Monoculturalism meets Rockefeller (and eats him)
Posted by DanielS on Friday, April 4, 2014 at 01:29 PM in Activism, Anthropology, Anti-racism and white genocide, Conservatism, European culture, Globalisation, New Zealand Politics, Popular Culture, Race realism, Social liberalism, White Nationalism
My friend Tadeusz Korzeniewski has suggested that we engage in an exchange of letters, by way of exploration of one another’s views. I have no idea what will come out of that, if anything. But it is too interesting a prospect to be neglected. So here is my opener, on the subject suggested by Tadeusz. Replies will be added to the page, not to the comment thread - that is for readers with their own thoughts on the matter at hand.
Your suggestion is that we choose as our subject the appearance of a Polish diaspora in Britain. A brave choice. I certainly don’t have a great number of positive things to say about it. I don’t think you will find many patriotic Englishmen who do. But there are those among the bien pensant classes and, of course, the shrinking band of Europhiles and outright devotees of libertarianism and economism, as well as the usual haul of thoughtless little sleepers who parrot any media mantra, who will tell you that east European immigration (because, obviously, all east Europeans are Poles) is “not a problem” and even “a benefit”.
Well yes, east Europeans are, at least, white and Christian (nominally, anyway). They seem refreshingly, unusually like us. And some of the girls can be very appealing. They drink and swear and dance, and then they can be laid. To the English ethnic sensibility, this is an understandable species in a way. They can “assimilate”, in a way.
Obviously, as a matter of ethno-nationalist principle, it’s very different. All our peoples must live sovereign and free, and that means alone, on their own ancestral soil. Europe’s peoples must grant one another this most essential collective freedom, because sovereign possession of territory is, and has always been, the guarantor of life itself. We have no business in each other’s lands. Is not Polish history a long and painful testament to that?
The present-day story itself is lacking in Polish tragedy, but it has its victims. The million-fold young Poles and eastern Europeans generally who, since 1st May 2004, have come to Britain, and travelled in even greater numbers to Germany, have deserted their own needy economies and treated ours like some low-rent, mud-free Klondyke. They have created enormous resentment in East Anglian towns such as Peterborough and Boston. They frequently live in gang-houses provided for them by migrant-worker agencies. Rumours abound that they sleep several to a room, and know nothing of the always rising costs of owning an English house and raising an English family. English workers simply cannot compete on the subsistence earnings the incomers are so willing to accept.
It is said that local employers recruit directly in Poland, the jobs never being advertised to prospective English workers; and that whole workforces are recruited and actually paid in Poland, the employers exploiting loopholes in EU law to avoid employment taxes in Britain. The whole deal is topped off with constant praise for how “polite”, “hard-working” and “skilled” the incomers are, while the English men and women they have replaced are routinely dismissed as “lazy” and “uneducated”, and are left to rot on state benefits.
The underlying narrative is that life in the old Soviet bloc countries of eastern Europe has remained economically harsh, and workers still understand what it means to do an honest day’s work for what, by Western European standards, is a pittance. They are only too grateful, we are told, to take up “the jobs British workers will not do”. British society, on the other hand, is written off as having become decadent and uncompetitive in the global economy. Our people have come to expect the good things in life without having to work for them. Europhile politicians and financial journalists, whose own jobs are not at risk in the new neoliberal universe, regularly reinforce this message. Some have the gall to lecture the English unemployed to the effect that if they don’t like it, they are always free to go and find work for slave-labour wages elsewhere in Europe, as if to be decanted from home and family into the life of a characterless economic cypher is an acceptable station for any human being.
It is true, of course, that the eastern European workers are an economically productive cohort. Migration is a filter for IQ, and the quality of first-generation migrants is higher in all sorts of ways than the average for their country of origin. Higher, in this case, than the average for the natives too. But by the same measure the eastern Europeans have come with rather more than the average loading of competent criminal gangs. The least of it involves metal theft: stealing manhole covers, stripping lead from church roofs and power-cabling from railway lines. Multiple accident insurance fraud is another little game. Armed robberies of soft targets like petrol stations and jewellers are also a favoured pick and, naturally, the drug trade has benefited substantially from “skilled eastern European labour”. The very worst of it has been the smuggling and prostitution - sexual enslavement, actually - of innocent and brutally used eastern European girls hidden away in inner-city whore-houses. Undoubtedly the most novel and multicultural felony has been the provision of rather more willing eastern European “brides” for the purpose of a passport scam, usually involving Asian fixers and African “husbands” willing to part with a few hundred quid for a quick I do. Not the hardest work a hard-working eastern European girl could find to do in opportunity-laden Britain.
The whole “hard-working” narrative took a bit of a knock from about the middle of the recession - well, perhaps not the “hard” part. We began to hear about penniless, unemployed eastern Europeans living rough in parks and public spaces, “skipping” supermarket bins and hunting the edible wild-life to extinction. The sight of regal swans gracing the urban river landscape has become a thing of the past on some East Anglian rivers. In contrast, alcoholism, at which eastern Europe has always excelled, has become a rather more commonplace feature of town-centres.
Now we are told the recession is over. But nine out of every ten new jobs is being taken by immigrants of one hue or another. Our kids struggle to enter the workforce at all. Only half of graduates find non-menial work. Of the others many are serving internships - generally without pay, just to have a chance of a permanent job at some point in the future. It is, of course, an utter betrayal of the young, to add to the long, long list of betrayals we have suffered in the grand cause of maximum corporate freedom. The politicians, together with the businessmen who have wallowed in its profits and the liberal Establishment which has found it so convenient and personally inexpensive, can never make amends for what they have done. Tumbrils and old maids with knitting needles will not make amends. Only mass repatriation, ruthless and complete, will make amends.
As for the eastern Europeans, they do not escape without a cost to their humanity. Like all new migrants, they have brought upon themselves and their children a ceasura they do not yet understand. The subtle rewards of peoplehood, of life among kind, of natural belonging and warmth and understanding have been replaced in them by becoming a stranger in another man’s land, and by the coldness and disinterest he feels for them. This is the true wage that the neoliberal system pays its migrant workers. Its materialism has become theirs, and its power to commodify human lives has commodified them. Until they go home they are merely labour, another commodity to place alongside goods, services, and damned capital.
Given the ‘ecological turn’ recently in this corner of cyberspace I recalled a thought that I had some time ago on using ecological concepts heuristically in connection to political analysis.
I came upon the work of Frederick Parker-Rhodes in my quest for the ideal computer language, which I have elsewhere on MR discussed in relation to Heidegger’s “as” structure and GW’s ontology project. Recent work in theoretical physics has provided empirical validation to his “wildly eccentric” views—which managed to provide a priori derivations of the dimensionless scaling constants of physics from his ontology detailed in his book “The Theory of Indistinguishables”. To be brief, there is his “combinatorial hierarchy” that derives from FRP’s attempt to find the underlying mathematical structure of what he called “wholesight”.
Below the fold is an excerpt from “Wholesight: The Spirit Quest” by Frederick Parker-Rodes…
Posted by James Bowery on Monday, February 4, 2013 at 01:08 AM in Art & Design, Christianity, Economics & Finance, Environmentalism & Global Warming, Global Elitism, Globalisation, Science & Technology, Social Sciences, The Ontology Project
A recent discussion of problems with Apple using humans as machines to build iPhones, iPods and iPads prompted the argument that “A major problem in mounting a challenge to globalization is that it delivers the goods” and that it’s unlikely that people will give up their iPhones. The situation isn’t bleak. People can adopt a few strategies, as individuals, to lessen the problem.
The first is to buy smart phones, music players and hand-held computers from smaller manufacturers. Let’s say there are 10 companies, all using Chinese human labor to make such products. How does it benefit one to go with a smaller manufacturer?
This is how. Bankers love large companies making a lot of profit as advertising can make their products highly desirable, and the profits entice investors to buy the large company’s shares. Then it’s a matter of bringing down the company and raking in the loot... naive investors lose, bankers win. Now, if the consumer were to prevent any company from getting large by buying products from smaller manufacturers, bankers have less to gain by bringing down a small company here and there, and can only benefit by bringing down an entire industry or the stock market in general, which they can’t do very frequently or else investors will lose confidence in the stock market.
Notice that buying from smaller manufacturers may also cost less as there’s no premium paid for a top-notch brand name. Also note that the extras that come with some top-notch products aren’t worth the price. Would you rather pay a $200 premium for a smart phone with 1080p video playback capability when the screen size makes this functionality useless and the functionality is useful only if you connect it to a 1920 X 1080 monitor, in which case you might as well use any computer built in recent years to send 1080p video to the monitor, or upgrade the graphics card of an older computer for a lot less, or buy, for less, a blu-ray player capable of playing mkv, mov, divx, mp4 and other formats from a plugged-in USB drive?
The second strategy is do-it-yourself projects. The ARM-based computer board at the hear of smart phones and hand-held computers can be purchased separately. The open-hardware beagleboard and beaglebone, for instance, sell for $150 and $89, respectively, and offer 720p video playback and muscle for ordinary computing tasks equivalent to the first generation of iPad. Other alternatives, some even cheaper, comprise of the leopardboard, craneboard, pandora, etc.
Now, it may be a hassle for some to separately buy a capacitive touch screen, cables, etc., and find a suitable enclosure for the computer board, but there are some people who’ve already done the job, like the Grégoire Gentil group at always innovating, who offer a ready-made smart book based on open-hardware, and they even offer, for free, a multi-boot system allowing one to switch between four open-source operating systems, depending on whether one wishes to use the unit as a smart phone or as a general purpose computer.
To use the unit as a phone, you can use voice-over-IP (VOIP) technologies such as skype (avoid google talk). To get cell phone functionality, you’re better off obtaining a barebones cellphone, which service providers will usually throw-in for free, using things along the lines of Grégoire Gentil’s products for your other smart phone and hand-held computer needs. Or maybe solutions comprising of a dongle that will let you use your unit with cell phone networks already exist.
Aside from these individual steps, there’s always organizing in specific ways to target the bankers.
The sweatshops Apple runs in China have recently come up in the news. Instead of using machines to assemble iPhones, iPods and iPads, Apple is using humans as machines. A factory in Shenzhen employs 430,000 people who work in halls with up to 20,000 to 30,000 people each. Workers aren’t allowed to talk to each other, there are no recreational breaks and people work under video surveillance. Some of the workers are children in their early teens, who are kept away from sight when inspectors arrive. Whereas the official work day is 8 hours, the standard shift is 12 hours, which commonly extends to 14-16 hours, at 70 cents per hour.
People asking for overtime are shrugged off and blacklisted; if they resign in protest, they’d have a difficult time seeking another job. Seeking to unionize is an imprisonable offense.
Occupational hazards include exposure to neurotoxic agents used to polish glass, such as hexane, whereas safer cleansers aren’t used because they take longer to evaporate. Monotonous, repetitive work leads to carpal tunnel syndrome and other disabilities. Those with disabling injuries are out of luck.
Many of these human-bots haven’t even seen in person, let alone held, a complete, functional iPad or another Apple product in their hand to evaluate what it is that they’re building. And when they sleep, they do so in cubicles packed with bunk beds, like prisoners in a crowded facility.
And to think that some people would describe this despicable situation as a wealth transfer from the the West to the East in terms of manufacturing and other jobs sent abroad! Superficially, the earnings of these workers have easily quadrupled compared to their working in rice farms earlier, but look at their living conditions, and watch as the purchasing power of money keeps going down because the government borrows from bankers, at interest, money the bankers create out of thin air.
If the Chinese masses work in farms, produce enough food for themselves, produce surplus food to barter against petroleum, medicine, etc., and the government creates it own money without debt, the Chinese can live independently and can sustain themselves, whereas now their economy’s in the hands of the international bankers while many of their people work like machines, sustaining mechanical injuries and damage from exposure to toxic chemicals.
The West doesn’t benefit either. Many Western consumers are precluded from buying bling bling such as iPads because of a lack of disposable income, and a good proportion of those who buy such bling bling do so by borrowing money, for which they’ll pay dearly in terms of interest.
Apple could technically improve worker conditions by cutting its profit margins, but is unable to do so because it’s a publicly traded corporation, and financial corporations have enough of a stake in it to dictate policies, the bottom line being increasing profit to attract investors. When the time’s ripe, these financial corporations will bring down the stock market, thus effecting a wealth transfer from the masses of naive investors to the bankers behind the financial corporations.
Many of the financial corporations having a stake in major non-financial corporations in major economies such as America’s are located offshore as well as many of the bankers. This diminishes the odds of a successful political revolt against the bankers. And we can see that the outsourcing of manufacturing and numerous other jobs from the major Western economies is further insurance against the same as weakened Western masses are less capable of revolt.
It was claimed that the devastation of the Third World by bankers creates plenty of would-be economic immigrants. The retort was that this is a Judeo-Marxist canard used to induce ‘white guilt’ and justify various ‘aid’ and ‘refugee’ programs. The retort added that parts of Africa in 1812 had yet to see the wheel, the implication being that Third world nations have been built or economically enhanced by the West. The retort also blames slaughters and devastation in the Third World on their natives alone.
Let’s see. Civilization shouldn’t be confused with economic security. An isolated hunter-gatherer tribe living in a jungle typically has sufficient food to eat, clothing and living structures; they are willing and able to provide for themselves. Whereas in a modern civilization such as the U.S., tens of millions are unable to provide food for themselves, in spite of being willing and able to work, and must depend on government handouts such as food stamps, and there are millions of homeless people.
The reason for the economic problems of Western nations is that malicious bankers issue and control money, which is also the case for nearly all Third World nations. So how does the Third world fare under banker control?
For a while now, this is how the international bankers have dealt with the Third World [some things apply to some Western nations also]:
Naturally, Third World nations will experience significant emigration pressures. Residents of some European nations will better understand what the Third World experiences when austerirty measures in their nations become more severe to pay the interests on loans they need from banks.
As of now, people are rioting over gas prices in Nigeria, but before one brings in the violence proneness of blacks, take a guess at what’s caused the rise and toward which purpose. One has to wonder how many other instances of rioting in Third World nations have their root cause in what the international bankers do, not in violence that would occur no matter what. These international bankers are behind numerous wars in the Western hemisphere, and they surely haven’t left the Third world in peace.
Notice that some black African nations are resource-rich but the masses live in poverty. Is this due to the corruption of their elite? They have corrupt elite, but if this were the reason, there would be lots of black billionaires [U.S. dollars] in some African nations, whereas the natural resource-related wealth is siphoned out by the international bankers, in the manner detailed above, and scraps, in comparison, are given to the corrupt elite.
People complain about me focusing on money and the community disproportionately controlling it when there are serious immigration issues to be discussed, but what’s causing the immigration issues? It takes more than merely opening Western borders to immigrants; Third Worlders need an incentive to emigrate en masse, too.
Will the masses be willing to go to a land far, far away where people speak a different language and have a very different culture if the masses have a reasonable income/sustenance where they live, and live in a relatively peaceful society? Will the masses be willing to give up the security of their existence for discordance, learning and re-learning skills in a foreign nation and the uncertainty of having a similar level of economic security there? These are important questions to reflect on. A desire to emigrate will be true of some individuals, but not the masses if there’s basic economic security [food, shelter, clothing, base medical facilities] and no warfare or civil strife.
But economic devastation provides a strong incentive for mass emigration pressure in the Third World. And thus we have the demand and supply of contemporary mass immigration into Western nations:
So is it wise to complain about immigration levels and focus on blacks, Hispanics, Muslims----like Amren, Vdare, the masses of the “alternative right” or “Third position” crowds----or is it wise to aim for the root cause, which lies in malicious bankers controlling the money supply? And is it wise to just focus on the money issue or also expose some of the other major crimes of these people, such as 9/11? They bring in all these immigrants to undermine ethnic cohesion in the West. Complaining about immigration doesn’t help and exacerbates division. But the money issue and 9/11 are of universal significance and unite the divided against the bankers. And some people complain of conspiracy and detraction from the important issues, such as immigration and multiculturalism, when 9/11 is brought up!
by Martin Hutchinson
The extraordinary rise in commodity prices, at the beginning of a global cyclical upswing, is beginning to reorder the pecking order of the world economy. Together with the advances made by China and India in the last decade, it is producing an entirely new world order, which many will find uncomfortable. In it, commodities, derided for decades as unimportant, have become scarce resources, to be guarded and managed with the utmost care. Conversely human labor and skill, on the basis of which the glories of human civilization were built, is entering into a state of gigantic glut.
The current commodities boom is qualitatively different from those of the past. In previous commodities booms, such as those of 1972-73 or 2006-08, the global economy was operating close to capacity, and indeed the boom was an important indicator that full capacity was about to be reached. The booms were accompanied by wage inflation and in both cases resulted in price inflation, although in 2007-08 the price inflation was aborted by the financial crash before it could really get hold.
At his blog Simon Darby has uploaded the first of two videos of Nick Griffin speaking to camera after the Copenhagen failure. I can’t embed it here yet, but this is the link.
I will add the link to the second video when it is available.
Here it is.
by K R Bolton
Multicultural politics, including that concerned with immigration, is a method of social engineering. Whoever raises a voice in public in opposition or even merely of caution is pilloried as a “racist” and a “reactionary”. Conversely, those who champion multiculturalism are upheld as the paragons of ‘progress’ and humanitarianism. Yet behind the moral façade multiculturalism is a cynical stratagem, an important part of the process of globalisation in the interests of a small, self-appointed plutocratic elite. This essay examines how multiculturalism is an aspect of globalisation.
It is ironic that an intellectual championed in particular by the anarchist-Left has given such a cogent definition of the motivating force behind multiculturalism. Among the numerous references to Chomsky made by the Left his diagnosis of capitalism as being “anti-racist” because it aims to create a society of humans as nothing more than “interchangeable cogs”, does not receive the same attention as his other views. As Chomsky states, individuals cannot function at an optimum level as producers and consumers if there are racial or what we might further categorise as cultural and national, divisions.
Chomsky is outside the mainstream of Leftist ideology, which sees humanity and the individual in precisely the same terms as capitalism sees humanity as defined by Chomsky in the above passage. Both capitalism and Marxism are globalist, and both are reductionist in seeing economic factors as the primary determinants of human behaviour and history. Marx himself was not adverse to Free Trade capitalism. He supported Free Trade insofar as he saw it as a dialectical catalyst for the destruction of national boundaries, which would internationalise “the proletariat” and eventually lead to a global system. Global capitalists maintain the same outlook today. Marx’s analysis in regard to Free Trade was correct, although his alternative is nothing more than to change the ownership of production and distribution. Marx said of Free Trade:
Today’s global corporate executives and planners concur with Marx. Marx further identified “protectionism” as the conservative position, Free Trade as subversive and revolutionary. Those – mainly political scientists and journalists, especially in the English-speaking world – who insist on defining “conservatism” (sic) as Free Trade liberalism, should return to an actual source; in this instance Marx, to re-evaluate their definitions:
Take a good look at the anarchists. We may be seeing a lot more of them. One can hope.
more videos below the fold
It seems impossibly fanciful, almost like a script for a Bond movie. A clutch of mega-corporations hatches a plan for the global control of an absolute fundamental for life itself: food. The plan calls not simply for the global domination of food supply, but for placing Nature beyond the law so farmers and growers must buy their seeds from the corporations. And because those seeds are genetically manipulated to produce barren plants, they must do it afresh every drilling season.
Cue the suave, unkillable good guy who always steals the villain’s very delectable girlfriend? ‘Fraid not this time. It’s down to freedom-loving Americans to save the world from predatory capitalism, with maybe some help from Ron Paul. There’s about a week left in which to inform Congress about right and wrong as they pertain to this bill.
From that last link (Campaign for Liberty):-
An MR reader sent me the following clip, which is actually of a guy reading an Op-ed News article titled “Monsanto’s Dream Bill”:-
The Telegraph’s Ambrose Evans-Pritchard published a pretty hard-hitting article today, filled with lurid references to nations in deep financial crisis. Those I have heard so much of since September 2008, I am rapidly developing an incapacity to be alarmed. No, the interesting thing about this article was the following stunning admission of where things will go:-
Forget monetary reform of fractional reserve banking (which allows banks to create a nation’s money-supply as debt out of thin air). You, Ron Paul and everyone who didn’t lose billions out of the crisis may think that restoring the right of democratic nations to coin their currency directly, as required in the US Constitution, is the answer. But we are, Evans-Pritchard says, going to get a global fiat currency. The EU agrees, and at the end of last month formally presented a case for a global currency system to the new American administration.
Now, at a time like this there should always be a gentleman born to Jewish parents who can be found leading the intellectual charge. And, as it happens, there is. The economist Joseph Stiglitz, a former Senior Vice President and Chief Economist of the World Bank and author of Making Globalization Work, has been the point man for the global currency. Here he is being interviewed by some outfit named Share the World’s Resources:-
Of course, he means “This is a Stiglitz moment.” It is also a moment when the nation state, upon whose political existence the defence of human bio-diversity depends, takes another long step towards dissolution.
The blog has experienced a serious technical problem over the last few days, which prevented new postings. Thankfully, James resolved it, and I’ve been pitched back into the world of political news and thought. And what I have been trying to get a handle on has been that brief and very strange, conflicted marriage of radical leftist idealism, political establishments generally, American national interest and corporate greed which is, or was, the movement for globalisation.
I was thrust into this line of country by a news snippet two days ago about the resignation of Brazil’s political heroine and Environment Minister, Marina Silva.
What really did for her was the strongly rising cost of commodities on world markets. Money, in other words ... and weak politicians. These include the one-time champion of workers rights and two-times elected president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. But this is the sad, too too predictable story of globalisation everywhere.
Now, let’s rewind eighteen years and see how it came to this. It means going back to the aftermath of the fall of the Berlin Wall. Anyone past his twenties will likely remember watching the whole process of revolution in the east unfold. It was an extraordinary and breathless passage of time, the like of which we simply did not believe we would witness in our lifetimes. Those involved, of course, knew that communism as ideology was an empty shell. Homo sovieticus had nothing to field against the national soul of the western satellites. But what was not known was how weak the state structure itself was.
But, also, what I never dreamt as I watched the images on the television screen was how little the hard-left in the West, which had supported the workers’ paradise throughout, was inclined to walk into history with Homo sovieticus. Instead, it stampeded into new political causes.
On Saturday the little big men of the World Economic Forum checked out of their Davos hotels and made the hop home in the company Gulfstream. Along with the customary hookers and political whores, the high-powered networking and, doubtless for some, the plain high, our heroes left behind all that damned public caring - at least, for another year.
There was a lot of hot air vented about knowledge and poverty, climate change, and water. But the hot button issues among the real players were the decline of the dollar as the world currency and the threat of a US recession. These merely reflects the corporate-heavy interests of the Davos “community”. Of the issue of the rights and interests of real people and peoples there was, of course, no sign. Or almost no sign. This report appeared this morning in the lower middle-class rag, the Sunday Express:-
Now, I’ve been all over the WEF’s brave new website and I can’t find a trace of the former Arch-Songster’s study. Which is odd. The only half-useful mention of migration which crops up via a word search on the site concerns this curious working session:-
Here is Martin Hutchinson’s latest at Prudent Bear, quietly informing bovine optimists that globalisation carries profound and profoundly depressing implications for more than the benighted working class in the West.
Tata Motors’ emergence as front-runner to buy Jaguar and Land Rover from the ailing Ford brings one question uppermost to a commentator sitting at a wealthy Western desk: Precisely which economic sectors can be relied upon in the future to provide jobs for Westerners at wages higher than are obtainable in the Third World? Will there continue to be opportunities to improve Western living standards, or are those living standards destined to descend to some kind of population-weighted average between Boston and Benin?
Tata is a typical and highly capable example of that new breed: the third world multinational company. Part of the multi-industry Tata Group, over a century old, from which it had access to both capital in its formative years and steel currently, it has established itself as the premier manufacturer of light trucks in India and as one of the top three automobile manufacturers. At the bottom of the market, it has announced plans to being out a 100,000 rupee (about $2,500 currently) automobile, which if successful will undercut its major competition by more than 30% and greatly expand the market for automobiles among the still impoverished Indian people.
Conventional Western business analysts have no problem with Tata manufacturing mini-cars for the Indian market, or indeed for developing country markets in Africa and elsewhere. They imagine that Tata is able to use its comparative advantage of cheaper labor to squeeze costs out of the manufacturing process, thus achieving what in the West would be an impossibly low price. They point knowingly to the expensive environmental features that the new automobile will lack, and imagine smugly that the it will be both tiny and of low quality, adequate for the noble impoverished of the Third World, but not seriously to be imagined as competition on the roads of London, New York or Stuttgart.
The announcement that Tata is to buy Land Rover and Jaguar has thus caused a considerable amount of cognitive dissonance. Land Rover and Jaguar are both icons of British automobile manufacture, hand crafted by generations of British skilled labor. Admittedly in the 1970s Jaguar’s quality control became so poor that Jaguars rivaled the Moskvich or the Yugo for frequency of repairs, but since 1979 or so quality has improved and the marque has established a cherished if not particularly profitable niche among the luxury automobiles of the world. Moreover, would Western buyers shell out the substantial cost of a Jaguar if they knew it had been manufactured in India; after all, how could the quality be relied upon?
With thanks to Flavio Gonzales at Troy’s forum, I’m pasting - without additional comment - the meat of an article on Bilderberg 07 by Daniel Estulin
The delegates at Bilderberg 2007: Istanbul, Turkey May 31-June 3
This year’s delegation will once again include all of the most important politicians, businessmen, central bankers, European Commissioners and executives of the western corporate press. They will be joined at the table by leading representatives of the European Royalty, led by Queen Beatrix, the daughter of the Bilderberg founder, former Nazi, Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands and Bilderberger President, Etienne Davignon, Vice Chairman, Suez-Tractebel from Belgium. According to Bilderberg Steering Committee list which this author had access to, the following names have now been confirmed as official Bilderberg attendees for this year’s conference (In alphabetical order):-
Here’s Monday’s piece from Martin, posted originally at Prudent Bear. A dose of cold realism for Mr Wolfowitz and the World Bank.
The World Bank gave the developing world an unexpected Christmas present Wednesday, when it unveiled its annual “Global Economic Prospects” report, looked out to 2030 and projected a higher developing country growth rate than in 1980-2005 and a huge emerging Third World middle class. Since it’s the job of the Bear’s Lair to deflate unwarranted optimism, the report represents a challenge that must be addressed.
The World Bank stated its expectation that GDP per capita in the developing world would grow 3.1% per annum as against 2.1% in 1980-2005. Its central argument is that the rapidly emerging global middle class, 1.2 billion strong in 2030, three times its 2005 size, with family incomes between $18,000 and $60,000, will realize their true interest and vote for World Bank-friendly policies such as open trade barriers and globalist foreign policies.
Even were they to do such a thing, it’s doubtful what effect they could have, since they would still be far outnumbered by the 6.8 billion impoverished souls who gain little from globalization and who would have to depend on benign “pro-poor policies” voted by the emerging middle class for the meager handouts that made their miserable existence possible.
It’s Monday, and this week prudentbear.com ran the Hutchinson take on property rights and the brief and likely fatal joys of outsourcing. The bearish nature of this message runs with the dissident grain and is a clever man’s way of introducing reasonable doubt into the conventional-thinking, mainstream mind.
That first doubt is the father of all dissent, and without it not a single one of us would be thinking and speaking as we do.
In his 1990 paper “Endogenous Technological Change” economist Paul Romer showed that economic growth is caused primarily by the spread and interaction of information, some but not all of which is “excludable” in that others can be prevented from using it once it’s created. As an instance of information-driven technological change, he instanced Francis Cabot Lowell’s 1811 industrial espionage on British power looms, through which he created the U.S. textile industry.
This afternoon my OE Inbox mysteriously received Martin Hutchinson’s latest Bear’s Lair piece. This one considers the prospects for the globalising economy. I am very pleased to publish it here.
A gated development for the subcontinent’s super-rich ... and a funeral for a cotton farmer, forced into suicide because of spiralling poverty. India’s economic growth is dazzling but, in the new, globalised era, its inequalities are becoming even more polarised, discovers Randeep Ramesh
The prospects are great for ecologically imposed patriarchy enhancing the fertility of whites via oceanic frontiers. The majority of the earth’s surface remains not only uncultivated, but not biologically productive despite the presence of adequate sunlight and near-adequate nutrients. If recent experiments in iron fertilization of high nitrogen low chlorophyll oceanic surface regions are any indication, the primary ingredient lacking is the pioneering spirit that led to the cultivation and increased carrying capacity of the Anglosphere’s frontier territories: The United States, Canada, New Zealand and Australia. It is reasonable to expect that the Anglosphere alone could increase its numbers by a factor of 10, relatively unmolested by multicultural supremacists, during this pioneering renaissance and maintain if not improve the quality of their populations. Other, less sea-faring European peoples could enjoy smaller but nevertheless profound population and territorial relief. Moreover this population increase could be very rapid if the fertility rates of the United States frontier is any guide. This is a prospect that seems plausible in no other way short of world war.
Posted by James Bowery on Thursday, March 9, 2006 at 11:19 PM in Demographics, European Nationalism, Globalisation, Libertarianism, Science & Technology, White Nationalism
A key distinguishing feature of humanity is its communication ability. But what exactly is communication as opposed to manipulation? How does communication arise? What are the conditions for its continuation? There have been a number of attempts at simulating the evolution of communication but till the simulation described in this article was run, none of them combined migration, climatic variation and the prisoner’s dilemma.
The simulaton is schematic but suggestive that migration can eliminate the very genetic capacity for communication and replace it with pure manipulation.
Posted by James Bowery on Saturday, November 19, 2005 at 11:40 AM in Demographics, Ethnicity and Ethnic Genetic Interests, Genetics & Human Bio-Diversity, Globalisation, Immigration
A little good news is needed now and then. The pioneer spirit is still alive. As a person somewhat responsible for the resurgence in technology prize awards, I have a few things to say about Burt Rutan’s capture of the Ansari X-Prize by being the first to fly a man to space in a reusable craft twice within a week. He follows the great technology pioneers Henry Ford and Charles Lindbergh, both of whom came to prominence during similar fair contests: The Guggenheim Trophy and Orteig Prize respectively. (From these exemplars some might now see a reason the powers that be shy away from fair contests—contests where they can’t really control who wins the prizes—and it was left to an Iranian family, the Ansaris, to fully fund the X-Prize.)
A speech by Burt Rutan before the National Space Society is worth a view (requires QuickTime ). He repeatedly and angrily declares his embarrassment at the risk averse culture that has strangled the pioneer spirit since the feats of the 1960s—nearly 40 years ago. I’ve got my issues with his speech but we clearly agree that something went horribly wrong with the pioneer spirit subsequent to the 1960s. The turning inward of the human potential has resulted in the halting of human progress upward and outward with aerospace technology being bureaucratically and monotonously scaled up for jumbo jet transportation. The result is the sort of danger warned of by Charles Lindbergh in his 1939 Reader’s Digest article “Aviation, Geography, and Race”: a sea of humanity threatening our race which is, after all, a global minority. Indeed the technological exemplar of this era has been driven by the rise of finance to preeminence—the inward-turning microelectronic revolution. The unintended side-effect of this revolution you see before you now as a website, but it is small consolation for the damage to our pioneer spirit. As we were warned by Henry Ford the great struggle of the 20th century was creative industry vs global finance. Global finance has dominated the past 30 years or more. Perhaps men like Burt Rutan can lead us out of our malaise and realize the human potential. If so it may be due to prize awards like the Ansari X-Prize that give men even younger than Burt Rutan a chance to make a name for themselves purely via their own grit and gifts.
The government of Zimbabwe after starving its population by driving the Germanic farmers from their lands—farmers who had accepted Mugabe’s invitation to stay in Zimbabwe and build a more “integrated” nation—now is to “cede land to the Chinese” a “fast growing nation”, in an attempt to bolster agricultural production.
White Genocide Project
Also see trash folder.
Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages.
Endorsement not implied.
Nationalist Political Parties
Whites in Africa