The People Vs The Employers In a Tucson Town Meeting: “We Know Where You Live”

Posted by Frank McGuckin on April 26, 2007, 08:08 AM | #

Like I wrote previously, Ordinary White Americans are not going to hand over large tracts of US territory. There has been a certain level of retreat, but this should not be confused with OFFICIALLY handing over large tracts of US territory to MEXICO,CHINA,P AKISTAN AND IRAN.

There is only one solution: kick the inavaders out to prevent them from having control over the military and educational institutions we built,paid for..and died for.

The idea that White Americans are going to retreat to the frozen tundra regions of North America and rebuild the greatest military and technological ever known to mankind with homestudy videos about how to troubleshoot TV sets is moronic.

Guessedworker, the English,Wlesh and Scotts have two choices:kick the invaders out or die as a race. There is no other option in the UK..you folks have a lot less places to flee to in the UK than in America.

Posted by dchamil on April 26, 2007, 10:31 AM | #

The city in question is “Tucson.” I was also visiting in 1990—during a heat wave. I could drink a tall glass of water, which tasted delicious, followed by no pee, no sweat, no nothing. The water just disappeared!

Posted by James Bowery on April 26, 2007, 11:25 AM | #

They should change the name of the city to “Gadsden”.

Posted by GT on April 26, 2007, 03:32 PM | #

More “restrictionist” blustering by a group which relies upon the anti-racist credentials of retired FBI agent 007 so that they might be “heard” and “taken seriously” by the enemy’s smirking city council.

Have the “restrictionists” conceded?  Reality says, “Yes!”  They stand opposite to Enemy Officialdom occupying the council seats, and have neither clue nor plan on how to turn the situation around.

They’ll retreat, just as all blustering loudmouths faithful to the stories and memories of a dead Old Republic but dependent upon the Kwa and its market for socioeconomic sustenance have retreated for the past 50 years, if not imprisoned or shot for behavior which has accomplishing absolutely nothing for our people.

New America, Arcadia, Vinland, or whatever we decide to call it, is coming.  Micro-powered, micro-socioeconomic communities powered by Ebarter leading to genuine free association, state- and provincial-level political co-option by White separatists, secession, and independence is an idea which sells itself. 

Note to Frank:  Be happy & Prepare to leave Aztlan!

—-

Running Back To Saskatoon

I been hangin’ around gas stations
I been learnin’ ‘bout tires
I been talkin’ to grease monkeys
I been workin’ on cars

Moose Jaw saw a few, Moosomin too
Runnin’ back to Saskatoon
Red Deer, Terrace and a Medicine Hat
Sing another prairie tune
Sing another prairie tune

I been hangin’ around libraries
I been learnin’ ‘bout books
I been talkin’ to playwriters
I been workin’ on words, phrases

Moose Jaw saw a few, Moosomin too
Runnin’ back to Saskatoon
Red Deer, Terrace and a Medicine Hat
Sing another prairie tune
Sing another prairie tune

I been hangin’ around hospitals
I been learnin’ ‘bout dyin’
I been talkin’ to heart doctors
I been workin’ on disease

Moose Jaw saw a few, Moosomin too
Runnin’ back to Saskatoon
Red Deer, Terrace and a Medicine Hat
Sing another prairie tune
Sing another prairie tune

This tune is home grown
Don’t come from Hong Kong
This tune is home grown
Don’t come from Hong Kong

I been hangin’ around grain elevators
I been learnin’ ‘bout food
I been talkin’ to soil farmers
I been workin’ on land

Moose Jaw saw a few, Moosomin too
Runnin’ back to Saskatoon
Red Deer, Terrace and a Medicine Hat
Sing another prairie tune
Sing another prairie tune

I been hangin’ around camera stores
I been learnin’ ‘bout sight
I been talkin’ to film makers
I been workin’ on eyes

Moose Jaw saw a few, Moosomin too
Runnin’ back to Saskatoon
Red Deer, Terrace and a Medicine Hat
Sing another prairie tune
Sing another prairie tune

This tune is home grown
Don’t come from Hong Kong
This tune is home grown
Don’t come from Hong Kong

Posted by James Bowery on April 26, 2007, 04:01 PM | #

Check out the ratio of media salary to median housing price of any “white” area you’re thinking of retreating to prior to committing to retreat.

A low ratio in a predominantly “white” area means the destruction of the middle class hence the white population.  A high ratio can mean it has already gone through a demographic collapse and it has become essentially an ethnic ghetto with large amounts of unreported low income households, but if it is predominantly white it is a reasonable bet for future investment of resources.

Posted by Cook on April 26, 2007, 05:27 PM | #

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UidZjiEzYY

This kid was educated on the American college campus.

Posted by anon on April 26, 2007, 09:02 PM | #

More youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbnH0cYHOcY
Is it just me or did Elizabeth Edwards imply that white children are more attractive than black children?  She said that Elizabeth Smart got media attention because it was a pretty picture and that abducted black children didn’t get the same attention.

Posted by Friedrich Braun on April 26, 2007, 10:19 PM | #

It’s better to have a race war while you’re still in the majority. Nothing focuses the mind of weak, decadent, hedonistic, egotistical Whites as open threats of genocide from the dark races.

Posted by James Bowery on April 27, 2007, 12:47 PM | #

I should also caution those who are trying to retreat that when they do find “white” areas with high income to median house pricing, they cannot expect the locals to be sympathetic to their flight.

This isn’t because the locals don’t want people moving in, but because they haven’t been exposed to the degradations of demographic transition and feel they can afford the moral vanity of “anti-racism”.  Moreover, they feel they need said moral vanity due to the fact that areas like theirs and people like they are continually portrayed as the source of all evil by media propaganda—particularly if there is even a hint that they are aware that demography is destiny.  These people will therefore steadfastly refuse to recognize the source of the value of the areas in which they live and will be going out of their way to “diversify” them if they can.  You may have less than a generation before the “community leaders”, in their moral vanity, sacrifice their children on the alter of political correctness, and then come for yours too. 

Worse yet are others who are in “white flight” but are doing so in pursuit of environments where they can continue their politically correct delusions.  These people are what I have previously called “vectorists”.  They participated in the destruction of places like California, usually profiting from land value appreciation prior to the destuction, and then move to rural areas to reinvest in land where they aren’t subjected to the consequences of their beliefs—but can perform the same “miracle” of demographic transition all over again.  These hypocrites provide sociopathic support for the morally vain “leaders” of the locality in their pursuit of further destruction.

If you retreat, be prepared to be silent about your beliefs unless you are independently wealthy and have your assets secured against confiscation by a politically active IRS/EEOC/etc.  Plans for micro-economies based on radically decentralizing technologies are a way toward such economic self-sufficiency, and that is something I am actively working on.  However, those efforts do have a severe problem getting off the ground since many people will not recognize the importance of such localization, and you won’t be able to talk about the racial angle with them.  If you try to hire low-lifes and arm them you’ll end up with the SPLC or whoever confiscating your assets during civil suits and all will be for naught.  They thrive on that kind of thing. 

In any case you may well have to move again in 10 to 20 years barring the destruction of civilization itself.

Posted by GT on April 27, 2007, 03:03 PM | #

Good points, James.

Without independent income one is forced to compete with locals for a handful of minimum wage jobs offered by employers who are “very conscious” of their sociopolitical “responsibilities” to the greater “community.”  They will fire you in a heartbeat for your beliefs. With microcommunities, however, we liberate and empower (where’s my pistol?) ourselves and the locals joining us, so that fear of job and profit loss for semitical-incorrectness is significantly reduced. As we grow local trucklers representing the regime and its market will become economically and politically marginalized.  Some will join us but most will flee to larger multiracial enclaves.  Let them.  They can flee but not hide.  We shall control the countryside.  “Flyover country” shall acquire a new meaning.

Posted by James Bowery on April 27, 2007, 04:12 PM | #

Careful with that pistol, GT.  If you rely on your “right to bear arms” you are subject to a Waco/Ruby Ridge style attack from the Feds with the full support of the local sheriffs office.  No one in power respects the bill of rights when it comes to white racialists.

Posted by GT on April 27, 2007, 05:55 PM | #

http://www.imagehosting.com/out.php/i531237_SouthwestArcadiaPolitical.JPG

Posted by James Bowery on April 27, 2007, 07:14 PM | #

I’m in the Pacific Northwest and I think the PNW is a write-off.

Aside from the low ratio of median household income to median housing price (a ratio that is getting dramatically worse even as we speak), the PNW has now been designated the primary domestic target by Neocons.

That means the closest you’re going to get to racialism is Giuliani.

From The Street:

Jeremy Grantham—the man Dick Cheney, plus a lot of other rich people, trusts with his money… says we are now seeing the first worldwide bubble in history covering all asset classes. Everything is in bubble territory, he says. Everything. ... By his calculations, the only assets likely to beat inflation by any significant margin if you hold them for the next seven years are managed timber, “high-quality” U.S. stocks, and bonds.

Posted by GT on April 29, 2007, 03:02 PM | #

James,

I believe the ratio of housing costs to income in the Pacific Northwest is better if we consider the countryside rather than the whole, which includes the coastal regions.

No matter. 

For political reasons the focus of Ebartering microcommunities must be working- and lower middle-class Whites in the countryside.  This does not to mean that right-thinking Whites living quietly in the cul-de-sacs of Muti-Cult suburbia can’t benefit as well.

Whatever the ratio of housing costs to income in the Pacific Northwest or elsewhere, members of Ebartering microcommunities are less dependent on the regime’s central bank and speculators.  Local leadership, creativity, experience, knowledge, labor (past and present), and community receive emphasis.

Posted by Terminus on May 11, 2007, 12:30 AM | #

Don’t give up one inch of our land. The time has come to fight back. If we give up any of our territory our country is finished. I am not yet ready to throw in the towel. Become armed, prepare for the day, it is coming my brothers and sisters.

God Bless The United States of America

Posted by James Bowery on May 11, 2007, 12:17 PM | #

With everyone from the President down to the local Chambers of Commerce engaged in treason, it is hard to see what can be done to salvage the territory of the United States of America, short of mass executions of nearly half of all employers down even to small business owners.  Is such a revolution even remotely realistic?

You certainly can’t allow traitors to retain their assets and as Machiavelli warned in his Discourses, better that you execute a traitor than that you deprive his heirs of their inheritance lest you incur the wrath of the generations upon your regime.

The solution I have previously pointed out is assortative migration of allodial rights.  Herein, allodial land refers to the inalienable (except under violation of others’ rights) right to subsistence land. 

To recap the idea:

As pointed out by John Locke, universally legitimate use of land derives primarily from new cultivation.  (Note in more recent times there has been recognition of nature preserves as transcending this rule but let’s assume for the moment that we have a way of defining the portion of Earth set aside for nature preserves and clearing all, but, perhaps, primitive hunter gatherers, off those lands.)  If you have some better basis for defining universally legitimate use of land I’d love to hear it.  What this means is that claims of “we were here first” must give way to “we own this carrying capacity because we added this carrying capacity to the land first”.  That means the descendants of the American pioneers are the legitimate heirs to most of the cultivated lands of the US—not the multinational corporations, nor the land barons, that have seized “ownership” of those lands in recent decades, nor the foreign slaves they’ve imported to the US.  There is evidence of previous Amerindian cultivation to lower levels of carrying capacity and that defines a universally legitimate land reservation for those tribes, which I venture to guess is a lot more closely approximated by the existing reservation system than treatment of indigenous peoples anywhere else with regard to land rights.  For example, Mexico’s land ownership is even more centralized than the US’s land ownership and that centralized ownership is even less respectful of its Amerindian tribes’ previous cultivation—a situation that has allowed Mexican elites to mobilize that population as slaves for invasion of the US’s legitimately held land.

Under normal circumstances what should happen during assortative migration of allodial rights is identification of individuals who are not compatible with the current territory’s sovereignty and expulsion of them, but also with migration of an allodial land right that belongs to them.  This allows borders to shift without war. 

But under circumstances of what might be called espionage or treason, it may be legitimate to deprive incompatibles of their allodial right.  In other words, it is fine for someone to believe that Mexicans should be admitted to the territory of the USA en masse—but if they actively subvert the will of the people through any means whatsoever (and that includes manipulation of the political system to get “laws” passed opening up borders when clearly the people didn’t desire this) then they are guilty of a crime against humanity and are legitimately deprived of their own human right to allodial land—the sole human right beyond life itself.

Adopting this system under current circumstances would result in the expulsion of a huge number of employers, along with their slaves, without their allodial land rights.  This is the moral equivalent to execution since no man can survive without land—directly or indirectly.  Their slaves have whatever rights they had from their original nation—and under this universal human rights system based on subsistence land allodium it would be legitimate for anyone from anywhere in the world to make war on the elite of the nation producing the slaves to reallocate land control.  For instance, this system would have made it legitimate for anyone anywhere in the world to kill the African tribal chieftains who were enslaving their own people for sale to the Marrano Jews.  (Yes, this idea might upset many church ladies of political correctness who like men like Obama’s philandering father lording their African wonderfulness over us but those church ladies can themselves find another nation within to live—without any rights—if they are so enthralled by such “alpha males” that they subvert US sovereignty for them.)