Straight Talk with Catherine Austin Fitts: We Are Victims of A Financial Coup D'Etat

"Straight Talk" features thinking from notable minds that the PeakProsperity.com audience has indicated it wants to learn more about. Readers submit the questions they want addressed and our guests take their best crack at answering. The comments and opinions expressed by our guests are their own.


This week's Straight Talk contributor is Catherine Austin Fitts: investment advisor and entrepreneur. She is the founder of Solari Investment Advisory Services, where she offers subscribers guidance for navigating the risks of the global financial system and the political economy. (FYI: Chris will be the guest on her weekly podcast, The Solari Report, on Feb 3). Her perspective on Wall Street and Capitol Hill are shaped by her past roles as Assistant Secretary of Housing under George H. W. Bush, and before that, as Managing Director and board member for the investment bank Dillon, Read & Co. 


p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 6.0px 0.0px; font: 13.0px Verdana}

1. Despite (or perhaps because of) your time as Assistant Secretary of Housing under Bush Sr., you are extremely critical of the government’s financial stewardship. What, if anything, changes with administrations and how much is institutionally baked into the cake?

The federal financial model is institutional, and its ultimate governance is outside of the government.

The choice of candidates impacts the quality of the political appointees, which factions get the large portion of the benefits of controlling the flow of contracts and pork, numerous incremental policies, as well as the tone of the Administration. 

However, the federal government lacks sovereignty. It lacks financial sovereignty - it is financially dependent on the banks that control its depository and slush funds, create the currency through the Federal Reserve and manage the accumulated capital of the same syndicates outside the government. It lacks information sovereignty as its data, information, and payments systems are controlled and operated by private corporations, primarily defense contractors. If we could dig out the true ownership of both banks and defense contractors, my guess is that it would look identical. Finally, the members of the Administration have no way of guaranteeing their safety and the safety of their families if they defy orders of those who have the weaponry and power to enforce their will by any means necessary.

This means that essentially there is no government as many of us think of it. It also means that the governmental mechanism is quite fractured, with many competing interests that lack an organizing mission. They simply share an organizing imperative to control and concentrate credit and cash flow and to enforce the liquidity of currency and credit that makes the system go.

Since WWII, the American economy has been “fiscalized.” By that I mean that most households, state and municipal governments, and local economies have become highly dependent on federal government credit, contracts, subsidies, and other forms of income and are heavily regulated by federal agencies. This widespread dependency on the federal financial mechanism is the basis for extraordinary central control.

In the summer of 2000, I asked a group of 100 people at a conference of spiritually committed people which of them would push a red button if it would immediately stop all narcotics trafficking in their neighborhood, city, state, and country. Out of 100 people, 99 said they would not push such a red button. When surveyed, they said they did not want their mutual funds to go down if the U.S. financial system suddenly stopped attracting an estimated $500 billion - $1 trillion a year in global money laundering. They did not want their government checks jeopardized or their taxes raised because of resulting problems financing the federal government deficit.

What this means is that there is widespread political support for the federal credit mechanism to continue to extract global subsidy through a policy of printing dollars and Treasury bonds, forcing people around the world to take them, and using them to attract and engage in trillions of financial fraud and covert capital and operations.

Between 1998 and 2002, over $4 trillion went missing from the federal government. During the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations, the US Treasury has consistently refused to produce audited financial statements, as required by law since 1995, or account for missing funds. This is two decades of financial operations run completely outside of the US Constitution and the law.

In short, whether from the centralized private interests that own and control the federal financial mechanism or a large population that is financially dependent on it, the fundamental economics are institutionalized.

That said, the operations involved are far-flung and complex. Numerous factions compete and collaborate, as do numerous intelligence and enforcement agencies and sections of the military. That means the model and the fundamental economics are enduring and institutional. However, what happens day to day can be quite organic and evolving.

2. You were sounding warning bells on fraud in the housing market over a decade before the collapse occurred. How far along are we at this stage in resolving the root causes of this mess? Now that the government has assumed full responsibility for Fannie & Freddie, does all this fraud get swept under the rug?

The first step to resolving the root causes are to bring transparency to the situation. What happened and why did it happen? Such transparency has not happened.

The second step is to identify what assets or equity has been stolen and to recapture and return them. That is, determine what money and property has been stolen and get it back. Such recapture has not happened.

The third step is to hold the people and institutions responsible accountable. This has not happened.

The fourth step is to determine appropriate permanent institutional reforms and integrate them. This has not happened either.

Let’s look at what has happened:

What happened and why it happened is not generally understood.

Essentially no money or property has been identified or returned.

Other than Bernie Madoff, essentially no one has been indicted or convicted. Indeed, the people who engineered the housing bubble and related policies have been rewarded with numerous public and private positions as well as financial compensation. We are watching record bonuses on Wall Street.

The institutions that engineered the housing bubble and the financial crisis have been richly rewarded with $12 trillion in bailouts, expanded access to the federal credit, and government assumption for the debt and liabilities of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Financial reform legislation has generated lots of make-work and expenses for thousands of companies and financial institutions without providing any meaningful reform.

So what does this all mean? The “strong dollar policy” – including the housing and debt bubble, trillions in financial fraud, and the suppression of the gold price – was part of a intentional plan to move trillions out of North America, both overtly and covertly. I refer to this as a “financial coup d’état.”

Wall Street and Washington issued trillions in fraudulent securities, used it to gain control over trillions in assets, and then were able to engineer the taxpayers refinancing out the fraudulent paper. Think of this as a leveraged buyout of a planet.

To the victors go the spoils. That is why we are seeing the people who engineered the coup so richly rewarded.

Richard Dolan has referred to parts of the military industrial complex as “the breakaway civilization.” That is a good description as we now have groups that have stolen trillions and are confident in their ability to keep it.

I am reminded of a story from Ron Suskind, former Wall Street Journal reporter in his book The Price of Loyalty: George W. Bush, the White House, and the Education of Paul O’Neill

“In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn’t like about Bush’s former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House’s displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn’t fully comprehend - but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.

“The aide said that guys like me were ‘in what we call the reality-based community,’ which he defined as people who ‘believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.’ I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ‘That’s not the way the world really works anymore,’ he continued. ‘We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality - judiciously, as you will - we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.’”

3. You see us experiencing continued asset price bubbles caused by the Fed’s excessive money printing. How do you see this playing out? Is high inflation/currency devaluation avoidable?

The algebra of our current situation is clear-cut. The only way to avoid ongoing inflation and currency debasement is to reduce standards of living, engineer depopulation (whether through war or other means), and/or to introduce and integrate new or suppressed energy, transportation, and health care technology.

4. Do you still advise investors build exposure to precious metals as a defense against money printing?

Yes.

5. What factors would you need to see to begin reversing that advice?

I would need to see one or more of the following. First, that the long-term bull market in tangibles was nearing a top. One indicator would be a gold-silver ratio moving below 20 towards 15. Second, I would need to believe that the efforts for those looking to create a global currency had failed or reached maturity, thus stabilizing one of the key factors that is moving the price up relative to fiat currencies. Third, I would become persuaded that nano-technology or another new technology or mining in space could shift the inventory of existing bullion in a significant manner or make counterfeiting easy. Obviously, if private ownership of precious metals by US citizens were to become illegal, that would prevent me from advising purchases. However, I think that is unlikely.

6. What advice do you have to offer the average American (e.g. NOT a deep-pocketed investor) who is concerned about our economic future and wants to preserve wealth and quality of life?

Your time and attention count. Stop listening to or associating with people or institutions that have a vested interest in centralization. Start by turning off your TV. Shift your deposits, purchases, and donations to people and companies that you can trust.

Protect your health. The food and water supply is slowly being controlled and poisoned. Taking steps to assure local sources of fresh food and water is essential for your health. So is educating yourself on steps you can take to detox your body and build your immune system. The rise of environmental and electromagnetic pollution calls for a level of effort to maintain physical energy and strength that was unthinkable a decade ago.

Lower your overhead. Use your time to build as many skills as possible that can help you do more for yourself and barter with those around you.

Invest in tangibles, including precious metals. Do now allow yourself to be drained by what I call the “slow burn.”

Finally, build your understanding and ability to engage in spiritual warfare. The financial corruption is a symptom of a much deeper and very invasive moral and cultural problem. Organize your life to serve whom and what you love.

7. You have said “we don’t have a wealth problem, we have a political problem” in this country. Can you elaborate?

The economy is being managed to ensure central control, not optimization of health and wealth, let alone excellence in our civilization and environment. This kind of centralization and control is destructive of wealth.

8. You’re optimistic on technology’s promise to create economic wealth and productivity. Where do you see the biggest opportunities?

That is a very good question. I don’t feel that I have access to the information I need to provide intelligent answers in this area. My guess would be if the kind of energy technology that Tesla claimed was possible would make both energy and communication essentially free. If he were right, that would have a profound impact on both politics and economics globally.

9. What are your thoughts on Peak Oil?

I believe our dependency on fossil fuels reflects a political choice rather than a material necessity. I also believe that much is being done covertly to keep the price of oil much higher than a market price. That said, we have a growing population and finite resources, so I am a subscriber to the “peak everything” theory.

I suspect one reason why new energy technologies have not been introduced is the fear that it would support even faster population growth that would be unsustainable for the environment.

10. How big of a risk factor do you see it to the trajectory our society is currently on?

Our current investment and cultural models are unsustainable. Change is upon us. Big change.

11. What question didn’t we ask, but should have? What’s your answer?

"To change our investment model, what changes do we need to make and how should we administer our investment capital?"

Here are several blog posts on some of my thoughts:

Thanks for the opportunity to be part of Straight Talk. It has been my pleasure!

 


 

If you have not yet seen the other articles in this series, you can find them here:

Readers can submit their preferences for future Straight Talk participants, as well as questions to ask them, via the Straight Talk forum.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://peakprosperity.com/straight-talk-with-catherine-austin-fitts-we-are-victims-of-a-financial-coup-detat-2/

Your time and attention count. Stop listening to or associating to people or institutions that have a vested interest in centralization. Start by turning off your TV. Shift your deposits, purchases and donations to people and companies that you can trust.
           +1

Wow, what an incredible interview! 
On one hand, it is so refreshing to see someone come out and call it what it is, a financial coup d’etat.  On the other hand, it is so incredibly sickening to read about it…Catherine Austin Fitts’ quote from Ron Suskind’s book makes even the word “hubris” seem inadequate.

 

[quote=pinecarr]Wow, what an incredible interview! 
[/quote]
Yes … In spades, in multiples, and on steroids.
This sounds like CT to me … to the basement with it <sarcasm>.
All I can say is WOW! 

Conspiracy Theory!
This woman is obviously deranged!

<sarcasm off>

Why has it taken this long for the site to allow this type of talk?  Really.

If we could dig out the true ownership of both banks and defense contractors, my guess is that it would look identical.

This comment in itself should make people stop and think a bit.  

Now, a question for CM.

How are you or anyone else able to make predictions or summations on the 3 E’s, without putting this fact into the equation?  I would really appreciate a response.

Also, many of us have taken a lot of disrespect for holding the same beliefs that CAustinFitts has proclaimed here.  Will this change from here on out?  I could probably go into the “basement” and pull out a few threads that were thrown down there by the mods/CM.com for discussing these exact subjects.  Will this change?

 

[quote=LogansRun]Also, many of us have taken a lot of disrespect for holding the same beliefs that CAustinFitts has proclaimed here.  Will this change from here on out?  I could probably go into the “basement” and pull out a few threads that were thrown down there by the mods/CM.com for discussing these exact subjects.  Will this change?
[/quote]
With all due respect, LR, I don’t think the point is who/what/how (CT or not), but What Are We Doing About It?
Viva – Sager

LR,
     I agree with you. I just finished reading “The Creature from Jekyl Island”, and the entire book is essentially what most would think of as CT. Griffin offers a tremendous amount of evidence that it is in fact a conspiracy, but it is true. Just the amount of war that has been fought for the financial gain and increased power of the central banking system is enough to make you sick. I find myself thinking, “What would be best for the power structure?” That may be the best way to predict what may happen next. I worry that with resources becoming scarce, and the fact that we in the U.S. are overconsuming, that we may be in for an engineered decline in our standard of living, not that we are not already declining. Knowing the history and how our monetary system works, inflation seems to be the path of least resistance. If we can buy less with our dollars, we will certainly consume less. After the dollar blows up in smoke, that would be the perfect time to introduce a global currency.  

Phil

 

Sager,I understand what you’re saying but, you have to know the Who, before you can take care of the rest.  Myself and many others on this board have brought up the Who, Why, What and Where’s to no avail.  I feel that if the world came to recognize that a very few “Who’s” are directly and indirectly controlling their lives, the “What do we do from here” would be quickly answered.

[quote=LogansRun]Conspiracy Theory!
This woman is obviously deranged!
<sarcasm off>
Why has it taken this long for the site to allow this type of talk?  Really.
If we could dig out the true ownership of both banks and defense contractors, my guess is that it would look identical.
This comment in itself should make people stop and think a bit.  
Now, a question for CM.
How are you or anyone else able to make predictions or summations on the 3 E’s, without putting this fact into the equation?  I would really appreciate a response.
Also, many of us have taken a lot of disrespect for holding the same beliefs that CAustinFitts has proclaimed here.  Will this change from here on out?  I could probably go into the “basement” and pull out a few threads that were thrown down there by the mods/CM.com for discussing these exact subjects.  Will this change?
[/quote]
LR,
I understand your frustration as regards the topic you are discussing. If I could respectfully interject here as regards your desire to discuss the CT topic and it’s relationship to this site I would offer my own viewpoint.
First, it is unlikely that there are not a few Who’s around who are in very powerful position to influence the lives of others and have done so down through time.
Second, knowing that, how would it alter what you needed to do to prepare for what you see coming our way. I recognize that if you were in a covert opps mode this may have a different outcome but this site is really not intended for that purpose IMHO. This site is for the average joe (actually those here are not really very average, but rather much more aware than the average) who sees that things are not going well and is trying to make changes in his life to make it a better place for himself and others.
Third, the discussion of a Who immediately opens the floor up for endless beliefs and opinions (and there are some facts as well per Griffen) but in the main it creates a contentious environment which is not what this site is all about …IMHO.
That said, I personally enjoy contemplating the topic myself from time to time and there are many sites such as Griffens which do discuss it and other CT topics. I’m happy that this is not one of them.
Coop

Interesting stuff.
I need more info than she had space to provide here to evaluate how she arrives at these statements responding to Question 9 Peak Oil. 

Dependendy on fossil fuels - I think that is mostly because they are the most convenient and lowest cost source at present. However, we certainly do not have free markets; for example, investments in energy sources are disorted by corn ethanol subsidies. 

Covert oil price controls - all I know is it’s a stated goal of OPEC to stabilize prices, I’m not sure how much that goes on is overt or covert, but we’re generally willing to pay the price at the pump.

 LImited introduction of new energy technologies - I think feasibility, practicality, and economic considerations limit our ability to come up with new technologies.  Seems to me If population or environment were really primary concerns there are a lot more limitations on the existing flows of energy and natural resources that could be put place.

 

[quote=SagerXX][quote=LogansRun]
Also, many of us have taken a lot of disrespect for holding the same beliefs that CAustinFitts has proclaimed here.  Will this change from here on out?  I could probably go into the “basement” and pull out a few threads that were thrown down there by the mods/CM.com for discussing these exact subjects.  Will this change?
[/quote]
With all due respect, LR, I don’t think the point is who/what/how (CT or not), but What Are We Doing About It?
Viva – Sager
[/quote]
If an infinitely powerful someone, or a group of someones, is “creating reality”, how should I propose to do ANYTHING about it?  I’m not so sure that even resource depletion will stop these people.

I think what Catherine Austin Fitts says provides a lot of food for thought. And if we want to investigate it on our own by visiting her site or visiting other sites for such theories, we can. (I went and read up on some of her bio and articles.)

I don’t mind getting occasional, tangental exposure, but I sure am glad that this site and community remains mostly agnostic and skeptical.

Poet

[quote=MarkM][quote=SagerXX]

With all due respect, LR, I don’t think the point is who/what/how (CT or not), but What Are We Doing About It?
Viva – Sager
[/quote]
If an infinitely powerful someone, or a group of someones, is “creating reality”, how should I propose to do ANYTHING about it?  I’m not so sure that even resource depletion will stop these people.
[/quote]
That’s right. If you want to know what is required to stop it, just watch the Egyptian people. Corporations are unreasoning machines and the neoliberal mindset cannot be reasoned with. The interrelationship between the 3 E’s does not exist for them.

ckessel, I think you have this exactly right. While what CA Fitts has to say  is, I think, is both credible and fascinating in a terrible way, the fact-checking of it all, as important as it is, is tangential to what I believe this site is about. This is not to be an ostrich.  I don’t doubt at all that the system is rotten to its core, but I suspect there is little the individual can do about it anymore except prepare on a personal and community level for its demise. 
In a similar vein, I have recently been feeling a little burned out reading about peak oil and climate change.  It’s all bad, I know, but how much more do I have to know tonight, read tonight on the interweb?  Probably best to just get on with on working out how to deal with the consequences…
Laughably, I am still very much at the reading stage

MarkM wrote: 

If an infinitely powerful someone, or a group of someones, is "creating reality", how should I propose to do ANYTHING about it?  I'm not so sure that even resource depletion will stop these people.
People are the main resource powering the machine, even if only a few are steering the machine. So, without intervention, it stands to reason that we will deplete all other resources by design and default.

As far as what one can do…check out this blog piece:

Be a Counter Friction to Stop the Government Machine 

By John W. Whitehead
7/12/2010

"Let your life be a counter friction to stop the machine."—Henry David Thoreau

...(referring to Thoreau)Here was a man who believed in living according to his principles. For instance, rather than pay taxes to support a foreign war that he believed to be unjust, Thoreau opted to go to jail. According to one account, the renowned author Ralph Waldo Emerson visited Thoreau in jail and asked, "Henry, what are you doing in there?" In response, Thoreau retorted, "Waldo, the question is what are you doing out there?" ...

...As Thoreau writes in Civil Disobedience:

There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly. I please myself with imagining a State at least which can afford to be just to all men, and to treat the individual with respect as a neighbor; which even would not think it inconsistent with its own repose if a few were to live aloof from it, not meddling with it, nor embraced by it, who fulfilled all the duties of neighbors and fellow-men. A State which bore this kind of fruit, and suffered it to drop off as fast as it ripened, would prepare the way for a still more perfect and glorious State, which also I have imagined, but not yet anywhere seen.

Barring such a state, which Thoreau sees as unlikely, he posited that true power—to create change, to administer justice, to seek out societal good—rests with the people as a whole and individually. We are morally obligated to do these things. Too often, however, we fail to do what is right, opting instead for what is expedient. "The mass of men serve the state, not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies. In most cases, there is no free exercise whatever of the judgment or of the moral sense; but they put themselves on a level with wood and earth and stones. Such," he wrote, "command no more respect than men of straw or a lump of dirt." Indeed, "they are likely to serve the devil, without intending it as God." Ultimately, according to Thoreau, it is up to each person to resist unjust government laws and actions—even when there is a price to be paid for doing so. If a law requires you to be an "agent of injustice," as Thoreau opined, "then, I say, break the law. Let your life be a counter friction to stop the machine." And how exactly does one go about doing so? Thoreau proposes a revolution—but a peaceable one, what Gandhi and King would later call nonviolent resistance:

If the tax-gatherer, or any other public officer, asks me, as one has done, "But what shall I do?" my answer is, "If you really wish to do anything, resign your office." When the subject has refused allegiance, and the officer has resigned his office, then the revolution is accomplished. But even suppose blood should flow. Is there not a sort of blood shed when the conscience is wounded? Through this wound a man's real manhood and immortality flow out, and he bleeds to an everlasting death. I see this blood flowing now.
*bold emphasis added to quote

 

-littleone

I just want to state that we are going to bring in a lot of different viewpoints in the Straight Talk series and our intent is provide interesting, thought provoking material from experienced individuals. 
We may, or may not, agree with whatever gets posted in this series.  Our posting of it neither constitutes acceptance nor alignment with the conclusions or positions of the various authors.  

My mission, and our mission, around here is to lead people towards action.  Of the people currently in power, I think I know all I need to know.  I don’t know who they are, as some may well be hidden from view, but nearly all of the ones I have met are delightfully and dangerously unaware of peak oil, associated and looming resource scarcity issues, and the relationship of both to our exponential economy.

It is this lack of awareness that provides me with all the information I need to take action because it leads me to the conclusion that our future will be shaped more by disaster than design.  Therefore, I need to take action and become resilient.

Finally, it is my hard-won experience that talk of powerful, shadowy groups tends to paralyze far too many people by raising and/or reinforcing the victim vs. victimizer role set.   Which means such talk runs directly counter to the main mission of this site.  Thankfully, the internet is very big place and there are a lot of outlets to discuss literally any topic anyone desires, so this is not an issue of free speech or intellectual oppression.  

We have our mission, other places have theirs, and everyone is free to choose.  Is this a great world or what?

[quote=MarkM][quote=SagerXX]

With all due respect, LR, I don’t think the point is who/what/how (CT or not), but What Are We Doing About It?
Viva – Sager
[/quote]
If an infinitely powerful someone, or a group of someones, is “creating reality”, how should I propose to do ANYTHING about it?  I’m not so sure that even resource depletion will stop these people.
[/quote]
Imagine if you will that we are on a bus, traveling down the road in the middle of the night.  We’re snoozing on and off, waking up every so often to realize “oh yeah, we’re on the bus” and then dozing off again.
At some point we wake up because the bus is swerving all over the road.  It’s still dark out.  Weird thing is, even in the low light, most of the folks on the bus are still asleep despite the rough ride.  
Wait – maybe not – up near the front a group of people are huddled near the driver’s seat.  Are they trying to get him to slow down or drive straight?  Maybe so – or maybe they’re urging him on.  Some of them do seem to be looking back over their shoulders as if to ascertain if anybody on the bus is watching them.
You see a sign flash past your window:  “Bridge Out Ahead” – that’s followed very shortly by chunks of wood and a “Do Not Enter” sign flying past your window.  Egads – the driver’s smashed through the warning barrier and is barreling ahead even faster!
So:  in the 30 seconds I have left, should I get up out of my seat, proceed to the front of the bus and start trying to figure out who exactly is responsible for the bus’ suicidal course?  Or should I wake up a few people around me, make sure they have their seat belts on, make sure mine is on, and then assume a crash position (and, optionally, say a prayer)?
Viva – Sager

Sager,Thanks for the story. Nice analogy. I agree with you completely. I just have a hard time accepting that we can’t commandeer the bus and toss the driver off the bridge.

Thanks for a great interview with Catherine Austin Fitts. She has a very well honed view of the political and financial machine coming from the top down. If you have ever read her story of her time with the investment firm Dillon-Read you would surely know how the “fat-controllers” operate markets and industries and control people. I have tuned into Catherine’s Solari.com site for well over a year now. She is knowledgeable and yet down to Earth in her practical applications for making changes in our simple everyday lives. To me, she is genuine and credible. She cares.
On another note, after reading all the comments, I would chime in to say that there are probably not a few people controlling the conspiracy but more like large corporate/international money movers controlling markets and extracting wealth from the populace just for the sake and  momentum of gathering more wealth and power.

And thanks SagerXX  for your analogy of the bus, yes we have to take action in our own lives and make changes within the system as it all unfolds in front of us…

And Littleone, thanks for the great empowering quote by Thoreau. we have to become the change we want to see.

Tommy

[quote=MarkM]Sager,
Thanks for the story. Nice analogy. I agree with you completely. I just have a hard time accepting that we can’t commandeer the bus and toss the driver off the bridge.
[/quote]
Ultimately that is what has to be done for all our sakes, and hopefully before the few survivors are left trying to extricate themselves from the crash. Personal preparedness is good, to whatever extent it can be done; but in the end it will only get you so far. You still need a functioning society out there that will be operating in a sustainable, sane fashion. The longer the greater society out there takes to come around, the worse it is for all of us, no matter how many barriers of resilience we have created for ourselves. And how much of the greater society out there is sufficiently resilient to withstand what’s coming down the pike? I would say a fraction of one-tenth of one percent - not a good situation for those handful of souls that are ‘truly’ prepared. 
I remember a report I read from the CFR:
China Prepares To Shock The World Off Of Oil Consumption
The actual report is here.
No solutions are being offered other than “letting the free market solve” this predicament.
And this sober response to the CFR report:

... An unhealthy financial system becomes increasingly useless as a measure for the real economy. One must increasingly look to real goods, particularly to natural resources, and I’m not referring to the valueless metals gold and silver, to measure the true health of the economy. For modernity, there is one resource far more valuable than all the others — oil. It is not coincidental that you can trace the beginning of the transformation of the American economy from one of physical production to rentier at approximately the time domestic American oil production peaked in 1970, followed closely by the oil shocks of the 1970s. The American economy was irrevocably changed. Cheap oil, not money, be it the dollar, yuan, yen or euro, is the foundation of modern life. The most astounding fact of recent American life is how for three decades, we’ve done everything we can to avoid the issue, thus increasingly harming the American and the entire global economy. Paul Schwartz of The Council of Foreign Relations has a good post on the oil numbers and China, simply, they don’t work. For years, I’ve been using the simple fact that if three-quarters of the Chinese used oil on the same per capita basis as Americans, and Americans continued doing the same, there would be no oil for anyone else — no one! The nut of Mr. Schwartz piece is,
If China’s recent economic growth pace continues, it will surpass South Korea’s current per capita GDP shortly after 2020 – meaning that the world may be forced onto alternative energy sources much sooner than it realizes.
No may be about it, though it is for this exact reason Chinese per capita economic growth rate will not be able to continue its pace, call it the Oil Yoke. As soon as global economic growth reaches a certain rate, the price of oil is going to choke it right back down. This gives truth to the biggest lie of corporate globalization, that the world could live like Americans, well not even Americans can live like Americans anymore. But that’s OK, we can live better, but it in the short-run certainly doesn’t help the Chinese, whose centrally controlled economy went full force in building a cheap oil infrastructure, only to belatedly find out cheap oil doesn’t exist anymore. ....
  This is not something that should be spoken of only on blogs and peak oil gatherings, but at the highest levels of government and shared with the general public who is frighteningly oblivious to it.