Giles, Baldwin and State vs Federal Representative Races 2010 presents a great opportunity. Turbulent conditions in confluence with off-year electoral races for Representative at both the State and Federal levels, open a window of opportunity. I have advocated targeting the take over of the US House of Representatives with the Laboratory of the States Platform, which would turn over Federal funds and programs to the States in order to comply with the 10th Amendment. Others, such as Constitutional Party Presidential candidate Rev. Chuck Baldwin and Mississippi legislature candidate Jimmy Giles of Radio Free Mississippi fame (or infamy depending on your persuasion), have advocated running for Representative seats in State legislatures. I must admit they have a point but I think they are underestimating the synergy of a combined effort between Laboratory of the States Platform candidates for the US House of Representatives, and candidates for State legislatures. Candidate Jimmy Giles has been a focal of controversy recently. Although I dislike the politics of personality that forms the bulk of that controversy, his soon-to-be-defunct “radio program” has been an valuable contribution toward the realization of the potential of 2010. Let me explain… Candidate Giles is an Anglo-Saxon warrior ready for battle demanding Anglo-Saxon military leadership. Although, despite being one of about a dozen technical types pulling the Joint Chiefs of Staff out of an “imminent nuclear war” situation back in 1987, I would not presume to put myself in the same league as a genuine Anglo-Saxon warrior. I am a smith. Nevertheless, I stand ready to fight and second his demand for leadership, disregarding his manner except insofar as it exhibits his sincerity. It is the correct demand for the times we are in. Moreover, he is correct that the first place that Anglo-Saxon military leadership should make its presence known is in representative government. Retired military officers have the vigor and independent income to pursue public office, and so doing, will be educated in the morbid details of the government’s standing violation of the Constitution to which those Anglo-Saxons took an oath to defend from all enemies both foreign and domestic. Moreover, I agree with Candidate Giles that in the case of those running for State legislatures as representatives, they should make no bones about their preferences for the kind of human ecology in which they wish to live and see their grandchildren raised. If that preference is, as with Candidate Giles, to represent “white people” in their search for a “white homeland” because “niggers are at large who will rape and murder you and the Federal, State and local police will not protect you from them”, then that is what they should do. Where Candidate Giles, and indeed even relatively honorable ministers like Chuck Baldwin, fall short is that there is a critical place for Anglo-Saxon military men who would run for United States House of Representatives, and where I may differ with Candidate Giles is in the platform I believe those men should adopt so as to uphold their oath—a platform that is not biased with respect to race, religion, etc.—a platform that is the most direct route to bringing the US Federal government within Constitutional limits. The Anglo-Saxon retired military officers running for state legislatures should work with the Anglo-Saxon retired military officers running for US House of Representatives in a synergistic alliance to allow the state legislatures to pursue truth and freedom with the funds now going to the Federal bureaucracies. The transition will, as a practical matter, be a devolution of Federal programs, as they stand, along with funds to the State bureaucracies. This transition must be legislated at the Federal level. That is why candidates for State legislatures, whatever their politics, should support the Laboratory of the States candidates for US House of Representatives. Moreover, in the current economic climate, there is a critical need for material and logistical support for the campaigns of the retired military officers running for office. These material supports are unlikely to be funded by Federal Reserve dollars. This is part of the urgency behind the work for a local currency system based on electronic barter. So let’s unite under this principle: Representative government at both the State and Federal level must work for States that are expressions of diverse and strongly held, even “religious” beliefs and principles—but the Federal government is for protecting US territory from trespass. Comments:2
Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 05 Jan 2010 23:39 | # Don’t worry, Euroleo. The land title centralization in the states you’re concerned about resenting LotS is so skewed against the men who shed blood that they’ll be more than happy to provide the service. Furthermore, since ya’ll will end up with so much better ratios of revenue, doesn’t the LotS platform let your people go? Why not support it? And insofar as States not being able to hold onto their sovereignty, you’re clueless about the changes in political and military reality since the “civil war”. At that time, people hadn’t experienced a Federal government that was out to race-replace them. Moreover, technology hadn’t amplified the ability of individuals nor had it so centralized infrastructure that the vulnerabilities are in what can only be called a metastable state. If you want to talk to some military types who are actually published in this area, it might benefit you but I certainly wouldn’t want to waste their time on you. 3
Posted by NW European on Wed, 06 Jan 2010 02:51 | #
Yes, by all means. After the United States is split up into ethnostates, I wholeheartedly support Italian-Americans having their own ethnostate. I’m sure that out of reciprocity you would support the same for founding stock Americans. It would also be in your self-interest, as having your own state would mean you would no longer be oppressed and burdened by the evil WASPs. 4
Posted by Euro on Wed, 06 Jan 2010 16:16 | # James,NWE; the let my people go remark was made somewhat in jest.You guys need to lighten up.I’m not dead set against you. I believe that intellectual confrontation/debate is good and healthy.It forces you to think (and re-think) and can be fun and stimulating. I will attempt to respond to your responses later this evening. 5
Posted by Ivan on Wed, 06 Jan 2010 20:15 | # I believed for quite some time now that Jim Giles was doing extremely valuable work. That being the case, I promoted him as much as I could with modest means available to me. And I don’t regret that I did. However, my belief in the usefulness of Giles’ genuine efforts to do what is right has eroded steadily all the way to his recent arrogant attack on Dr William Pierce at which point it became obvious to me that the unintentional damage of what he is doing significantly outweighs its benefits. What follows is my second letter to Giles regarding his attack on Dr Pierce. Unlike the first one, Jim opted not to air my second letter; that’s why I’m posting it here. I intend to post it on the upcoming Open Thread in VNN as well. WARNING: Contains strong language. ————————
P. S. If you want to read this letter in your show, you do not have my permission to do so unless you are willing to read it in its entirety. All or nothing. I have this little gambling problem, Jimbo, like Dr Duke you might say ————————- I still believe in Jim’s good intentions and that he can do a very useful work provided he overcomes his ego, drops his arrogance, and finds a way to get rid of his staggering ignorance. 6
Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 06 Jan 2010 22:24 | # Candidate Giles’ focus on State legislatures covers a multitude of “sins” since even if he is an SPLC operative as some folks over at OD would have us believe, the biggest problem with the SPLC is its imposition of its religious canon at the Federal level. As I said, religious beliefs (in the broad—Oxford’s 3rd definition—sense of that word) at the level of States is not only allowed, but mandated by the philosophy of truth and freedom. Even if it were to turn out that Candidate Giles was Mark Potok’s gay lover (for the dense out there: I’m being sardonic here), buying out his little acreage under eminent domain and providing him with relocation expenses to be nearer to his joy in life would be marvelous for all concerned, don’t you agree? I mean who wouldn’t be fascinated to watch the course of “evolution” of a State where SPLC operatives were coming out of the closet with Mark Potok and living with the consequences of their own religious beliefs without inflicting them on others? 7
Posted by Drifter on Thu, 14 Jan 2010 01:10 | # Although both are meritous, there is some conflict between this guy’s ideas http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/2009/12/immodest-proposals.html and the Laboratory of the States. 8
Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 14 Jan 2010 01:49 | # Ultimately there need be no such conflict since as land ownership decentralizes, Federal government tax burdens approach a much lower value than State government tax burdens. This allows the States to become the primary locus of taxation which then allows them to try out many options—including his. Post a comment:
Next entry: It’s politics. And it’s KMD.
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) |
Posted by Euro on Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:20 | #
James writes:The Anglo-Saxon retired military officers running for state legislatures should work with the Anglo-Saxon retired military officers running for US House of Representatives in a synergistic alliance to allow the state legislatures to pursue truth and freedom with the funds now going to the Federal bureaucracies. The transition will, as a practical matter, be a devolution of Federal programs, as they stand, along with funds to the State bureaucracies.
Yo,Jimbo! Take a gander at this. First, a State by State breakdown of who’s gettin’ the loot here:
http://www.taxfoundation.org/press/show/22659.html
Next,a State by State breakdown of ethnicity here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Most_common_ancestries_in_the_United_States.svg
Notice anything peculiar?
Your LOTS will founder,largely because most of those wonderful States you’re so enamored of are getting a piece of the action in exchange for loyalty to the current regime. (A loyalty that is part of a not-so-subtle ethnic animus.) The same goes for those “Anglo-Saxon” macho-men. In any event,the States have proven themselves incapable of maintaining their sovereignty in the past,what makes you think they’ll be any better at it in future?
Ponder this:
“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.” ~ Lysander Spooner
LET MY PEOPLE GO,JIMBO!!!