One of the best taglines that I ever saw that underscores the absurdity of humanity’s current plight is this:
“If humans are so smart, then why do they need Money to live?”
I’ve heard people retort, “But I don’t need money to live.” Yes, we know. That’s the point. None of us “needs” money as a physical component to our ability to breathe and eat. And yet, somehow, somebody, somewhere and in some time long past has convinced us to spend the lion’s share of our time and energy in the acquisition of money so that we can buy “stuff,” in the George Carlin sense of the word.
When I take walks in my neighborhood I observe the birds and trees staring back at me. I often wonder if they are thinking: “I don’t get it. How do you people think you are the most evolved species on earth when all of us have mortgage-free homes?”
So let’s answer that question. Who DID invent money … or more to the point, Who invented DEBT?
And thus we open a series of blogs that will lean heavily on the books written by Joseph P. Farrell. Farrell weaves a thread in all of his books that is born from an idea that he calls the Topological Metaphor, or simply abbreviated as, the Metaphor. It is the underlying root of fields as diverse as finance, physics, philosophy, music, DNA sequencing … let’s just say: the Metaphor is where you start, with everything.
The Metaphor began gaining acceptance during the Renaissance largely due to the efforts of the Medici family whose agents in Byzantium had “magically rediscovered” a trove of ancient wisdom known as the Hermetica, or, Hermeticism. The Hermetica is said to be a repository of the wisdom that Mankind had acquired by the time of the ancient Flood. It was said to have been preserved and passed down by ancient civilizations like India, Egypt, Mesopotamia, and even China. The trail this body of work followed as it wound its way into the hands of the Italian banking families is fascinating in itself. But we’ll save that particular trail for future blogs.
For the purpose of our discussion here, we want to lay out what is demonstrated by the Metaphor. It is said to have been an attempt by early Man to rationally explain how the material world came into existence and how the physical medium of that world can be manipulated. As you might guess, it would come to provide the theoretical basis of experimentation in all kinds of Alchemy. Already you may be hearing echoes of the Unified Field Theory. Clearly, the person who unlocks the secret of the physical medium will hold in his hands the power of both Creation and, frighteningly, Destruction.
Let’s conceptualize the Metaphor. Imagine a blank white page as a symbol of the original empty void of Nothingness, like this white space:
Now imagine the first act of creation symbolized by this Circle. Think of this primal act of creation as “carving out a space” from the Vast Nothingness. Here I ask you a trick question. How many objects do you see below this line?
The knee-jerk answer is: “I see one object, the circle.” However, in the Metaphor, you are here seeing THREE concepts:
1) the vast white space of Nothingness outside the circle, the original Void,
2) the confined circle that got created out of the nothingness, or the First Something, and
3) the common surface, or boundary, that separates the Nothing from the Something: the edge of the circle
Note that this describes a 3-in-1 concept. Hold that on the back burner of your mind.
Believe it or not, this Metaphor, when interpreted falsely by men of evil intent, is what has led a planet full of intelligent human beings down a path of misery and destruction. Conversely, this same Metaphor, when interpreted in a beneficial way, could be used as a basis for a system of infinite man-made beauty and ingenuity. We will explore this often in future blogs.
Let’s explain how the Metaphor came to be used falsely to promote infinite indebtedness.
The Metaphor can be used as a basis for all kinds of fields of human endeavor and study. But let’s talk briefly about one in particular since it came to have so much power over the way Mankind lived: Religion. I promise that this will be brief! In most systems of organized religion — both Western and Eastern, ancient and modern — some representation of a Trinity doctrine is held as the core belief. One way that a typical Trinity doctrine is expressed is graphically displayed in this diagram.
Note that you have two somewhat opposite concepts, the Father and Son, and also you have a common surface that harmonizes the two “opposites”. This is the Mother or Goddess function. She is the “common fence barrier” between the Father and the Son.
Around the time of the rise of the Mesopotamian city-states and post-diluvian Egyptian culture, men opted to be ruled by central governments with military and administration needs to care for. Farmers began storing their production outputs and seed for future crops in the center of their communities, at the temples. Naturally, from time to time, people had to draw on those resources. The priesthoods of these western societies had to come up with a community protocol for managing the temple inventory and keeping the king happy. That protocol came to be embodied in that “Goddess” idea, that common surface between Man and his Creator. In every religious system you choose in the Old World, eventually the “Goddess” role in their system always rose to most important component of that system.
THE CRUX OF THE PROBLEM
The priests drew on the same 3-in-1 formula of the Metaphor as guidance for running the community. However, there are ways to twist the formula. Now, we may never know exactly WHO in the distant mist of time formulated such an idea, but here below is one unfortunate way to apply the Metaphor. (I personally suspect Nimrod’s wife, but that’s another story.) The priesthood believed:
1). In the beginning God existed alone in the empty void.
2). God “dismembered” a part of himself or otherwise sacrificed his resources in order to “give birth” to Man.
3.) Therefore, Man now owes a perpetual Debt back to God every day that Man enjoys life. Ultimately, Man will pay back that debt with his death.
(paraphrased from the book “Financial Vipers of Venice,” Joseph P. Farrell, p. 52)
Conveniently, the priesthood made another startling revelation. They looked around and noticed that THEY were the human representatives of God. And even better, the King sat on a throne by the grace of God and the priests were the King’s advisors. The priests spoke for God. Therefore, it was their duty to act on God’s behalf by assisting the masses of debt-owing Mankind to make payments on their debt to God every time somebody needed a resource from the temple-storehouse.
The priesthood corrupted the Metaphor to apply it in practical terms as shown in this diagram. You can probably already see how that line of reasoning could be spun wildly out of control. Debates over the charging of interest, Usury, raged like a ping-pong game down through the centuries. We will talk about that in future blogs.
Thankfully, not all men interpreted the Metaphor as a rationale for the acceptance of endless deified debt. In fact, when the Hermetica suddenly became popular during the Renaissance, a network of influential thinkers began challenging the mind-set of the bankers of Venice. One of these men was Giordano Bruno who sadly paid for his heresy with his life. Bruno insisted on interpreting the Metaphor from a mathematical point of view, not a theological one.
Bruno’s viewpoint was that every Man was a divine creature and therefore every Man could be his own Banker. (This reminds us of expressions by Colin McKay at Deror.org that we will attend to in future blogs as well.) Farrell concludes:
“Hermeticism … thus knows no version of debt or sacrifice — or priestly elites empowered to perform them — and thus, if translated into financial and monetary terms, it is supremely a metaphor of debt-free production and creativity, of debt-free money.” (Vipers, p. 57)
We might envision a view of the Metaphor as shown in this image, with all the “sacrifice” language erased. Farrell repeatedly asserts that a beneficial interpretation of the Metaphor is one of “fecundity” or fertility and creativity. Imagine a system of life where you form a mental concept of something you wish to accomplish. If you live in a society that has mastered free-energy systems, you then have unlimited resources from which to draw to use to accomplish your goal. You don’t have to go buy or borrow any resources to accomplish your goal. You simply use what is all around you in infinite abundance.
An interpretation like this also more closely resembles the “natural order” of those birds and trees we mentioned at the beginning of this post. All living things, except humans, manage to exist every day within fairly well-balanced, self-regulating systems. The lemon tree draws water and nutrients from its environment and outputs lemons. It does not borrow the resources; it just uses them in its own system of input and output. When the bird needs twigs and fibers to build its nest, it simply goes out and gets them. No down-payments, no mortgages. Obviously this is an over-simplied illustration and there are factors of self-preservation and territorial rights to be considered. But the point is that there is no logical rationale to justify a social construct that demands that human beings go about their daily activities under the guidance of Debt.
At the very least, the Metaphor demonstrates a system that exists with debt-free money. Notably, this idea has worked in many societies. China is no exception and we mention that in light of the shift we are all watching right now as the debt-laden “closed” system of finance that we have labored under in the West appears to be coming to a screeching halt.
But now the question remains, Can we replace the Closed Metaphor with an Open one?
If you would like to pursue Farrell’s summary in his own words of these interpretations of the Topological Metaphor, fast forward to the 48-minute mark of this YouTube audio. His book is available on Amazon and via his publisher, here.
My contact information with link to my personal blogs and Karatbars portal are found at my billboard page of SlayTheBankster.com . Here is the YouTube archive of the RogueMoney Friday radio show where this blog was discussed on March 11, 2016: