Join Us at the 2023 World Economic Conference in Orlando, Florida!

? Dates: November 17, 18, and 19 ? Location: Orlando, Florida, USA (or tune in from home with our virtual ticket options)

Are you ready to unlock the future of economics and finance? Prepare for an unforgettable World Economic Conference experience in sunny Orlando, Florida! This premier event is your gateway to insights, networking, and valuable resources that will supercharge your understanding of the global economy.

?️ What’s Included for In-Person Attendees:

1. Event Admission: Enjoy reserved seating assigned based on the order of ticket sales, ensuring you have a prime view of every presentation.
2. Presentation Slides: Gain access to the presentation slides from all speakers, allowing you to delve deeper into the topics discussed.
3. Video Recording: Can’t make it to a session? No worries! You’ll receive access to video recordings of all conference presentations, so you can catch up at your convenience.
4. WEC Event App: Connect with the conference on a whole new level. Access presentation slides, bonus reports, recordings, and more via the official WEC Event App.
5. Bonus Conference Materials: Get a package of bonus conference-related materials, including exclusive bonus reports and videos (as provided by Martin Armstrong).
6. Morning Information Sessions: Don’t miss out on important morning information sessions, screened on-site in the meeting room on Saturday and Sunday.
7. Networking Opportunities: Exclusive access to the Event App Networking Feature allows you to connect with fellow attendees, both in-person and virtual, fostering valuable professional relationships.
8. Culinary Delights: Savor delicious breakfast and lunch on Saturday and Sunday, prepared to keep you energized throughout the day.
9. Cocktail Reception: Kick off the conference in style at our Friday evening cocktail reception. Meet and mingle with fellow attendees while enjoying refreshing drinks.
10. Swag Bag: As a token of our appreciation, each in-person attendee will receive a swag bag filled with goodies, including an Armstrong Economics notebook, pen, and an event collector’s mug!

Unable to travel? We also have two different ticket options for those wishing to attend virtually! 

Don’t miss this opportunity to be part of a global gathering of economic and financial minds. Secure your spot at the World Economic Conference in Orlando, Florida, and gain the knowledge, connections, and resources you need to thrive in the world of finance and economics.

Space is limited, so act now and reserve your seat! Visit our Events page to register and join us in sunny Orlando this November.

Now available at all major retailers!

The eBook will be available shortly.

The second edition of “The Plot to Seize Russia – The Untold History” is now available for purchase in paperback and hardcover on Amazon and Barnes and Noble. The ebook will be available shortly.

Book description:

“Take care of Russia,” Boris Yeltsin said as he departed his presidency in August 1999. These words were directed at current Russian president, Vladimir Putin. Yeltsin specifically picked Putin as his predecessor to prevent the takeover of Russia.

So, who was Yeltsin warning against? Newly declassified documents from the Clinton Administration prove that there was a plot to rig the Russian election of 2000. These never-before-seen documents confirm numerous attempts to implement pro-Western policies using the Russian oligarchy headed by Boris Berezovsky.

On the other side were the communists who desired a return to the glory days of the Soviet Union. As one of the largest international hedge fund managers, author Martin Armstrong found himself in the middle of perhaps the greatest espionage, or attempt at a regime change for Russia, in modern history.

The Plot to Seize Russia pulls back the curtain to expose the most extraordinary attempt to seize power in modern history, but with the pen rather than armies. These declassified documents reveal a plot that has altered our thinking about the relations between the United States and Russia. The thirst for power comes seething through every line of these papers that alter our perception of reality, change the course of history, and now threaten us with World War III.

There are very few opportunities to step inside the actual models that track capital flows, forecast market turning points, and map global economic cycles. This May, we are offering three highly focused educational webinars designed to take you from understanding the system… to applying it in real time.

These sessions are built on over 40+ years of research and are taught by Erwin Pletsch, who has spent decades working directly with Martin Armstrong’s models.

Understanding the Economic Confidence Model

May 12

The official training, titled “Understanding the Economic Confidence Model,” walks through the origins, structure, and real-world application of the ECM—the model that tracks global booms, busts, and shifts in confidence.

You will learn:

• How the ECM was discovered and constructed
• How to interpret its timing and turning points
• The connection between confidence, capital flows, and global markets
• Real-world examples of ECM alignment across countries and asset classes

This session is designed for anyone serious about understanding why markets move—not just reacting to them.

Understanding the Monetary Crisis Cycle

May 13

If the ECM shows when confidence shifts, the Monetary Crisis Cycle explains what happens when that confidence breaks. This session dives into the cyclical nature of sovereign debt crises, currency transitions, and global capital migration.

You will learn:

• The origins and recurring patterns of monetary crises
• How foreign exchange and capital flows behave during instability
• The relationship between the MC Cycle and the ECM
• Historical turning points and trend changes tied to the cycle

This webinar is suited for anyone looking to understand the broader global financial system—from currencies to sovereign risk.

Updated Advanced Techniques and Considerations for using Reversals and Arrays

May 15–16

This is where theory becomes execution. The official advanced training, “Updated Advanced Techniques and Considerations for using Reversals and Arrays” focuses on applying the Socrates model in real-world trading environments.

You will learn:

• How to use Reversals (price) and Arrays (time) together
• Advanced techniques for identifying high-probability trades
• How to interpret market structure using Socrates tools
• Practical strategies based on real trading scenarios

This is an advanced, two-day intensive workshop designed for experienced traders already familiar with the concepts.

These three sessions are designed to work together:

• The ECM teaches you when major turning points occur
• The Monetary Crisis Cycle explains why they happen
• Reversals & Arrays show you how to act on them

These are the actual models used to interpret global financial trends—delivered in a format that allows direct interaction, Q&A, and deeper understanding. Capacity is limited. These are live, interactive sessions designed for anyone interested in better understanding the inner workings of Martin Armstrong’s analyses.

There was a time when your photo album sat in a drawer, private, personal, and disconnected from the outside world. Privacy no longer exists in the modern world as personal data will become the key tool of control, and now Google is taking the next step by turning your memories into fuel for artificial intelligence.

According to a recent report, Google has rolled out a major update to its Photos platform that allows its AI system, Gemini, to scan your entire photo library to build what it calls “Personal Intelligence.” What this means in plain English is that your images are no longer just stored, they are analyzed and integrated into a broader behavioral profile. Google openly admits the system can use actual images of you and your loved ones to generate AI content, eliminating the need for users to manually upload reference photos.

This is not a minor tweak to a photo app, but a structural shift in how data is harvested and understood, because every image you have ever taken now becomes part of a living model that attempts to understand who you are, who you associate with, where you go, and how you live your life. What was once private into something continuously processed and categorized.

The justification is framed as efficiency, where users no longer need to search or describe anything since the system already understands the context, and Google presents this as innovation by claiming the AI will automatically fill in the blanks by learning from your data, yet what is being constructed is an algorithmic identity that merges your private life with machine interpretation.

The system analyzes faces, objects, and even text within images, grouping individuals, identifying locations, and extracting written information from receipts, documents, and signs, which means your photos are no longer static files but are converted into structured intelligence that becomes searchable, categorized, and increasingly predictive.

Once this data is created, it does not remain isolated, because Google has confirmed that when Photos is connected to other services like Gemini, information from your images can be shared across platforms to fulfill requests, which is how ecosystems evolve from separate tools into unified systems that construct a comprehensive profile of the individual.

The industry will argue that participation is optional, and while users technically have the ability to opt in or out. In reality, companies deliberately make it difficult, if not impossible, for users to fully opt out of tracking.

AI is evolving from general tools into deeply personal systems, integrating email, calendars, search history, and now personal photos into a single framework that reflects an increasingly detailed digital version of the individual, marking a transition from utility to behavioral modeling.

Governments have already demonstrated a willingness to expand surveillance through financial monitoring, communication tracking, and regulatory oversight, and the infrastructure being built by Big Tech provides a foundation that can be leveraged for broader control, especially when financial data, behavioral patterns, and visual intelligence are combined into a single ecosystem.

OPT-OUT: Go to myaccount.google.com and begin by turning off every tracking and personalization setting available, because leaving even one active continues to feed the system. Do not permit any form of “personalization,” as that is simply the mechanism used to justify data collection across services. Google is not limited to your photos, it tracks your location through Maps and embedded photo metadata, it records your browsing history, and it logs every video viewed and every search made, all of which are combined into a single behavioral profile. It is not enough to disable these settings going forward, since the historical data remains intact, so you must also go back and delete all prior activity to reduce what has already been collected.

The Pentagon has requested $54 billion for artificial intelligence–driven warfare, a figure that dwarfs prior allocations and signals a decisive shift in how conflicts will be conducted going forward.

This is a restructuring of warfare, where autonomous systems are being positioned to operate across air, land, and sea, replacing traditional deployments with machine-driven execution at scale. CIA director David Petraeus said it was “the largest single commitment to autonomous warfare in history.” As the Guardian noted, $54 billion is an astounding figure that amounts to half of the UK’s entire defense budget.

What stands out immediately is the pace, because this is not a gradual transition. Autonomous drones, remote systems, and AI-assisted targeting are already being deployed in active theaters, and the cost structure of warfare is changing as a result, since low-cost, scalable systems reduce the financial barrier to engagement. This is a new arena with untold potential for destruction of civilizations.

This is why the government and private sector are harvesting surveillance data. The same systems designed for data processing, automation, and consumer use are now being adapted for surveillance, targeting, and operational control, creating a convergence that centralizes both capability and influence.

Government is simulating battlefield outcomes in real time, which reduces reliance on human judgment and shifts authority toward machine-generated conclusions. A top general with experience will be second-tier to an advanced AI system capable of computing millions of scenarios in real-time.

There is no fully established doctrine governing the deployment of autonomous systems at scale, particularly for coordinated drone operations, and current models remain vulnerable to failure and manipulation. Again, deploying such systems without fully understanding their limitations introduces risks that extend far beyond conventional warfare.

This $54 billion request is absolutely absurd, considering the Pentagon already has a $1 trillion budget. But the Pentagon has never had a real budget—the agency has failed EVERY audit, and when a whistleblower was close to exposing fraud, a rogue terrorist defied the laws of physics by flying a plane into the building where the files were held. The Pentagon will spend that money whether the funding is approved or not, but the real question remains: how will advanced artificial intelligence change the future of warfare?

I have said many times that interest rates do not lead inflation but react to it, and what we are seeing in Turkey right now is a central bank attempting to hold the line as external pressures rise, because the Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey has kept its benchmark rate at 37% while warning that inflation risks are increasing again, largely due to geopolitical tensions and rising energy costs tied to the Iran conflict.

This decision is not a sign of stability, but rather a reflection of constraint, because inflation in Turkey remains elevated above 30%, and the central bank itself is acknowledging that price pressures could accelerate again, particularly as energy imports become more expensive and global uncertainty feeds into domestic costs.

What many overlook is that Turkey’s economy is deeply integrated with the West, both financially and structurally, which means it is highly dependent on foreign capital inflows, dollar-based trade, and access to international financing. That connection ultimately limits its policy flexibility, despite political rhetoric about independence.

Turkey relies heavily on imported energy, and when global oil prices rise, those costs immediately feed into inflation, forcing policymakers to maintain higher interest rates to defend the currency and prevent capital flight, even though those same high rates put pressure on domestic growth and credit conditions.

This creates the classic dilemma that I have described for decades, where a country does not fully control its own economic direction because it must constantly respond to shifts in global capital flows, and when confidence declines due to war, inflation, or instability, capital moves quickly, leaving policymakers with limited options.

The Iran war has added a new layer of pressure, because disruptions to energy markets and rising geopolitical risk reduce investor confidence, and when that happens, countries like Turkey must offer higher returns to attract or retain capital, which explains why rates remain elevated despite the strain on the economy.

At the same time, maintaining high rates for an extended period slows economic activity, increases borrowing costs, and creates internal stress within the financial system, which leads to a growing conflict between political objectives and economic realities that cannot be resolved easily.

This is where Turkey’s position becomes particularly fragile: it is trying to balance its role between East and West, maintaining access to Western capital markets while pursuing an independent foreign policy. But when financial pressure rises, the reality is that capital flows dictate outcomes regardless of political intent.

I have warned that once geopolitical tensions ignite, they do not remain contained, and what we are now witnessing is the steady expansion of conflict lines as Turkey is being recast from a strategic NATO partner into a geopolitical threat by the very alliance it once helped anchor.

The European Union has now openly shifted its tone, with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen effectively grouping Turkey alongside Russia and China, stating that Europe must ensure it is not influenced by “Russia, Turkey or China,” which is an extraordinary statement when directed at a NATO member and signals a clear break in strategic trust, especially when such language aligns closely with broader geopolitical narratives emerging from the Middle East.

Not so coincidentally, tensions are escalating rapidly between Turkey and Israel. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly warned that Israel faces a widening circle of adversaries and must prepare for emerging threats across the region. Turkish officials have responded by accusing Israel of deliberately seeking its “next enemy,” with Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan stating that Israel “cannot live without an enemy.” Bibi has remained in control by posturing Israel as on the defensive against external enemies, yet he has become the aggressor. It is Netanyahu, not Israel, who could not survive without an enemy to ward off.

When you step back and examine Turkey under Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, this is a nation that has never accepted a subordinate role within Europe. Turkey has long viewed itself as a regional power with deep historical roots tied to the Ottoman Empire, and Erdoğan has made that posture explicit by declaring that no one can “threaten or bully Turkey,” reinforcing Ankara’s willingness to confront both Europe and its traditional allies when it perceives its sovereignty to be at risk.

What makes this situation far more dangerous is that Turkey is not a minor player that can simply be pressured into compliance, because it possesses one of the largest and most capable militaries in NATO, second only to the United States in manpower, with hundreds of thousands of active personnel, advanced drone capabilities, and a strategic geographic position controlling access between Europe, the Black Sea, and the Middle East, which makes any deterioration in relations far more consequential than policymakers appear willing to acknowledge.

Europe continues to depend on Turkey for migration control, regional security, and energy transit routes, yet it is now publicly labeling the nation as a threat. This is precisely how alliances fracture and friends turn into foes.

The growing hostility between Turkey and Israel introduces an additional layer of risk, because both nations operate militarily within overlapping regions such as Syria.

Europe’s decision to move against Turkey also risks pushing Ankara further away from the Western sphere and toward alternative alliances, including Russia and China, thereby accelerating the fragmentation of the global order and weakening NATO cohesion at a time when it is already under strain.

Broader conflicts are not triggered by a single event, but by a series of shifts in rhetoric, policy, all building momentum until the system reaches a breaking point. The reality is that Turkey is no longer treated as a reliable ally by Europe. As Israel elevates Turkey within its own threat framework, Europe appears to be following that trajectory, signaling a deeper realignment that will have far-reaching consequences for regional stability and the future of the Western alliance.

I have said for years that governments and institutions always begin with what people will accept and then gradually expand from there. What we are now seeing in educational technology is perhaps one of the most disturbing developments, because it targets children under the guise of learning.

Studies have now confirmed that roughly 90% of commonly used school apps are transmitting tracking data, even when they are not actively being used, and many contain hidden third-party trackers operating in the background. This is not simply about helping a student complete homework or communicate with a teacher; this is continuous data collection that records behavior, interaction patterns, and device activity regardless of whether the child is even aware it is happening.

For many reading this, particularly those who did not grow up in a digital classroom, it is important to understand how pervasive these platforms have become, as students today are required to use them for nearly every aspect of their education. Assignments, testing, communication, textbooks, and grading have all moved into apps and online systems, meaning participation is no longer optional, it is mandatory. Parents assume these tools exist to support education, yet behind the curtain, they are functioning as data collection systems layered into the daily routine of children.

I see this as no different from what we witnessed with Pokémon Go, where people believed they were simply playing a game, but in reality, they were contributing to a massive data collection operation. The difference here is that children are not choosing to participate, they are required to, and instead of mapping physical locations, these systems are mapping behavior, attention spans, learning patterns, and interaction habits from a very early age.

What is being built is not just an academic record, but a behavioral profile that follows the individual over time, capturing how they think, how they respond, how long they focus, and how they engage with information. Once that data is collected, it does not simply vanish, it becomes part of a broader ecosystem that can be analyzed, shared, and monetized in ways that are rarely disclosed in plain terms.

Many of these platforms rely on third-party integrations, which means the data is not confined to a single provider but is distributed across multiple entities, each extracting value from it. This creates a web of data collection that is nearly impossible for parents to fully understand or control, and the more these systems are adopted, the more normalized this becomes.

From my perspective, this is how control expands, not through force, but through normalization. When data collection is embedded into something like a game, people participate willingly, but when it is embedded into education, it becomes institutional. That is a very dangerous shift, because it removes the ability to opt out without consequence.

We are moving into a system where data is the new currency, and the earlier it is collected, the more valuable it becomes. Starting that process in childhood creates a lifetime of behavioral data that can be used to predict, influence, and potentially control outcomes in ways that most people do not yet fully grasp.

I have said for years that people misunderstand the global monetary system. It is not driven by trade balances. It is driven by capital flows and access to dollar liquidity. The discussion of a currency swap between the United States and the United Arab Emirates shows how the system actually works under stress.

The United States is now considering a currency swap with the UAE as tensions around Iran rise. This is not about trade policy. It is about liquidity. When uncertainty increases, capital begins to move. Countries need dollars to stabilize their financial systems and maintain confidence.

Currency swaps are often presented as technical tools. In reality, they are lifelines. They allow a foreign central bank to access U.S. dollars directly. This bypasses stressed markets and helps prevent a liquidity crisis that could trigger capital flight.

This is exactly what happens during geopolitical conflict. The Iran situation has raised concerns about the Strait of Hormuz. That region is critical for global energy flows. When energy is threatened, markets react immediately. Currency volatility rises and capital seeks safety.

The UAE is a strong economy, but it is still exposed. Its currency is pegged to the U.S. dollar, meaning it must maintain sufficient dollar reserves to function properly. When global stress increases, even strong economies seek direct dollar access. That is why a swap line becomes important.

There is also a geopolitical layer. Currency swaps are tools of influence. When the United States provides dollar liquidity, it reinforces alignment. If access is restricted, countries look for alternatives. That can include increasing use of other currencies like the Chinese yuan. The UAE has stated it would consider using the yuan if the U.S. denies them the opportunity to swap, but the issue has become polarizing.

“The war in Iran has already cost us dearly,” Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md. Said to Treasury Secretary Bessent. “In addition to lives lost, we’re talking about over a billion dollars a day in taxpayer money, we’re talking about higher gas prices, higher prices overall, and now we understand that the UAE is asking you to provide them a swap line through the Exchange Stabilization Fund.”

The key point people miss, because this is not about whether a country is rich, it is about whether it has access to dollars when the system comes under stress. This is precisely what I have always explained about currency swaps, because they are not favors or political gestures, they are lifelines, and when a country fears losing dollar inflows, especially one tied to oil exports through a chokepoint like the Strait of Hormuz, it must secure liquidity or risk instability in its currency, its banking system, and ultimately its entire economy.

This is also where many misunderstand de-dollarization. The world is not abandoning the dollar. It is trying to create options as nations want flexibility as geopolitical risks rise. Currency swaps are central to that process because they determine access to liquidity.

Confidence drives markets. When confidence falls, capital moves quickly. Without liquidity, currencies weaken, and systems come under pressure. Governments respond with tools like currency swaps to restore stability.

The fact that this swap is being considered tells you pressure is already building. These agreements are not routine. They are signals that policymakers expect volatility and a continued crisis.

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong, you said that Iran is the merger of Marxism and Islam. I believe you also said that the Shah did not realize that sending the youth to school in the UK and the US was a mistake, and that they returned to Iran, indoctrinated with Marxism. Was this the backdrop to Death to America?

Frank

REPLY: Absolutely. The Shah made the mistake of sending people to study in the West during the late ’70s when universities were taken over by the LEFT and indoctrinated students into this dangerous idea that has been behind the single most devastating upheaval in human history. No other theory has caused so much death as the LEFTISTS.

This merger of Marxism and Islam was unique to Iran. It involved revolutionary Shia clerics adopting Marxist language, leftist intellectuals reinterpreting Islam, and a tactical alliance against a common enemy. This collaboration was a key factor in the revolution’s success, though it proved to be short-lived. It has often been overlooked and just seen as an Islamic Revolution, which is NOT correct. This is part of the problem in negotiating with Iran currently. If we DO NOT understand that this is a merger of Islam reinterpreted by Marxists, good luck in trying to negotiate.

The common language of Anti-Imperialism and Social Justice was merged. The main bridge between these two seemingly opposed worldviews was their shared commitment to anti-imperialism and social justice. For many in Iran, the Shah’s regime was presented as a symbol of Western imperialism and gross economic inequality. That’s where Marxism came in, where everyone should have the same. Marxism provided a sharp critique of capitalism and imperialism, while a newly radicalized version of Shi’a Islam, often called “Liberation Theology,” framed the struggle against the Shah as a fight for the oppressed (mostaz’afin). This overlap in goals created the initial common ground for an alliance.

Ali Shariati was the Intellectual Architect. He is regarded as one of the most influential Iranian intellectuals of the 20th century. He has been referred to as the “ideologue of the Islamic Revolution,” and was the most important figure in forging this ideological blend of Marxism & Islam. Ali Shariati, of course, was a French-educated sociologist who was converted to Communism by Marx himself. Shariati was not a Marxist per se, but he was deeply influenced by Marxist concepts of class struggle, which he artfully integrated into his reinterpretation of Shi’ism. He argued that the original, revolutionary Shi’ism was a religion of the oppressed, which he called “Red Shi’ism,” in contrast to the passive, established “Safavid Shi’ism” of the religious establishment. By presenting Islam as a modern, revolutionary ideology, he offered a powerful native alternative to Marxism, making the anti-Shah movement both religiously authentic and socially radical.

Beyond Shariati’s intellectual synthesis, the revolution against the Shah was driven by a loose but effective alliance of convenience between various political groups. The Clergy & Khomeini: Although Ayatollah Khomeini was deeply anti-communist, he and his clerical followers were skilled politicians. They adopted popular Marxist slogans like “economic equality” and “struggle against imperialism” to tap into widespread anti-Shah sentiment, successfully channeling this energy into their own vision of an Islamic state.

Islamic-Marxist Guerrillas (MEK) became the most literal fusion of the two ideologies that occurred within the Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK). Founded in 1965, the MEK explicitly described its ideology as a “combination of Islam and Marxism.” The group argued that a “true Muslim” was naturally aligned with socialist and anti-imperialist goals. They fought alongside Khomeini’s forces during the revolution but were purged soon after.

Secular Marxists (Tudeh Party), was Iran’s largest communist party, and was originally wary of Khomeini’s religious movement. However, their fervent anti-Shah position eventually led them to support the revolutionary coalition, hoping to influence its outcome from within.

The alliance was purely pragmatic. Once the Shah was overthrown in 1979, the fundamental incompatibility between Marxism (which is atheist) and an Islamic state (which is theocratic) became immediately clear. Khomeini’s regime quickly moved to eliminate its leftist allies in what has been called a “counter-revolutionary” purge. Marxist and Islamic-Marxist groups, including the Tudeh party and the MEK, were ruthlessly suppressed, with thousands of members executed or forced into exile.

It became a Revolutionary Synthesis, rather than a merger of Marxism and Islamic fundamentalism, which was a revolutionary synthesis, not a permanent fusion. For a brief period, their shared opposition to the Shah united them in a powerful coalition to achieve the revolution. However, their fundamental differences proved irreconcilable, leading to a violent and decisive break in the revolution’s aftermath.

Religion aside, what I find curious is that Marxism is expressly forbidden in the Ten Commandments, confirming that this has been an inherent problem within human civilization for thousands of years. Just counting Russia and China, the death toll thanks to Marxism and the LEFT is estimated at Deaths under regimes that identified with Marxism–Leninism (e.g., the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin, China under Mao Zedong, Cambodia under Pol Pot, etc.) is estimated between 50 and 90 million deaths, and that is just China and Russia. It has been the deadliest theory ever promoted by formal education.

Some argue that Sparta did not wage war against Athens because of communism vs. capitalism. They fought for power, fear, and security—as Thucydides documented—within the very different political and economic realities of the 5th century BC. However, the economics tells a different story. Sparta was a communist state. It never issued coins to discourage individual wealth.

Sparta never issued coins. All they had were iron “oboloi”, which were intended to be impractical to prevent the accumulation of wealth. Sparta did not issue coinage for centuries due to a deliberate set of ideological laws, known as the Lycurgan Reforms, designed to create a perfectly disciplined, militaristic, and egalitarian society. The state actively used its monetary system to enforce these values.

According to ancient historians like Plutarch, the legendary lawgiver Lycurgus banned the use of gold and silver coins, replacing them with heavy, cumbersome iron bars to stifle corruption, greed, and the pursuit of luxury.

The Spartan currency, called Pelanor (also referred to as ‘obeloi’ or spits), was deliberately made impractical. A single piece weighed around 1.5 pounds (0.68 kg) but had very little value, so even a small sum would require a cart to move.

The iron was deliberately made brittle by quenching it in vinegar while red-hot, rendering it useless for making tools or weapons. This ensured the currency had no purpose other than trade. This was an early communist state with “Anti-Money” by design.

This cumbersome system suppressed foreign influence, reduced theft (because of the difficulty of concealing the large bars), and curbed corruption by making bribery nearly impossible. More importantly, it discouraged the accumulation of private wealth and helped enforce the “equal” lifestyle of the Spartiate citizen class, which was essential for military discipline.

While the iron currency worked for internal trade among citizens, Sparta was not a closed economy. The Perioikoi (a subordinate class of free inhabitants) managed trade and used foreign currency, and the Spartan state itself famously used Persian gold coins to build its navy and ultimately defeat Athens in the Peloponnesian War.

While Athens was the power that defeated the Persians and rose to form its own empire, indeed, Sparta was jealous of that power. But at the root was also this difference in social theory. Athens was capitalist and free, with art, expression, and philosophy. These were characteristics that were at odds with the philosophy of Sparta.

The lesson here is that when dealing with Iran, we must understand that at the very basic core, they remain anti-capitalist/imperialist. This is how they see the USA and Israel. There is a basic fundamental difference in philosophy, and until we stop judging Iran by what we would do, we will never understand the adversary.

You can never achieve social justice where everyone earns the same, still have personal liberty and freedom even to speak, and economic efficiency all simultaneously. It has NEVER worked from ancient times to China and Russia, and it is suppressing Europe into an economic depression. It tore Iran apart at the seams. This Marxist interpretation of Islam destroyed Iran, which ranks in the top three energy reserves in the world for oil and gas, though it is undeniably a global energy superpower.

The Islamic Revolution was responsible for completing and solidifying the nationalization of Iran’s energy sector. The key to understanding this lies in the early 1950s. In 1951, the democratically elected Prime Minister, Mohammad Mossadegh, nationalized Iran’s British-controlled oil industry. However, this bold move led to a CIA and MI6-backed coup in 1953, which ousted Mossadegh and reinstated the Shah. After the coup, control of Iran’s oil industry effectively returned to Western companies

PRIVATE BLOG – Copper & Iran War

Private blog posts are exclusively available to Socrates subscribers. To sign-up for Socrates or to learn more, please visit Ask-Socrates.com.

https://ask-socrates.com/