The Specter of Global Monetary Union

The euro was from the beginning a “political conceit.” Anyone with a basic knowledge of economics could predict that a monetary system built on the principle of one-size-fits-all interest rates for 17 different nation-states with vastly divergent economies would end in disaster for its participants.

Why pursue a system so contrary to sound economic principles?

The most logical answer, as evidenced by the statements of European integrationists, but also by the proposals of many globalist opportunists now conspicuously entering the scene, is that the Eurozone was designed to fail. The euro exists arguably to undermine national economic sovereignty and create an artificial need for regional political cooperation, much like the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), the earliest attempt at European political integration. The theory behind the ECSC was essentially that if Germany and France were forced to submit to common control of natural resources, war might be averted. It was Jean Monnet who said:

There will be no peace in Europe if the states are reconstituted on the basis of national sovereignty…Europe’s nations should be guided towards their superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose but which will irreversibly lead to federation.

Former President of the European Central Bank Wim Duisenberg, echoing Monnet, several years ago said that “monetary union” must go hand in hand with “political union.”

A nation without control of its money is a nation without any real power. How can a nation project power without the ability to guarantee the liquidity necessary to mobilize military elements?