Direct Link to Latest News


Social Capital is Best Store of Wealth

April 10, 2013

( There is nothing fancy or magical about the "House of Rockefeller" left. It is a family business.)

A proliferation of openly Christian and ethical fraternal organizations, beginning with a family business, would be the sociological equivalent of free energy.


Social capital and multiple streams of income, not home ownership or "precious" metals, is how the elites have built inter-generational wealth and attendant political influence.

by Abe "in East LA"

I have a follow up to "Goldbugs Can Expect More Losses." Many comments asked:  "If the metals aren't a good investment at present, where they should put their money?" I would suggest that they do what the elites do - build social capital and then start a business.

Social capital is the ONLY true wealth. It is the ability to get cooperation from others. That's why money works: it facilitates third party cooperation. Any money invested in learning a new language, carpentry, (real) masonry,  or gardening will have a better ROI than Gold or the Dow.

scapra.jpgSocial capital is THE TRUE SECRET to illuminati-masonic-judaic-secret society power: Really, it's just simple social capital, i.e. having enough people on the same page to get things done. We should all cultivate it for ourselves as well. A proliferation of openly Christian and ethical fraternal organizations would be the sociological equivalent of free energy.

As for businesses, an LLC corporation can be formed on the cheap in most states, and is only $800 in the most expensive (CA). Just have "consulting" be your business and have your friends and family be your "customers".

With a business of your own, you can have all your productive and collectible assets passed on to the next generation without an estate tax since no one is inheriting property but merely being placed in charge of the business' next generation of leadership. Thus, there is no tax on giving your son a job managing the family assets.

Social capital and multiple streams of income, not home ownership or "precious" metals, is how the elites have built the inter generational wealth and attendant political influence that allowed them to monopolize the economic gains from increased productivity and technology. We could all make use of these simple secrets to start leveling the playing field.


Corroboration can be found in the dynastic wealth that presently controls the world. Instead of making this case at length, I would point readers to four books on the history of money:  Babylon's Banksters by Joseph P. Farrell; The Secrets of the Federal Reserve by Eustace Mullins; The Grim Reaper by J. W. McCallister, and Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins. The gist is that all the secret societies serve central banking interests; and central banking is indeed a family affair WHICH is best summarized from the following quote taken from Dean Henderson's article "The Federal Reserve Cartel: Part 1: The Eight Families -

"80% ownership of the New York Federal Reserve Bank- by far the most powerful Fed branch- by just eight families, four of which reside in the US.  They are the Goldman Sachs, Rockefellers, Lehmans and Kuhn Loebs of New York; the Rothschilds of Paris and London; the Warburgs of Hamburg; the Lazards of Paris; and the Israel Moses Seifs of Rome.

.... Ten banks control all twelve Federal Reserve Bank branches.  He names N.M. Rothschild of London, Rothschild Bank of Berlin, Warburg Bank of Hamburg, Warburg Bank of Amsterdam, Lehman Brothers of New York, Lazard Brothers of Paris, Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York, Israel Moses Seif Bank of Italy, Goldman Sachs of New York and JP Morgan Chase Bank of New York.  Schauf lists William Rockefeller, Paul Warburg, Jacob Schiff and James Stillman as individuals who own large shares of the Fed.  The Schiffs are insiders at Kuhn Loeb. The Stillmans are Citigroup insiders, who married into the Rockefeller clan at the turn of the century."


Another forceful image of the power of social capital and extended families in action can be seen in the Rockefeller family portrait featured in the article by Olavo de Carvalho on this website:

Very few of the Rockefellers seen in the above photo will inherit anything, but they will administer one of the many corporations or subsidiaries that belong to the House of Rockefeller.

There nothing fancy or magical about the "House of Windsor" or the "House of Rothschild" or anything else. This kind of self- appellation doesn't use metaphysics to confer elite status. It is a simple way of denoting a family business. Imagine if entire nations were filled with such interconnected, networked, God loving, pro family, and racially conscious folks.

There would be no poverty or alienation. In every neighborhood, ordinary folks of acquired means and ability like the "House of Smith"and the "House of Jones" would serve the same function as Chinese Benevolent Societies - which is a prime factor in Asian economic mobility in the West.

Even in "the hood," newly established families like the "House of Garcia" or the "House of Jamal" could serve the same functions and provide avenues to social modernization for races and communities left behind.

We don't need to redistribute wealth, we need to let people create it by taking charge of their families, society, and future. It starts with the simple realization that no man is an island and that no investment will allow you to win this fight single handedly.

Note: I asked Abe if he was practicing what he preaches. His reply:

I've just recently purchased some rural land in a part of California that will remain undisclosed. The land is in fact a carefully selected network of inexpensive properties that, once developed, support one another and will require the active input of multiple families working as a team to keep things running. I am in the preliminary process of developing that land with a  network of extended family and close friends. All of this will be managed under a corporate entity in which each family will own a share of the issued stock. To elaborate a bit,  one of the properties will be farmed responsibly, one will have a small grocery store, one a specialty shop, and some will provide lodging income. I hope in time to build something able to rival In-N-Out burgers or Chik-fil-A in size, scope, and civic engagement. I also want to stress that the social capital acquired through one's familial and/or fraternal network needn't be limited to gardening and other arts and crafts, see this video about 3-D gun printing.

More general:

Social Capital  - YouTube Presentation

First Comment:

Brian said (April 11, 2013):

Am I missing something here?

This basic concept of social capital is all fine and well, one sorely needed starting on a grassroots level. The author even envisions eventually rivalling, e.g.; Chik-fil-a in "size, scope and civil engagement."

But the thing I see lacking has to do with the currency. What good is it if what you're building with the intent of beating them at their own game uses THEIR money, and subject to THEIR rules?

Any comprehensive grassroots operation along these lines must also include the introduction of alternative, regional currencies if it's going to have any potential snowball effect in making the present money power irrelevant.

Abe replies:

The reality is that before you can offer an alternative to the current currency regime one needs the prerequisite influence, which requires wealth and a large base of support.

I agree with you on the need to end usury and fractional rerserve fraud, but either way you slice it we can get more done with more at our disposal. A large group of family(ies) and trusted friends can pool the fiat necessary to start something without debt financing and even if the venture fails, at least the group will still own the capital assests invested initially and purchased along the way. Also, once a network of support is up and running you can easily just CREATE YOUR OWN currency.

That's right, just issue notes of credit redeemable for the goods and/or services provided by one of your ventures to other local businesses that can do the same. And with enough contacts in the community you can find any number of others who will participate in your micro economy, BUT you will need a substantial base of pre-existing wealth and social capital first - hence the need for a successful non debt-financed family business, preferably with more than one source of revenue. The methods I'm speaking of work because I've seen them in action not only in the ruling elites but with my own father and his before him who managed to build large enterprises off of the land and trade at a time when Mexicans and Indians were severely discriminated against in this country. One of the only useful things my father told me, and his father told him, is that "If they wont give you a job then make your own damn job." Similarly, if you want an alternate currency, then go make something of yourself and then start your own damn micro-economy. You can avoid counterfeiting charges, like the kind the feds used against this guy ( by applying your notes to barter laws, paying the relevant taxes, and personally confirming each transaction made by third parties with your redeemable notes like your own personal bitcoin system.

Finally, I hope you checked out the video on Gun printing, here's one on ammo making ( Practicing either of these skills is a highly empowering and highly profitable form of male bonding for any familial or fraternal network you may have. Same with organic gardening: any of these skills is like making your own money given the fungibility of arms, ammo, and healthy food. Just be creative and stop whining.

Comments for "Social Capital is Best Store of Wealth "

Carl said (April 13, 2013):

While there is no doubt that the corporation is more powerful than the individual, and there are clear benefits to social credit, passing on businesses to family there is still one a factor missing in this argument.

There is no doubt from what I read that with the remaining liquidity, whether that is sheltered in a family business account or in a personal savings account, that the advice of you and your peers is "cash is king." Nobody ties up 100% of all their assets into business in the form of product or merchandise on their store shelves leaving themselves nothing to live off. It can't all be tied up in the business.

The question still has not been answered, what do you do with the remaining liquidity or the profits from the social capital. Lets say you have a business worth 100 thousand and you pay yourself 30 thousand at year end to make it simple.

Do you 1) leave this 30 thousand in a business account within the family business then take as you will 2) buy gold and or silver and store it safely away from institutions 3) Buy Bitcoin and hope for no kill switch 4) Do you buy food, seeds, land, real estate, items which can be used later or sold?

Have you ever seen that photo circulating of Rothschild standing in a room with hired goons beside a giant stack of gold bullion bars? I don't make decisions based on this but for example, Cortez was a pretty cruel guy, and all for gold. The central banks are still buying it, especially in Asian. Hey aren't they the next superpower (China)?

If you are suggesting that people build a business and keep their funds in the bank, making use of the serpents currencies, be prepared for the consequences when and if things go "Zimbabwe." When the music stops, will you be holding a nothing but a rotten potato?

Abe (reply to Jeffrey in FR) said (April 12, 2013):

I sympathize with your situation but since I am not familiar with European tax structure any advice will be of limited use. I do think,
however, that you can start with these ideas in a very small way if a business venture is too demanding or one is isolated.

I would recommend finding a Catholic Church (or maybe even a Mosque) in your nation that is still traditional. I know the light of Christ has been
dimmed in much of Europe but it's still possible to find people with a similar disposition. After that it is simply a matter of building good
will among the parishioners and then starting to participate in their community. Eventually you will be a welcomed member and can propose
your business ideas.

In the meantime the new community will give you people to engage in mutual support building activities with. In the worst case scenario, building up a community in this manner and starting an "unofficial" business where you and your fellow parishioners can trade goods and services among yourselves to reduce
your costs of living might be the ONLY viable alternative if getting official recognition truly is impossible. God bless, and may your
generations be mended.

PS: I agree with you entirely about the primacy of language. Those who control our words control our reality. That's the true purpose behind
the media and publishing monopolies - It's not about profit, it's about power.

Jeffrey (France) said (April 12, 2013):

I am trying my hardest to do as suggested. I also have worked out, with help from you and your articles over the last five years, that we need to live in a "capitalist" world, but our common view of capital is flawed. Abe's article explained far better than I could, what I mean by capital.

The problem is how do we do it. My research has found the best vehicle for this family firm, in France anyway, would be a foundation. Depending of course on the foundation's statute, which would have to be very carefully worded, this entity could provide us with everything my family needs, whilst doing everything it can to help other families like mine. It will be charitable but non lucrative, but will have no restrictions on owning for profit enterprises, all profits for which are charged at 10% when transferred to the parent foundation. Great! My problem: A foundation needs to be signed off by the interior minister and I have the sneaky feeling he might not be too keen on my idea.

I guess, to cut a long email short, my question to you is: Is there a resource of current professionals, lawyers, accountants, notaires etc, who also know the current system is unsustainable, who want to help us.

Sure, I can go to university here to become a lawyer (avocat}, but can the world wait another seven years? The application form for the correspondence course is on my desk. While doing everything we can to replace the current system with a better one, I need to know how to fight for justice now, in this terribley unjust country.

I believe wholeheartedly, the force that is used to control us is language. An example I found on the acte de naissance (birth certificate} of my children: Apparently I have been informed and recognize the "divisible nature of the link between me and my children". Call me paranoid, but that doesn't sound right to me. this is a sentence which was added in 2006. On the outside, it appears that we are controlled by violent force, but this violence is only used to back up words.

I have never felt more alone. When you totally reject the society you find yourself in because of the endless wars of aggression, the rampant corruption all the way to the president himself, the fascist armed thugs waiting for you at the checkpoint, the contaminated food supply, the eroded soil, the 50% of our freshwater going to cool down our old nuclear reactors, the tax, my god the tax! I could go on, but I'll start to cry. So first we reject country. Thinking all countries are different of course, we did that physically. Finding ourselves in the same "country" but with different rules and similar effects, we reject it philosophically. This is where we find ourselves alone. We have effectively rejected everyone around us. Does a nation need to exist physically, or can a stateless people form one, because i know I am not really alone, It's just that I have never met any of those millions of people who are with me. Maybe I should give the Icelandic embassy a ring, as far as nations go, at least they stuck it to the bank owners.

Keep up the good work Henry and I'll keep trying to repair the bridge between generations, me and my children.

Michele said (April 11, 2013):

It seems to me, further corroborated by the comment left by Dan, that the author of the article wants us to emulate the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers. Copying the actions of gangster-mentality families does not appear to me to be a good way to improve the human condition at all, we would be at each other's throats in no time. The Rockefellers said that competition is a sin, for them it is because they are psychopaths.

The nucleus of the family is key, and the extended family provides more support and protection, but these should be built up into supportive communities, not a "them or us" social structure. You don't have to destroy others in order to survive, but that is the mentality of the globalists.

The psychopathic bloodlines that have built up obscene wealth at the cost of destroying both the mass of society and the planet itself do not recommend themselves to me as the solution. Psychopathy is a disease and a destructive force in our society. Deal with that and you have a better chance of living like normal human beings again.

Dan said (April 10, 2013):


That's how the old clan system worked. Clans were part of the natural human pattern after families and extended families. Still practiced naturally by indigenous people in the "third world" the Globalists seek to break it up through War, or destruction of indigenous agriculture by Monsanto: things that generate refugees.

In order to get social capital 'investment' large families bonded by committed parents with traditional values is essential. I believe we can rest assured that there's no LGBT analog that can compete with it, because they can never replicate or mimic the quality of bonding you only can get from large families and clans.

This is why the biggest money in the world is always in the hands of family clans, with patriarchs. They fear competition, so they've systematically broken up the naturally occurring clan system where ever they can.

An aide to Franklin Roosevelt bragged in a letter that the New Deal and the war had fragmented the nuclear family, and "the clan system, never very strong, has been all but destroyed".

Henry Makow received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto in 1982. He welcomes your comments at