Debunking Money

I think you’ll find that Damon Varbel has a unique way of putting our world into perspective. You might even find it ‘mind-blowing,’ but you’ll have a hard time making a case against what he presents. That’s because it’s all true. No conspiracies needed, just facts about the way our money and markets really work.

Debunking Money (volume 1): Money, Myth, and Machiavelli

The issue is WHO controls the system, not WHAT backs it.

Debunking Money #2: Orwell and the Animal Farm

This video describes the structural facts (as opposed to theory) of the monetary system. It avoids theoretical terms like “intrinsic value” and “fiat” and “out of thin air” that have been used to confuse us and just sticks to the facts.

The intent of lesson 1 was only to make a couple key points necessary to understand what is described here in lesson 2.

Debunking Money #3: Corporate PR, Financial Power, and Evaluating Some Popular “Solutions”

What is the biggest source of power in the world? Lesson 1 discussed the issue of financial power, but for those who haven’t lived in the world of balance sheet power it may still seem like a vague theoretical notion.

After a short intro about the need to restore the authentic real world vs. the fake corporate PR world, this lesson digs into financial power in more detail,explains how you might think of it in terms of the power parents have over children, and then evaluates some of the popular solutions being discussed in the political realm:

– ending the fed
– cutting back on government in the interest of a “free market”
– putting the banks through bankruptcy.


Debunking Money #4 and #5: The Way the World Really Works

In an attempt to layout what really drives the world rather than believing the false notion that 40-something fresh Ivy League grads serving as politicians have the power, these lessons further the Debunking Money narrative that debt-based hierarchical money = financial leverage = true power. Lesson 4 revisits the 20th century past to reconsider where we’ve been, and lesson 5 peers into the 21st century future for a clearer perspective on where we’re going. Huxley would like what he sees.


 About this Video Series

Damon Vrabel stopped being a public activist in early 2011.

Here is the last post he made on his blog:

Several people have asked why I stopped publishing. To answer the question, this will be my last post:

1. As Bill Clinton basically said when asked why his administration had been so favorable toward China after beating up Bush in the campaign about it, sometimes we don’t know what we think we know until we’ve jumped into the ring.

2. One reason I did jump into the ring was to run my own direct test to determine (a) whether change is possible, and (b) what people really want. I planned a 1-year test from the point I initially started publishing, but it took less than 9 months to conclude:

a. Change is not possible through journalism, the media, or online debates. Plus, as Chris Hedges says in Empire of Illusion, at this point it is impossible to bridge the divide between “a literate, marginalized minority and those who have been consumed by an illiterate mass culture.”

b. As I said in previous articles, IF we participate in the system, I’m not opposed to it at all. How could I be? I’d be a tyrant if I wanted to force hundreds of millions of people to change their behavior. And the fact is, that “IF” was answered long ago. We Americans have chosen the material benefits of being managed by the financial system for generations. We like demand-side freedom, i.e. choosing between Coke and Pepsi, but don’t want supply-side freedom. We like the supply-side to be taken care of for us. We love the benefits that come from it being imperially run—the credit card always works, the gas station is always open, our water faucets and light switches do what they’re supposed to do, the markets keep going up (oops…maybe not). All of our economic needs are outsourced to others, so we have the luxury of spending our time pursuing wants. And if these types of benefits are good for us, they’re good for the rest of the world. We have no moral authority to stand opposed just because we’re now going to lose our privileged position—a rather childlike perspective.

3. Given #2, my only wish is that the system would be transparent. Like Carroll Quigley, I see no rational reason not to inform people so there are fewer caught on the wrong side of the tragedy and hope dialectic. That was the purpose of my last video—to simply explain what’s happening with a slightly different twist than the others who have described the same basic system.

4. Putting all blame on the top of the system is biased and psychologically immature. Labeling a group “all bad” is an example of splitting—a primitive defense mechanism we tend to use to maintain an illusion of “all good” for ourselves, our country, our political party, etc. Some of my articles and videos intentionally played the splitting game because the media is designed to exacerbate splits, so if I wanted to pursue media work, I needed to play the game. But splitting is very harmful to society, so I will no longer do it. Moreover, as stated in #2, almost everyone contributes to the system so blaming only the top would be disingenuous.

5. Given human nature and the inherent requirement for empires to grow (or die in defeat to another empire), we will have one type of imperial system or another as long as humans are in charge. All such systems are narcissistic in form, so it’s futile in my view to argue between different forms of narcissism.

So I will not be publishing anymore, at least with the narrow focus on the financial system. It’s an illusion to think arguing about finance, economics, and markets will fix anything. But for those who want to continue learning about the system, I recommend Catherine Austin Fitts. I’ve said nothing more than her. In fact, I learned it from her—she was an insider, I was not. I borrowed the phrases “multi-generational wealth” and huge “pools of capital” at the top of the system from her. Noam Chomsky’s phrase is “coalitions of investors.” Same thing…I’ve revealed nothing new.

I also recommend Hedges’ Empire of Illusion for those who want to dig more into the spiritual and psychological dimensions of the situation in which we find ourselves. I agree with him, “The world that awaits us will be painful and difficult.” It’s useful to accept and adjust to this inevitability rather than wishing it away or being angry about it. There is no way around it because the ruleset we’ve lived within for decades was not sustainable. It depended upon exponential growth, exponential debt, exponential resource consumption, and exponential environmental impact.

As the world goes through a necessary reset of the rules, we will experience significant upheaval. I recommend Chris Martenson’s material at to understand the exponential ruleset and to dialogue with an enlightened community taking steps to minimize the upheaval for their local communities. That is the only prudent option at this point.

Discussing the Debunking Money series with Max

One thought on “Debunking Money

  1. Pingback: The Thicket of Views | unSpy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s