G. Edward Griffin. The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve. 5th edition. American Media, 2010. See here to purchase the book.
G. Edward Griffin enrolled in the College of Financial Planning in 
Denver and received a Certified Public Planner (CFP) designation in 
1989. He is affiliated with the conservative John Birch Society and has 
served as the Contributing Editor of its New American magazine. This book criticizes the Federal Reserve System.
Here are some items:
A. As Griffin notes, bankers make money from interest, and this 
occurs when they lend money out. Interest accumulates on the debt and is
 paid to the bankers. But there are problems with banks loaning out a 
lot of money. For one, the money that they are lending out is other 
people’s savings. If there is ever a run on the bank and depositors are 
demanding their money right then and there, the bank will not be able to
 give it to them. As George Bailey said in It’s a Wonderful Life,
 the money is not stored in a safe but has been loaned out to other 
people. Second, banks take a risk when they loan out money, namely, that
 it will not be paid back. According to Griffin, one motive behind the 
creation of the Federal Reserve was to enable banks to loan out money 
with more impunity, thereby allowing bankers to make more money from 
interest. More reckless banks can be bailed out by the Federal Reserve, 
which receives money from all of the member banks. The government can 
also bail the reckless banks out. Or, if the debtors fail to pay off 
their debts, the Federal Reserve can print out more money and lend that 
out to the debtors.
B. The problem that occurs when the Federal Reserve prints more money
 or releases more money into the system is inflation: the already 
existing dollars become debased. Griffin acknowledges that, as he 
writes, the United States is not experiencing hyperinflation. He 
believes that is due to foreigners taking American dollars out of the 
system when Americans buy their products, and foreigners buying up 
American debt. If this were to cease, hyperinflation would occur.
C. Historically, Griffin argues, bankers have profited from war 
because they get to loan out money to both sides in the conflict. 
Ultimately, Griffin contends, their desire is for a one-world 
government. Griffin refers to documents that appear to promote a 
one-world government. Griffin prominently features an enigmatic 1966 
document entitled the “Report from Iron Mountain.” This document 
rhapsodizes about how war has historically consolidated nations, and the
 author is looking for a different way to control people. As Griffin 
acknowledges, nobody knows who wrote this or if the author was being 
serious. Griffin believes it comes from within the government 
establishment. Griffin also refers to environmentalist documents that 
lament the existence of humanity and promote a worldwide redistribution 
of wealth. Griffin doubts that the rich and powerful promoters of 
environmentalism seriously care about the environment. They invest in 
industries that pollute the environment; in the case of Gorbachev, he 
presided over the Soviet Union’s horrible environmental policy. For 
Griffin, they are merely using the environment as an excuse for moving 
towards a one-world government: if people fear environmental disaster, 
they will support a global government to redress the problem.
D. Griffin responds to standard historical scenarios. Against the 
charge that the Federal Reserve was created to add stability and to 
prevent the sorts of panics that preceded its creation, Griffin contends
 that many banks prior to the Federal Reserve were behaving 
irresponsibly by printing out money and further detaching its value from
 metals. They were moving in the opposite direction from the sound money
 system that Griffin supports, in short. Moreover, financial disasters 
have continued to exist even after the creation of the Federal Reserve. 
Against the charge that prominent Wall Streeters feared and opposed the 
creation of the Federal Reserve, Griffin contends that this was all for 
show, for prominent financiers helped to create the Federal Reserve. 
According to Griffin, Teddy Roosevelt and J.P. Morgan shared more common
 ground than people think! Griffin challenges conventional explanations 
for why financiers financed the Bolshevik Revolution—-e.g., to help one 
country over another in World War I—-showing that the financiers were 
inconsistent in that case. Griffin seems to think that financiers 
supported the Bolsheviks to create a formidable international enemy, 
which would result in wars and higher defense budgets; bankers would 
provide the money for that. (The Communists, meanwhile, accept 
capitalist money for the sake of their own survival, but they hope to 
hang the capitalists with the rope that the capitalists provide; Griffin
 provides quotes to that effect.) Against the charge that easy credit 
was necessary to finance the early economic development and expansion of
 the U.S., Griffin speculates that this could have occurred through 
economically responsible means, had they been tried. Griffin also offers
 some Civil War revisionism. Some of that resembled contemporary 
defenses of the Confederacy: that, through tariffs, the North was trying
 to reduce the South to economic servitude and dependence on the North, 
that the South invested a lot of capital in slavery, and that the South 
did not really want slavery, anyway, since people who are paid to work 
are more motivated. Griffin is far from being pro-Confederacy, however, 
for he states that bankers were also financing the Confederate cause: 
some of them supported the creation of a southern empire that would 
unite with Latin American nations. Napolean also gets a cameo as a rebel
 against the financial establishment, albeit for self-serving reasons.
E. Griffin also responds to what is considered to be conventional 
knowledge. For example, the conventional view is that the IMF and World 
Bank pressure countries to embrace free market capitalism and austerity 
in government spending. Griffin observes, however, that they have lent 
to communist countries, and he notes that these lenders give to 
governments; such a policy contributes to statism, not a free market.
F. Griffin is critical of various proposals to redress the problems 
that he discusses. One proposal is to eliminate the Federal Reserve and 
to have the federal government itself print the money. There are also 
the proposals of Milton Friedman and supply-side economists, which try 
to limit the money supply but still presume that the government should 
print out money. The Balanced Budget Amendment will not work because the
 Congress can circumvent it in case of an “emergency,” whatever it 
defines that to be. What Griffin seems to advocate is a privatized money
 system, as people trade in the money that they choose. He thinks people
 should trade in metals, however, as that provides more stability. 
Griffin also offers a solution as to how banks can store up money while 
also lending some out for business development. Griffin is not overly 
optimistic that his plans will be effected, for the establishment 
fiercely guards its power, but he thinks that reform can come, sometime 
down the road. People can throw out the big spenders from Congress, and 
they can store up metal coins in case of an emergency.
G. There were parts of this book that were difficult for me to 
understand, since I can improve my knowledge of economics. One point 
that Griffin reiterates is that debt backs up today’s money and, if that
 debt were repaid, the money supply would vanish; therefore, bankers do 
not really want the debt to be repaid. I did not entirely follow that.
H. There are some indications in Griffin’s book that things are more 
complex than his overall scenario indicates. He acknowledges that the 
Federal Reserve wants to limit inflation, since bankers do well when the
 economy does well. He states that a significant amount of the federal 
debt is owed, not to the Federal Reserve, but to Americans who have 
bought bonds; to default on that would hurt their savings. That differs,
 somewhat, from his scenario in which the Fed prints out a bunch of 
money for the government and would rather that money not be paid back.
I. I have been watching Robert Shiller’s Yale class on financial 
markets, the 2011 one. Shiller states that, prior to the FDIC, there 
really was no insurance of banks. Griffin argues, however, that people 
will naturally gravitate towards banks that are insured, without the 
government stepping in. Griffin is highly optimistic about the ability 
of laissez-faire capitalism to resolve problems.
J. This is the fifth edition. It has new sections on the 2008 
financial crisis. Much of the book focuses on the 1980’s, however, plus 
there is one part of the book in which Saddam Hussein is presumed to be 
in power in Iraq, and Griffin doubts that will end anytime soon! Some 
may have a problem with this format, as it is chronologically 
disjointed. I had no problem with it, but I cite it as something to 
remember in reading this book.
In conclusion, this book is interesting and well-documented. Griffin 
does well to argue that there are people who act for their self-interest
 and influence policy to do so; he did not successfully explain, 
however, how a one-world government would serve these financial 
interests. The book has a lot of the typical John Bircher tropes but 
goes deeper and provides more nuance. Each chapter ends with a lucid 
summary, which is helpful.
I checked out this book from the library. My review is honest.
 
 
 Posts
Posts
 
 
 
