The Dangers of Internationalism - Parallels Between 1932 and 2011 - No Nation Is a Master of Its Own Destiny

The Dangers of Internationalism
by Arthur Kitson
first printed in 1932

Owing to the failure of the world's Governments to discover a remedy for the economic evils with which all nations are now afflicted, we are being told by our leading politicians, economists and journalists that no nation is to-day a master of its own destiny, and that the economic affairs of the world are so interwoven that a remedy can only be found in the union of all nations. It is proposed by various publicists that it will be necessary to have an international currency, that all tariffs must be abolished; and Sir Arthur Salter goes so far as to propose a federation of the various European races. Apparently, these writers and speakers have given but superficial consideration to this whole subject, or else they are the instruments of the financial group that is bent upon controlling the trade, industries, and even the politics of the world.

Let us first take the subject of tariffs: The object of tariff protection is to limit competition mainly to the producers of the country in which protection has been adopted. Protection has been made necessary by the attempt to establish a universal monetary system. If we take the United States as an illustration: Their plea for protective tariffs has always been the protection of American labour for the purpose of raising the status of the working classes above the level of that of other nations. In this respect the tariffs have been unquestionably effective. In no country in the world has labour been more highly paid. Moreover, it is quite certain that had there been no tariffs, one of two things would have happened: either the United States would have been inundated with goods from the Far East, such as China and Japan and India, and many of her industries would have been destroyed; or else the American operatives would have had to live on a very much lower plane of existence.

Now turning to the financial question: The effects of a universal currency would be, in the absence of tariffs, to reduce the working classes of all countries to one very low standard of living. The masses of mankind would be engaged in a life and death struggle for the possession of money and for the control of foreign markets; and the nation who could produce goods at the cheapest rate – in other words, the nation whose operatives could be induced to live at the lowest stage of existence compatible with their ability to produce goods – would become the most successful!

No greater calamity could befall the world's inhabitants than the establishment of the economic system which the League of Nations is at present endeavouring to arrange. Both the financial and economic systems which the League has championed, are fraught with the greatest disaster to humanity. We have had the experience of the evils of the League's establishing the gold standard throughout Europe. The present crisis is the result of that absurd policy.

Far from adopting a universal world currency, the most beneficial policy would be for each nation to have its own national paper currency – a currency that has no circulating power beyond the boundaries of the nation issuing it. Such a currency forms a natural protection for its trade and industries. It prevents the cut-throat competition which a world currency permits, and it renders international trade a system of barter – that is, the exchange of goods for goods, which is the natural and rightful form of trade.

When England exchanges its coal and iron, cotton and woolen goods, for products which it does not or cannot produce – such as coffee, tea, spices, etc. – such trade is mutually beneficial to the countries engaged therein. But when Germany sends us cotton goods to compete in our own markets with our cotton goods, when America sends us boots and shoes to compete with our Leicester and Northampton shoe industries, and in return demands gold or our National Bonds, we are exposed to a twofold injury: the importation of what we are already manufacturing injures our industries and thereby lessens employment here, whilst the export of gold which has been the basis of our currency causes a shortage of purchasing power and tends to raise our Bank rate which adds to our costs of production and lessens the demand for our goods in our home market. Similarly, the export of our National Bonds tends to make us a tributary country, so that we have to export gold or other commodities as a tribute to the nation possessing the bonds for which we get no return.

The plea for world-wide or an international currency is of modern conception and has originated with the group of international money dealers who, to a large extent, control the money and credit of the world. This group have a settled policy, and all that is happening, and has happened for the last few years throughout the world, is according to a definite plan, viz., the world's conquest.

Until the beginning of the present century, the only known method of conquering the world was by military invasion – a very dangerous, expensive, and cruel system. But during the last half century it was realized that a far simpler, more effective and less dangerous method was possible by the control of money. By this method no armies or navies or munitions of war are required, no blood need be shed, and the public need know nothing of their danger until they are safely enslaved in the form of Debt. All that is necessary is to secure the control of the press and other channels of publicity, such as the radio and leading publicists.

This has already been done. International finance controls practically all the channels by which the public are influenced. The world's safety will only be achieved by breaking the money monopoly that has been established by the laws of nations.