I'm not particularly interested in people's irrational beliefs.

I'm not denying that there are powerful influence groups, and that some of these groups have some kind of esoteric or cultish culture like the free masons, the scientology, and various kabbalah inspired cults. But the nature of their belief, the fact they are cultish or esoteric is of absolutely no bearing at all about what it is that they do that we are actually concerned about, which is the fact they are people in power who conspire to further their personal agenda at the expense of everyone else. Everything else is drama and sleeve effects: best for Dan Brown inspired hollywood productions, but complete fantasy when it comes to discussing practical political matters such as how to get rid of that giant bunch of colluding technocrats that makes our life miserable.

I think there is way too much focus on the cultural / religious aspect, and that discredits very badly the people who are over-stressing this dimension at the expense of a normal, healthy, level headed anarchist discourse which should be entirely free from reference to people's particular (irrational) beliefs. To push the matter a bit further, as I explain in my ealier post, it's very likely that the esoteric stories are a cover and a distraction. People have a short attention span, and there is nothing more effective to get rid of them than sending them on wrong track by getting them hooked on something mysterious but that's got nothing to do with what they were inquiring about in first place. And as a bonus they look like a bunch of loonies when they start putting that kind of information in their communications so that nobody is going to believe what they report.

Just look at the image "normal people" (the ones we are supposed to convince that anarchism is the way) get when reading anarchist sound and logical stance laced with Dan Brown style stories of esoterism and secret societies. Why the mix of styles? Why not discuss that kind of stuff on esoterism related forums, and stick to the actual facts that matter when discussing geopolitics and economy?

So to go back to the theory, Rothschild is supposedly "controlling" central banks? What evidence is there. Based on what is this statement being made? There must be a way that this information is known. What is this way? Why do people believe that theory? I'm waiting to be convinced by logic and sound evidence. Throwing in the story that Rothschild has a bizarre hobby that consists in scacrifying goats in the middle of a circled pentragram drawn on the ground of his manor with his own blood is of very little relevance with the kind of information I'm expecting to get convinced about his alleged connection with the QE scam run by central banks and governments of G20 countries.