|
|
|
MR Radio: Prof. MacDonald in conversation with GW and DanielS
The interview is quite a long one by our standards, but I believe it is entertaining and informative throughout. Given that no-one seems to conceptually acknowledge the dark side (so to speak) of inclusive fitness theory it perhaps undermines the creditability of those that wish to make broad political points using inclusive fitness theory as to (1) do they actually fully understand the theory and (2) do they understand how excess competition effectively removes relatedness from the picture (siblings killing siblings is perfectly optimal within many animal species from the point of view of the victorious Sib). Given that fitness within social evolution can be derived from both the individual level and the group level (note all evolutionary change concerns changes in alleles and their frequencies) as demonstrated by Hamilton and Price’s work (and Steve Frank etc) in hierarchical selection theory how do these insights relate to political economy? For example, if we take Aristotle seriously than any polis must be a balance between the parts and the whole (individuals and the group) what mechanism can be used to discourage ‘free-riding’ and self-serving perfidy by our own indigenous elites? Accountability to the groups interests seems lacking in contemporary Western life. If Europeans are so ‘individuated’ - uniquely so? - why is it that only a few centuries ago that Celts, Nordic people etc were so tribal and ultra-communitarian in their cultures. Why the stark difference in pre-modern pagan social ontology compared to the ontology of liberal modernity. Given the relatively short time frame any explanation based upon changes in gene frequency would seem analytically bankrupt. The Greeks also had a more communitarian social-ontology (Sparta anyone?, Aristotle and virtue ethics etc). Given the social ontology of liberal modernity (massive ideological emphasis on individ- uals and individualism) what type of personalities and psychological traits succeed within such a environment? If all human interactions are viewed through the prism of individual competition is that healthy or wise for the long term sustainability of the group (one could speak here too of free-riding and the slow accumulation of toxic ‘externalities’ cultural, environmental, social etc generated by liberal modernity which in short term benefit certain individuals but at the longer term determent of everyone). Given that all political societies are ultimately about power and power relationships (see Carl Schmidt), and that power is always open to abuse, a high degree of relatetedness/ homogeneity/ social capital is by itself not enough. What mechanism of elite accountability and social cohesion are possible and necessary? If denied the siblicide point, then why are civil wars so vicious and nasty (often the worst)? Higher levels of relatedness (on average) didn’t stop Englishmen, or Irishmen from utterly hateful behaviour towards their brothers during civil wars… Comments:3
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 29 Apr 2015 23:06 | # I found this conversation to be perhaps the most entertaining and enjoyable we have done. It was particularly interesting to see a divide slowly opening up between my general approach to the problem of our survival and continuity, with its emphasis on mass consciousness, experience, holisticism, and essential thinking: http://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/what_it_means_to_be_human_part_3 ... and the approaches of Daniel and Prof MacDonald, which, while not being identical, were often rather well aligned, certainly in terms of rationality and cognitive elitism. This was quite unexpected for me, and underlined once again how tough it is to be understood even by friends who know one’s thought well. MacDonald was very good value, easy to talk to, and was never caught out for an answer. I hope we will do a further programme with him over the next 12 months or so. 4
Posted by kablabla on Thu, 30 Apr 2015 14:21 | # I am saving this comment of katana’s, though I will probably not restore it. It is obfuscation. Readers can go to his site if they want to know his opinion. Here, there have been too many instances when significant matters were under discussion and all he would do is horn-in, obfuscate, suggest that “this was all nonsense” and impose talk about how flawless Hitler was. 5
Posted by Ask me if I care on Thu, 30 Apr 2015 19:39 | # Katana, yes, we don’t get how perfect Hitler was, how he had it figured-out perfectly. “The three of you still don’t get it, but you will eventually, I hope.” Katana, you don’t get it. Though you have tried to pretend it isn’t true before, there is NEVER a case where I am indulging in words for words sake and not getting to the point. I am not confused, I know what I mean (I am not sure if it came across in the conversation or in the edit; haven’t had a chance to listen to it myself yet) but I know that you don’t want people to understand this because you are desperate for them to believe that they need your reverence for Hitler and that they need Hitler when they need neither. Thus, if I make a point, let alone a meaningful one, you are going to freak-out and post BOLD advertisements for Hitler’s anti-Bolshevism to obfuscate and divert from the fact. Your god, Hitler, was not the only one against Bolshevism. He would not cooperate with others because he wanted their land. You said that you were going to stick to your Nazi sites, now go to it. Nobody with half a wit wants to go there. You are a bore; everyone knows already what you are going to say: Hitler was perfect, the Nazis could do no wrong. There is nobody more tedious than you. Be glad your comment wasn’t deleted right away. Go fish in your own pond. 6
Posted by Multicultural organizationas in London on Thu, 30 Apr 2015 21:46 | #
http://nwioqeqkdf.blogspot.com/2015/04/a-small-slice-of-england.html
7
Posted by Lindtner + Humphreys on Thu, 30 Apr 2015 23:22 | # Lindtner + Humphreys Christian Lindtner and Kenneth Humphreys to appear in international conference: FYI: There will be an important international conference on the New Testament in Roskilde, Denmark on June 21-24, 2015 Gospel Interpretation and Q-Hypothesis. 8
Posted by DanielS on Fri, 01 May 2015 09:39 | # Greg Johnson and Hugh MacDonald (not to be confused with Prof. Kevin MacDonald) discuss: Vanity, Pretentiousness and Snobbery http://www.counter-currents.com/2015/05/vanity-pretentiousness-and-snobbery/ You can get some value out of just about any Greg Johnson discussion. This one much less than others. Why? Because he is trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. More aptly, he is trying to compare incommensurate roles in the functional ecology of a racial system. Greg wants very strongly to hold to the polemic of THE left as the enemy. At least in so doing, in this discussion, he elaborates his motive for elitism and takes it farther in an effort to justify vanity, pretentiousness and snobbery. Of course, in discussing these three vices, he misses the qualitative point, the spirit of the distinction of these vices which make them condemnable. And in suggesting that he should be among an elite cadre he is only further exposing in this discussion why some might justifiably not wish to look upon him in that way. However, there is another way to look at this matter of “elite capabilities, skill development” and processes of evolution: There is common advice for racialists in WN circles - learn a trade, something like plumbing, electronics, mechanics..some skill that people need, where your politics are irrelevant and where people aren’t going to judge, or even ask you about personal matters. Are these people better in some ways? Yes. Is what they are doing important and warranting respect? Of course. I look upon Greg’s work in having analyzed a myriad of texts and his certifiable skill in parsing philosophers and philosophical matters as an invaluable task - one which is technically neutral enough, like mechanics, that it makes personal life, even his obnoxious elitist politics, far less important than his helpful orientation on these technical matters Greg has a qualitative niche, an important part, in a White leftist scheme. One would hope that would be enough. As everyone, there are ways in which Greg could be looked upon as suspect of being worthy to occupy a commanding presence among an elite cadre on a permanent basis to look after us all - including in important matters of judgment. This very discussion betrays that, when so often the perspective that he is inclined to value only plays into that which has gotten us into this mess in the first place. I won’t dredge up my arguments with what has been his security blanket of “the greatest statesman, Hitler”, Dyal, Nietzshe, and the perspective toward an overvaluation of a view toward men that some of the guys over there at CC take, but there is a serious implication that his judgement might not best be accepted as above all. Still, I can accept him as having an important place and providing invaluable advice. I’d be reluctant to accept his position and judgements as abiding and binding across the board, on all matters. That is not to say that accomplished academics should not feel good about and be rewarded accordingly to what they do better than other folks; and they may or may not be above vulgar vices of others. But others are likely to have skills and abilities, which play into both individual and full systemic judgment and orientation, that are invaluable to systemic maintenance and should be accorded respect and honor. It is disrespectful and a serious error of discouraging participation to polemicize against the union of European people and its incentives for participation - looking for defects to exclude people rather than looking for value in members; and justice - and propose that some people, like the wonderous Dyal (who doesn’t find White men cute enough) should have some fixed, quantitative role above others. Anti-egalitarianism or being against “equality” is to play into a false and destructive paradigm, a Jewish trap as surely as any. We are dealing with qualitative issues of commensurability and incommensurability or we are playing a fools language game, doing the bidding of Jews and the very objectivist traitors who sold us out to begin with. 9
Posted by Funky Town on Fri, 01 May 2015 12:01 | # On the other hand, qualities would determine what is below standard as well. Why anybody should have been subject to “Funky Town”, ever, let alone have to hear it repeatedly on the public air waves would be unintelligible were it not for what we now know of the YKW: I was reminded of this having heard it (bellowing from a restaurant onto a Poznan street!) just moments ago… “Won’t you take me to funky town”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liuCTk2nPG8 Another abuse of the public air has been: “Boogie Nights”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XEmFuEbpzM “Dance with the boogie get down…got to keep on dancin’, keep on dancin” How could it be that one has to hear this? It calls for ostracism from community standards. It creates a strange and alienating environment. Beyond hostile - it is torture…then when we get into the strains of rap music, we are talking anti-White war music - an even more extreme of alien and hostile environment is created. 10
Posted by Creative protest of London Hasidics to be May 2 on Fri, 01 May 2015 16:07 | # Stamford Hill and the Campaign against the “Jewification of Britain”
Hasidic Jews of Stamford Hill, North London:
Full article at TOO: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2015/05/stamford-hill-and-the-campaign-against-the-jewification-of-britain/
11
Posted by White Argentinian on Fri, 01 May 2015 23:45 | # William Johnson interviews a Southern woman who rejects feminism but defends White woman against anti-woman exaggerations typical of WN. I believe it was this same woman who had previously said something which made me angry, namely that “non-Whites have all of South America.” Thankfully, in this show, Johnson invites an Argentinian man named Augustine to set the record straight.
12
Posted by Jews, Muslims allied against Europe on Sat, 02 May 2015 15:15 | # Jews and Muslims as allied brothers against Europe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7zoPu6wbrI Good comment by Franklin Ryckaert at TOO
13
Posted by "Far Right" protest Hasidics on Sat, 02 May 2015 20:00 | # Far right plans march against ‘Jewification of Britain’ in Stamford Hill
15
Posted by unpc dowunder on Sun, 03 May 2015 04:31 | # Over the last decade or so, the alternative right has tended to divide into two camps - those who emphasis the Jewish role in anti-white thinking and those who blame North European liberalism. Regardless of which side has the stronger argument we still need to explain why whites have been so receptive to arguments based on individualism (whether pushed by Jews or gentiles) and radical egalitarianism (as opposed to just class-based economic egalitarianism). Hence, it’s great to see the debate moving onto the reasons for the vulnerability of whites to individualistic liberal thinking. I think part of the reason for the sudden, dramatic shift to liberalism (both right and left wing) has been the decline of Southern European cultural influence among North Europeans. Classics (and therefore the ideas of the Ancient Greeks and Romans) are no longer taught much to western elites, Catholicism is declining, Aristotle is no longer really seen as a great intellectual, and fascism is regarded as totally without positive qualities (as opposed to being a mixed bag of good an bad ideas that was pushed too far). The Italians and French also lost a lot of cultural status among Americans and North Europeans after their their association with fascism and their poor showing in WWII (which made them look corrupt, nepotistic and cowardly). Hence they no longer have the same kind of cultural influence they had before WWII.
16
Posted by Behind Baltimore on Sun, 03 May 2015 06:23 | # Keith Alexander and James Edwards provide and informative take on the Baltimore riots and the powers-that-be aiding and abetting them. 17
Posted by Jews develop blacks as revolutionaries on Sun, 03 May 2015 23:47 | # E. Michael Jones: Jews turned blacks into revolutionaries to overthrow the government of The United States; from inception of revolutionary spirit in The N.A.A.C.P. to the government’s successful overthrow by means of the “Civil Rights” movement. 18
Posted by "Left" as anti:national/ tradition, class divisive on Mon, 04 May 2015 00:28 | # “The Left” unnecessarily construed as anti-national, anti-traditional and class divisive in Collin Liddell’s “The First Leftist Genocide of The Twentieth Century”
It is not built-in. And what we would be basically “dictatorial” about is the border surrounding the whole people, not just the workers and the unfortunate. The central commitment to a false either/or that has gained convention in journalese and has been exploited by Jewish interests to prevent the effective unionization of our interests as Whites:
There is no reason why a left, i.e., a unionization, has to be anti-traditional, anti-national or pitting less fortunate against more fortunate. On the contrary, it can facilitate accountability to these interests all around. 19
Posted by Systemic maintenance requirement on Mon, 04 May 2015 02:46 | # http://age-of-treason.com/2015/04/28/fear-and-loathing-and-treason-part-1/#comment-14336 And Tan, this is one of the reasons why monocausality is to be avoided. It makes one myopic in a world that should be investigated processually. The Jews as the “every problem “will be used by Hitler worshipers as a part of their desperation to justify his program across the board - which translates to antagonizing and dividing most of Europe. There is no need to be paranoid that someone is necessarily trying to distract from the JQ if they are taking care of and understanding their own system, including its susceptiblities. Jews have predominant influence in 7 key niches and vigilance must be turned most often to these elite positions: religion, finance, law, media, business (esp. international), academia and politics. The problem that I can see with a term such as “pathological altruism” is that it is a psychologism - too narrowly packed onto the psyche rather than looked upon in social terms, which would be the more fruitful investigation - and again, both our positive maintenance and problems ought to be looked upon as an engaged, interactive, reflexive and ongoing social process. Fine, we look at the Jews as most crucial among problems, but we have our own system to take care of as well. Recognizing our susceptibilities does not let the Jews off the hook for exploiting these openings. In the service of defending our system and not getting caught up in mere reaction to Jews, I am satisfied that my structuring (which Katana dishonestly tries to say is obfuscatory) of two problems - Jewish interests on the one hand and objectivism on the other - provides a good, orientative balance (in particular, we need to correct objectivism with acknowledgment of the validity of our relative group interests). Objectivism, which would outstrip that, carried to its logical extreme, is both compelling as a means to power and as a means to get beyond guilt, but is easily exploited by Jews. To problematize not only the Jews, but objectivism by contrast to our relative systemic interests, is a necessary corrective in favor of ecology and accountability to historical/systemic maintenance against what is now an ancient habit for Europeans for objectivism (which is susceptible and weak on agentive deliberation).
20
Posted by n/a on Mon, 04 May 2015 03:08 | # GW, How often does anyone besides DanielS still post here? How many people still regularly read? I don’t know what your goal was in handing over MR to DanielS, but unless it was to drive away everyone except DanielS, I don’t think it’s succeeded. I understand you don’t like Nazis, and DanielS doesn’t like Nazis. But (1) re: the interview, I think you’re completely misguided in believing you must somehow win an internet battle with those who sympathize with WWII Germany before your brand of nationalism can be ascendant. If you won the heart and mind of every pro-Nazi WN on the internet, you still will not have begun to reach the number of people you’ll need to reach to achieve any real success. So it would make sense to me to simply ignore the former and focus on the overwhelming majority of the population who are not pro-Nazi internet WNs. The left did not win power by first stamping out every fringe leftist movement. (2) Even if you choose to continue with this misguided quest, I don’t think someone like DanielS is going to change anyone’s mind (if anything, he’s probably pushed more people in the opposite direction).
“I would not want his image to appear along side Nazi imagery, even if critical. But that is the problem with the Hitler advocates. They force a response when and how one might not like.” No, no one forced you to post anything. If you don’t want to come across as deranged, stop posting deranged responses to people who in the broader picture are irrelevant. I would also suggest not spamming the comments of every post with links. Start an open thread and post the links there, so that if anyone besides you and GW are left here, they have a chance to have on-topic discussions without being drowned out by you. 21
Posted by DanielS on Mon, 04 May 2015 03:32 | # GW, How often does anyone besides DanielS still post here? How many people still regularly read? I don’t know what your goal was in handing over MR to DanielS, but unless it was to drive away everyone except DanielS, I don’t think it’s succeeded. n/a, this is your wishful thinking and obviously not true. All one has to do is look upon the interviews that we’ve conducted in the last few months. Next, we are still in the process of making changes. We should be adding a new and fine writer shortly. I understand you don’t like Nazis, and DanielS doesn’t like Nazis. Good, I’m glad you understand that. Too bad you didn’t bother to read what I’ve written above before trying to bury it as if its worthless.
We are not trying to win the battle with them, we are distinguishing ourselves from them for whom it may concern (i.e., normal people, who are put off by Hitler and Nazism). Not only is that not misguided, it is crucial that people have this platform available. I can’t speak for GW, but I am not trying to win them over. They have their own holes to crawl in.
We will, but it has been necessary to mark this distinction at least for a time.
That is your wish, but won’t be true. There are three kinds or four kinds who would have a problem with me. Nazi and Jesus people, of course. But they have other places to go. There might be Nordicist snobs who don’t like me but there is a mistake in that, because I do advocate maintaining their distinction. There is another kind who may feel that they are beyond me intellectually. To this kind I would reply that I do not reject people or send them away because they may be sharper or more accomplished than me. On the contrary, I welcome them to participate and show us how its done. If what they have to say is any good, I’d be inclined to turn it into a lead post. DanielS, “I would not want his image to appear along side Nazi imagery, even if critical. But that is the problem with the Hitler advocates. They force a response when and how one might not like.” No, no one forced you to post anything. Listen buddy, the kind of bs that Truck Roy was putting across in that very popular podcast required a rebut. And nobody forced Stormfront to choose its obvious name, with its allusion reinforced by obvious typeface.
Stormfront is the most popular White Nationalist website. It is necessary to distinguish MR from its errors. Nothing deranged about it. Your comments are way off the mark.
Thanks for the “well meaning” advice. Now take it and go start a blog of your own. Since we are so hopeless here, you don’t have to worry about us. 22
Posted by DanielS on Mon, 04 May 2015 08:37 | # To problematize not only the Jews, but objectivism by contrast to our relative systemic interests, is a necessary corrective in favor of ecology and accountability to historical/systemic maintenance; against what is now an ancient habit for Europeans of objectivism (which is susceptible and weak on agentive deliberation).
23
Posted by Tanstaafl's paranoia on Wed, 06 May 2015 05:08 | # Tanstaafl’s paranoia: Age of Treason Radio http://age-of-treason.com/category/age-of-treason-radio/ Tan says:
Wrong, Tan. Think about what I am saying: we will do best to set about with two poles, one Jewish, the other our susceptibility for objectivism (objectivism as opposed to looking after our relative group interests as we should). From there, we may attend to Jewish power and influence and our systemic maintenance most often; and in process attend to other problems as well - other non-White imposers and traitors high and low. You may not like the term monocuasalism* and it may be used by people who are trying to distract from the J.Q., but there is NO suggestion here that we are crazy and that Jews are not hostile, powerful antagonists requiring acute and priority focus (again, keeping ongoing and most frequent vigil with regard to 7 key niches, while perhaps not giving them ALL attention ALL of the time). Next, you quote the feeble minded and dishonest Katana to concur where he is totally wrong:
Totally wrong. I am clear in what I think**, and clear enough in how I say it for anyone, but perhaps those, like Katana, who want to believe in Hitler’s perfection (and for people to not hear what people like myself are saying). Tan, the messiness, the less than perfectly clear causality of the multi-interactive social world must be why you prefer to cite John Friend (with his neat but absurd conspiracy theories to explain all) as a definitive authority. What you do in focusing on Jews is a good thing, but you are taking it to paranoia when you suggest that someone (e.g. myself) is not using his brain and trying to obfuscate the Jewish role when he looks at our susceptibilities and philosophical corrections thereof. I can hope for better from you, but if you are endorsing Katana’s BS and John Friend, then perhaps the William Pierce perspective has you held too captive to let go.
Not that computer training is the only thing playing into monocausality or even that there is anything wrong with focusing on the Jews; but that he is taking too myopoic a perspective and that (computer training) might be one factor..
24
Posted by Nathanial's solutions in 3 min. KM in Cesspool on Sun, 10 May 2015 06:14 | # Dr. MacDonald elaborates his concept of pathological altruism, noting the integral role of the wish/need to conform to moral rules in the phenomenon: http://lnrlive.com/tpc/tpc20150509c.mp3 Also, Brother Nathanial - solutions to Jewish imposed White dispossession in three minutes. His conservative proposals:
Brother Nathanial’s suggestions provide some helpful clarity, but are far too late, giving conservative advice which, at this point, could only preserve, foster and prolong the agony of non-White demographic infestation and take-over; along with international Jewish and corporate power niches. ........................... 25
Posted by J Expression vs Regulation on Wed, 13 May 2015 05:11 | # Gene expression rather than top down gene regulation At Majority Rights nine years ago, Bowery wrote this critique of MacDonald’s theory: Basically suggesting that the evolution of severe Jewish ethnocentric behavior is more an expression of genes seeking dominance than a result of top-down control (though he does acknowledge that plays a part too). Expression of dominant genes explains why they ravage Whites where benign though recessive hosts and promote other middle easterners and Africans despite not fairing as well or even worse against them genetically: i.e., Bowery held that their group strategy is more an expression of dumb genetic mechanism than top down craft:
by James Bowery on Sunday, May 7, 2006 at 04:27 PM in
I do not view your and MacDonald’s theories as incompatible. I agree Another good comment, rather good questions, from Ben Tillman
James,
random commenter writes: What is the mechanism the gene expression is controlled?
26
Posted by Milken's nose 4 $: because air is free on Thu, 14 May 2015 18:11 | # “Give me the power to issue the currency and I care not who makes the laws” David Duke show Date: 05-14-15 The Federal Reserve, the 2008 bail-out and insider trading.. Distinguishing the capitalist system from the free enterprise system Yiddish speaking Broker Randy Newman: “outlawing advanced information is like trying to outlaw air - its always going to happen in this situation.” And obviously, if you know in advance what is going to happen in the markets you can breed enormous money from the real wealth that’s behind it. There are always some people who know in advance what is going to happen, and if information is passed on by a tribal basis it is very hard to track. With Jewish infiltration of government and private institutions they can easily pass on advanced information and bypass insider trading laws. People can make millions and trillions of dollars in the stock market with advanced information. If you know in advance, e.g., that Lockheed Martin is going to produce certain missiles… Or if it is known that the Fed chairman is going to lower interest rates then they know that this will cause the weakening of the dollar and they could go to other currencies; even purchasing Calls and Puts on the dollar in advance. Government needs to regulate to some extent and referee against mega corporations who can take a temporary hit and under price smaller businesses (one of the flaws of Ayn Randism), putting them out of business. Huge Corporations running amok this way thwarts the true nature of free enterprise, with money begetting money, rather than the best products and prices winning out. If private companies get to the point where they can become a monopoly, that is as dangerous to people as the state running a monopoly, maybe more so, because the state may have at least common interest with the people wheres the private company has only on interest, its narrow own, often to the sacrifice of the people as a whole. Regarding insider trading, small events and news can effect movements for a short interval (nowadays, with electronic trading, even just a fraction of a second is enough) that can make a big difference in an exchange. Manipulation of news with rumors and such and trades made on manipulated information allows for money breeding; this takes real value out of the market and people’s investments; the traders are then able to go out and buy real assets with the absconded money. The cost to society is enormous. Soros’s manipulation of the Asian markets was responsible for the Malaysian meltdown in the 1990s. In the 1986, one of the biggest stock market scandals in history: Levine, Seagal, Bosky and Milken were charged with insider trading of stocks worth billions. Bosky was fined 100 million. Millions in fines were paid by Milken but he still came out enormously wealthy. In 1987 he made 550 million dollars. This one guy made more than all of the top 41 Fortune 500 corporations earned that year. They were guilty of one of the greatest financial frauds since the Rothschilds but with Jewish lawyers and judges they serves light sentences for their crimes. ...his tribe came together to do damage control so that Jews were not seen as profiteers. Those Jews who helped soften the blow went on to gain key positions. On Wikipedia, junk bond king Milken is also called a philanthropist because he funnels a great deal of this money to Jewish causes… Federal Reserve, EU, The World Bank, IMF and just about every major industrial country and therefore in lesser, beholden counties Jews remain key to financial issues. 27
Posted by Milken's nose for money: because air is free on Thu, 14 May 2015 18:12 | # “Give me the power to issue the currency and I care not who makes the laws” David Duke show Date: 05-14-15 The Federal Reserve, the 2008 bail-out (biggest theft ever, including Golman-Sachs dumping of worthless derivatives while selling them to others - “insurance of securities” on top of high risk housing loan bonds - largely forced loans to minorities through groups like Obama’s ACORN) and insider trading.. Distinguishing the capitalist system from the free enterprise system Yiddish speaking Broker Randy Newman: “outlawing advanced information is like trying to outlaw air - its always going to happen in this situation.” And obviously, if you know in advance what is going to happen in the markets you can breed enormous money from the real wealth that’s behind it. There are always some people who know in advance what is going to happen, and if information is passed on by a tribal basis it is very hard to track. With Jewish infiltration of government and private institutions they can easily pass on advanced information and bypass insider trading laws. People can make millions and trillions of dollars in the stock market with advanced information. If you know in advance, e.g., that Lockheed Martin is going to produce certain missiles…or if it is known that the Fed chairman is going to lower interest rates then you know that this will cause the weakening of the dollar and you could go to other currencies; even purchasing Calls and Puts on the dollar in advance. Government needs to regulate to some extent and referee against mega corporations who can take a temporary hit and underprice smaller businesses (one of the flaws of Ayn Randism), putting them out of business. Huge Corporations running amok this way thwart the true nature of free enterprise, with money begetting money, rather than the best products and prices winning out. If private companies get to the point where they can become a monopoly, that is as dangerous to people as the state running a monopoly, maybe more so, because the state may have at least common interest with the people wheres the private company has only one interest, its narrow own, often to the sacrifice of the people as a whole. Regarding insider trading, small events and news can effect movements for a short interval (nowadays, with electronic trading, even just a fraction of a second is enough) that can make a big difference in an exchange. Manipulation of news with rumors and such and trades made on manipulated information allows for money breeding; this takes real value out of the market and people’s investments; the traders are then able to go out and buy real assets with the absconded money. The cost to society is enormous. Soros’s manipulation of markets was responsible for the Malaysian meltdown in the 1990s. In 1986, one of the biggest stock market scandals in history: Levine, Seagal, Bosky and Milken were charged with insider trading of stocks worth billions. They were guilty of one of the greatest financial frauds since the Rothschilds but through Jewish lawyers and judges they served light sentences for their crimes. ...their tribe came together to do damage control so that Jews were not seen as profiteers. Those Jews who helped soften the blow went on to gain key positions. On Wikipedia, junk bond king Milken is also called a philanthropist because he funnels a great deal of this money to Jewish causes… The Federal, EU, World Bank, IMF and just about every major industrial country and therefore in lesser, beholden counties, Jews remain key to financial issues. 28
Posted by MacDonald on Sun, 17 May 2015 22:54 | # MacDonald’s most recent interview - this one at Red Ice: 29
Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 18 May 2015 02:04 | # Daniel, before you wedge your head any further up your own keister with all this talk of “hermeneutics” you should pay heed to this quote from the philosopher Hume:
30
Posted by Raging Bull on Mon, 18 May 2015 06:15 | # There is no reason why hermeneutics cannot take heed of the passions, if not follow them - if I were being cute, I’d say that following them would be another narrative (say, like the story of “raging bull”), with its own logic of meaning and action, but particularly as we are talking Hume, I’d tend to look at this as an observation to take under consideration at the empirical end, a part of the “circular” process of inquiry. Its a good comment though, good feedback: that is why you’re missed here. You must be right that rationalism can be exaggerated. Still, I’d guess that it will be mitigated and subject to some rational consideration by socialization. If proposed as an alternative narrative by which to guide one’s life, the passions would emerge quite speculative and the life would probably be very short and or brutish. But again, I tip my hat to you. Having been a very temperamental person (still am, some times), and not having had recourse to much rational discourse - being surrounded by people who gave free reign to their passions (temper) and wish to be expediently done with annoyances - I used to use my anger (which was intense, often a rage bigger than I was) as maps to show the way to social critique. It did seem to work to uncover some mysteries, but eventually it was used against me by those who know how to manipulate emotionalism - (as Truck Roy explains that sociopaths skillfully do) - especially where I was not in Italy and people could stereotype me, “other” me and vilify me as a “crazy” Italian. The problem with this evolutionary strategy for me was that I was in America, not an Italian village. Therefore, there was not a community of kindred people around who could be bothered to talk, who could understand and help pick up the pieces with me in an efficient way. Taking for granted that level of emotionality may have served in a common population, as Christianity may have served there as well, but not in the antagonistic heterogeneity of The US.
I must say that my father was never physically violent. However, in display of anger, rage and hatred, Raging Bull was mellow, no comparison to my father, in fact. 31
Posted by Is UKIP controlled opposition? on Mon, 18 May 2015 20:38 | # Jack Sen at London Forum - ‘Is UKIP controlled opposition or genuine Nationalism’ 32
Posted by Hess report: Bye bye Nashville on Tue, 19 May 2015 06:11 | # As opposed to White country music and culture.. “Nashville should be known for welcoming immigrants”
33
Posted by melpeexxx on Tue, 19 May 2015 17:05 | # Jews (Ashkenazim) are only interested in personal satisfaction and are not concerned with goyim demographics. We are a super intelligent and shrewd cult who likes to keep things the way they are. A winning team does not wish to change the rules. 34
Posted by a la la la la la la la la la on Tue, 19 May 2015 22:32 | # you said that twice, said that twice, that you don’t want to change the rules, said that twice, said that twice… 35
Posted by Jewish manichean trickery, rule changes on Wed, 20 May 2015 07:24 | # “Jews (Ashkenazim) are only interested in personal satisfaction and are not concerned with goyim demographics. We are a super intelligent and shrewd cult who likes to keep things the way they are. A winning team does not wish to change the rules.” Jews may not change their rules where it suits them, but they change ours, often reversing the meaning: From “civil rights” and “leftism” the list is long of such Jewish corruptions, perversion really, of terms and conceptual tools. Their Manichean trickery applies to us, not to themselves; for themselves they are Augustinian.
36
Posted by earth-wish for the benefit of common good on Thu, 21 May 2015 21:13 | #
Hector: “For me it would be a great deal better to meet Achilles man to man, kill him, and go home, or get killed before the city, dying in glory.” (Iliad, Book XXII, lines 108-110).
37
Posted by unpc downunder on Sun, 24 May 2015 03:45 | # With Jewish over-representation in the US reaching Weimar levels in some instances, a sensible affirmative action principle is “other things being equal, Gentiles should get hiring preference over Jews.” This way Jews can only be selected if they are the best candidate for the job. Over time this principle would cut Jewish representation by at least 40 percent. This affirmative action principle should also be applied in favour in men over women, particularly in culturally important fields where women (particularly upper middle class women) are increasingly over-represented (teaching, media, PR, government administration etc). The other good things about this form of affirmative action, is that it doesn’t have to lower standards, it just shifts selection of similarly qualified candidates in favor of whites and white family formation. 38
Posted by DanielS on Sun, 24 May 2015 11:16 | # We need a more radical separatism from Jews than that, unpc downunder. However, for a politician to talk in those terms could be good tact as it is an evidently innocent way of calling attention to just who the powers-that-be are, the injustice of it, and to provide assurance to our people that we are fair mined. This can then lead to demonstrations that while we could be fair, the Jews never will be. Therefore, we need them to be separate from our system altogether, not just disingenuously agreeing to some correction of their over representation, while they tuck their influence and money in some other place. . 39
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Thu, 01 Oct 2015 17:32 | # Well, I think that aside from that issue of his choice of words, even if you think it’s crucial that he makes the distinction between white hippies and Jewish Marxists of the 1960s, I would say that having read through the whole article, it seems to me that Kevin MacDonald has done a pretty good job at identifying just how ridiculous PJ O’Rourke is. O’Rourke is essentially kissing the backsides of the Jews with amazing fervency, and MacDonald is showing the exact mechanism through which that kissing is occurring. 40
Posted by recent KM on Jewish influence on migration & war on Sun, 29 Nov 2015 23:36 | # David Duke interviews Kevin MacDonald, who talks about Jewish influence on war and migration throughout the world. 42
Posted by KM: YKW hate the White working class on Fri, 22 Dec 2017 23:11 | # 43
Posted by Comfy Tangent talks to MacDonald & Patrick Little on Mon, 21 May 2018 12:14 | #
44
Posted by How can 2% of the population run everything? on Mon, 29 Oct 2018 06:57 | #
Post a comment:
Next entry: Picking up the British electoral pieces
|
|
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 DanielS on Wed, 29 Apr 2015 05:35 | #
It is a great privilege to speak with Professor MacDonald. As I have said, his work, particularly his credible, calm and rational presentation of the powers behind the 1965 Immigration and Naturalization Act - as he is shown discussing in the late Byron Jost’s film - is what brought me into open White Activism. He has undoubtedly been a similar inspiration to many.
... ... ...
I had wanted the adjacent post, prior to the interview with MacDonald, to be the one showing the chart about African population growth..
...displaying a concern and threat to all Europeans.
I would not want his image to appear along side Nazi imagery, even if critical. But that is the problem with the Hitler advocates. They force a response when and how one might not like. They are aggressive and on the offensive by design - a little too convinced that is the way to be, they are neither cunning nor respectful enough.
It is an unfortunate problem of communication wherein one is forced into a conflict - even where not inclined to view the other with malice, let alone intending to act as such - as provocation can turn relations into a reciprocally escalating diatribe. Your response is treated as aggressive and you are disingenuously depicted as the unreliable one compared to the good, innocent little Nazis - their advocates absurd, complete unanimity, as eternal victims and the ones of perfect virtue does not allow for a balanced negotiation of the facts of our mutual interest and responsibility.
It is an interesting problem and one that bears careful consideration.