Home | About | Donate

Systems of Wealth Hoarding Hide in Your Mind


Systems of Wealth Hoarding Hide in Your Mind

Joe Brewer

The internet is exploding with conversations about the Panama Papers — the largest data dump in history of secret files about rich people hiding and hoarding money. And yet the biggest story of all is hardly getting any attention.


Hey Joe,

Again, lots of really sharp observations in your writing, but no mention of where those "rules" come from, or who wrote them.

It's not as though the mass mind simply arrived at these "rules" as if they were conclusions. "Interested parties" have worked diligently for centuries on behalf of their own interests as members of the looting class. Part of this endless diligent effort has included crafting and promoting mental constructs that are congruent with the economic architecture of looting, and suppressing and demonizing mental constructs that cut to the truth about looting.

Frankly Joe, we have enemies. They are out to get us. We need to, with part of our analytical and strategic thinking, focus on who these enemies are, how they operate, and how to disempower them.

While there is certainly some value in assessing the functions and processes of humanity's evolutionary consciousness, we require an assessment that ties these processes back to the "interested parties" in the looting class who actively and strategically manipulate the functions and processes of humanity's evolutionary consciousness.

And while we're figuring out how to understand "the rules" so that we can change them for ourselves, we must simultaneously strategize and organize to take wealth and power back from the looting class that has usurped them.


A basic principle in the way people do things and in the way they think that manifests itself in the system of growth that we all live in, if not accept, is >>> the path of least resistance. A corollary to this is advice is that >>> you try to make it easy for people to give you what you want. If it is easy to go one way and hard to go the other then expect people to choose the easier one.

How hard is it to know the truth when you are fed lies? Lies are easy to find and the truth is hard to find. Who tells us what to believe? The first thing such people always say is that you can believe them ...lol. Did you read it in the NY Times? How hard is it to say the NYT was lying? It is like so impossible to believe that you could be right if you believed something different than what the NYT does! How could they have gotten it wrong what with all their reporters and knowledge base and little old you have it right? So we're there WMDs or not?

Do many people have the background to reanalyze the news and critique the framework and economic system that the news refers to or oppose the cultural norms as presented by the media? Not all that many, so people struggle to make sense of the world outside themselves based on the snippets of news and headlines about places they don't really know much about and events that they rarely have any background understanding of. Most people go through life asking "Will this be on the test?" When they struggle through the newspaper they are wondering if this item is important to know? Is it something America supports or are we against that? Most things are 'out of context' not because they are but because people don't know the context. Is this good for our side or their side and will this even matter later is tiresome to try and figure out unless you have followed the story already. It is hard to catch up when you fall behind and most people never do. They aren't in school anymore and reading the news has become very much like homework for most people. It takes work to keep up with the news on your own.

So people began to rely on reporters to provide background and perspective and there lies the rub. People are told what they believe. People aren't told what to believe or what they should believe as much as they are talked to as if this was what they already believed because in most cases they have no idea of what is going on anyway and rely on the reporters educated viewpoint. Hillary is more electable! Yet polls show Sanders is ahead of the republican candidates by more than is Hillary? How does that work then?

People don't know how it all works and most haven't the time to learn. Do we need another way of looking at growth? At the oligarchy? A helluva lot people have learned what that word means thanks to Bernie...! It's a start.


"Why do we find it so difficult to react to stories about systemic corruption in a way that gets to the heart of the problem? Many policy-analysis groups have tried drawing attention to it for years now. There have even been attempts to tackle the issues of global tax systems in the UK, US, and Germany — a lot of song and dance as the Titanic continues sinking into the dark abyss."

Anyone who studies cognitive frames OUGHT to realize that a term like WE suggests an equal power, equal representation, equal influence, and equal access that truly and clearly is not the case. It also lumps ALL persons into the singular uniform category referred to as "we," as if all persons had the same opinions, resumes, morality, intelligence, and levels of activism.


Secondly, for the same reason that BIG MONEY collects in dark pockets and secret bank accounts surreptitiously, and little is done about global warming, and less about stopping wars... it's all DUE TO the power of that small ilk of persons. Those WITH tons of Capital call the shots.

And Mr. Brewer ought not be clueless about this. ONE pharaoh controlled the lives of thousands of slaves, and ONE queen controlled the lives of her subjects, and ONE Pope controls many aspects of the lives of a billion Catholics.

So long as there is patriarchy, male father figures endowed with authority will wield that authority over others. This is FAR less a mystery related to cognitive frames than about the on-the-ground TANGIBLE logistics of power.

Those with power write the rules. It's as true in the U.S. as it is in Greece. And while in many nations, people ARE trying to fight back; so long as the courts answer to those in power, a Catch--22 is created whereby those on the receiving end of unfairness must APPEAL to those who have normalized a culture OF unfairness.

Here are examples MOST people can relate to:

Blacks who experience police violence must appeal to authorities that largely support those police departments... in their pursuit of justice.

Palestinians on the receiving end of Israeli soldiers' brutality must appeal to Israel for remedial action (in addition to world opinion).

Most of the problems in the world are based on disproportionate power equations.

So toss the damned frames. The TRUTH is obvious! In this case, the fluff of framing gets in the way of what's patently clear!


"Take these rules together and you see why our minds keep us from seeing the architecture of wealth extraction — even though it is all around us like The Matrix surrounding Neo before he unplugged."

What I find disappointing is that Mr. Brewer takes off on a discussion related to supposed rules that "govern" all of us, that great UNIFORM "we." But he doesn't ask the question who set up these rules? Or follow the "cui bono" to its logical conclusion: that the same power bastions that make money out of thin air through central banking systems, and wish to grow the world to ecological ruin also are the ILK that set these "rules" up through political, social, cultural, religious, and most of all... economic systems.

These "rules" didn't just germinate like seeds sprung from the bosom of the Great Mother/Nature.

Oh... and a LOT of people see through these "rules." The problem is that they're not in positions to alter them! The 1% has tied up the top of the pyramid from which all marching orders pretty much stem.


Yeah, back to physical brain science, telling us about why we're so focused on physical reality we can see instead of abstract facts. They should remove the beam in their own eye and look at psychology, which determines the structure of the physical brain as much as physics and physiology.


As my former mentor, George Lakoff, would say there are semantic “frames” that give structure to our thoughts about abstract ideas that must be grounded in our lived experience if they are to be understood.<<

So glad to see that Brewer has the courage to share his vision as he opens his mind to endless possibilities and probabilities.

Brewer could have learned for himself, had he opened his mind to traditional venues rather than false gods, that Lakoff simply synthesizes what has been in place in scripture for two thousand years. Brewer says,

"How is it possible that people can get so riled up by the hate-mongering of Donald Trump, for example? And yet barely a peep is made that tax havens, trade agreements, tax policies, and more (and entire architecture of wealth extraction at the planetary scale) are operating invisibly all around us to make societies more unequal and hoard wealth among a shrinking elite with unprecedented political power."

Well, Brewer, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to connect the dots. The emphasis has been on the wrong syllable, but we still persist in making insanity part of our political agenda. We shred and rewrite history because we think if we do that long enough, sooner of later we can destroy what is absolute TRUTH. We live in a world gone absolutely mad and no matter how disgusting and obnoxious Trump is, at least he's had the courage to give voice to the concerns that, as responsible citizens, we should have made priority, but instead there have been rainbows to chase. So be it. The rest of us who have been so terrorized into accepting the "agenda" now stand back and watch as the world is set on fire. But the buck will not stop there. No, not until the dumb and dumber finally realize that there is more to Life than sexual preference. And there it is in a nutshell.

Throw your rotten tomatoes. Bring it on.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


Be aware of The True Believer, beware of the true believer. rump speaks to the "lost dream belief", being robbed is too close to the bone and shatters the dream belief.


WE are the problem because unfortunately THEY are of the same species as US and our dreadful shared molecule, DNA, has had around 4 billion years of practice at trying to get something for nothing at the expense of everything else.

One would hope that our magnificent brain would manage to see through this, but, unfortunately, it seems that it likes to acquire wealth and power, and once some wealth and power has been acquired, the brain is drugged by it and just wants more.


Why do you take sentences out of context? Say what you want in your own words but stop taking my words out of context please! I don't mind that you quote but without quoting in context, you are just causing confusion. That is why I am not responding to what you wrote. Look at that last quote...you could have added the word oligarchy in parenthesis and made my sentence resemble the intent of it but out of context it is meaningless. I'm not going to go along with that. I put too much thought into what I write, if you please!


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


We (posters) are being very critical here, but this article shares some good things. We (American readers) have not responded to the Panama Papers yet because we have not read them and (in at least some cases) because their manner of publication and announcement begs suspicion, what with the sideswipe at whistleblowers and at Wikileaks and the preposterous obedience of 400 journalists that reportedly did not report anything of this for a year. I don't mean by that that it is not important; I do mean that it is difficult to know what to take from it because the people releasing the information are grinding their axes and hiding something.

The idea of frames has some value here, despite Lakoff's obtusely thou-shalt-vote-Dem twisting of such things. Surely we shall trip trippingly along with the post-monkey neurosystems that we have, much as we have. Yeesh.

That does not bode well for facile generalizations about those frames, and perhaps just as well.

Still, the author is on to something. Trump's dramatic and rhetorical resemblance to 20th century European fascists and banana republic toady goons has its genuine dangers, but these are nothing like the valence of the wholesale and institutionalized theft and usurpation of the global and national political and economic systems.

There is something eerie that in such a context, the Donald draws attention.


Your worldview is based on the FALSE premise that all persons are the same. That they think alike, behave in like fashion, and express no quintessential distinctions.

(The existing reality is the result of what's been tactically imposed--through wars, financial controls, and religious ideologies-- by Dominant groups. These dominant groups do not now, nor have they EVER spoken for all. It would seem to me that in an era where it's so patently clear that specific groups work hard to CONTROL the dialog, the "adult narratives," and the official stories... with so much else in the way of truth, lived experience, and wisdom rendered "off limits," that those with working minds might understand that these same tactics have ALWAYS been used to marginalize any who challenge the norms.)

The Abrahamic religions--Islam, Judaism, and Christianity in all its sects--are rooted in the idea that Abraham founded TWELVE TRIBES. Jesus also chose TWELVE disciples. Astrology is an ANCIENT (yet contemporary) system of correspondences that sets up a connection between human beings and greater cosmic forces.


And among that 12, 2 archetypes gravitate to war, unequal societies, and hierarchies that allot power (and that includes decision-making) to a few who control the many.

When I challenge the UNIFORM "we" frame, I am doing it to expand consciousness beyond the idiocy that consigns humanity to the same redundant feedback loop AS IF there is no alternative. In fact, there are 10.

The Monotheistic assertions that God is a male, that war is holy, and that all must obey very narrow behavioral norms (and the equally narrow beliefs that foster them) is a PRISON and that prison starts with the perception of the possible.

I am expanding it.

Many of you can't stand it. Many of you sound like soldiers even if you are not. You salute the notion that we're all part of some warrior state/culture as if it were an unchallenged verity. IT IS NOT.

I will continue to speak for OTHER.

Some people (obviously not those blinded by their own arrogance) might actually learn something!

Astrology was not made into a heresy punishable with death because its predictions were often wrong. To the contrary, it's Astrology's anti-authoritarian (one size fits all, all must conform to ONE way) vision that has always been a problem to the church-state power nexus.

Why argue FOR the continuity of so limited a world view and concept of our human possibilities... true possibilities are based on diversity. WE subsumes ALL into one FALSE frame.

Quite a few in this forum can't even acknowledge that there are 2 GENDERS designed as co-creative forces, partners in ongoing Creation. They place all women into the category of MAN and assert that what is true for him, is also true for her.

It's not true. And by insisting on this ONE norm... you essentially cut off all possibilities for genuine PROGRESS.


So I have no say about my words being taken out of context? Do figure that is a fascistic attitude or do you think that disempowering the creator of the content puts me in my place? What is this babble about thinking you are writing against me or being against me? Where did that come from? I am objecting to my words being taken out of context, where is this other stuff from? Apparently I am not allowed to protest my words being taken out of context then? Go back and read what I wrote and ask yourself if you are not projecting or applying some group bullying crap on me? So you think that I am giving myself so much importance because I am objecting to my words being taken out of context!

Then you say if I don't like being quoted? Here is what I wrote though.

I notice you picked up on that personal attack group think that is becoming a bit too easy to jump into, so that even if I am only objecting as to how my own words are misused (taken out of context) than I am so full of myself? I write them but I have no rights? Maybe I just shouldn't write them and then you and the others might treat me with the same respect and fair play as you want for yourselves?

Apparently I am resented too though I fail to see where I was insulting or even rude. Writing is a creative act and political writing takes a lot of study as well. I talk to people with the respect that I don't believe that things need to be dumbed down for them but I now think that is what is most resented. I try to speak effectively as there is strength in words but that is resented as well I guess.

Nevertheless, any serious writer objects to someone else taking a few words completely out of context especially in a public forum because others will read them and think they meant something else. Taking words out of context in such a case does cause confusion and is unfair to the author and their original intent.


So what was the first thing we saw when the papers were released. A headline with a picture of Putin, with the comment in the article that Putin wasn't directly implicated but his friends were. What a test if applied to our politicians!


You have a point although that is simply typical for the press and Putin does have a couple of billion stashed away anyway. However the world is talking oligarchy and there is no doubt that the west has more of them and more tax havens and corporate tax havens especially. Time for some diversionary misdirection is my sense. Sure the stuff is real but these are just a few. Temporarily these will be thrown to the wolves but while people are angry they are distracted by it all and that gives time for other things to run to completion. What would you do if you were hiding accounts illegally? You'd have some time to protect yourself, move things around etc. while all eyes are on this.

They threw Putin in as the sacrifice ...lol. Or they are trying to.

Btw you can see why Bernie shakes things up. Someone did this because Bernie had made the word oligarchy well known and for the first time the super rich are subject to public criticism. Rich people not paying taxes is a big issue and this makes it reall for many people.


After reading your comment, I came away with the sense that you want the truth from politicians and fair play for people from the powers that be whichever and whatever those powers are. I think we all do.

That said...

People are not perfect. People lie, cheat and steal. When they become politicians, many of them try to make their lying, cheating and stealing legal...lol. Corporations are artificial people who have been given extra protection and advantages that people do not have. Why would people do that to people? Why? See above.

That said...

Corporations are not perfect. Corporations lie, cheat and steal. When they lobby politicians, many of them try to make their lying, cheating and stealing legal because that is their universe. A century ago most corporations were like the mom and pop version of corporations. They were extensions of ourselves, just a group of investors looking to make a ton of money. Corporate intentions have grown up however. The corporate entity has made the ton of money, many times over already but there is no ending - no time limit on a corporation's growth or wealth and power. So they kept growing since they weren't really limited like true living entities. Corporations have no defined life span to stop them.

By removing limitations to political power, through lobbyists and contributions, corporations became Frankenstein monsters almost uncontrollable by their creators. Citizens United gave corporations - a group of very wealthy people - extra votes. People vote both as people and as investors those people also vote through their corporations as well. Unlimited campaign contributions is not fair play and makes a mockery of the law. Moreover, it most certainly was not the founder's intent in creating a democracy. Corporations are considered as persons only through a technicality of law. But it is advantageous to some so it continues mocking the basic intent of democracy. Influencing elections has now become legal. Revolving doors and tax havens and all the rest are now legal only because there are those who expect to benefit from the increase of growth by corporations. They benefit by sacrificing the fair play you seek.

Now through trade deals, corporations have taken the first baby steps towards a new form of personhood and special treatment reserved only for them. After usurping a citizen's rights corporations are now seeking to acquire the rights of nations. Having been given financial and political protections and 'personhood' by their national governments, the next step is following the path to corporate nationhood. Through trade deals corporations are now seeking the rights of nations! They seek to be outside or beyond the reach of national laws. What else is left for corporate persons but to gain the rights and powers of corporate governments. Corporate citizenship becomes corporate nations!

In the terminator science fiction movies, the rise of the robots becomes the Frankenstein monster but humanity faces another threat...another kind of artificial entity. Let's hope that it remains only speculation and stays in the realm of fiction but humanity is creating an opposing force - a nemesis - directed against people. Someday people may find themselves fighting a new form of fascism and opposing the new 'nations' that follow those dictates.

Humanity versus United Corporations International...

Good luck kiddies!


Biologically, what are WE? Merely another manifestation of the same agressive self-replicating molecule.You view the issues as cultural; I view the issue as biological. If via culture we can modify our stupidities I would be happy.

Anyway, good luck with your beliefs and if you manage to change things for the better through them, I will be the first to thank you.


This is an interesting, anthropocentric discussion as its deals with manipulations of intangible financial wealth. It does not take into account the fact that the operations of civilization are rapidly degrading natural material wealth by using up natural material resources, producing material wastes and damaging the environment. Mother Earth, of course, takes littl notice of these games by the pesky human beings.