Who is the Lord of the Federal Reserve? Or Who does the Fed Lord over?

Economics Political Theory
1

I have recently started comprehending better how the Federal Reserve works, and natually, acquired the hate that pretty much all of you have for it (and enjoying it).

However, one thing still has me stomped, who lords over the Federal Reserve, or/and who does the Federal Reserve lord over?

Couple things I am perfectly clear on based on the web research I’ve done in the forums (since the Mises Institute doesn’t seem to provide a clear posture in regards in any of their official articles).

  • I honestly don’t care about the public/private ownership of the Fed debate. In the spirit of what Liberty Student once said, “I don’t care about that”. The unrefutable fact that the Federal Reserve, along with the U.S. Government, are harmful towards U.S. society, pure and simple (harm makes no distinction between private and public as far as I am concerned).

  • It is clear to me that the Federal Reserve is effectively a Cartel of Banks, and I am open to the possibility that it is part of a much bigger extension of a World Cartel of banks, government banks or private banks.

  • I understand that the Fed was a State initiative, but still owned by several private entities. Efficiently robs the living daylights out of anyone who deposits anything in their vaults. And in effect, prints unbacked “I.O.U.'s” to it’s clients in gratuitous fashion.

Here’s my real interest though, and by my reckoning, a far more important question over the private/public ownership debacle? Who lords over who between the Federal Reserve? The United States of America Government? Foreign Banks? Member Banks? etc. (I am open to any other actor here). Hierarchies is my primary interest (in many ways, I am ideologically, a hierarchist). I am practically confused on who calls the shots on who, who gives the orders on who and what not. I am open to the possibility that there may not be a clear cut hierarchy, and perhaps there is some sort of “even footing” amongst the members of the various institutions. And most importantly, who has the true power/faculty to shutdown or destroy who…

Admittedly my reading of it has been bereft, since I have been very busy trying to read as many of the books found here in Mises, but I still have so much to catch up with, and I don’t feel ready to debate anything above the most essential of basics in Austrian Economics. It has been 2 years since I have read anything related to the Austrian School, let alone Economics, but it has not dampened my hate for the State, it’s similiars (like the Fed and Organized Crime), and my desire to see it’s destruction (or reformation to a private entity). So yeah, some understandings I have of economics have become lax as of late (as I horribly discovered rereading some works of Rothbard). Been distracted with reading books in business (since I have advanced in said career these past 2 years), so I couldn’t really worry about matters of Economics these past two years. But that is through, and I wish to post regularly again here.

So yes, what institution(s) is(are) the lord and master of the Fed? Is the Fed the true lord and master of the Federal State of the USA? If amongst your answers involve a scholarly book, who’s author already dealt with the answer, please point me to it’s direction. I have a higher preference of answers that have the proper scholarly backing over answers shouted out over the blue.

btw, it’s great to be back here in the Mises Institute, and I hope to get insightfull, truthfull, and scholarly answers. Gonna be open to what you can properly tell me.

2

Great question! The simple answer is The Powers That Be, but we really do not know who they are, which is your question. None of us can really answer it. Another thread you might find interesting is the ongoing discussion in WTF Rockefeller funded Mises? We can guess some things about TPTB, but ultimately they are just guesses, though I reckon Clayton guesses pretty close sometimes.

3

All undeputized power is ultimately private. If you and I can see it (it has a public face), then it’s not undeputized power (with maybe the exception of some of the crown royals and the Pope). The Fed does not run USG - USG could arrest every member of the Fed if it wanted, as long as they’re on US soil. And the idea that USG are helpless babes who just “don’t get it” is silly. The Fed is an organ of USG that exists at the behest and for the benefit of USG.

The central banking cartel is bigger than just the Fed. The Fed exists in a larger ecosystem - think IMF, LBMA, BIS, World Bank - that is composed of many powers whose interests are not completely aligned. The metaphor I like to use is to think of the economic and political landscape as consisting of “hilltops” and then think of various interests having power-sharing arrangements - or outright completely control - of these various hilltops.

Just like the CEO is the “public face” of the board (whose names you probably will never know), so the President, Federal Reserve Governor, Prime Minister, IMF chief, and so on are the “public face” of powers many of whom you and I will never know. I don’t fully understand how they enforce their agreements but I think it’s a combination of reputation (gentlemen’s agreements), fraternal membership (ostracism), old-school patriarchy (disinheritance) and - ultimately - implied threats of tit-for-tat whether through legal or extra-legal channels.

Watch this to see how the world is never what you think it is… as soon as you focus on one part of the picture, you lose focus on the larger picture:

Clayton -

4

The Exchange Stabilization Fund - This is how academics look at it. They even argue for secrecy and necessity of economic transactions…

Exchange Rate Oversight - More academia opinion about the control mechanisms of the ESF.

This is why I am tempted to think that the Treasury (Exec branch) really is about as powerful as the FED. The ESF doesn’t have to report all of tits transactions to any balance sheets. The ESF funds CIA operations. It funds IMF transactions. It funds unfunded liabilities.