-master, but as long as the institution remained in place and acceptable there would be plenty of people more than happy to take their place. Similarly, there are plenty of people who would happily become 18th century style slave-masters in 2015 if given half the chance.
So if you want real change, you need to attack systems, ideology and paradigms. Sure, I certainly call out some of the worst defenders and profiteers of the status quo all the time on this site, but I don’t for a minute think that simply getting rid of these individuals will change anything permanently unless we alter people’s hearts and minds first, and then the system itself second.
A great example of how dangerous and counterproductive an obsession with the “Rothschilds, Rockefellers, etc” can be, was evidenced here on this site a month ago. In the post titled, Meet the Extreme Super Rich – A List of the 80 People Who Own as Much as the World’s Poorest 3.6 Billion. Here are a couple of screen shots from the comment section.

Think about how completely unproductive these comments are. Even if they are 100% true, so what? Sheldon Adelson is #8 on that list, with an estimated wealth of $38 billion; and he is absolutely spending it, and absolutely directly influencing events on the world stage in a very negative way (see: Sheldon Adelson – The Dangerous American Oligarch Behind Benjamin Netanyahu).
Does it really matter if someone else is pulling his strings? In the grand scheme of things, it doesn’t. We already know how the oligarchs control the world through central bank money printing, wars, etc. These people must be battled in the world of ideas, not in the world of obsessing over shadowy families. That’s merely a waste of time and valuable energy.
Martin Armstrong seems to agree. Here are some excerpts from his post: Rothschilds – Fact or Disinformation to Protect the Guilty.

The conspiracy promoters are just not satisfied with the fact that we are screwed and perhaps nobody is in charge to stop or push anything. The days of the Rothschilds owning banks and financing wars is old history, Yet to this day, they paint this family as behind everything. This to me is PROPAGANDA for they are not even on center stage. Hey, as long as the get people to blame them, the NY Bankers are free to bribes all they want and politicians are for sale to the highest bidder. Sorry – but the Rothschilds have been long out-classed by New York. That was 19th century.
No family is worth $500 trillion and the Rothschild do not own every central bank. This is just total propaganda that is the perfect cover for those who are really screwing society. This is the oldest trick in the book – kids play this game: I didn’t do it, he did. Or how about – “The dog age it.”
He does not own the central banks and we had under contract over $3 trillion at Princeton Economics in the ’90s. Nobody has ever come that close to what we advised on. Even now, we are still being called in for advice on portfolios more than 100 times what RIT Capital Partners controls.
What is happening is very interesting. We have more people abandoning the banks as advisers today than perhaps at anytime in my career. This has been because they have woken up to the new way of doing business – transactional banking where the clients are the target. The good old days of relationship banking no longer exist among the NY money-center banks. Those days are long gone.
Pay attention to the REAL players. This nonsense is a total diversion from the truth. While you are pointing fingers at the Rothschilds, the NY boys are counting their money.

Certainly something everyone in the anti-establishment camp should think about deeply.



In Liberty,
Michael Krieger

Source