Most readers of the Canadian Patriot are probably familiar with a popular Canadian think tank which is promoting national banking by the name of COMER (Committee on Monetary and Economic Reform). Since COMER and lawyer Rocco Galatti have grabbed national headlines increasingly over the matter of their Supreme Court battle to re-constitute Canada’s National Bank as the sole lender of Zero interest rate loans to the government, it was deemed necessary to investigate the group in greater detail to best understand if COMER’s motives are honest or not. After a brief examination of their new website, I felt it rather important to write up a few harsh conclusions and underline my reasoning for drawing them.
It can be stated right off the bat that COMER is Delphic poison designed to attract relatively sane Patriotic Canadians who tend to think in our direction into a fetish frenzy around reviving the Bank of Canada as a mechanism to issue low interest loans to the government.
As a disclaimer, COMER’s founder William Krehm appears to be innocent of any problems that are found with his group. Mr. Krehm is a 101 year old economist. I had spoken to him on the phone in 2008 and he was a pleasant old man who was nice enough to mail me all of the books he published for free. But after studying the new COMER website, it is apparent that Mr. Krehm is not running the show any more and appears to be little more than a name.
Judging by an overview of the newly updated website, it seems like there are forces who have taken over the control of the COMER brand who are absolutely poisonous. From 2002 until at least 2006, COMER was still supporting Glass-Steagall, two tiered credit, capital budgeting as well as the national bank. That has all changed, and now it is pretty much only the Bank of Canada… Their call for a renaissance of the National Bank is partially competent, but only on an extremely superficial level. The biggest failure of their reasoning in support of the bank is that it is totally wrapped in formal/legalistic reasoning, zero principle, lots of sentimentality, zero political intention, no reference to derivatives and finally nothing on the issue of technological progress in any meaningful sense of the word.
The Malthusian Agenda
The biggest red alarm comes from the the objectives page of COMER
. This page lays out the earth-based economy model. The thesis is pure entropy and is in direct opposite to everything the Committee for the Republic of Canada and International LaRouche Movement represent. COMER even flaunts that they employ SYSTEMS THEORY
as their fundamental basis for economy. This is the mind of the Club of Rome that we are looking directly into.
COMER’s book section
promotes works by the likes of Maurice Strong and Gestard d’estaing, among other agents of oligarchical influence, while COMER‘s newsmagazine
is now full of articles by British psy ops agents like Andrew Coyne, Maude Barlow, Joe Stigliz, Paul Hellyer and David Suzuki Foundation directors. They have a couple of sane people like Ellen Brown thrown in there, but overall the pedigree has become quite sour. These are operatives who are pushing for Green Malthusian New Deals… which is what the oligarchy wants anyway.
Think of the Fabian Society of Canada’s League of Social Reconstruction of 1933. The whole point of the LSR was to mimick the form of American System planning while removing the substance in favor of a fascist agenda. That seems to be what COMER is now catering towards and that’s also very in line with what the NDP and Liberal Parties are being shaped by now: Technocratic Malthusianism that uses the mechanisms of Hamiltonian systems but in the service of Jeremy Bentham’s ideas.
I’d say that our best method for dealing with such Delphic traps as COMER is laying out, to keep all discussion on the principle of Anti-Entropy and political realities such as those being shaped by the BRICS. National banking only has meaning if governed by a principle of Hamiltonian credit (the sort which Diefenbaker fought for in 1958), and Hamiltonian Credit only has meaning if governed by anti-entropic strategic goals.
The BRICS and a New Global Credit System
If, however, Canada were to accept the development initiatives put on the table by leading BRICS nations such as Russia and China to open up the Arctic for international peaceful development, it cannot be ignored that the mechanism of the Bank of Canada will serve as a valuable and necessary instrument in both Canada’s physical economic reconstruction. Certainly, within a new global fixed exchange rate system such as the BRICS+ nations are moving towards, national banking remains an indespensible instrument for emissions of productive Hamiltonian credit, and as such the COMER-sponsored fight to re-constitute the national bank should be supported by leading citizens and politicians in Canada, albeit with an eye to its deficiencies, planned or otherwise.