January 23, 2011

Who Will Dictate the Wave’s Collapse? (MERS, the Land Scandal, Corporatism Itself)

Filed under: Corporatism, Land Reform — Tags: — Russ @ 2:28 am


I’ve used the metaphor of Schrodinger’s cat to describe the function of the MERS system within the general Land Scandal. Another way of putting this according to Schrodinger’s terminology is the “collapse of the wave function”. This means, in its basics, that the pre-observation existence of an electron is smeared out as a potentiality over several possible orbits around the nucleus, as a wave. Only when it’s actually subject to observation does the electron wave “collapse” to a particle with a discrete orbit.
This has obvious metaphorical application to the Land Scandal. What have the banksters and MERS wrought here? They wanted to smear out in principle all ownership status and the actual location of the note, so that the bank-wave function could collapse wherever MERS and the banks chose in any particular case, while to outside eyes there would be nothing visible but the quivering cloud of obscurity. This was part of a monumental criminal program to defraud investors and then society as a whole of trillions.
It’s also exemplary of the core program of corporatism itself, which is to absolve corporations of all responsibilities and liabilities while empowering them with infinite rights. A favorite tactic, both within particular corporations and among an array of them, is to smear out accountability so that it’s impossible for an outsider seeking audit or relief to receive a response (he can’t cause the wave to collapse in any meaningful way) while the corporate cabal unilaterally collapses the wave at whatever point it chooses to exercise a prerogative.
I’ve compared this to asymmetrical warfare, whose essence is for the conventionally weaker party to concentrate at points of its choosing, strike the stronger enemy at a weak point, and disperse before the bigger, slower enemy can respond. Although by now it seems strange to say it, corporations are still the weak, unconventional force. They are an insurgency. We the people can smash them the moment we choose to redeem our freedom and prosperity. But they wage effective guerrilla warfare on the pseudo-legal and propaganda fronts. The government assists them in striking our weak points – for example, systematically committing foreclosure fraud to steal from people who aren’t likely to understand how to fight back and who have been successfully demonized as “deadbeats”. The inertial mass lumbers or sits while the assault gradually encompasses it. If all goes well for corporatism, by the time we realize that the prospective deadbeat is all of us, that we’re all in the banksters’ targeting, it’ll be too late.
The specific Scandal we’re talking about these days is how, now that anyone other than themselves is closely observing this wave function, we find that the banksters themselves made it so that it’s often impossible, going by their own rigged law, to figure out who has the right to foreclose.
So the correct social response to this is clear. We must turn it right side up. We must forcible collapse the wave function in any particular case wherever is most beneficial to society. This is the banksters’ own chosen ambiguity. They unilaterally set up this ambiguity, as part of a crime against the people. Therefore the people have the right and the duty to clarify it to our own benefit and right. Therefore, what if according to the bankster system no one can establish who has the note or the “lost” note (robo-signing doesn’t cut it)? If we cannot figure out who has the right to foreclose? In that case, the right to foreclose may exist in the abstract, but no one in particular could ever exercise it. They set it up as its own smeared out wave, so they would be able to collapse that wave any place they wanted. But if we go according to the law, it may be that they’re unable to collapse it anywhere. No one in particular would be able to cause that wave function to collapse. The house, now unforecloseable, would be liberated from the banks completely. And the banks brought that upon themselves. If this process, already taking place in scattered individual cases, could become universal through our refusal to continue paying mortgage debt to illicit recipients, we could smash the banks and take a big step toward redeeming the land.


In part two I’ll describe in detail how the great crime was carried out, from the fraudulent inducement of tens of millions of mortgage loans all the way to the intentional crashing of the economy in 2008 and subsequent Bailout, with particular reference to MERS’ critical role within the structure.


  1. Although the media doesn’t seem to be mentioning it, Ireland has not voted to pass the bailout. The chances are that the Irish will vote against passing the bailout.

    The Irish are probably the most well-educated population in Europe, and they probably realize that it is they who are bailing out a large group or speculators that includes the German banks, Goldman Sachs and the Rothschild Company. They have figured out that their own big bankers took monumental risks and then booked huge bonuses for themselves as a rewards for bankrupting the country. The highly educated population of Iceland figured out the same thing.

    In the US, however, with Wall Street bonuses coming in at a record $154 billion, and with the Fed having to monetize the Treasury Bond market to keep it from imploding, the US Main Stream Media has remained all but silent. The US no longer has a particularly highly educated population. The US population does not resemble that of Ireland or Iceland. It resembles that of Detroit, Camden, New Orleans, Chicago, Miami, Las Vegas, LA and DC. The majority of US citizens haven’t figured out that their own nation’s big bankers took monumental risks and then booked huge bonuses for themselves as a rewards for bankrupting the country.

    Comment by black swan — January 23, 2011 @ 8:05 am

    • I sure hope they vote against it.

      As for US citizens, they’re being way too slow about it, but I think they are learning. Everywhere there’s anecdotal evidence for that. (Of course, if the polls are correct that Obama’s meretricious speech really significantly increased his “approval rating”, that’s a depressing data point.)

      The US population which will be most pivotal is that of the suburbs of Miami, Las Vegas, LA and DC, and all similar areas. If they see the truth and respond to it, we have a good shot. If they side with their destroyers and go fascist, things will be much worse.

      Comment by Russ — January 23, 2011 @ 2:34 pm

  2. Having read 13 Bankers & Econned and followed this blog and many others, what concerns me is the system that will emerge after the “great cleansing.” There will always be extremely intelligent, greedsters that will manipulate organizations for their own advantage. Then they will form coalitions. Systems naturally grow and to say local is best won’t make it happen or last.

    Comment by Natalie Golovin — January 23, 2011 @ 10:49 am

    • Local isn’t the best. It’s the only. We are in the early stage of breakdown collapse. The Corporatist response has been an escalation of the police state model and a perversion of the rule of law – obfuscating it’s meaning to fight their need.

      The function of a continental government served interstate and international commerce. The exponential curve defined by the era of global trade based on petroleum is cresting and will decline as fast as the ascent accelerated.

      Local organization and resilience is the only sustainable model for long-term survival of even the most basic social systems.

      Comment by rjg1021 — January 23, 2011 @ 11:57 am

    • Natalie, systems naturally grow within their capacity for growth. But this one, as rjg points out, has far outstripped that capacity. There hasn’t been any actual real economy growth in at least a decade; all nominal “growth” has been financial smoke and mirrors, in particular the housing bubble. And today’s bogus “recovery” is just a Bailout bubble, a corporate looting bubble, a war bubble, and a stock bubble. These are all based on nothing but the equivalent of government printing, for as long as it can enforce the reserve currency fiction.

      But the facts are that this globalized economy is unsustainable in terms of energy and keeping the debt Ponzi going. The Bailout temporarily propped up the Ponzi, but who’s going to bail out the Bailout?

      And the crash and incipient depression themselves, by dampening oil consumption, temporarily alleviated Peak Oil pressures. But it also caused the mothballing of c. two dozen major oil projects which were slated to replace the declining production from existing fields. That sets us on a collision course with the classical Peak effect, where demand tries to exceed supply, sometime around 2013.

      But then, with oil now approaching $100, the recovery bubble might crash once and for all sooner than that, in which case we might never see the classical Peak. It’ll be moot.

      So in the end, this system must collapse completely, and a new, post-fossil fuel one take its place, before it can possibly start growing again in the way pre-industrial systems sometimes grew.

      Comment by Russ — January 23, 2011 @ 2:48 pm

    • I’m not sure how much outrage is left anymore in the authors of “13 Bankers”, judging from the recent (last 6 months) posts on their blog (baselinescenario.com). On the other hand, the author of “Econned” has consistently shown in her blog that the outrage has only intensified.

      Comment by RT — January 24, 2011 @ 10:36 am

      • Yes, Baseline (like some other former dissenters I’ve recently seen change their tune) seems to be buying high on this fake recovery and the kleptocracy. Simon wants back in or something, so he’s been slowly but surely tacking.

        Yves on the other hand gets better and better with her muckraking. (Although I can’t stand the new configuration of the site.)

        Comment by Russ — January 24, 2011 @ 11:13 am

      • As I’ve said before, I only drop by baselinescenario occassionally these days because of their shift in tone.

        Simon had a strong voice early. James is preparing for a new career. Both have clearly determined that it is in their best interests to mute their dissent to occassional sniping at the incremental policy changes being promoted as opposed to the vast amount of ongoing fraud that none of those proposed changes comes even close to addressing.

        The most strident of the major public voices out there are definitely Bill Black and Janet Tavakoli, who are actually calling for the Rule of Law to be followed (and being called lefties for it!). If we were to define a scale, from left to the right, with the left being anchored by the “no meaningful change” crew (e.g., Krugman, DeLong and pretty much any Chicago School economist) and the right being anchored by the Rule of Law Bill Black and Janet Tavakoli, I’d put Steve Keen dead center with Yves to the right of him and Simon to the left.

        I don’t think any of us can truly afford to be to the left of Bill Black, as anything less than fully embracing the Rule of Law means perpetuating a criminal system.

        Comment by Tao Jonesing — January 24, 2011 @ 3:34 pm

      • I was reading another Bill Black piece the other day and it occurred to me that a good concrete way of explaining my ideas on the permanent racket war of attrition and why reform can’t work is that even if an actual reform bill and not a sham bill (like finance “reform”) or shock doctrine bill (like “food safety”) were enacted, for it to work would require that every regulator in perpetuity be just like Bill Black.

        But his kind have always been rare, and are unheard of today. (I literally haven’t heard of any. Anyone who temporarily pops up and seems good for a little while – Barofsky, Warren, Tom Miller – always disappears or regresses to the mean. There’s some lower level judges, and that’s all.)

        Comment by Russ — January 24, 2011 @ 3:58 pm

      • What surprised me was how easily it is to get banned by blogging sites for making graphic banker comments. Apparently, calling bankers vampires, squids, banksters, etc is considered anti-semitic (and yes, I was innocent/ignorant and only recently became aware of this transgression). Of course, there are watch groups that monitor such comments and make formal objections to the blog owners. When that happens, the blog owner’s typical response to such pressure is to likely ban the commenter, or risk adverse publicity, damage to reputation, etc. I have come across a couple of links the substance of which have had a chilling effect on how I comment going forward:



        Comment by RT — January 24, 2011 @ 6:44 pm

      • I don’t think people like Bill Black were always as rare as they are today. In the wake of the Great Depression and the Pecora Commission, society woke up to the importance of good regulation (and regulators) in ensuring fair dealing. Unfortunately, the neoliberals killed society as a concept, and now we’re just left with a collection of individuals, most of whom are sociopaths and/or narcissists.

        But I wasn’t even talking about regulators. I was talking about the Rule of Law. The police and attorneys general are not regulators but law enforcement, and they’re not prosecuting any of the financial crimes that clearly have been committed. For example, instead of busting the real crime syndicate on Wall Street, we have the FBI going after NYC “mobsters.”

        Apparently, only humans can commit crimes. Corporate criminality is always treated as a civil matter, if at all.

        Comment by Tao Jonesing — January 24, 2011 @ 8:44 pm

      • Tao,

        That was my exact same thoguht when I saw them crowing about arresting some members of a less powerful gang. – Why don’t they go after the real gangs? Oh, but they actually work for the worst criminal enterprises, which have been largely legalized.

        Or I should say, have attained enough power to legalize themselves. That’s kleptocracy.

        I guess where we may disagree is on whether or not it’s possible to resuscitate a rule of law which is at least on life support and arguably already dead, or whether we must give birth to a new law.


        Pro-banksters will latch onto any idiotic pseudo-defense, since they have no actual defenses.

        I get that if you want to do broad educational work you may have to take evasive action where it comes to censorious pro-bank moderators. Although I’m inclined to think the kind of place which would ban mild terms like those you listed will probably also end up banning certain ideas no matter how they’re expressed.

        At any rate, I hope you don’t let yourself become chilled by it.

        (Although it seems that the purveyor of the vampire squid crack himself has been doing some soul-searching over that and other ways he has of expressing himself:


        So we can see how easily liberals especially can be intimidated.)

        As for government surveillance, the notion is disgusting to any human being. (As are insulting lies like the one from Napolihack in the piece you linked. Informed people know perfectly well that none of this has anything whatsoever to do with “security”, except the security of rich criminals, and is actually intended to make the people far less secure, since it’s aimed at the people. Not to mention the crack about “radical opinions”. No opinion could be more radical than any involved in support for or propagation of this kleptocracy. It’s anyone who supports the system who is a rampaging rioter.)

        But I try to be stoic about it for two reasons:

        1. Anyone who resolves to fight these crimes has to just bite the bullet and assume that he is under some kind of surveillance or will come under it eventually. Unfortunately, that’s a hazard of acting as a citizen under tyranny.

        2. I’ve read conflicting evidence on how competent the system is capable of becoming in processing all this information. Most of what I’ve read from information “experts”, as well as most of what we’ve empirically observed, seems to indicate that the system is focused on quantity for its own sake, but isn’t very good at extracting quality from that quantity, and may not even care all that much. After all, the contractors are getting paid, aren’t they?

        I’ve said sometimes that I think one of the few things about the corporatist structure we have going for us is precisely how sociopathically commodified it is, that few involved care about anything than their particular rent extraction but feel no greater responsibility to their own system.

        That the mortgage servicers are foreclosing willy-nilly even though that’s not in the interests of most other system players, and is arguably against the interest of the big banks themselves (if it really is exposing their whole MBS structure to exposure as a monumental fraud) is one example.

        So perhaps the very fact that they collect information in such bulk, out of such venal motives, may hinder their being able to use information in the way most rationally effective for the preservation of the kleptocracy. It’s similar to what Assange means in trying to impose a “secrecy tax” on the system.

        The whole thing is set up to be bloated and inefficient.

        Comment by Russ — January 25, 2011 @ 3:02 am

  3. The die has been cast. The shocking thing about the MERS story is how derelict the corporations have been in protecting their own interests. I have sometimes thought of corporations as self-perpetuating entities in their own right, but at long last we see them being cannibalised from within by individual greed. The question for me is how much will be left behind the gleaming glass facades downtown when the “waveform collapse” occurs. Legal fictions of balance sheets and worthless pieces of paper?

    Comment by paper mac — January 23, 2011 @ 5:52 pm

    • These legal fictions and worthless paper are all we have now. That, plus the implicit agreement among everyone to pretend that the balance sheets and paper values are real.

      That’s why no one including the MBS investors really wants to know whether or not these trusts actually exist. If they all keep pretending those exist, then for that long they will exist.

      But the weak link is how the servicers have no interest in propping up the zombie, but only in foreclosing. You’d think a self-imposed foreclosure moratorium would be in the banks’ own interest, a kind of bank holiday during which Congress could try to figure out how to legalize all this.

      But that’s not in the servicers’ interest, so we can expect them to keep foreclosing.

      Comment by Russ — January 24, 2011 @ 5:25 am

  4. Russ, the banks have a self-imposed foreclosure moratorium, and have had this in place for years. Why foreclose on NPLs and show insolvency, when the Fed will buy the junk paper at full face value, as it did with QE I, Maiden Lane I, II, and III (mostly CRE paper), and as Fannie and Freddie did with trillions of taxpayers’ dollars? The Wall Street holding banks are TOTALLY unregulated, and can do whatever they want as long as they don’t mark it to market.

    In America there are two distinct classes. There is the ruling class (banksters, kleptocrats, etc), which is made up of owners and rentiers. Then there is the tenant class, which is made up of the working people and the welfare people. What’s happening in the US is that the ruling class is shrinking at the same time it is consolidating its wealth and growing its power. Conversely, the tenant class is growing at an alarming rate, as those, who thought they were owners, are finding themselves in homes with no equity . They are literally renting from the bank. They have no power, are living paycheck to paycheck, and may, someday, find themselves sifting through their belongings, figuring out which ones they might be able to hold on to as they are forced out of their dwellings.

    The ruling class makes the rules, but the ruling class does not enforce the rules against the members of it own class. Because of this, the wealthiest 400 Americans have as many assets as do the bottom 150 million Americans. This disparity between the ruling class and the tenant class will continue to widen as long as the ruling class continues to grow more powerful. Welcome to neo-feudalism.

    Comment by black swan — January 24, 2011 @ 10:59 am

    • Yup, that sums it up well.

      Except for the part about foreclosures. There have been monstrous numbers of them in recent years.

      Comment by Russ — January 24, 2011 @ 11:16 am

  5. Great writing, Russ. Wave-particle duality makes for a very elegant metaphor. Keep up the good work!

    Comment by reslez — January 27, 2011 @ 8:16 pm

    • Thanks, reslez. I should have the second part of this done in a day or two.

      Comment by Russ — January 28, 2011 @ 3:59 am

  6. […] They’re tyrannically insane and can only be eradicated completely and permanently.   In the first part of this post I described an intellectual framework for social counteraction. Just as the banks, through devices […]

    Pingback by The MERS Wave Function (2 of 3) « Volatility — January 29, 2011 @ 7:28 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: