Showing posts with label globalists. Show all posts
Showing posts with label globalists. Show all posts

Why Are Globalists And Governments So Desperate For 100% Vaccination Rates?

 Alt Market

August 1, 2021



I don’t think I am the only person that has noticed it – There has been a sudden deluge of covid vaccination propaganda and vaccine passport propaganda in the past month, more so than I think we have seen since the beginning of this year. 

I am speaking of the US in particular, but it is important to point out that in the US the establishment is still desperately clamoring for a much higher vaccination rate. In places like Europe, the UK and Australia vaccinations rates are higher and governments have moved on to the vaccine passport phase of their agenda.

Some people may be confused by the obvious lockstep that most nations are moving in as far as covid mandates and restrictions are concerned. How is it possible that almost all the governments on the planet are in agreement on medical totalitarianism? Well, it’s rather easy to understand when you realize the majority of them are linked together through globalist institutions like the World Economic Forum, which has repeatedly called the pandemic a “perfect opportunity” to push through their plans for a “Great Reset”.

The “Great Reset” is a long term ideological usurpation of what’s left of individual freedom and free market economies, and it’s goal is the imposition of a global socialist/communist dictatorship. Globalists wrap these objectives in pretty sounding words and humanitarian sounding aspirations, but at bottom the “Reset” is about an end to liberty as we know it. This is not an exaggeration, this is reality; this is what these people desire above all else. But how to achieve such a goal?

Read the Entire Article

UN Head Orders Monitoring Panel To Oversee Implementation Of New Urban Agenda

Technocracy News
April 20, 2017

UN.org

New Urban Agenda is a “non-binding agreement”, and yet there will be a monitoring task force to insure that it gets implemented. Make sense? It’s not designed to make sense. ⁃ TN Editor
Almost six months after the United Nations adopted a new 20-year urbanization strategy, U. N. Secretary General António Guterres this week made his first official pronouncement on cities.
As part of the ongoing effort to reshape how urban issues are addressed within the international body, Guterres announced Wednesday the composition of a highly-anticipated eight-member panel that will assess the future of the lead agency on urbanization, UN-Habitat. The result of the panel’s assessment will have a significant impact on oversight of that 20-year strategy, the New Urban Agenda.
While the agenda, a non-binding document approved by 167 countries at last year’s Habitat III summit, was formally adopted by the U. N. General Assembly in December, that process left up in the air two key issues: the fate of the Nairobi-based UN-Habitat and, relatedly, formal responsibility for overseeing implementation of the New Urban Agenda. Potential reforms to UN-Habitat had become increasingly contentious during the New Urban Agenda political discussions — threatening even to scuttle the entire process.
So, in approving adoption of the New Urban Agenda in December, the General Assembly simultaneously called on Guterres to conduct “an evidence-based and independent assessment” of the agency and its work, which ranges from slum upgrading to comprehensive planning, municipal finance strategies to national legislation for cities.
“We live in the century of unprecedented urban growth. For the first time in history, over half of world’s population is living in cities,” Guterres, who took over as secretary-general at the beginning of the year, said Wednesday in a statement. “[At Habitat III], participating states adopted the New Urban Agenda as a collective vision and political commitment to promote and realize sustainable urban development, and a paradigm change, rethinking how cities are planned, managed and inhabited.”

Missing expertise

That “paradigm change” is likely to require further repositioning of UN-Habitat. Making recommendations on the details of that new mandate will be the task for the eight-member panel.
The panel includes several key global figures in urbanism, including Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo, Indian slum activist Sheela Patel, United Cities and Local Governments President Mpho Parks Tau, and Peter Calthorpe, founding member of the Congress for New Urbanism.
The new body is rounded out by national-level ministers and diplomats from Indonesia, Lesotho, Mexico and Slovakia. Of those four, Lesotho sent its head of state to Quito — one of only three at Habitat III — and the other countries played key roles in the preparatory process for the conference.

Globalist War on Cash Accelerates

The New American
November 18, 2016

As part of the globalist establishment's ongoing push to create a totalitarian “cashless society” where every transaction can be tracked and controlled, Indian authorities last week suddenly demonetized the two largest denomination bills in circulation. In Sweden, where government already tracks and monitors almost everything, central bankers are plotting the creation of a “digital currency” that could be completely controlled — along with those who use it — by authorities. And in Australia, establishment-minded mega-banks are plotting with politicians to force everyone into a United Nations-backed “cashless society” where banks and government have total control over the population. In each case, different excuses have been used. But taken together, it is obvious that something major is going on, worldwide. Liberty and privacy are literally at stake.
As this magazine highlighted more than two years ago, the global establishment has increasingly been pushing for humanity to submit to what its propagandists touts as a “cashless society.” Basically, the agenda, pushed by the UN and top globalists, is to have a world in which all payments and transactions are conducted electronically — thereby creating a permanent record for governments to inspect and track at will. Multiple governments and dictatorships from Africa and Asia to Europe and the Americas have been explicitly working toward that goal, and in recent years, even more have joined the effort. Powerful globalist forces and organizations including the UN, Microsoft, the Rockefeller dynasty, the mega-banks, central banks, and more are helping, too. However, amid the push, analysts and critics have been pushing back, warning that the implications of such a shift would be nightmarish for people everywhere.

Warning: Trilaterals And Technocrats Are Congregating At The Department Of Defense

Technocracy News
July 28, 2016
Eric Schmidt, CEO of Alphabet, Inc. and member of the Trilateral Commission (Wikileaks)

Ashton Carter, currently Obama’s Secretary of Defense, is a poster-boy for Technocracy. He is also a member of the elitist Trilateral Commission that has been promoting global Technocracy since its founding in 1973 by David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski.
Carter has quietly assembled the Defense Innovation Advisory Board, which he claims will “advise the Pentagon on technology innovation issues.” As he recently announced new members, he stated,
[The board] “is charged with keeping DoD imbued with a culture of innovation in people, organizations, operations, and technology, to support people who innovate, those creative figures in our department who are willing to try new things, fail fast, and iterate; and also to ensure that we’re always doing everything we can to stay ahead of potential adversaries.”
  • Eric Schmidt, executive chairman, Alphabet Inc. (DIAB chair)
  • Jeff Bezos, president, chairman and CEO, Amazon Inc.
  • Adam Grant, professor, Wharton School of Business
  • Danny Hillis, computer theorist and co-founder, Applied Inventions
  • Reid Hoffman, co-founder, LinkedIn; and partner, Greylock Partners
  • Walter Isaacson, president and CEO, Aspen Institute
  • Eric Lander, president and founding director, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard
  • Marne Levine, chief operating officer, Instagram
  • J. Michael McQuade, senior vice president for science and technology, United Technologies
  • William McRaven, chancellor, University of Texas System
  • Milo Medin, vice president, Access Services, Google Capital
  • Richard Murray, professor, California Institute of Technology
  • Jennifer Pahlka, founder, Code for America
  • Cass Sunstein, professor, Harvard Law School
  • Neil deGrasse Tyson, astrophysicist
While all of these could accurately be singled out as Technocrats, Carter has stacked the board with three of his elitist cronies from the Trilateral Commission.
Eric Schmidt is the head of Alphabet, which includes Google. Schmidt admittedly seeks to use technology to control the entire planet, and is the leading proponent of Transhumanism.
Walter Isaacson is a long-time member of the Trilateral Commission and is President of the Aspen Institute, formerly the Aspen Institute For Humanistic Studies. Aspen has indoctrinated tens of thousands of corporate executives and has been tightly intertwined with the Trilateral Commission since 1973.
Marne Levine, the chief operating officer at Instagram, formerly served as Vice President of Global Public Policy for Facebook. At Facebook, Levine worked with governments and organizations to understand and adapt to its technology and global policies.
Jeff Bezos, founder and CEO of Amazon, Inc.,  is another tech titan who has dreams of taking over the world economically.
Collectively, these people represent many other companies and organizations through participation in their boards of directors.
Should the Trilateral Commission have this kind of access to and influence within the Department of Defense? Given their goal of creating a “New International Economic Order” (which is Technocracy, or Sustainable Development), certainly not.

Video: Hillary Clinton, A Threat to All Humanity. World War III is “On the Table”. Her Candidacy Must be Opposed

Global Research
July 24, 2016




The world looks on in horror as Hillary Clinton heads to Philadelphia to be nominated as the Democratic Party’s candidate for the presidency.
Yet still the leading lights of the so-called “progressive” movement argue that it is the left’s duty to vote for this neocon warmonger.
But the consequences of this strategy may well lead directly to nuclear war. This is the GRTV Backgrounder on globalresearch.ca
The nuclear option is on the table.  Hillary Clinton constitutes an existential threat against all of humanity.
Her candidacy must be opposed. 


CFR Globalist: End U.S. States, Build China-style Regional Gov't

The New American
May 14, 2016
CFR Globalist: End U.S. States, Build China-style Regional Gov't
It is time for the United States of America to ditch the whole “states” thing, and for the federal government to re-organize the nation politically into massive regions with powerful regional governments fully subservient to national and even international authorities. The goal of the dystopian “economic master plan” is for America to become more like Communist China on the road toward a North American Union.
That might sound ridiculous — perhaps like the ravings of a mad man — to the average American. After all, the United States is, by its nature, a union of 50 states that have delegated a few limited and defined powers to their agent, the federal government, in pursuit of, among other objectives, securing “the Blessings of Liberty.” If globalists get their way, though, that “antiquated” notion would be tossed on to the ash heap of history.   
Writing in the New York Times last month, a mid-level globalist operative with the war-mongering, global government-promoting Council on Foreign Relations argued that there needs to be a “new map for America.” “Advanced economies in Western Europe and Asia are reorienting themselves around robust urban clusters of advanced industry,” wrote Parag Khanna, a CFR globalist and self-styled “leading global strategist,” whatever that means. “Unfortunately, American policy making remains wedded to an antiquated political structure of 50 distinct states.”

Keiser Report: Moths to Economic Flames

Keiser Report
January 31, 2016



In this episode of the Keiser Report, Max Keiser and Stacy Herbert discuss moths to the flame as corporations, individuals and whole nations self-liquidate on the pyre of bad debts. They look at the incredibly shrinking benefits of massive Japanese money printing and also at the proposal that Western oil giants self-liquidate as the best means of deploying their capital in a newly free oil market where the marginal producer once again sets the price. In the second half, Max interviews economics writer and researcher, Chris Martenson of PeakProsperity.com, about his new book, Prosper: How to Prepare for the Future and Create a World Worth Inheriting. They define ‘prosperity’ and name the best ways to create it for yourself, despite any global trends working against it.



ECONOMIST WARNS WORLDWIDE BUSINESS TAX NEXT STEP IN GLOBALIZATION

Washington Times
November 11, 2015

Are you aware that the American government has been slowly giving away its power to international bureaucrats to determine how its businesses and citizens are taxed?
Most wars do not turn out the way the people who started them intended. Setting aside the hot military wars, look at the consequences of the “war on drugs” and the “war on money laundering and tax evasion.”
The global war on money laundering and tax evasion has failed in the three decades since it began in earnest, and it is now on its way to undermining the rule of law around the world, the legitimate role of financial institutions, and the right of sovereign governments to determine their own tax policies.
The new anti-money-laundering laws and regulations have resulted in millions of Americans who live abroad and others living outside their home countries being unable to get bank accounts and other financial services in the countries where they live.

Secrets Of The Elite: Why Forbes’s Rich List Doesn’t Include The Wealthiest Families On The Planet

True Activist
September 20, 2015



“Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.“

This is a House of Rothschilds maxim, widely attributed to banking tycoon Mayer Amschel Rothschild in 1838 and said to be a founding principle for the highly corrupt banking and political system we have today.  Along with the Rockefellers, the Rothschild dynasty is estimated to be worth well over a trillion dollars. How are these powerful families linked to the ongoing crisis of global wealth inequality, why are so many people unaware of their existence, and why doesn’t Forbes ever mention them in their annual list of the world’s wealthiest people?

Global wealth inequality is out of control, and it’s no accident

In January 2014, Oxfam announced that the richest 85 people on the planet share a combined wealth of $110 trillion. The figure was based on Forbes’s rich list 2013, and it equates to 65 times the total wealth of the entire bottom half (3.5 billion) of the world’s population. While some deluded commentators welcomed this as “fantastic news,” the rest of us were disgusted. Winnie Byanyima, Oxfam’s executive director, said at the time: “It is staggering that in the 21st Century, half of the world’s population own no more than a tiny elite whose numbers could all fit comfortably on a double-decker bus.”
Two months later, following Oxfam’s calculation and having published the new 2014 rich list, Forbes journalist Kasia Morena did some fact-checking. She found that the number of billionaires owning the same as the poorest 3.5 billion had dropped from 85 to 67: which demonstrates an enormous widening of the global inequality gap in just one year.
Fast-forward to 2015, and another Oxfam investigation. The anti-poverty charity warned in January that if nothing is done to tackle global wealth inequality- by forcing corporations to pay their taxes and closing off-shore tax havens, for example- the richest 1% will own more than everybody else in the world combined by 2016. In a paper called Wealth: Having it all and wanting more, Oxfam outlined how the richest 1 percent have seen their share of global wealth increase from 44% in 2009 to 48% in 2014, and will likely surpass 50% in 2016. Winnie Byanyima again warned that the explosion in inequality is holding back the fight against global poverty at a time when one in nine people do not have enough to eat, and more than a billion people still live on less than $1.25 a day.

Globalists Using Muslim Terrorists as Pawns

The New American
May 8, 2015

Globalists Using Muslim Terrorists as Pawns
Jihadists beware: You are being used as pawns and useful idiots for a much deeper agenda. The evidence is clear, and the goals are relatively transparent.
The Obama administration plans to begin more military training and arming of “moderate” jihadists in Syria as soon as this week, according to U.S. defense officials cited in media reports. The U.S. government’s stepped-up military support for “vetted” Syrian jihadists is ostensibly aimed at helping them battle less moderate Islamists in ISIS — a terrorist group that both Vice President Joe Biden and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Martin Dempsey haveadmitted was armed and funded by Obama’s “anti-ISIS” coalition in the war on Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad.
Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed in an interview last month that the U.S. government had been providing support to Chechen Islamist militants in the northern Caucasus region. “Our security services recorded direct contact between North Caucasus fighters and representatives of U.S. intelligence in Azerbaijan,” Putin said in the film, adding that he informed then-President George W. Bush, who vowed to stop the support. Instead, Putin claimed, U.S. intelligence agencies wrote to Russian authorities and said they had a right to back all “opposition forces” in the country.
In other words, Muslims are being used as pawns. That much is clear.
And despite alleged “East-West” tensions recently, that narrative also collapses under scrutiny, with “Eastern” and Western” rulers all pushing what they themselves refer to as a “New World Order.”   

Signs That The Elite Are Feverishly Preparing For Something BIG

End of the American Dream
April 19, 2015

Police State Riot Control Exercise - Public DomainWhat in the world are the elite up to?  In recent days, we have learned that the New York Fed is moving a lot of operations to Chicago because of concerns about what a “natural disaster” could do, the federal government is buying 62 million rounds of ammunition commonly used in AR-15 semi-automatic rifles for “training” purposes, and NORAD is moving back into Cheyenne Mountain because it is “EMP-hardened”.  In addition, government authorities have scheduled a whole host of unusual “training exercises” all over the nation.  So are the elite doing all of this in order to prepare for something really BIG, or should we just chalk up all of this strange activity to rampant government paranoia?
First, let’s talk about what the New York Fed has been doing.  What kind of natural disaster would be bad enough to completely shut down the operations of the New York Federal Reserve Bank?  It would have to be something very unusual, and apparently the New York Fed is very concerned that such an event could happen.  According to Reuters, the New York Fed has been transferring personnel to Chicago and building up its satellite office there just in case a “natural disaster” makes it impossible for normal operations to continue in New York…
First, let’s talk about what the New York Fed has been doing.  What kind of natural disaster would be bad enough to completely shut down the operations of the New York Federal Reserve Bank?  It would have to be something very unusual, and apparently the New York Fed is very concerned that such an event could happen.  According to Reuters, the New York Fed has been transferring personnel to Chicago and building up its satellite office there just in case a “natural disaster” makes it impossible for normal operations to continue in New York…
The New York branch of the U.S. Federal Reserve, wary that a natural disaster or other eventuality could shut down its market operations as it approaches an interest rate hike, has added staff and bulked up its satellite office in Chicago.
Some market technicians have transferred from New York and others were hired at the office housed in the Chicago Fed, according to several people familiar with the build-out that began about two years ago, after Hurricane Sandy struck Manhattan.
Officials believe the Chicago staffers can now handle all of the market operations that are done daily out of the New York Fed, which is the U.S. central bank’s main conduit to Wall Street.
This seems very odd.
In all of U.S. history, there has never been a natural disaster in New York City that would have been bad enough to totally shut down the operations of the New York Fed for an extended period of time.
So why are they so concerned?
Well, I can think of one event that could cause such a disruption…
An east coast tsunami.
This is something that I wrote about in this article.  But other than that, it is hard to imagine a natural disaster which could shut down the New York Fed for an extended period of time.
Another very odd thing that we learned about this week is an absolutely massive purchase by the government of ammunition that is commonly used in AR-15 semi-automatic rifles.  The following comes from an article by Paul Joseph Watson…
The Department of Homeland Security is set to purchase over 62 million rounds of ammo typically used in AR-15 semi-automatic rifles, just weeks after the ATF was forced to back down on a ban on M855 bullets.
A posting on FedBizOpps.gov this week reveals that the DHS is looking to contract with a company to provide 12.6 million rounds of .223 Remington ammunition per year for a period of five years – totaling 62.5 million bullets.
The solicitation explains that the purchase is intended, “to achieve price savings over the current .223 Rem duty ammunition.” The bullets will be used by U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents nationwide for “training” purposes.

Why in the world would U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents nationwide need such a massive amount of ammunition for “training” purposes?
That seems very odd.
Something else that seems very strange is the fact that NORAD is moving back into Cheyenne mountain after all these years…
It shut down nearly ten years ago as the threat from Russia seemed to subside, but this week the Pentagon announced that Cheyenne Mountain will once again be home to the most advanced tracking and communications equipment in the United States military.
The shift to the Cheyenne Mountain base in Colorado is designed to safeguard the command’s sensitive sensors and servers from a potential electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack, military officers said.
The Pentagon last week announced a $700 million contract with Raytheon Corporation to oversee the work for North American Aerospace Command (NORAD) and US Northern Command.
Admiral William Gortney, head of NORAD and Northern Command, said that ‘because of the very nature of the way that Cheyenne Mountain’s built, it’s EMP-hardened.’
So the U.S. military is concerned about an EMP attack all of a sudden?
Spending 700 million dollars to move back inside a mountain just because it is “EMP-hardened” is a pretty big deal.
Do they know something that we don’t?

MEET THE SECRETIVE GROUP THAT RUNS THE WORLD

Zero Hedge
April 12, 2015

Nothing comes closer to the stereotypical, secretive group determining the fate of over 7 billion people, than the Bank of International Settlements
Meet The Secretive Group That Runs The World
Over the centuries there have been many stories, some based on loose facts, others based on hearsay, conjecture, speculation and outright lies, about groups of people who “control the world.” Some of these are partially accurate, others are wildly hyperbolic, but when it comes to the historic record, nothing comes closer to the stereotypical, secretive group determining the fate of over 7 billion people, than the Bank of International Settlements, which hides in such plain sight, that few have ever paid much attention.
This is their story.
First unofficial meeting of the BIS Board of Directors in Basel, April 1930
The following is an excerpt from TOWER OF BASEL: The Shadowy History of the Secret Bank that Runs the World by Adam LeBor.  Reprinted with permission from PublicAffairs.
The world’s most exclusive club has eighteen members. They gather every other month on a Sunday evening at 7 p.m. in conference room E in a circular tower block whose tinted windows overlook the central Basel railway station. Their discussion lasts for one hour, perhaps an hour and a half. Some of those present bring a colleague with them, but the aides rarely speak during this most confidential of conclaves. The meeting closes, the aides leave, and those remaining retire for dinner in the dining room on the eighteenth floor, rightly confident that the food and the wine will be superb. The meal, which continues until 11 p.m. or midnight, is where the real work is done. The protocol and hospitality, honed for more than eight decades, are faultless. Anything said at the dining table, it is understood, is not to be repeated elsewhere.
Few, if any, of those enjoying their haute cuisine and grand cru wines— some of the best Switzerland can offer—would be recognized by passers-by, but they include a good number of the most powerful people in the world. These men—they are almost all men—are central bankers. They have come to Basel to attend the Economic Consultative Committee (ECC) of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), which is the bank for central banks. Its current members [ZH: as of 2013] include Ben Bernanke, the chairman of the US Federal Reserve; Sir Mervyn King, the governor of the Bank of England; Mario Draghi, of the European Central Bank; Zhou Xiaochuan of the Bank of China; and the central bank governors of Germany, France, Italy, Sweden, Canada, India, and Brazil. Jaime Caruana, a former governor of the Bank of Spain, the BIS’s general manager, joins them.
In early 2013, when this book went to press, King, who is due to step down as governor of the Bank of England in June 2013, chaired the ECC. The ECC, which used to be known as the G-10 governors’ meeting, is the most influential of the BIS’s numerous gatherings, open only to a small, select group of central bankers from advanced economies. The ECC makes recommendations on the membership and organization of the three BIS committees that deal with the global financial system, payments systems, and international markets. The committee also prepares proposals for the Global Economy Meeting and guides its agenda.
That meeting starts at 9:30 a.m. on Monday morning, in room B and lasts for three hours. There King presides over the central bank governors of the thirty countries judged the most important to the global economy. In addition to those who were present at the Sunday evening dinner, Monday’s meeting will include representatives from, for example, Indonesia, Poland, South Africa, Spain, and Turkey. Governors from fifteen smaller countries, such as Hungary, Israel, and New Zealand are allowed to sit in as observers, but do not usually speak. Governors from the third tier of member banks, such as Macedonia and Slovakia, are not allowed to attend. Instead they must forage for scraps of information at coffee and meal breaks.
The governors of all sixty BIS member banks then enjoy a buffet lunch in the eighteenth-floor dining room. Designed by Herzog & de Meuron, the Swiss architectural firm which built the “Bird’s Nest” Stadium for the Beijing Olympics, the dining room has white walls, a black ceiling and spectacular views over three countries: Switzerland, France, and Germany. At 2 p.m. the central bankers and their aides return to room B for the governors’ meeting to discuss matters of interest, until the gathering ends at 5.
King takes a very different approach than his predecessor, Jean-Claude Trichet, the former president of the European Central Bank, in chairing the Global Economy Meeting. Trichet, according to one former central banker, was notably Gallic in his style: a stickler for protocol who called the central bankers to speak in order of importance, starting with the governors of the Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, and the Bundesbank, and then progressing down the hierarchy. King, in contrast, adopts a more thematic and egalitarian approach: throwing open the meetings for discussion and inviting contributions from all present.
The governors’ conclaves have played a crucial role in determining the world’s response to the global financial crisis. “The BIS has been a very important meeting point for central bankers during the crisis, and the rationale for its existence has expanded,” said King. “We have had to face challenges that we have never seen before. We had to work out what was going on, what instruments do we use when interest rates are close to zero, how do we communicate policy. We discuss this at home with our staff, but it is very valuable for the governors themselves to get together and talk among themselves.”
Those discussions, say central bankers, must be confidential. “When you are at the top in the number one post, it can be pretty lonely at times. It is helpful to be able to meet other number ones and say, ‘This is my problem, how do you deal with it?’” King continued. “Being able to talk informally and openly about our experiences has been immensely valuable. We are not speaking in a public forum. We can say what we really think and believe, and we can ask questions and benefit from others.”
The BIS management works hard to ensure that the atmosphere is friendly and clubbable throughout the weekend, and it seems they succeed. The bank arranges a fleet of limousines to pick up the governors at Zürich airport and bring them to Basel. Separate breakfasts, lunches, and dinners are organized for the governors of national banks who oversee different types and sizes of national economies, so no one feels excluded. “The central bankers were more at home and relaxed with their fellow central bankers than with their own governments,” recalled Paul Volcker, the former chairman of the US Federal Reserve, who at- tended the Basel weekends. The superb quality of the food and wine made for an easy camaraderie, said Peter Akos Bod, a former governor of the National Bank of Hungary. “The main topics of discussion were the quality of the wine and the stupidity of finance ministers. If you had no knowledge of wine you could not join in the conversation.”
And the conversation is usually stimulating and enjoyable, say central bankers. The contrast between the Federal Open Markets Committee at  the US Federal Reserve, and the Sunday evening G-10 governors’ dinners was notable, recalled Laurence Meyer, who served as a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve from 1996 until 2002. The chairman of the Federal Reserve did not always represent the bank at the Basel meetings, so Meyer occasionally attended. The BIS discussions were always lively, focused and thought provoking. “At FMOC meetings, while I was at the Fed, almost all the Committee members read statements which had been prepared in advance. They very rarely referred to statements by other Committee members and there was almost never an exchange between two members or an ongoing discussion about the outlook or policy options. At BIS dinners people actually talk to each other and the discussions are always stimulating and interactive focused on the serious issues facing the global economy.”
All the governors present at the two-day gathering are assured of total confidentiality, discretion, and the highest levels of security. The meetings take place on several floors that are usually used only when the governors are in attendance. The governors are provided with a dedicated office and the necessary support and secretarial staff. The Swiss authorities have no juridisdiction over the BIS premises. Founded by an international treaty, and further protected by the 1987 Headquarters Agreement with the Swiss government, the BIS enjoys similar protections to those granted to the headquarters of the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and diplomatic embassies. The Swiss authorities need the permission of the BIS management to enter the bank’s buildings, which are described as “inviolable.”
The BIS has the right to communicate in code and to send and receive correspondence in bags covered by the same protection as embassies, meaning they cannot be opened. The BIS is exempt from Swiss taxes. Its employees do not have to pay income tax on their salaries, which are usually generous, designed to compete with the private sector. The general man- ager’s salary in 2011 was 763,930 Swiss francs, while head of departments were paid 587,640 per annum, plus generous allowances. The bank’s extraordinary legal privileges also extend to its staff and directors. Senior managers enjoy a special status, similar to that of diplomats, while carrying out their duties in Switzerland, which means their bags cannot be searched (unless there is evidence of a blatant criminal act), and their papers are inviolable. The central bank governors traveling to Basel for the bimonthly meetings enjoy the same status while in Switzerland. All bank officials are immune under Swiss law, for life, for all the acts carried out during the discharge of their duties. The bank is a popular place to work and not just because of the salaries. Around six hundred staff come from over fifty countries. The atmosphere is multi-national and cosmopolitan, albeit very Swiss, emphasizing the bank’s hierarchy. Like many of those working for the UN or the IMF, some of the staff of the BIS, especially senior management, are driven by a sense of mission, that they are working for a higher, even celestial purpose and so are immune from normal considerations of accountability and transparency.
The bank’s management has tried to plan for every eventuality so that the Swiss police need never be called. The BIS headquarters has high-tech sprinkler systems with multiple back-ups, in-house medical facilities, and its own bomb shelter in the event of a terrorist attack or armed conflagration. The BIS’s assets are not subject to civil claims under Swiss law and can never be seized.
The BIS strictly guards the bankers’ secrecy. The minutes, agenda, and actual attendance list of the Global Economy Meeting or the ECC are not released in any form. This is because no official minutes are taken, although the bankers sometimes scribble their own notes.Sometimes there will be a brief press conference or bland statement afterwards but never anything detailed. This tradition of privileged confidentiality reaches back to the bank’s foundation.
“The quietness of Basel and its absolutely nonpolitical character provide a perfect setting for those equally quiet and nonpolitical gatherings,” wrote one American official in 1935. “The regularity of the meetings and their al- most unbroken attendance by practically every member of the Board make them such they rarely attract any but the most meager notice in the press.”8 Forty years on, little had changed. Charles Coombs, a former foreign exchange chief of the New York Federal Reserve, attended governors’ meetings from 1960 to 1975. The bankers who were allowed inside the inner sanctum of the governors’ meetings trusted each other absolutely, he recalled in his memoirs. “However much money was involved, no agreements were ever signed nor memoranda of understanding ever initialized. The word of each official was sufficient, and there were never any disappointments.”
What, then, does this matter to the rest of us? Bankers have been gathering confidentially since money was first invented. Central bankers like to view themselves as the high priests of finance, as technocrats overseeing arcane monetary rituals and a financial liturgy understood only by a small, self-selecting elite.
But the governors who meet in Basel every other month are public servants. Their salaries, airplane tickets, hotel bills, and lucrative pensions when they retire are paid out of the public purse. The national reserves held by central banks are public money, the wealth of nations. The central bankers’ discussions at the BIS, the information that they share, the policies that are evaluated, the opinions that are exchanged, and the subsequent decisions that are taken, are profoundly political. Central bankers, whose independence is constitutionally protected, control monetary policy in the developed world. They manage the supply of money to national economies. They set interest rates, thus deciding the value of our savings and investments. They decide whether to focus on austerity or growth. Their decisions shape our lives.
The BIS’s tradition of secrecy reaches back through the decades. During the 1960s, for example, the bank hosted the London Gold Pool. Eight countries pledged to manipulate the gold market to keep the price at around thirty-five dollars per ounce, in line with the provisions of the Bretton Woods Accord that governed the post–World War II international financial system. Although the London Gold Pool no longer exists, its successor is the BIS Markets Committee, which meets every other month on the occasion of the governors’ meetings to discuss trends in the financial markets. Officials from twenty-one central banks attend. The committee releases occasional papers, but its agenda and discussions remain secret.
Nowadays the countries represented at the Global Economy Meetings together account for around four-fifths of global gross domestic product (GDP)— most of the produced wealth of the world—according to the BIS’s own statistics. Central bankers now “seem more powerful than politicians,” wrote The Economist newspaper, “holding the destiny of the global economy in their hands.” How did this happen? The BIS, the world’s most secretive global financial institution, can claim much of the credit. From its first day of existence, the BIS has dedicated itself to furthering the interests of central banks and building the new architecture of transnational finance. In doing so, it has spawned a new class of close-knit global technocrats whose members glide between highly-paid positions at the BIS, the IMF, and central and commercial banks.
The founder of the technocrats’ cabal was Per Jacobssen, the Swedish economist who served as the BIS’s economic adviser from 1931 to 1956. The bland title belied his power and reach. Enormously influential, well connected, and highly regarded by his peers, Jacobssen wrote the first BIS annual reports, which were—and remain—essential reading throughout the world’s treasuries. Jacobssen was an early supporter of European federalism. He argued relentlessly against inflation, excessive government spending, and state intervention in the economy. Jacobssen left the BIS in 1956 to take over the IMF. His legacy still shapes our world. The consequences of his mix of economic liberalism, price obsession, and dismantling of national sovereignty play out nightly in the European news bulletins on our television screens.
The BIS’s defenders deny that the organization is secretive. The bank’s archives are open and researchers may consult most documents that are more than thirty years old. The BIS archivists are indeed cordial, helpful, and professional. The bank’s website includes all its annual reports, which are downloadable, as well as numerous policy papers produced by the bank’s highly regarded research department. The BIS publishes detailed accounts of the securities and derivatives markets, and international banking statistics. But these are largely compilations and analyses of information already in the public domain. The details of the bank’s own core activities, including much of its banking operations for its customers, central banks, and international organizations, remain secret. The Global Economy Meetings and the other crucial financial gatherings that take place at Basel, such as the Markets Committee, remain closed to outsiders. Private individuals may not hold an account at BIS, unless they work for the bank. The bank’s opacity, lack of accountability, and ever-increasing influence raises profound questions— not just about monetary policy but transparency, accountability, and how power is exercised in our democracies.
Read the entire article