Cooperative Capitalism pptx

i
Cooperative
Capitalism
ii
iii
Cooperative
Capitalism
___________________________________________________
A Blueprint for
Global Peace and
Prosperity
2
nd
Edition
Expanded and Updated
_________________
J.W. Smith
Institute for Economic Democracy Press
iv
Copyright © 2005 by J.W. Smith
We believe all ideas should have maximum exposure. Thus for any properly
cited individual quotation up to 500 words no permission is necessary.
By expanding upon parts of this manuscript, or nesting your work
within the framework of this in-depth study, you can present a clearer
picture while producing a book in six months as opposed to 6-to-10 years.
Permission will be granted by the author (), and the manuscript
will be sent by email, to those who present a serious and scholarly outline of
a proposed book utilizing this foundation.
The authors, The Institute for Economic Democracy, and their officers
and supporters, specifically retain full rights to this work and other
published research so that others may use it, correct it, expand upon it, and

produce an ever-more powerful and workable plan for sustainable world
development and elimination of poverty.
Published by: The Institute for Economic Democracy
www.ied.info/
Smith, J.W., 1930-
Cooperative Capitalism: A Blueprint for Global Peace
and Prosperity / J.W. Smith 2
nd
ed.
Includes bibliographical references and Index.
ISBN 0-9624423-8-9 (hbk)
ISBN 0-9624423-9-7 (pbk)
1. Free enterprise—History. 2. Free trade—History.
3. Capitalism—History. 4. Democracy—History.
5. International economic relations—History. I. Title
Quality books provided the above for an earlier edition
6. Henry George 7. Public commons 8. World Federation
Book cover designed by John Cole, www.johncolegrf.com
This book is printed on acid free paper.
v
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION 1
Personal Property Rights, Community Property Rights, and Private
Property Rights 2
A Very Short History on the Few Claiming the Rights of the Many 3
Subtle-Monopolization is a Remnant of Feudal Exclusive Property Rights 9
SECTION A 16
INTERNAL TRADE 16
WASTED WEALTH THAT THE DEVELOPING WORLD
MUST AVOID 16

1.HENRY GEORGE’S CONCEPT OF A MODERN LAND
COMMONS 17
2.THE EFFICIENCY OF A MODERN TECHNOLOGY
COMMONS THROUGH APPLYING HENRY GEORGE’S
PRINCIPLE OF CONDITIONAL TITLES TO NATURE’S
WEALTH 21
3.THE EFFICIENCY OF A MODERN MONEY COMMONS
23
Creating a Constant-Value Currency 28
4. SUBSIDIARY SUBTLE MONOPOLIES WITHIN THE
PRIMARY MONOPOLIES OF LAND, TECHNOLOGY AND
MONEY 31
5. RECLAIMING THE INFORMATION COMMONS 36
Eliminating Political Corruption by the Wealthy and Powerful 38
A Modern Communication Commons converts wasted Time to Free Time
38
An unseen and unfelt Money Transaction Tax 39
That Population can be stabilized without Coercion has been proven 40
SECTION B 42
EXTERNAL TRADE 42
A PEACEFUL AND PROSPEROUS WORLD 42
6. REFOCUSING ECONOMIC THOUGHT 43
Fair and Equal Trade as opposed to Unequal “Free” Trade 44
Plunder-by-Trade has a Long History 45
Never did a Nation develop under Adam Smith Free Trade 47
True Freedom, is based on Economic Freedom 50
America chose not to Support the World’s Break for Freedom 52
History supports Friedrich List, not Adam Smith 55
7. HOW A “FREE” PEOPLE WITH A “FREE” PRESS ARE
PROPAGANDIZED 57

The CIA’s Mighty Wurlitzer Suppressing the World’s break for Freedom
58
vi
Corporate-Funded Think-Tanks Backed the CIA’s Mighty Wurlitzer 61
Academia and the Media cannot escape an established Social-Control-
Paradigm (Framework of Orientation) 64
Death Squads: Rising Democratic Leaders must be eliminated 66
Strategies-of-Tension (“Framework of Orientation”) Controlling a “Free
Press” and a “free” Nation 67
The World was Breaking Free 69
Controlling Elections in the shattered Empires of Europe and Asia 71
Destabilizing Dissenting Political Groups 73
Professors, Intellectuals, and the Masses are locked into Protecting Empire
79
A Few of the Many Mighty Wurlitzers in History 80
8. THE PERIPHERY OF EMPIRE COULD NOT BE
PERMITTED THEIR FREEDOM 83
The Korean War: A Strategy-of-Tension for Worldwide Suppression of
Breaks for Freedom 95
9. A LARGE SEGMENT OF THE WORLD ALMOST
BROKE FREE 100
The Soviet Federation could not recover from the Disaster of World War II
102
The Cold War Warped the Soviet Economy 103
The Fear was losing Control of Resources and the Wealth-Producing-
Process 104
The Fiction of Western Efforts to rebuild Russia 109
The Plan was to take the Soviet Federation Out 110
Afghanistan, the Final Straw that Collapsed the Soviet Federation 112
The ‘Official’ Enemy is now Terrorism 114

10. A VIABLE YUGOSLAVIA COULD NOT BE
PERMITTED 116
The CIA’s Mighty Wurlitzer Turned Reality on its Head 119
The Reality the Mighty Wurlitzer was Hiding 120
The Wealth moves to the Powerful West 122
The Huge Gains to Imperial-Centers-of-Capital 125
Financial and Economic Warfare 126
Getting Indigestion Assimilating New Allies 131
Allied Imperial-Centers-of-Capital Gaining Wealth 133
11. THE IMF/WORLD BANK/GATT/NAFTA/WTO/
MAI/GATS/FTAA MILITARY COLOSSUS 142
More Financial Warfare 148
The Economic Insanity of Capital Destroying Capital 152
Practicing Economic Policies Opposite that Imposed Upon the Undeveloped
World 154
Sincerely Sharing the Wealth-Producing-Process 156
12. CONCLUSION: DEMOCRATIC-COOPERATIVE-
(SUPEREFFICIENT)-CAPITALISM 162
Powerful Nations will not willingly give up Their Superior Rights 166
vii
These are Historic Moments 168
Restructuring to an efficient Internal Economy 170
Democratic-Cooperative-(Superefficient)-Capitalism, Restructuring all
Societies to a Life of Peace & Leisure 170
ABOUT THE AUTHOR 210
viii
Acknowledgments
I wish to thank the many great authors and reporters cited who have laid
out reality so clearly. Without their dedication to truth, there would have
been no way to find one’s way through the maze of misinformation.

The classics of Petr Kropotkin and Friedrich List were crucial for
understanding the early history of monopoly capitalism.
Ralph Borsodi’s insights were crucial for understanding money. Later
authors whose insights into current events were invaluable to me are:
Michel Chossudovsky, Jared Israel, William Blum, Sally Covington, Jared
Diamond, James Fallows, Jeff Faux, William Greider, Susan George, Sean
Gervasi, Michael Kettle, Philip Knightley, Mark Lane, Christopher Layne,
John Loftus, Arjun Makhijani, Milton Mayer, Ralph McGehee, William
McNeill, Seymour Melman, Yousai Mohammad, George Monbiot, Michael
Parenti, L. Fletcher Prouty, Ellen Schrecker, John Stockwell, Lester
Thurow, and William Appleman Williams. There are many more, too
numerous to mention, and I thank them also.
Ray Miklas and Pete Gannon (stuffguys.com) kept my computers
running. Special thanks go to Anup Shah, Bernie Maopolski, William
Kötke, John Bunzl, and Jeff and Diana Jewell. All worked hard for its
timely release. Special thanks go to Mieczyslaw Dobija’s research on money
originating as an accounting unit of productive labor.
Special mention must be made of Mochamad Effendi Aboed of
Indonesia and Professor Radh Achuthan. Professor Michael Rivage-Seul,
Cosmas Bahali of Tanganyika, and reporter Dmitry Yanovich from Belarus
are valuable members of our team.
I owe a deep debt to Professor Robert Blain of the Southern Illinois
University, Professor Glen T. Martin of International Philosophers for
Peace, and Professor Walter Davis of Kent State University.
Phil Hawes, Keith McHenry (Food Not Bombs), Alanna Hartzok,
Steve Zarlenga (Lost Science of Money), Professor Francois Muyumba,
Professor Mustafa Abergasem, Joseph Gimba, John Leonard, Michael
Mityok, David Aronson, and at least a 100 more around the world have
provided great support.
I sincerely thank all for their input. I alone remain responsible for any

errors that remain.
ix
Acronyms
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
Coordinating Committee for Multilateral Export Controls (Cocom)
Counterintelligence Program (COINTELPRO)
European Community (EC)
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA)
General Agreement on Trades and Tariffs (GATT)
General Agreement on Trades in Services (GATS)
German Central Intelligence Agency (BND)
Gross National Product (GNP)
International Monetary Fund (IMF)
Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA)
Military Professional Resources (MPRI)
Most Favored Nation (MFN)
Multilateral Agreement on Investments (MAI)
Multilateral Trading Organization (MTO)
National Agreement on Free Trade of the Americas (NAFTA)
National Endowment for Democracy, (NED)
National Security Council Directive (NSC, NSD)
National Union for Total Independence (UNITA)
NATO Alliance High Representatives to Bosnia-Herzegovina (HR)
North Atlantic Treaty Alliance (NATO)
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
Office of Strategic Studies (OSS)
Organization of Oil Exporting Countries (OPEC)
Partnership for Peace (PfP)
Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA)

Proto-Indo-Europeans (PIE)
Quadrilateral Group of Trade Ministers (QUAD)
Regional alliance of Eastern provinces of former Soviet Union (GUUAM)
Seven leading Western Countries (G7)
Socialist Workers Party (SWP)
Special Operations Command (SOCOM)
World Trade Organization (WTO)
x
xi
Cooperative
Capitalism
xii
Michael Hudson and Baruch Levine’s Privatization in the Near East and
Classical World traces the ebb and flow of “privatization” through 5,000
years of history eventually developing into the “Western” system of
exclusive property rights.
We ask the reader to pay close attention to our description of today’s
residual-feudal exclusive property titles that are direct descendants of
aristocratic, monopoly, exclusive property rights. Note Henry George’s
concept for changing exclusive title to nature’s resources, put on this earth
for everybody, to conditional title (though he did not use the word
conditional) converts that property back to a commons but in modern
form. Eliminating those monopolies protects honest property rights,
increases competition, and, assuming productive jobs are shared, increases
economic efficiency possibly equal to the invention of money, the printing
press, and electricity. Democratic-cooperative capitalism is superefficient capitalism.
Each gain of rights for the dispossessed has been touted by a power
structure, and normally accepted by the masses, to be full rights. Obviously
the power structure has had enough control of the universities and media
for centuries to maintain that thought control. This control has been in

place for so long that we are all part of it and are unaware of that fact. Nor are
many aware that one function of the massive military of powerful nations is
to impose the current monopoly structure on the rest of the world.
Run an Internet search using the key words “Christian, libraries,
burned.” This will alert you that both Western and African cultures were
advanced to a high educational level with substantial libraries. It will show
that, over a period of 300 years, those libraries and culture centers were
destroyed, the educated were killed or forced underground, and dropped
the “civilized” world into the 700 years of the Dark Ages.
In the destroyed Library of Alexandria had been a working steam
engine and an artifact found in the Middle East dating to those early
periods was determined could only have been a battery. This means forces
within society destroying its own culture delayed the onset of the Industrial
Revolution (phones, trains, cars, planes, and TV sets) at least 1,200 years.
We know that a few millennia ago China had a large iron industry,
rotary drills, mechanical seeders, an ocean plying navy, and that this
technically sophisticated society too regressed into peasant poverty.
The 300-year destruction of the civilization of Rome appears to be, and
is, massive. But each event would have been an occasional, and largely
unknown, massacre in some far corner of the empire. Are not occasional
suppressions and massacres throughout the 20
th
century and early 21
st
century, throughout the periphery of empire very comparable and an
accurate description of today’s world?
Contact us if you can add to this picture. Thank you. The Institute for
Economic Democracy support group. (www.ied.info/, ).
Introduction 1
Introduction

Superior rights for the few and inferior rights for many are structured
into the subtle monopolization of land, technology, and money; all
produced by nature or social technology and properly belonging to all. The
unearned wealth from the subtle monopolization of those enclosed
commons both reduces the efficiency of an economy and lowers the share
of wealth for others. Having been born and raised within the current
residual-feudal exclusive title legal structure and taught with sincerity—by those
who learned those fables right in the university that this is the most efficient
economy—we are unaware that these highly inefficient subtle monopolies
even exist.
Society is a machine to produce and distribute the needs of the people.
All inventions are a part of nature and thus a part of a natural commons.
Privatizing this natural wealth has seriously reduced economic efficiency,
that we are taught otherwise notwithstanding. All wealth is processed from
scarce resources those resources are on or under the earth so land was the
first commons to be privatized.
a
Restructuring to a modern land commons
and ensuring each person the right to their piece of land would greatly
increase economic efficiency while protecting earned private property rights
far more thoroughly than the current subtle-monopoly system.
Technology is a part of nature and a common heritage to all waiting to
be discovered and used. Both economic efficiency and rewards to inventors
have been lowered by privatizing technology through the current residual-
feudal exclusive patent structure. The claiming of rights to the communication
spectrums by corporations is a great example of the continued structuring
of inequality into law through privatizing what is the common heritage of
all. There was a massive gain in rights by a few subtle monopolists, a loss of
common usage of the TV and radio airways for the masses, and a huge loss
a

Real wealth is produced by combining resources, capital (both industrial and financial), and
labor. It has been proven that labor anywhere in the world can be trained to run modern
factories so there is a large surplus of labor. We will learn below that both technological and
financial capital were historically kept scarce through subtle-monopolization but will be
plentiful in a modern commons. This leaves availability of resources as the primary limitation
on the production of wealth.
2 Econo mic Democracy: The Political Struggle of the 21
st
Century
to society through limiting the world economy to operating at a small
percent of its potential efficiency.
a

Money is such a powerful tool for producing wealth that the powerful
have always reserved its creation and control to themselves and, as we all
know well, money (which is only a social technique) remains subtly
monopolized today.
Full rights and equality reclaimed for all people through a modern land,
technology, and money commons within democratic-cooperative-capitalism
(fundamentally a Henry George concept) would convert the economy to
superefficient capitalism and, assuming a sharing of productive jobs, efficiency
increases would equal the gains from the invention of money, the printing
press, and electricity. Private property rights and individualism would be
strengthened, competition would increase, and a quality lifestyle could be
maintained by each while working only 2-to-3 days per week.
That these subtle monopolies are necessary to accumulate capital is a
fable created to protect wealth and further privatize property that properly
belongs in a modern commons. Capital can be accumulated much faster in
an economy with full and equal rights. Removal of subtle monopolization
and returning rights to the modern commons to all would not only increase

your rights to land, your rights to the use of technology, your rights to
finance capital, your rights to information, and your rights to your share of
the wealth from their productive use, it will ensure those rights.
Proponents of the current excessive rights structured into law fail to
understand that giving a few an excessive share of rights restricts the rights
of others (inequality structured in law) and thus is a subtle form of
monopolization. Through relatively small changes in the legal structure
those subtle monopolies disappear, rights to the modern commons are
reclaimed, the essentials of private property rights and individualism are
expanded, and competition is increased.
Personal Property Rights, Community Property
Rights, and Private Property Rights
Under the aristocratic system from which Western society evolved (and
is still evolving) aristocracy claimed all property rights. As all other rights
are closely tied to property rights, the common people had few or no rights.
Instead of equal rights to nature’s wealth, property rights as structured
today are direct descendants of these feudal aristocratic exclusive rights.
a
Witness corporations currently successfully structuring into law a denial to the public for
community Wi-Fi connections which would reduce costs of phone and Internet service by
over 90% even as it provides access to national and international TV and radio feeds and
movies. As it is 100% free, the fast developing Skype phone service may derail those
communication monopolies before all those laws can be put in place.
Introduction 3
Personal property rights are properly total and unfettered rights to that
produced with one’s own labor or that produced by another person’s labor
purchased with one’s honest earnings. This includes personal possessions,
homes, machinery, most industries, and all consumer products.
Community property rights are that produced by nature and which
sustains all life. This includes land and resources on, above, and beneath the

earth. Air, water, timber, oil, coal, iron, copper, communication spectrums,
and the genes of all plants and animals which are all properly common
property to be used by all. No person produced any one of these items and
all are essential to life.
Claiming exclusive private property rights to air and water may appear
to have social efficiency advantages while there is a surplus. A scarcity of
such fruits of nature, however, would likely mean impoverishment or even
death for those excluded through exclusive titles. Thus, in times of scarcity,
community rights should supercede private property rights and that is
recognized in Western law.
But the rights of all stakeholders to the fruits of nature are not
recognized in residual-feudal exclusive private property titles. With only occasional
exceptions, the rights of the community are ignored in those titles to
nature’s wealth. Throughout this book we will be addressing how under
Henry George’s concept of conditional title (though he may not have used
that term) to nature’s wealth (land and the resources on and under the land)
all will have rights to their share of this great wealth and it is far more
socially and economically efficient than residual-feudal, exclusive subtle
monopoly titles.
A Very Short History on the Few Claiming the Rights
of the Many
While consolidating the first modern states, aristocracy and the Church
defeated the free cities of Europe one by one and began privatizing the
commons. The masses naturally wished to maintain control of their
resources and retain their community support structures. “Only wholesale
massacres by the thousand could put a stop to this widely spread popular
movement, and it was by the sword, the fire, and the rack that the young
states secured their first and decisive victory over the masses of the
people.”
1

As more and more of the commons were privatized, the 14
th
-Century
saw the beginning of a 300-year effort to erase all trace of community
support structures and community ownership of social wealth. The process
to individualize the masses to limit their power had begun:
For the next three centuries the states systematically weeded out all
institutions in which the mutual-aid tendency had formerly found its
expression. The village communities were bereft of their folkmotes
4 Econo mic Democracy: The Political Struggle of the 21
st
Century
[community meetings], their courts and independent administration; their
lands were confiscated. The guilds were spoliated of their possessions and
liberties, and placed under the control, the fancy, and the bribery of the State’s
official. The cities were divested of their sovereignty, and the very springs of
their inner life—the folkmote, the elected justices and administration, the
sovereign parish and the sovereign guild—-were annihilated; the State’s
functionary took possession of every link of what formerly was an organic
whole. Under that fatal policy and the wars it engendered, whole regions,
once populous and wealthy, were laid bare; rich cities became insignificant
boroughs; the very roads which connected them with other cities became
impracticable. Industry, art, and knowledge fell into decay For the next
three centuries the states, both on the Continent and in these islands [Great
Britain], systematically weeded out all institutions in which the mutual-aid
tendency had formerly found its expression. It was taught in the universities
and from the pulpit that the institutions in which men formerly used to
embody their needs of mutual support could not be tolerated in a properly
organized State.
2

Periodically a researcher of economic history will run into the fable
“The Tragedy of the Commons.” This fable uses the example of pastures
used in common to prove this was an inefficient legal and social structure.
Each farmer has rights to pasture his cattle. To earn more money, self
interest dictates that some will turn more cattle onto that pasture than their
allotment. The pasture is overgrazed, the soil erodes, and all will lose.
This author has experience with pastures used in common and the
truth is the opposite of the fable. During the Great Depression, bankrupt
ranchers on the prairies of the West were occasionally organized into
“grazing districts” which are lands grazed in common. The fable ignores
that those ranchers have equal rights, none have superior rights. Each has
an allotted number of cattle they can pasture, and any excess cattle will be
confiscated. The result: private land with residual-feudal exclusive private
ownership is typically overgrazed as ranchers maximize their income by
mining the topsoil through overgrazing while those grazing districts, the
soils of the commons under conditional title, are conserved.
Where did that fable come from? Just as corporations today fund think-
tanks to pour out social control beliefs that protect their wealth and power
a
,
the fable of the “Tragedy of the Commons” and other such social-control
paradigms (Eric Fromm’s “frameworks of orientation”) were promoted by the
powerful centuries ago to justify the reduction of others rights and the
increase in their rights through the privatization of the commons.
The three centuries of the establishment of the British enclosure acts is
only one of many examples of structuring inequality of rights into law
through enclosure of the commons. We will be discussing how insurance,
law, health care, and information are also a natural commons that have
a
J.W. Smith, Economic Democracy: The Political Struggle of the Twenty-First Century, expanded and

updated 4
th
edition (www.ied.info/: The Institute for Economic Democracy, 2005), Chapter
six. We researched in depth how democratic societies were controlled for the masses to
accept policies which, in final analysis, were against their best interest.
Introduction 5
been privatized in that centuries-long process of providing excessive rights
to the powerful through structuring inequality into law.
The powerful throughout the past centuries not only claimed an
excessive share of the wealth of nature which was properly shared by all
within the community, through the unequal trades of mercantilism they
claimed an excessive share of the wealth on the periphery of their trading
empires. Adam Smith describes mercantilism for us:
[Mercantilism’s] ultimate object is always the same, to enrich the
country [city or state] by an advantageous balance of trade. It discourages the
exportation of the materials of manufacture [tools and raw material], and the
instruments of trade, in order to give our own workmen an advantage, and to
enable them to undersell those of other nations [cities] in all foreign markets:
and by restraining, in this manner, the exportation of a few commodities of
no great price, it proposes to occasion a much greater and more valuable
exportation of others. It encourages the importation of the materials of
manufacture, in order that our own people may be enabled to work them up
more cheaply, and thereby prevent a greater and more valuable importation of
the manufactured commodities.
3
William Appleman Williams describes mercantilism at its zenith: “The
world was defined as known and finite, a principle agreed upon by science
and theology. Hence the chief way for a nation to promote or achieve its
own wealth and happiness was to take them away from some other
country.”

4

When the injustice of mercantilism was understood, it became too
embarrassing and was replaced by the supposedly just Adam Smith free
trade. But free trade as practiced by Adam Smith neo-mercantilists was far
from fair trade. Adam Smith unequal free trade is little more than a
philosophy for the continued subtle monopolization of the wealth-producing-
process, largely through continued privatization of the commons of both an
internal economy and the economies of weak nations on the periphery of
trading empires. So long as weak nations could be forced to accept the
unequal trades of Adam Smith free trade, they would be handing their
wealth to the imperial-centers-of-capital of their own free will. In short, Adam
Smith free trade, as established by neo-mercantilists, was only mercantilism
hiding under the cover of free trade.
Through the subtle monopolization of highly efficient industrial
technology (a privatized commons), control of the wealth-producing-process
worldwide was to remain with the imperial centers while the periphery was
to provide the resources to feed their industries. The imposition of
structural adjustments upon the developing world today is little more than a
continued expansion of the privatization of the commons. The developed
world would never impose those structural adjustments upon themselves,
rhetoric that they will notwithstanding. Efforts to do so in a very small way
6 Econo mic Democracy: The Political Struggle of the 21
st
Century
relative to adjustments imposed on the periphery of empire were met with
immediate social unrest and abandoned.
When the old imperial nations broke themselves battling over the
world’s wealth (World Wars I & II), the world began to break free. The
only wealth left was in America which promptly attained full imperial status

through suppressing those breaks for freedom (the Cold War) and taking
over Britain’s job of imposing Adam Smith unequal free trade upon the
world. Those breaks for freedom were successfully suppressed but the
battle goes on.
Though our previously published research exposed the centuries-long
process of the powerful few claiming a part of the rights of the many, we
need to look closer. The suppression of the rights of the many by the
governing few was possible by excluding the masses from consideration as
people. This is seen most clearly in the description of natives of Africa and
the Americas. The first black Africans brought back to Europe were
described as looking like, but not really being, people. Later American
Indians were described as not being people because they had no souls.
After those ruses (social-control paradigms) were set aside, natives in the
undeveloped world were said to be incompetent and incapable. By not
being recognized as capable people, they could be enslaved and treated as
private property.
But the same concept of non-persons was at work within European
society. Within the slowly eroding community support structures, all were
relatively equal. But the powerful (aristocracy) slowly gained more power
and claimed ever more of the land. The claiming of that land gave
aristocracy more power. They eventually claimed all the land, looked upon
themselves as far superior to the common people, and maintained the
subtle monopolization of wealth through forbidding intermarriage or even
mixing socially.
Those aristocratic rights could not have been claimed without first
inculcating within the population the beliefs of innate superiority of one
group and the innate inferiority of others. This was accomplished through
the fables of the heroic knights of aristocracy and our children read these
fables updated to today’s world.
a

Control of aristocratic society’s literature
was so effective that the masses accepted their lower status and developed
intense loyalty to their kings and lords and many still revere them today.
Note the intense loyalty shown to the wealthy and powerful (the system).
The loyalty of the masses, along with massive firepower and a sharing
of the plunder, provided the manpower for the imperial nations to conquer
the world. Through being Christians with souls, both aristocracy and the
common people believed they were superior and thus justified their
a
Control of a societies foundation beliefs is well understood by powerbrokers. Few books
dare to be so politically incorrect as Chapter seven exposing how history and literature of a
free society are carefully controlled to protect a power-structure and their unearned wealth.
Introduction 7
suppression and oppression of “savages” throughout the world. That belief
in superiority through having Christian souls was eventually set aside but in
many the belief in innate superiority remained.
As people of color on the periphery became educated, formed nations,
and developed some power, beliefs in superiority were no longer
fashionable. One simply could not control billions of educated people while
simultaneously telling them they were inferior.
As people told they are equal have to be treated equal, more subtle
ways of control were required. The subtle monopolies, financial warfare,
economic warfare, covert warfare, and overt war as addressed in depth in
this author’s Economic Democracy: The Political Struggle of the Twenty-First Century
were all aspects of that control. Most battles throughout the world are the
powerful attempting to retain or expand superior rights that have been
theirs for centuries and suppress those attempting to regain their rights.
Inequality is still being structured into law today. The powerful,
developed world established the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the
World Bank, the General Agreement on Trades and Tariffs (GATT), the

North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the World Trade
Organization (WTO), and are in the process of establishing the Multilateral
Agreement on Investments (MAI [resurfacing under the General
Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS)]) and FTAA (Free Trade Area of
the Americas) as the financial and legal structure under which it retains
access to the world’s resources at a fraction of true value.
Final authority will rest with the Gats [MAI, WTO, FTAA] Disputes
Panel to determine whether a law or regulation is, in the memo's language,
'more burdensome than necessary'. And Gats [MAI, WTO, FTAA], not
Parliament, will decide what is 'necessary'. As a practical matter, this means
nations will have to shape laws protecting the air you breathe, the trains you
travel in and the food you chew by picking not the best or safest means for
the nation, but the cheapest methods for foreign investors and merchants.…
Under Gats [MAI, WTO, FTAA], as proposed in the memo, national laws
and regulations will be struck down if they are 'more burdensome than
necessary' to business. Notice the subtle change. Suddenly the Gats treaty is
not about trade at all, but a sly means to wipe away restrictions on business
and industry, foreign and local.… The WTO reports that, in the course of the
secretive multilateral negotiations, trade ministers agreed that a Gats tribunal
would not accept a defense of 'safeguarding the public interest'. In place of a
public interest standard, the Secretariat proposes a deliciously Machiavellian
'efficiency principle': 'It may well be politically more acceptable to countries to
accept international obligations which give primacy to economic efficiency.'
This is an unsubtle invitation to load the Gats with requirements that rulers
know their democratic parliaments could not otherwise accept.… Hearings
are closed. Unions, as well as consumer, environmental and human rights
groups, are barred from participating - or even knowing what is said before
the panel.
5

8 Econo mic Democracy: The Political Struggle of the 21
st
Century
This book is designed to combine our published research 11 and 16
years ago on the waste within the subtly-monopolized internal American
economy with our later research on the waste through covertly and
militarily monopolizing world trade. The only way the world can be
developed to a sustainable level is if the wastes of subtle monopolization,
both in internal trade and external trade, are avoided.
a

The United States of America, founded on the great ideals of freedom
of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of movement, and freedom from
oppression, is a great country. This author cherishes those values as much
as anyone else and believes firmly that the current war against terrorism
must be waged.
b
But that war must be fought through granting full rights
and equality to all the world’s citizens, not by military power. The immense
gains in economic efficiencies through full equality and rights for all people
under democratic-cooperative-(superefficient)-capitalism speak for themselves.
Once a society has attained full equality and full rights for all, class
differences will largely disappear. But society will not be the dull sameness
propagandists have taught us to believe. Groups of people are not innately
superior to others. Individuals within all groups have thousands of varied
talents both innate and developed. With both family and community
support, talents and individuality can blossom and flourish. Within reason,
each person’s potential will be maximized.
Certainly there are great individual achievements under individualism.
These achievements were pursued relentlessly but what is ignored is that

they were, one way or another, given great community support. Unnoticed
are the talents that have remained undeveloped because of the limitations
of support for most in highly individualized societies. Under the enormous
efficiency and supports of democratic-cooperative-(superefficient)-capitalism, people
and society will develop and blossom as never before.
a
The United Nations was designed specifically to be controlled by the imperial-centers-of-capital.
Before it can effectively federalize the world it must become democratized along the lines of
the World Constitution and Parliament Association Constitution in, (http://www.
radford.edu/~peace/ippno/doc.html, and other groups pushing for federation of poor
nations: Earth Federation html, Commission
on Global Governance United Planetary Federation .
org/ index.html, World Citizen Foundation United Nations

b
As the anthrax used in the anthrax scare immediately after 9/11 was DNA-traced
to the CIA’s Fort Dietrich labs almost certainly that was a CIA strategy-of-tension to
create more fear in the American people to further justify the War on Terror. This
brings into serious question on the claims that Al Queda is the extensive worldwide
organization as claimed. When one understands strategies-of-tension to justify foreign
policies one realizes that Muslim terrorists may be much smaller in number and
weaker than we are being told
Introduction 9
Subtle-Monopolization is a Remnant of
Feudal
Exclusive
Property Rights
Social customs are a form of law. It is well recognized that such
customs are huge obstacles for societies to evolve efficiently. The fact that
the debris of residual-feudal exclusive title to nature’s wealth severely reduces

the economic efficiency of capitalism is not even considered.
We are taught that monopolies have been eliminated by law. This is not
true. Laws are designed by the powerful, for their protection, they have
specifically designed subtle monopolization into the laws of capitalism.
Under feudal law granting exclusive title a tiny minority totally monopolized
wealth producing property and the wealth produced. Western societies
evolved from Feudalism and those who gained power only granted residual-
feudal exclusive property rights to more people on a basis that could be
mathematically proven a large percentage could not become property
owners.
The basic principals of monopolization were never abandoned, that we
are taught they were notwithstanding. We have full rights only in the sense
that each have a chance at becoming a wealthy monopolist. But only a
calculable few can attain those superior rights.
This is not visible to Americans and Europeans because of the large
percentage that have a high standard of living and thus appears to have full
rights. But, unrealized by the masses and most in academia, that high
standard of living is only through the purchase of the wealth of weak
nations for a fraction of its true value, and the distribution of that
appropriated wealth through the massive expenditures (the multiplier factor)
on the military which is the final arbiter to maintain the system of laying
claim to the world’s wealth. This translates to an economic system not
viable in times of peace. The powerful today are fighting to retain their
monopoly property rights to nature’s wealth just as the feudal powers
fought to maintain the monopolization of wealth based on their exclusive
feudal property rights.
All this will become visible as we demonstrate how, through
abandoning those remnants of exclusive feudal titles to nature’s wealth,
restructuring to democratic-cooperative-capitalism and becoming superefficient
capitalism, economic efficiency will increase equal to the invention of money,

the printing press, and electricity. As we describe today’s internal economies
and global trade, we ask the reader to take note of the close connection of
current subtle-monopoly laws to the total monopoly laws of feudalism. Today’s
wars are protecting a monopolized wealth-producing-process just as aristocracy
fought to retain their feudal monopoly structure. Today’s partial
democracies are only a stepping stone towards full freedom and full rights
for all. Once the last remnant of exclusive feudal property titles to what is
10 Economic Democracy: The Political Struggle of the 21
st
Century
properly social wealth is converted to Henry George’s concept of conditional
titles that recognize everyone’s rights to their share of nature’s bounty full
democracy, true freedom, and full rights will have been achieved.
At each point in the centuries-long march to full rights and full
democracy, the powerful have structured the laws for their protection. The
rights of the masses were only considered when a crisis threatened and allies
were needed. Full rights were not attained even after revolutions. There was
simply too much debris of monopoly law and monopoly custom (residual-
feudal exclusive property rights) to clean away.
Our previous research on the current inefficiencies and potential
efficiencies of world trade keep referring to the savings possible within
internal subtly-monopolized economies. The first five chapters summarize
that earlier research
Historically, members of many hunter/gatherer tribes worked less than
four hours a day and, in the few areas where they survive, some still do.
Even during the Middle Ages, normally half of one’s waking hours were
available for leisure time. But during the Industrial Revolution, the pressure
to increase profits forced a steady increase in working time. Between the
years 1600 and 1850, the average working hours per year doubled, from
1,880 to 3,650 hours. After 1850, the strength of unions reversed the

process, and by 1939 had almost halved the average working hours.
Although unions were moving toward the 30-hour week, from 1939 to
1992—due to WWII, the Cold War, and the following “prosperity”—union
strength steadily declined and weekly working hours in America increased
from 40.7 hours in 1973 to 47-hours in 1988.
6
The reduction of working hours to 20 hours a week or less was a
recognized possibility during the 1920s and 1930s; but then came WWII
and the Cold War. Even as labor productivity doubled and then doubled
again the concept of drastically shorter working hours disappeared from the
social mind.
a

While the Cold War was being fought, society was not permitted the
luxury of toying with alternative social contracts. The status quo was
protected by branding any challenging ideas as “communist,” “socialist,” or
“un-patriotic.” This reaction is a conditioned reflex for most within the
imperial centers who are trained to view people advocating such ideas as
enemies.
For perspective, one should consider that nothing was more
“communist” in America than Social Security when it was first proposed.
But under the crisis of the Great Depression, when the threat of worldwide
revolution was high, unemployment insurance and funded retirements were
given to the powerless as their right.
a
Juliet B. Schor, Overworked American, (New York: Basic Books, 1991), p. 2. Social studies
textbooks still mentioned the potential of short working hours as late as the 1950s and the
concept is again becoming fashionable.
Introduction 11
No one today considers unemployment insurance and the community

support structure of Social Security as anything other than a right, and
everyone would scoff at the suggestion that it is “communist,” “socialist,”
or “un-American.” The same would be true if ever the last of labor’s rights
were claimed, i.e., the right to a productive job and a full share of the fruits of
land, technology, created money, information, and free time. Once claimed, all would
insist on and defend these newly won rights, which can only be realized by
eliminating currently wasted labor, currently wasted capital, and the current
waste of resources under subtle monopolization.
People are so accustomed to the current structure of residual-feudal
exclusive property rights that they do not realize the gains that are possible if
laws and customs were changed to correspond with the increased
efficiencies of technology. Full rights would mean each obtaining a decent
standard of living while working only 2-to-3 days per week.
Of course, those who have gained excessive rights by intercepting
production from that increased efficiency would loudly proclaim that any
change would harm everyone. This, of course, would be only for their
protection. There is an enormous cost to the rest of society, and eventually
to everyone, as the powerful continually expand their residual-feudal exclusive
rights by restructuring laws and institutions to systematically intercept the
wealth produced by our increasingly efficient technology. Most books
describe problems but provide few solutions. Through exposing the true
causes of poverty and wars the solutions stand out in bold relief.
Understanding economics becomes easy when we realize that the
classical economists were also protecting wealth and power. They
consistently insisted that labor should be paid just enough to reproduce
itself and that all wealth produced by increased efficiencies of technology
should go to capital even as they ignored that this primitive accumulation of
capital went first and foremost to grand castles and high living.
7

Gerard Winstanley in the 16
th
-Century, Jean Jacques Rousseau in the
17
th
-Century, Johann Herder in the 18
th
-Century, and Karl Marx in the 19
th
-
Century spoke to the rights of the weak; primarily labor.
8
Most other
classical economists were protecting wealth and power.
Aristocrats would not be caught dead doing common labor. Thus those
necessary to run an economy (the bourgeois) were given some residual-
feudal-exclusion rights. Those beneath the new arrivals to polite society still
were denied those rights.
Aristocratic feudal property rights were being implanted in America but
the dispossessed only had to move to the vast expanse of unclaimed land
and this left no one to operate the feudal estates. The common people
were, only by default, given rights to land. Although a gain, land was, as
Henry George taught us, still subtly monopolized by residual-feudal exclusive
titles and, due to the high cost of that monopolized land, full rights were yet
denied the majority.
12 Economic Democracy: The Political Struggle of the 21
st
Century
The gain in rights in America spilled back into Europe. The short-lived
French Revolution promising full rights to all was overthrown but, to

prevent more revolutions, those in power released some land rights and,
over the next 150 years, unemployment insurance, social security and other
rights were granted to the common people of Europe. To prevent a ballot
box revolution during the Great Depression of the 1930s, Social Security,
unemployment benefits, and other rights were granted to Americans.
During that crisis the same threat again faced Europe and almost all
governments were turned over to fascists to prevent a voters’ revolution.
a

A ballot box revolution did occur in Spain. The powerful were voted
out but fascists took that government back by force (1936-1939). That
externally-orchestrated overthrow of a true democracy was improperly
named in history as the Spanish Revolution. After WWII, the powerbrokers
faced the prospect of the world taking the rhetoric of democracy seriously
and breaking free. The process of denying those rights to most required
imperial centers giving rights to nations on the periphery essential for allies
and the immense expenditure of money on the Cold War gave buying
power and the appearance of more rights to almost all labor in those imperial
centers.
As the common people fought for equal rights, and did gain, the
power-structure protected itself by trumpeting each partial gain of rights as
full and equal rights. But the residual-feudal exclusive rights of capital
promoted by classical economists have never been fully set aside and full
and equal rights as promoted by a minority of philosophers has never been
attained. It is this lack of full rights which creates the poverty and violence
of today’s world.
Providing equal rights through Henry George’s suggested slight
changes in the structure of residual-feudal exclusive titles to nature’s wealth
would eliminate the current unacknowledged subtle land, technology, and
money monopolies that are the essence of today’s economy. At minimum

cost and without waste use-values would be distributed to all. The quality of
life will rise rapidly even as the hours of required labor and the GDP drops
possibly 50 percent. The drop in GDP, even as quality of life rises,
measures the previously wasted labor, capital, and resources of a subtly-
monopolized, residual-feudal, economy. The GDP then rises as people utilize
their new free time for family interactions, to develop their many artistic
talents, or to simply socialize with friends.
Under a modern commons within democratic-cooperative-(superefficient)-
capitalism, the just rights of private property are fully protected,
individualism and competition are strengthened, and money no longer
flows through those subtle monopolies to the interceptors of wealth.
a
An attempt to turn America’s government over to fascism at the same time was made but
General Smedley Butler refused to head the overthrow and exposed their plot. Smedley D.
Butler, War is a Racket (Los Angeles: Feral House, 2003)
Introduction 13
Society’s production is instead—through the mechanisms of equal rights to
nature’s wealth, equal pay for equal labor, and equal sharing of productive
jobs—distributed instantly and without unnecessary costs to the producers
of wealth. Under those rules of equality, the need for massive military
forces and their attendant massive slaughters disappear.
The efficient economy we are describing can not happen until residual-
feudal exclusive titles to nature’s wealth are restructured into conditional titles.
At each point in the centuries-long march to full rights and full democracy,
the powerful structured the laws for their own protection. The rights of the
masses were only considered when a crisis threatened. Full rights were not
attained even after revolutions. There was simply too much debris of
residual-feudal exclusive law and custom (monopolies) to clean away.
Theoretically we have democratic governments today. But in reality we
have only partial democracies with the potential of full democracies. But we

are getting closer. Once those residual-feudal exclusive subtle monopolies are
abandoned, a full democracy will emerge. Likewise, if a crisis transposes
partial democracies into a full democracies the simple legal changes to
eliminate those residual-feudal exclusive subtle monopolies and establish
superefficient capitalism can be made.
Those owning and working within the superstructure of those subtle
monopolies are the world’s brightest and most talented. That is why they
reached for and attained those positions and they will unanimously dispute
their redundancy even as a few of them finance and guide the enormous
propaganda process, as outlined in Chapter seven, which protects their
excess rights.
The gains to society will be enormous when under a system of full and
equal rights with a sharing of productive jobs these talented and brilliant
people will be producing wealth instead of intercepting wealth.
If we are so militarily secure, why does America have such a violent
foreign policy as this book exposes? It is because the rest of the world may
declare their freedom and federate into powerful centers of capital just as
America is so federated, as the former Soviet federation was at the height of its
power, and as all of Europe is becoming.
If most of the developing world formed trading alliances, and assuming
that cohesiveness held, they could negotiate with the imperial centers for
equality in trade and would soon build equality in wealth. Thus the
federation of weak nations is a threat to all imperial centers of capital.
However, it is also the foundation for peace. Unless they are being
destabilized by outside powers, federations typically do not have internal
military struggles.
Once weak nations first ally, and then federate, there will be no
periphery for the imperial centers to control. With the assurance of the
destruction of all belligerents, surely the imperial centers will not go to war
with each other. With most the world’s precious resources in a newly