Speculation, Winners, Losers and Odious Debts: Finance Against Economy, 7
By the application of the definition of odious debt, we may detect in society endless examples – or rather cases, a less aseptic term – of this crime, whether perpetrated by means of moneypulations or not; so I think it is more important, and more concise as well, to ensure here the definition is clear, rather than indulge in a stream of examples at various scales. Therefore I count on your personal ability to translate the definition into actual implementations, and to detect such cases.
Indeed, in all such cases, in the course of such investigations, the problem arises continually to distinguish honest debt from odious debt, and it is the core indeed. Studying and clearing the mechanisms, that is, who is the robber and who the robbed, what is robbed and how, exactly, is the basis on which to assess what debts or parts of them are odious and thus to be repudiated and not enforceable.
And as one descends from layer to layer, the leafage thickens, and with it this core issue, too. But, fortunately, things get simpler where it counts. In fact, what counts, and thus what we’re interested in, is the top of the pyramid of criminal parasite speculators.
And as we move towards the top, on the contrary, everything gets simpler and aligns more and more explicitly to the basic purpose that spreads by the top, seizing everything and everyone, and especially the ways and means align.
And the way these ways and means align is that the more the games are really big, the more they are based on moneypulation.
At this point, reasoning by relative importances, we can resolve not to waste our energies on the lesser levels and concentrate on the top, on the head of the tapeworm. And to dust off some good old basic logic for the occasion: