13 thoughts on “

    • Thanks! If you want to provide material for the blog send me an email through the Scuttlebutt tab and I’ll discuss it with you. Can’t promise I’ll post anything (I have a schedule of content I’m working through) but I’ll definitely take a look.

  1. This site is a Jerusalem for those with a hungry, truly anticapitalist soul, and I wanted to thank you for your grandiose work.
    Have a wonderful new year !

  2. Bogumil,

    I recently replied to your previous response comment regarding my decision to share more information related to my personal research, because the comments in your most recent Post was approaching the thousands of the words and I do not want the comments sections of future Blog posts to be filled up with me talking about something that is too broad and deviating away from the main focus of the Blog post in question.

    Is it okay if share the rest of my research here in the About Section until I find the time to create my own Blog?

    I ask, because I have been considering the possibility of starting my own Blog for quite a while now. But since I also do not want your About Section to be flooded with comments about me delving into “NS Monetary Policy,” I may have to set aside some time later this year to create a blog and let you know once it’s up and running. And if I do decide to create that Blog, I will let you know when it is ready by email vis-à-vis the Scuttlebutt Tab. With that being said, allow me to explain why your research and mine appears to be intertwined because, to quote Jung (as in Carl Jung, not Rudolf Jung), there is far more at work here than just a Synchronization of Meaningful Coincidences by happenstance.

    My Political Science and Economic History research began in 2012 and I had only finished gathering the research earlier this year. It was only because of your continued perseverance to continue working on the ARPLAN Blog that I have just begun to piece together what is now a gigantic jigsaw puzzle the size of “The Decline of the West” and “Prussianism and Socialism” combined. I do not expect to be finished piecing together the jigsaw puzzle until sometime next year and even then, I am only just getting started.

    To begin, I should note that my research is not necessarily restricted to the historical circumstances of the early 20th Century, although the vast majority is nevertheless affected by the early 20th century since the decision-making of the Liberal Capitalists and Marxism-Leninists from 1945 to the present day–yes, including the Coronavirus Pandemic.

    I have no idea if you aware of this or not, Bogumil, but the rest of humanity has been riding on a Postmodernist merry-go-round since 1973. It began when the Bretton Woods System and its revised “Gold Standard” (1945-1973) finally fell apart and neither the US nor the Soviet Union have offered anything potent except “Fiat Currencies” from 1973 onwards. Not even China (in fact, the Chinese Renminbi is pegged to the US Dollar) offered anything in the way of an alternative. What I have been noticing since 1973, based on my own research, is a constant revisiting of a millennia-old Hegelian Dialectic posited by Aristotle and Plato of Ancient Athens over the concept of “Currency.” Aristotle and Plato’s Dialectic for the West and the rest of humanity can be best summarized as this:

    Shall the West and the rest of humanity as of late continue to uphold Aristotle and Plato’s assertions by backing any Currency with Gold and Silver (Bimetallism) or with Schuld (Debt/Guilt) by Fiat (Chartalism) respectively?

    Or ought we to finally consider the possibility of making a serious effort to back a Currency by Arbeit (Labor/Work) itself?

    I can’t believe that I have finally make it to this point after the better part of a whole decade, because nobody that I know of has been to fully comprehend the implications of the latter question. Not even Feder or Strasser (both Gregor and Otto) were able to realize the true extent of those implications. I am only saying this because there are serious consequences in store for us if we continue doing “business as usual” by sticking with Aristotle and Plato’s Dialectic.

    What I have been delving into these past several years is all uncharted territory for World History, except it’s all backed by plenty of historical evidence and hard data going back decades, if not whole centuries.

    In closing, to quote Seneca the Younger: “Ducunt volentem fata, nolentem trahunt.”

    -FAH

  3. Bogumil,

    Looking back at the past several months of comments that I had made across different ARPLAN Blog Posts, I am glad that there has been a consistent pattern related to the concept of “National Socialism.” This may seem trivial, but the technical name which I had consistently given to refer to my almost decade-long research is “National Socialist Monetary Policy” or “NSMP” for short.

    To summarization the the crux of my research, there are four specific aims:

    -Gather enough hard data and historical evidence regarding the conceptualization, articulation, theorization, and implementation of alternative Currencies in everyday transactions as a “Medium of Exchange,” “Unit of Account,” “System of Deferred Payment” (for paying Debts incurred from borrowing), and a “Store of Value”;

    -Determine the feasibility of a Socialistic Monetary System distinct enough to be independent of the ill-fated “Time-based Currencies” of Robert Owen and Joseph Warren of the Enlightenment’s Utopian Socialism (aka “Liberal Socialism”), as well as Bimetallism (Gold and Silver), Chartalism (“Full and Faith and Credit” or “Debt”), Cryptocurrencies (Bitcoin), and all other conceptions of Currency. Ideally, it ought to be a well-documented, well-researched refutation of Marx and Engel’s infamous and obscure skepticism toward NSMP;

    -Determine the feasibility of an Socialistic Accounting System with its own Arithmetic equation for facilitating Accounts more complex than “Single-Entry Account Bookkeeping,” and independent of both Liberal Capitalism’s “Double-Entry Account Bookkeeping” and Cryptocurrency “Triple-Entry Account Bookkeeping” for Blockchains and Timestamps;

    -And consider drafting mock policy proposals and realistic simulations of potential scenarios with the Intent of understanding the flaws and advantages of a Nation-State having distinct Currency, Monetary and Accounting Systems specifically-tailored for “Economic Socialization” while also being impossible to replicate with the “Economic Liberalization” of Liberal Capitalism, Lenin’s NEP, Kosygin Reforms, Chinese-style Economic Reforms, Perestroika, and so forth. [Currently, I am now at this stage.]

    The term “NSMP” was deliberately chosen early on in my research almost a decade ago because I was trying to research the possibility of a National Currency specifically-tailored for Socialism in general (and not just National Socialism alone) without having to rely on Liberal Capitalist Policies which plagued the Soviet Union, Third Reich, and PRC throughout their existences. As you can probably imagine, it never ceases to amaze me that the term “National Socialist” or even “National Socialism” are still historically-loaded semantics associated with “Nazism.”

    Therefore, Bogumil, I would like to ask you two important questions:

    -Was the term “Nazism” supposedly a ‘contraction’ of the German word “Nationalsozialismus” as a derogatory slur from the Weimar years or was it created post-1945 in order to frame the entire essence of “National Socialism” by conflating it with the worst failures of “Hitlerism” and to a lesser extent those of “Strasserism?”

    -And were you able to find out who originally came up with the term “Nazism?” To this day, even after all these years, I still have yet to find anything beyond mere anecdotal evidence suggesting that it was coined in the 1920s, either by Joseph Goebbels in “The Nazi-Sozi” or else by a ‘Konrad Heiden’.

    Heiden originally appeared within my own research since he was the one who accused a Russian-French woman of authoring an infamous fabrication called “The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion,” which was notorious for popularizing the ridiculous Conspiracy Theory that conflated “Jews” and “Communists” as part of an alleged ‘Cabal’ of “International Bankers.”

    Out of curiosity, I did trace the origins of this particular Conspiracy Theory and found out that it was just an Anti-Soviet White Russian propaganda ploy against the Soviets in the Russian Civil War to justify, among other things, the Red Scare in the United States. In fact, I still find it to be highly suspicious for American Mass Media outlets in the 1920s to be disseminating popular movies denigrating Socialism and also setting the precedent for the later McCarthy Era in the 1950s.

    Personally, a lot of information commonly known about the 1920s remains highly suspect, since the decade also saw the rise of Mass Communications, Mass Advertising, and Mass Marketing applications capable of manipulating thoughts and emotions of target audiences. An argument can be made that recent concepts like Social Media, Fake News, Post-Truth and Identity Politics, Truth Decay, Data Mining, Personalized Advertising, Surveillance Capitalism, and the “Commoditization of Information” are all technologically-advanced variations of concepts that were already being pioneered in the 1920s. I know that the Liberal Capitalist Friedrich von Hayek set the precedent for “Information” to become a Commodity, which was not articulated and realized until the Computerization and Digitalization of Information between the 1970s and 1980s, finally being made a Reality thanks to the World Wide Web (WWW) by the 1990s. In fact, I even found parallels to the “Y2K Bug” from 2000 and its subsequent reappearances in 2010 and 2020 as well as the more ominous “Y2038 Bug.”

    My next Comment here is related to my own personal research about the conceptualization of “De-Hitlerized National Socialism,” particularly some very obscure and overlooked post-1945 historical evidence which I had gathered over the years and not only support my own research, but also those of yours by extension, Bogumil.

    Signed,
    -FAH

  4. Bogumil

    I have some fascinating news to report. I did a bit of searching last week and found out Hannah Arendt advocated for a “Council-System” comparable to the one which Baron von Stein (and especially the articles of various authors that were posted on the ARPLAN Blog) had advocated. Even more promising are concepts very familiar to aspects of NSMP within my own research.

    The specific works in question are “The Human Condition” (1958) and “On Revolution” (1963). She advocated for the Prussian “Council-System” in “On Revolution” but in specifically American context, which is very promising since Arendt herself specifically argues that “the spirit of the US Constitution” has been ‘lost’ and that in turn justifies a Prussian-American “Council-System” in order to overcome the Congressional partisanship and lobbyism that has been justified ever since James Madison wrote “Federalist Paper No. 10.”

    The only difference between my version of NSMP and the one advocated by Hannah Arendt is within the pages of “The Human Condition.” In that book, Arendt specifically stated that human behavior can be split into classifications: “Vita Contemplativa” (Contemplative Life) and “Vita Activa” (Active Life). Vita Activa is the most obvious since she cited three types of activity, “Labor,” “Work,” and “Action.”

    “Labor” refers to any menial activities that one does to subsist and survive (what I explicitly refer to in my research as “Meaningless Work”). Any boring 9-to-5 job, military conscription, street cleaning, truck driving, and similar activities fall within this category.

    “Work” refers to any activities that one does for a purpose and meaning (what I explicitly refer to in my research as “Meaningful Work”). Examples range from you continuing your research on the ARPLAN Blog and me doing my research on the details of NSMP to someone finally being able to pursue the work that they wanted to do in their lives because they were born for it.

    “Action” refers to any activities that one does with an “Intent” of deliberately doing something that is worthy of being in the annals of World History. Arendt cites the Ancient Greek author Homer and him writing the “Iliad” and the “Odyssey” as being an example. Examples of “Action” range from Oswald Spengler spending most of the 1910s writing Volume I of “The Decline of the West” to Ernst Jünger volunteering in the First World War and later participating on the periphery of the July 20 Plot in the Second World War. Ideally, it ought to be something one can totally be proud of doing and have no regrets because it is truly something worthy of having its own place within the annals of World History.

    Where I make the greatest divergence in my research, albeit acknowledging and even sometimes agreeing with Arendt’s thesis is with regard to “Vita Contemplativa,” which is Philosophical and Metaphysical. Arendt criticizes Karl Marx within “The Human Condition” for not giving enough importance for Vita Contemplativa is crucial to the existence of Political Philosophy and the importance that it has to Political Theory. This argument is understandable since the works of Marx and Engels are overabundant on “Vita Activa” (like “Communist Manifesto,” “Das Kapital,” or “Critique of the Gotha Program” to name a few), but are scant when it comes to issues like overcoming Aristotle’s “Bimetallism” and Plato’s “Chartalism” in lesser known works like “Poverty of Philosophy.”

    Where I find myself distancing the most from Arendt is when I argue in my conceptualization of NSMP that “Dasein” becomes especially important within Jungian psychology “for tapping into the “Collective Unconsciousness” to achieve “Individuation” within the “Collective Consciousness” so as to achieve Socialism vis-à-vis “Socialization” with others.

    Dasein is inherent within every human (you, me, everyone else who reads the ARPLAN Blog and these comments, and the rest of humanity who does anything greater than “Meaningless Work” or “Labor” in the Arendtian sense) and that it is our ‘skeleton key’ for tapping into the Collective Unconsciousness. You and I achieve “Socialization” in the Collective Consciousness whenever you add a new post on the ARPLAN Blog or whenever I decide to add a new comment on the ARPLAN Blog.

    Where the original ARPLAN and Nietzsche become apparent is when somebody somewhere decides that the spirit of ARPLAN be allowed to continue so that we may understand the “Will-to-Power” inherent within true Socialisms and to do everything possible to avoid the “false Socialism of the Last Men” (like Owenism, Fordism, and Hitlerism). Truly, the Will-to-Power of every true Socialism is dependent on our efforts and anyone else (be from the past, the present, or the future) who made the deliberate decision to help us in our researches, Bogumil.

    In my next comment, I will be introducing to you the researches of two people who I believe were influenced by the works of Werner Sombart: Dr. Karl Polanyi and Joseph Schumpeter.

    I look forward to hearing from you as always.

    Signed,
    -FAH

  5. Bogumil,

    I will be sharing with you my own research into the central thesis of Werner Sombart as well as Joseph Schumpeter and Dr. Karl Polanyi in relation to the concepts of “Late-Stage Capitalism,” “Creative Destruction,” and “Fictitious Commodities.” To begin, I must argue that all three concepts are like the holy trinity for understanding why Liberal Capitalism is behaving erratically as of late and why there has been this growing resurging in Socialism and Communism among youths and young adults within the Western world.

    We ought to remember that Liberal Capitalism cannot exist without “Capital,” “Private Property,” or as I have often referred to it in my research, “Property-as-Wealth.” I deliberately chose “Property-as-Wealth” as my umbrella term for both Capital and Private Property because one cannot talk about Capital without Private Property any more than one cannot talk about the European Union (EU) without mentioning the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Capital and Private Property are the same entity under Liberal Capitalism much like the EU is a “Free Trade Agreement” (FTA) and NATO acts as a “Military Alliance” to enforce the terms of this FTA by keeping Russia out of Europe and giving Germany the illusion of power in a sort of Faustian Pact.

    Every true Socialism from Marxism-Leninism and Maoism to National Socialism and National Bolshevism agrees that Property-as-Wealth ought to be abolished for causing more trouble than its intrinsic worth. It is clear from my research that all true Socialisms seek to introduce “Property-as-Power.” Property-as-Power is the Socialist equivalent to the Liberal Capitalist Property-as-Wealth and it goes by different names throughout my research over the years. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels both called it the “Productive Forces”; Friedrich Nietzsche referred to it as the “Will-to-Power”; Carl Jung referred to it as “Synchronization”; Oswald Spengler called it “Productive Property”; Ernst Jünger called it “Total Mobilization”; and Heinz Guderian and the Prussian military-aristocracy consistently referred to it as the “Schwerpunktprinzip” (Focal Point Principle); and Hannah Arendt called it “Vita Activa.”

    What prevents Property-as-Power from existing, as I found out, is whether there needs to be a way to replace the Property-as-Wealth of Liberal Capitalism with the Property-as-Power of all Socialisms. In order to understand the logic of Property-as-Power is to understand why I have consistently argued in my research is that one of the prerequisites of Socialism is the creation of an alternative monetary system, complete with its accounting and financial systems for facilitating Command Economies.

    There is a consistent argument from Sombart’s works, specifically “War and Capitalism,” that Liberal Capitalism as we know it has finally reached its limits and that the two World Wars and the Cold Wars have no direct bearing on the emergence of “Late-Stage Capitalism” until we finally understand the financial and monetary side of economics. To quote Alfred Mitchell-Innes from the “Credit Theory of Money” on the eve of World War I, “‘things are not the way they seem’” (https://www.community-exchange.org/docs/The%20Credit%20Theoriy%20of%20Money.htm).

    Broken down like this, Sombart’s thesis regarding Late-Stage Capitalism is finally realized the moment Western Central Banks, Financial Markets, Accounting and Financial Firms discover that Aristotle’s Bimetallism (the Silver and Gold Standards) is incapable of sustaining any effort by Western Civilization in both Wartime and Peacetime. In the case of Wartime, the Gold Standard was suspended in World War I and lost its credibility again in the Great Depression; in the case of Peacetime, a reformed Gold Standard vis-à-vis Bretton Woods came to an end in the “Nixon Shock” of 1971 and the collapse of Bretton Woods itself by 1973.

    Since resurrecting the Gold Standard again is pointless, it became natural for Western governments in the 1970s to turn to Plato’s Chartalism (the “Debt Standard” as I like to call it) and start issuing Fiat Currency backed by their “Full Faith and Credit.” Five examples of Fiat Currencies stand out the most: the US Dollar, the British Pound Sterling, the EU Euro, the Japanese Yen, and the Chinese Renminbi; all five are what give the XDRs (Special Drawing Rights) of the International Monetary Fund their Value.

    Note the word “Credit” within the phrase “Full Faith and Credit.” The phrase means that any State-issued Fiat Currency created by any nation-state’s central bank for potential borrowers, for farms, firms and factories, for workers and farmers is in many respects a form of “Nexum” (Debt Bondage) from Ancient Rome. This is more so apparent every time somebody borrows a Loan denominated in Fiat Currencies (with Interest for the Borrower or Negative Interest for the Lender). As Hjalmar Schacht pointed out in the opening pages of “The Magic of Money,” it becomes extremely easy for both Lenders and Borrowers alike “to lose sight of Property” in the Liberal Capitalist sense of Property-as-Wealth. This in turn explains why the National Debts of many nations nowadays are so high (https://www.usdebtclock.org/world-debt-clock.html).

    Since Liberal Capitalism can neither rely on Gold and Silver mining vis-à-vis Aristotle’s Bimetallism nor can Western Civilization and all of humanity sustain the vast accumulations of Plato’s Chartalism, Joseph Schumpeter’s “Creative Destruction” and Dr. Karl Polanyi’s “Fictitious Commodities” became justifiable by Liberal Capitalists.

    Always remember that under Liberal Capitalism, unlike all true Socialisms, the Market Economy is constantly in flux and unstable to the point of becoming downright impossible for any Nation-State to rein in and hold its Economy accountable to the everyday realities of its People. Creative Destruction occurs within every “Business Cycle,” where Life becomes an unending cycle of Expansion, Crisis, Recession and Recovery or more precisely Revival, Prosperity, Liquidation and Depression. Liberal Capitalist regimes are constantly finding ways to prolong the cycle in order prevent any true Socialism from appearing.

    Examples include Welfare Capitalism, Insurance Capitalism, Finance Capitalism, mass consumption and mass production of Consumerism and Producerism to create an illusory prosperity through “Consumer Spending” and “Government Spending,” as well as Progressive Taxation and Tax Cutting, Regulations and Deregulations from Lobbyists and Nepotists as Special Interests, and technological advancements like Computerization and Digitalization, the World Wide Web, Automation, Artificial Intelligence, Mass Surveillance (“Surveillance Capitalism”), and eCommerce websites like Amazon.com and Social Media websites.

    One of Liberal Capitalism’s more exotic countermeasures are “Fictitious Commodities.” The commoditization of everyone’s “Personal Information” on Social Media through Personalized Advertisements for revenue is one example. The commoditization of “Climate Change” through the selling and purchasing of “Weather Derivatives” is another.

    “Fictitious Commodities” as a concept was developed from Marx and Engels’ criticism of Liberal Capitalism’s “Commodity Fetishization” of “People,” “Land,” and “Capital.” Any Commoditization of People (like Slaves and Gig Workers), Land (like Real Estate, Monthly Rents and Mortgage Loans), and Capital (like Stocks, Bonds, Derivatives, Options, Insurance, and Welfare) all originate from the “Labor Theory of Property” (LTP) of John Locke’s Two Treatises of Government.

    It is the Labor Theory of Property which justifies the conceptualization of “Common Property” or “Commonwealth” and “Private Property” or “Property-as-Wealth.” The only way the objective of my research, the conceptualization of “National Socialist Monetary Policy” (NSMP) is going to be realized, there needs to be a post mortem critique of Labor Theory of Property by attempting to replace Property-as-Wealth with the more appropriate Property-as-Power.

    In closing, I will be submitting another comment later this week about what it would take for NSMP to alter the very definition of Property and my attempts to articulate an alternative version of Labor Theory of Property. What I had yielded was the Marxist “Proletariat” becoming the Nietzschean “Übermensch.”

    Signed,
    -FAH

  6. Bogumil,

    This is Duty and Honor. How are things with you on your end? It has been a while since we last spoken, hasn’t it?

    I thought I should inform that my workload for this month has been trimmed down enough for me to look forward to the next ARPLAN Blog post as always.

    I still do not have enough free time this month to work on my Blog, but sometime within mid-to-late December, though.

    Anyhow, Looking forward to hearing from you soon.

    Signed,
    -DAH

Leave a Reply