War, Prosperity and Civilized Co-existence of Humanity

Sankarshan Acharya[1]
Founder, Pro-Prosperity.Com and Citizens for Development

April 2, 2016

To: Leaders and Followers

Please feel free to circulate.
This is also available and updated
at http://pro-prosperity.com/War-Prosperity-and-Civilized-Coexistence-of-Humanity.html

Subject: War, Prosperity and Civilized Co-existence of Humanity        

Historically, wars have had three rational goals:

1. Defend against subjugation.  USA is not being militarily threatened by any nation.  USA does not need to war against other countries.  It is one thing to teach Al Qaida a mortal lesson for bombing the World Trade Center.  But invading country after country to destabilize nations is a myopic strategy for USA and costly for Americans with 94 million looking for employment, $20 trillion in government debt and $4.5 trillion in new money created by the Federal Reserve, 62 individuals holding more wealth than the bottom half, the top 1% having more wealth than the rest, families in food stamp and government aid increasing relentlessly, etc.  Due to economic hardship wrought by wars, Americans are cursing their neo-con warriors for myopic and inefficient war and trade strategies.  

2. Subdue and rob a productive opponent:  The winner a war subjects the loser to hard work to supply service and merchandise freely or for fiat money.  The American neo-con warriors have been so far justifying a military strategy with enrichment of Americans.  WWII, indeed, led to subjugation of two productive nations (Japan and Germany) that were made to work for enrichment of USA and, as a result, the latter got out of the wrenching Great Depression. 

The Bush Administration's neo-con war strategy has, however, spectacularly failed to see that unless USA could subjugate today's most productive nations like China and India, prosperity through war was impossible to attain.  During the Bush Administration, USA subdued many middle-eastern nations, but the defeated people simply became dependent on USA and Europe due to large-scale emigration and internecine.  My 2005-2006 memos to President Bush conveyed that his war strategy would succeed (in terms of enriching Americans) only if U.S.A. could bomb Beijing and New Delhi to subdue the Chinese and Indians.  After such memos, the Bush Administration wisely made a decisive U-turn in its war strategy, scrapped its plans to invade Iran, and entered a new era of strategic friendship with India. 

3. Spread superior doctrine of governance of the world

  • Prophet Mohammad and his disciples spread Islam as a superior religion (way of life) with tenets like (i) everyone is equal before the same god (Allah), (ii) there is no son or reincarnation of god and (iii) no one can charge interest on savings (riba-free system).  Mohammad scripted Quoran (constitution of Islam) and Sunnah and Sariat (rules of law).  Islam's tenets were enlightening when scripted.  Islam was, therefore, embraced by one-fifth of humanity.  Mohammad and his disciples, however, blundered by (a) making Quoran, Sunnah and Sariat sacrosanct, i.e., not amenable to amendment based on latest human wisdom, and (b) requiring infidels (disbelievers  of Islam) and their culture to perish with their properties usurped by Muslims. The earliest recorded individual who opposed interest on money is Saint Vashistha, in 500 B.C., who has been described in British literature as Hundu Lawmaker. He was followed by Plato and Aristotle to advocate for interest-free ecoomy.
  • The British adopted the Islamic tenet of equality to convert their monarchy to a parliamentary democracy, adopted an unwritten constitution to enact vividly written rules of law.  The British also made provisions to amend their rules of law based on newly evolving human wisdom with elite academic pundits anointed to design and promote reformed rules of governance.  The British democratic system was then adopted in USA and most other nations. 
  • After a British mathematician at Oxford, Bertrand Russell, asserted that science had triumphed over religion and god, though he did not define god rationally, the Anglo-American system of governance was formally separated from religion. This made the Anglo-American intellectual supremacy on governance of the world nonpareil and desirable for mankind until 2008.  This also gave raison d'etre for USA and U.K. to wage wars against fascism (Germany, Japan and Italy) during WWII, against communism in cold war after WWII, and against Islamic terrorism since the World Trade Center attack by Al Qaeda in 2001.
  • The American warriors had no qualms to drop the nuclear bomb on humanity in 1945 to defeat fascism and then to threaten communism in order to maintain primacy of Anglo-American system (rules) of governance.  U.S.A. and U.K. had to coddle with the Jewish state of Israel since 1945 as Jews Americans had developed the first nuclear bomb, even by facing the brunt of adverse relationship with other countries. Now the world has changed dramatically with the monopoly on the deadliest weapons gone.  Strapping nuclear bombs around the vest to subdue and rob the rest of the world is not a viable rational strategy for any nation anymore.  U.S.A. and U.K. are, therefore, wisely searching for a new world order based on a more rational basis than possible earlier.   
  • The 2008 crash of the Anglo-American system of governance made a rational world order necessary for civilized coexistence of humanity. 
  • The established Anglo-American system of governance has been proved to be facilitating surreptitious systemic robbery of enterprising wealth creators, causing  inefficiency, instability, fundamental unfairness (unconstitutionality) and unanimous disagreeability.  This system has, thus, failed to be intellectually supreme.  The 2008 crash publicly exposed these epistemic truths discovered in research since 1991, as the pundits of systemic robbery failed to paint the crash as a slap of invisible hand (god) without defining god rationally. 
  • The modern way of living with the Anglo-American system of robbery of enterprising wealth creators has been shaped by the elite academy as Elite Academic Religion which has ultimately loaded students with massive un-repayable debt after emptying the hard-earned savings of the students' parents to build ivory towers and fatten elite pundits of systemic robbery at academic campuses just like the ornate temples, churches and mosques and associated priests in the bygone era of religious indoctrination.
  • It is now publicly understood that the Elite Academic Religion that has shaped the established Anglo-American system of governance cannot guarantee civilized coexistence of humanity and is not a way to be intellectually enlightened. 
  • The Elite Academic Religion has become a replica of the earlier modern religion of Islam in its spectacular failure to enlighten or enrich enterprising individuals. 
  • The strategy of war, thus far, to subdue the vanquished people to work for the warriors has made Americans the most obese, less competitive, and less inclined to slog for the systemic robbers.  As a result, the neo-conservative strategy of bombing to indoctrinate the rest of the world with the failed Anglo-American system of governance driven by Elite Academic Religion has all but faded by the end of the Bush Administration.  The end of such irrational war strategy has been consummated by the Obama Administration. 

Theorem on elite pundits of systemic robbery: The elite pundits of systemic robbery - anchored in academy, media, government and industry - have attained the following notoriety:

  • Elite Pundits of Systemic Robbery knowingly lied before the US Congressional Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission that no one saw the financial crisis of 2008 coming and that the crisis was a slap of invisible hands (god) using a book authored by a Yale Professor Gary Gorton, published by Oxford University Press, and extolled as a must-read by the mandarins of the elite academy at places like U of Chicago and Princeton as well as ex-Federal Reserve Chief Ben Bernanke.   
  • Elite Pundits of Systemic Robbery have become significantly more lethal, than normal terrorists, by systemically  destroying a gargantuan amount of hard-earned wealth of enterprising wealth creators and by pushing the latter to anger, despair, depression, drug-alcohol overuse, premature death (which is occurring at a disproportionately higher rate among the Whites who comprise proportionately larger number of wealth creators than the other races in a country like USA), and shooting people at random through fits of anger or terrorist acts.
  • Elite Pundits of Systemic Robbery have Deliberately plotted systemic robbery of enterprising wealth creators by suppressing research since 1991 on a unique unanimously agreeable system of governance for preservation of hard-earned wealth needed for civilized coexistence of humanity and by destroying the professional career of the sole author of this research so that the latter is pushed towards despair, depression, alcohol-drug overuse and premature death to forever foil his pursuits for propagation of such research. Providentially, this author since childhood world not be a smoker, alcoholic, or narcotic drug user.  Neither could he be depressed and despaired or lured to be muzzled about his discoveries.
  • Elite Pundits of Systemic Robbery have Devilishly spread its dragnet to keep its modus operandi of systemic robbery highly secret: 
  • After I mimeographed my mathematical general equilibrium model at the Federal Reserve in 1991, academic pundits close to me conveyed to me that I would be unemployed if I pursued for this research. 
  • Blind academic referees conveyed, "who are you to criticize our banking system?" and "your model is too complicated to be published."
  • Many Federal Reserve officials told me that no one would understand my complicated mathematical model and no one would do anything about the policies (like unanimously agreeable safe central banking) attained in general dynamic equilibrium within this model. 
  • The more they concocted and spread such lies about my research with threats to my livelihood, the more enlightened and resolved I became to pursue for propagation of it. 
  • I knew that professional controllers of the elite academic journals in economics and finance fully understood my model.  Many colleagues told me privately that my model was robust and my presentation was forceful and convincing. 
  • Once I concluded that vested interests in the elite academy wanted to destroy my career and wherewithal for survival, I started meditating to translate my mathematical theorems into plain English and succeeded in doing so in 2003 in a paper entitled "Safe [Central] Banking" which I submitted to the US Congress on March 31, 2003 with a warning that vested interests would stop enactment of the unanimously agreeable safe central banking discovered in my research since 1991, until taxpayers lost trillions of dollars in a crisis that I saw looming. 
  • Since the U.S. Congress had already enacted into law the unprecedented bank foreclosure rule (coauthored with a J.F. Dreyfus) as a part of the FDIC Improvement Act of 1991, it took my warning seriously and promptly asked the Federal Reserve to testify about safety and soundness of the banking system in October 2003 and then hold a conference of experts in November 2003 in Chicago.  I was invited to the November 2003 conference.  I did not go to the conference, but asked the conference organizers to distribute my Safe Banking paper among elite academic pundits, who recommended that the US banking and financial system was invincible.  This was contrary to the looming crisis found in my research. 
  • This shows that the elite academic pundits knew that someone in the academy (who was a professor at NYU and then at University of Illinois) who also was in the government (Federal Reserve) saw the crisis coming since 1991, who had fought with Federal Reserve officials as well as top management at the largest bank (Citibank) about banks' piling systemic risk on taxpayers due to holding company shenanigans that privatized profits while socializing losses, and who directly communicated with the US Congress starting 2003 about enactment of preemptive policies to avert a looming crisis.
  • The economics editor at Cambridge University considered in 2003 my book on safe central banking and financial market reform as publishable because it was written in a "campaign style for reform." But the CU President refused to have such a book in his collection.  I conveyed to the CU economic editor in early 2009 about the potential of a CU-published book to convince the US Congress to enact my proposal for safe central banking to preemptively avert the gargantuan loss to enterprising wealth creators that I saw since 2003 as looming and that actually occurred in 2008, when the Congress had to authorize ad hoc implementation my safe central banking policy to stem the domino of crashing markets.  I then saw logs at throttle speed from CU Computer Center hacking my personal computer in early 2009.  After I promptly conveyed this event of PC hacking to US Congress and President, an anti-PC hacking act was enacted later in 2009.
  • The Oxford U press published a book by Yale Professor Gary Gorton to paint the 2008 financial crisis as an act of invisible hands (god) without rationally defining such invisible hands (god).  I have considered Gary Gorton a friend and had dined with him at NYU. I have reliable information showing that Professor Gary Gorton of Yale was the International Economic Review referee of my paper on unanimously agreeable central banking attained within a general dynamic equilibrium model of the economy (which also proves that the current system was unstable and inefficient), which I had submitted to IER in 2010.  Professor Gorton recommended rejection of my paper by stating that it was not suitable for an economics journal.  Two other papers I had submitted to IER earlier were published in IER. 
  • The elite academic pundits and their disciples at the helm of too-big-to-fail banks and regulatory institutions used Gorton's Oxford U published book in 2010 to blatantly and shamelessly lie before the FCIC that the 2008 crisis was an act of god that no one saw coming!  Did they think that I was god (not human) and so they were correct to claim that no human saw the crisis coming?  They knew all along about their shenanigans on hiding the truth that I saw the crisis coming and had general equilibrium policies to preemptively avert the crisis.  They were caught unawares that I had submitted my research and policy proposals directly to Congress and had alerted the Congress that the elite academic pundits of systemic robbery were denying publication of such profoundly important research in the journals they controlled through a self-serving blind review system. 
  • I submitted the same paper on unanimously agreeable safe central banking to Rand Journal of Economics in 2013 which had it refereed (according to my information) by an Oxford U professor who admitted in his referee report that this paper had made intellectual contributions but claimed falsely that the paper was driven by philosophy.  My model is founded on fundamental fairness and is not driven by any ex-ante philosophy or dogma whereas the extant published research challenged by my model is driven by ex-ante presumed dogma which is not proven to attain in any equilibrium.  The safe central banking policy attained within my general dynamic equilibrium model is proved (not presumed) to be fundamentally fair, efficient, stable and unanimously agreeable.  Such policies are nonexistent in the extant literature on economics or finance.  The extant models have been shaped with ex-ante presumptions or dogmas that a few agents have superior privilege as compared to the vast majority of principals (citizens).  Such dogmas driving the extant literature are unanimously disagreeable, fundamentally unfair (unconstitutional), inefficient and unsustainable. 
  • Other elite journals like Econometrica, Journal of Economic Theory and American Economic Review returned my paper and submission fees without review.  A Review of Financial Studies (published by Oxford U press) editor has informed me that my general equilibrium model on safe central banking was not suitable for even a presentation at a joint Fed-NY and NYU conference.  So did a conference in Oxford U.
  • Since the elite punditry on systemic robbery is a srious national security threat (as per the Theorem presented here) and is driving the current angry anti-establishment political movements, the U.S. government should subpoena the records at elite academic journals like International Economic Review, Rand Journal of Economics and Review of Financial Studies on my submission to determine the referees and their vested interests. This is a grave issue of preserving wealth and jobs of enterprising Americans who have lost $13 trillion of their hard earned wealth and 9 million good paying jobs leading to anger, despair, depression, drug-overuse, suicide, premature death and shooting of others..  

e)    Elite Pundits of Systemic Robbery are significantly worse supremacists than even the Ku Klux Klan. By refusing publication of unanimously agreeable, efficient, sustainable and fundamentally fair rules of governance necessary for civilized co-existence of humanity in the elite journals they control while perhaps appraising the Congress that research rejected by their journals cannot be used to reform the established system of governance, the elite academic pundits have proved (a) that they believe in their supremacy in promoting policies on systemic robbery and (b) they do not care about the gargantuan loss of wealth or about the destruction of good-paying jobs of enterprising wealth creators or about the ensuing anger, despair, depression, drug-overuse and premature loss of lives.

f)     Elite Pundits of Systemic Robbery have become more dangerous to civilized coexistence of humans than any other group of terrorists (or Devils) has ever become on earth.

Corollary to the Theorem: The established media has repeatedly goaded the anti-establishment front-runner for president, Mr. Donald Trump, to disavow and condemn Ku Klux Clan.  Mr. Trump responded by disavowing and condemning the KKK ad nauseam. The only establishment front-runner for president in 2016 is Mrs. Hillary Clinton. 

Mrs. Clinton has stated that she is being advised by established experts. 

To establish its fundamental fairness (constitutionality) and to thwart latent but most egregious national security threats stemming from pundits of systemic robbery, the established media must ask Mrs. Hillary Clinton the following questions:

  • Do Mrs. Clinton's expert advisers support the established system (rules) of robbery of enterprising wealth creators who according to her public speech on March 22, 2016 lost $13 trillion of hard earned wealth and 9 million of good-paying jobs? 
  • Do Mrs. Clinton's experts believe, contrary to FCIC findings, that the gargantuan loss to enterprising wealth creators was caused by a slap of invisible hands (god)?
  • If Mrs. Clinton's expert advisers do not support the established system (rules) of robbery, then which established rule of robbery (e.g., the 1999 law on universal banking that effectively voided the Glass-Steagall barrier between commercial and investment banking) they want repealed and which new rule they want enacted to abolish the established system of robbery?
  • Since (a) Professor Sankarshan Acharya is the only known author of research on unanimously agreeable rules of governance which is antithetic to the established system of robbery, (b) the establishment pundits have refused to publish his research in the elite academic journals and media they control, and (c) he is not advising Mrs. Clinton, does it not prove that she is certainly not for repealing any established rule that facilitates systemic robbery with impunity? 
  • Aren't the elite pundits of systemic robbery of enterprising wealth creators not worse supremacists than the KKK and more lethal than the normal terrorists? 
  • Can Mrs. Clinton disavow and condemn the elite pundits of systemic robbery of enterprising wealth creators? 
  • Yes, the media should also ask Mr. Donald Trump and every other presidential candidate about their views on questions 3 and 4.

Conclusion: An adage in Sanskrit says "Eka Brahma, Dwitiya Nasthi," which means that absolute knowlwdge (like 2+3=5) is unique and unanimously agreeable. The unique unanimously agreeable knowledge on civilized co-existence of humanity - which is also efficient, sustainable and fundamentally fair - is a system of governance that does not permit anyone to usurp individual or common wealth even surreptitiously.


[1] I am deeply thanklul to Kalpana Acharya for reading several of my writings including this one. I am, however, solely responsible for remaining errors and contents.