Myth and self-interest in the creation of a white American republic

Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, 09 August 2009 14:39.

So Michael O’Meara beat off nineteen other entries to win the TOQ essay contest with his rumination titled “Towards a White Republic”.  We will pass over the oddity of someone winning an essay competition run by the publication for which he writes.  It’s not something I’ve heard of before.  We have to take editor Greg Johnson’s word that O’Meara’s offering was superior to the others, although I was permitted to read one of them in advance of its submission and, for scholarship and new thinking at least, it comfortably surpassed the winning entry.

That essay was of particular interest to me, it’s true.  It handled its subject with no less surety than the foundational work of a certain ex-MR specialist in that area (who is currently adorning the TOQ sidebar).  O’Meara plainly scored for style – he’s an easy writer to read.  But more than that, he was topical.  The star of the White American Republic is definitely rising in nationalist circles.

It is evident from O’Meara’s references in the essay to his own relationship with White Nationalism that he sees himself as something of an onlooker.  Rather, I think he is attached to the European New Right and its tradition of philosophical critique as opposed to creativity.  I say “opposed” and mean it.  In the West the world of ideas is cleaved between the Analytical or empirical, with its natural outlet in scientific enquiry, and the Idealist, with its appeal to mind and art.  There is no reconciling the two.

ENR Idealists disdain the Anglo-American Analytical tradition for its materialism and its spectrographic bloodlessness - though even the harshest critic among them is in no hurry to eschew the modern, technological world which is its fruit.  How could they?  The undeniable and wondrous progressiveness of science is an expression of the European sociobiology, eternally conflicted with a hostile natural world as that is.  It is of us.  Indians who live a life filled with the shades of god-like men and the symbols of ancient gods gave the world the Vedas and Sanskrit and the numeral system.  But they did not create modernity.  Only we did that.  We could not live as Indians live and be true to our questing nature.

And yet ... so harmful to our collective existence has the concentration on narrow proofs and material conclusions been, the question inevitably arises: can we survive at all as we are, without shades and symbols, without religiosity and romance, and without the cavalier and vague presumptions of Idealist thinking?

This, of course, is the question I first rehearsed here, and summed up in the following:

... the fear - near uniformly held among our thinkers - is that empiricism is too dry and incommunicable to train our people to the task of their own salvation.  Their eyes must still be lifted to the horizon.

And so we arrive at the kernel of the problem: explaining ”why love” is not the same as loving!  It’s the eternal emotional gap in the empirical mindset, and it has no obvious solution.

Now, O’Meara does not, in fact, explain why the myth-filled life is essential to our future.  He makes the presumption that it is, in a similar way that White Nationalists have tended, down the years, to presume that “raising racial consciousness” is the key to the new world.  O’Meara writes:

If a presently unattainable ideal is not first articulated as a mythic possibility, it remains unrealized, for its idealization is part of the process that quickens its realization.

Prozium, another on the TOQ sidebar, has written warmly of the winning entry, wholly approving of a steroidal act of mythicisation to move the white American masses:

Prerational human instincts are the taproot of White Nationalism: tribalism, ethnocentrism, xenophobia, kin selection, altruism. These instincts (which give rise to emotions) are then filtered through the lens of American history (racial conflict between Whites and non-Whites) and combined with the myths mentioned above to reach the final product. The rational arguments that racialists make to justify separatism are secondary considerations. Shorn of their prerational foundations, say, a healthy love of kin, they rarely lead to the desired mythic conclusion.

Well, is any confirmation of the potentcy of the mythic conclusion to be found in the recent European past?  Not really, because neither of the two major, popularly-based attempts at expansion in the modern or industrial era - one successful, one not – were presented to the public in an unapologetically mythic form.

In the West, John Gast’s American Progress gestured very roughly in the direction of myth.  But it communicated no deep truths, no unresolved yearning, and no Wagnerian vision of a final triumph of light over darkness in the West.  For the latter, Gast employed mundane school books and the telegraph.  He characterised the westward expansion as a bringing of civilisation to wilderness (note, not to the savage tribes but to the land they roamed).

John B L Soule’s “Go West, young man, and grow with the country”, later truncated by Horace Greeley,  was still more prosaic and worldly.  Yet young men and women did exactly what Soule recommended, and they did it for their own reasons of which there are two - and only two - sufficient to the task of making a large body of people move.  One is the desire for increase, of which the desire for land is part, and the other is the desire to live free.  In other words, Manifest Destiny, which was more a national attitude than official US government policy, was not realised for some higher altruistic purpose.  It was not for civilisation’s sake as Gast sought.  It was for the individual settler’s own sake that he walked and rode and drove his wagon westward.

This is not a hopeful precedent for O’Meara.  But there is one other presentational model of racial expansion to consider.

Joseph Goebbels’ propaganda machine was not shy about idealising the aims and deeds of the Fuehrer and the party.  It even gave the treatment to forced labour!  But here’s how Goebbels himself wrote of “The East as Fulfilment” in 1942:

East is our national radiation. Here of all places the circulation of our racial blood must be directly stimulated and accelerated again and again. Here we must harness to the fatherland’s disposal, the brightest minds and strongest hearts. They are here for the purpose, and it is their national political mission to see to it, that the Reich’s pulse beat, become perceptible and audible to its utmost cells. The program of National Socialism for the German East will have to be implemented by countless human beings and organizations.

In the meantime, years and decades will pass; but one day it will be as we often dreamed, as we sang of it in our songs and as our poets portrayed it to us: yellow ears will wave here on vast fields, bread for our people growing on our own soil. A hardy people of peasant stock will keep guard in the East. Sword and plough stand ready to shape and preserve the peace. A rich and inexhaustible German cultural life will be able to unfold here. In all people and on all fields the Reich will be at home here.

Every young German will have to consider it a matter of honour to dedicate at least a couple of years of his life to the East. Countless numbers will remain, strengthening the rampart of bodies that shields our fatherland. For the East is not only the yearning, but also the fulfilment of our nation.

“Yellow ears will wave here on vast fields, bread for our people growing on our own soil” … this is romanticism, not myth.  And so it was in the treatment of landscape by artists in National Socialist Germany.  They portrayed the life of the German peasant-farmer as an expression of the German soul.  But, from what I can tell, they did almost all of it without straying eastward beyond their own national borders.

image image
left: mythic treatment for Herr Hitler in a pre-1933 poster; right: romantic treatment for the German landscape and the life of the peasant, painted 1938.

An interesting point here is that lebensraum was rather more than a dream of dominion in the east.  German agriculture, which even today is a mess of small, inefficient farms kept afloat by EU subsidy, had remained deeply rustic and anti-modern right up to the outbreak of war.  Hitler approached the deep structural changes it needed in full knowledge of Stalin’s modernising handiwork (which, of course, concluded with the famine of 1932-33 in the very bread basket he, Hitler, most coveted).  He settled for a short-term programme of small reforms and land distributions to aid the peasantry, while reserving the ambition of expansion to the east as the ultimate solution.

Thus, even lebensraum was predicated on rational thinking, not on some wild, atavistic intoxication with race and destiny.  That said, the idea of living space in the east was not new.  It had been circulating among German nationalists for seventy years.  In 1919, a Heinrich Himmler in his late teens wrote:

I work for my ideal of German womanhood with whom, some day, I will live my life in the east and fight my battles as a German far from beautiful Germany.

And here, at last, we see a glimmer of the mythic.  Himmler was preparing himself for a future of fighting battles, presumably against the forces of regression and darkness which must be driven back from the lands they hold in their barbarian grip.  It is a long way from Gast’s vision of the triumph not of the will but of the written word ... a triumph of the thinking mind over those “pre-rational human instincts”.  It’s even further from Soule’s.

What we do not know, of course, is the extent to which Himmler’s yearning for a life of greatness in the east lived in the hearts of simple working men and women in early 20th century Germany.  The suspicion has to be that it was substantially a preoccupation of nationalists alone and, therefore, that the romanticisation of that life … its shades and symbols … was also really only a nationalist preoccupation.  Germans generally might have been open to the idea of beginning a new life on conquered eastern soil.  But any decision to migrate once peace came to the world again may have had much more to do with self-interest than the vision of racial glory.

The question for O’Meara (and Prozium) is: what evidence do you have that not just Irish- and German-Americans but Anglos, Swedes, Dutch, Poles, Italians and all the rest will respond “pre-rationally” to the mythic rather than a rational call to self-interest?  Another question.  If you have nothing but a hunch, a gut feeling, are you really only expressing your fealty to the Idealist tradition?  And another question.  Given what MacDonald has told us about implicit and explicit racism, might the implicit variety prove sufficient when combined with a clearly enunciated self-interest?  And one last question.  If, essentially, that enunciation comprises the first Analytic cause of genetic interests, where does that leave Idealist thinking?



Comments:


1

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 09 Aug 2009 17:12 | #

The above implies no endorsement, Soren.

Perhaps being sui generis I am neither or both

Have you gone further than Kant in reconciling truth and beauty?  Swans are the very peak of beauty, it is true.  That’s oil I have to say.


2

Posted by James Bowery on Sun, 09 Aug 2009 17:22 | #

GW writes: The question for O’Meara (and Prozium) is: what evidence do you have…?

How empirical of you!

PS:  I look forward to TOQ publishing the rest of the submissions.  Hopefully their authors will do so independently in any case.


3

Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 09 Aug 2009 17:28 | #

We should think of the romantic as characterized by yearning after, dreaming of, the perfect object of one’s desires, and the mythic - and more particularly for the individual, the heroic - as characterized by struggle to attain the perfect desired object, the struggle for perfection.


4

Posted by Dan Dare on Sun, 09 Aug 2009 18:48 | #

The Nazis were hardly unique in having a propaganda machine that romanticised an idealised pastoralism. This 1942 poster could be representative of an arcadian paradise not a million miles from your goodself, GW.


prop02


As to the essay itself, the author makes a good fist of explaining why those New Worlders who are that way inclined view the world through a racial prism, while Old Worlders tend not to. That aside, it is a rather pedestrian, common-or-garden call to arms that breaks little new ground.

The fundamental flaw in the secessionist argument lies in the strong probability that it will take another several generations before living conditions in the United States and the other white-settler countries become dire enough to provoke a political reaction from the European-descended population. As long as sufficient space exists for a long-term retreat in depth from regions that have become ‘vibrantly enriched’ that will remain the coping mechanism of choice.


5

Posted by c on Sun, 09 Aug 2009 18:58 | #

It would interest me to know whether I am an Idealist or an Empiricist.


You’re just self-important.


6

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on Sun, 09 Aug 2009 18:58 | #

Given what MacDonald has told us about implicit and explicit racism, might the implicit variety prove sufficient when combined with a clearly enunciated self-interest?
-Guessedworker

Right.  There are a whole host of issues that normal European folks care about other than race, immigrants, the Jews.  Until we can provide them with answers for political and economic upheaval, can indeed provide them with superior alternatives to what they’ve now, we won’t be successful.

The NSDAP was a populist movement and was successful because they had solutions to normal people’s problems.  They rebuilt and bettered communities.  And that meant something to the people that all of the demagoguery in the world couldn’t change.

I’m afraid that’s where we’re going wrong.  We’re unidimensional - we understand the JQ, and immigration, and race, and IQ, and so forth.  But we are not yet at the stage of sophisticated mass action to preserve our blood and soil, not even close.

So at the moment, we can see where the MultiCult ship is headed but can do little about it.


7

Posted by James Bowery on Sun, 09 Aug 2009 19:35 | #

At the risk of being too unidimensional I must ask you, Mark Ijsseldijk, what do you think of
Citizen’s Dividends To Capture Parliamentary Governments?


8

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 09 Aug 2009 20:59 | #

Dan,

That looks like the Downs west of Friston, with a view to the old Belle Toute lighthouse:

Yes, idealisation is fine, even necessary given the indomitable faith gene.  Most people just need to believe.  But as CC near-enough notes, there is a qualitative point at which romanticism tips over into power issues.  That’s when the wishes of ordinary men are dictated by strong personalities with powerful ambitions, and stuff happens.

James,

Empirical AND been here before:

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/why_we_do_it_and_is_it_enough/

Mark,

You make a lot of sense.  In the end, it’s politics.


9

Posted by Englander on Sun, 09 Aug 2009 21:44 | #

GW, when it’s available (assuming that it isn’t yet) I’d be interested in reading the entry which you read and felt was superior to the winning essay. I’m sure everybody else is interested too.


10

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 09 Aug 2009 22:14 | #

Englander,

Apparently, it was among the runners-up and will be published by Gregg Johnson by the end of year.  Maybe one of us can do a piece on the arguments in it.

The writer is a regular commenter here, btw.


11

Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 00:16 | #

Yes, idealisation is fine, even necessary given the indomitable faith gene.  Most people just need to believe.

Not suprising, because, if pressed to its logicial conclusion, not only the Kraut’s Fatherland, but the Englishman’s Merry Old English, that “green and pleasant land”, goes on the chopping block.  Unless, of course, the faith gene goes on the chopping block too, but that smacks of the Kraut’s “palingeneticism”, “a world without faith” - Imagine.


12

Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 00:23 | #

Merry Old England


13

Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 00:32 | #

CC, Video removed!

that smacks of the Kraut’s “palingeneticism”, “a world without faith”

Never mind that.  Where do you stand on Michael O’Meara’s predeliction for myth?  Which side of the philosophical fence are you really on?


14

Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 02:30 | #

Which side of the philosophical fence are you really on?

I can never see any real bridging of the is/ought to be gap.  So that leaves us with our abiding faith in the worthiness of the love we have for what we feel to the depth of our being is best in life.  That being the case, the noble that are the humble submit with joy, and the honorable who are the loyal are steadfast to the end.  The power elite of “English” decent are “traitors”, but would the eastern “English” who share more of their ethnic genetic interests in common with western “Germans” have been any less the “traitor” in your mind if they had refused to fight against the Krauts because that would have been to the detriment of their EGI?  If so, what ground do you have to stand on in contending as such, other than the inherent “worth” of the “English” ethny, and “Merry Old England”, which by rights “should” be preeminent?


15

Posted by Harsh_Henry14W on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 02:58 | #

What we are really seeing on this thread is the battle betwixt Race Realism and White Nationalism.

Between a Materialist world-view and a Romantic Nationalist world-view.

It has been tried in the real world!  Stalin found that few were willing to die for the self-interest theories of Marxism and so had to re-introduce Russian Nationalism to get the people to fight, to sacrifice against their own rational self-interest for a larger Mythic Good, in the ‘Great Patriotic War’

Rather, I think he is attached to the European New Right and its tradition of philosophical critique as opposed to creativity.

Nah.

O’meara is actually more of a critic of the European New Right then anything.  (check out this critque of de Benoist for instance: http://www.theoccidentalquarterly.com/archives/vol5no3/53-mo-pluriversum.pdf )  Any dude who quotes Evola and Thiriart is going to be farther to the Right then the European New Right.


16

Posted by Harsh_Henry14W on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 03:31 | #

The Nazis were hardly unique in having a propaganda machine that romanticised an idealised pastoralism

Let us not forget that Thomas Jefferson was an Agrarian type as well!  Was he some proto-nazi too?!?!?!

The fundamental flaw in the secessionist argument lies in the strong probability that it will take another several generations before living conditions in the United States and the other white-settler countries become dire enough to provoke a political reaction from the European-descended population.

There is a current economic crisis and a health crisis as well.  There are already cries from the left about nazis carrying swaztikas at town halls!  We are entering the street-fighting phase.  Also there is Peak Oil.  We are alot closer to the Collapse then alot of people think!   

Is Obama Gorbachev? By James Howard Kunstler

Itz here!


17

Posted by Desmond Jones on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 03:57 | #

O’Meara’s piece is reminiscent of the great line in the movie, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.

Ransom Stoddard: You’re not going to use the story, Mr. Scott?
Maxwell Scott: No, sir. This is the West, sir. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend.

Or in this case print the myth and force the facts to fit the myth.

The huge desire for inclusiveness is amusing. Catholics, O’Meara, Prozium (his mother is Austrian and probably Catholic) MacDonald, Sunic and who knows how many others at TOQ pushing inclusion by lying about the fact that ethnicity was not contentious in America.

National or ethnic differences in this racially mixed environment were simply less meaningful than differences between Europeans and non-Europeans.

ROTHFLMAO. What a pile of shite!


18

Posted by weston on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 04:32 | #

Or in this case print the myth and force the facts to fit the myth.


Like your oft-repeated but never-supported contention that “white” is a 20th century Jewish construct?

ROTHFLMAO. What a pile of shite!

Less contentious doesn’t mean not contentious.


19

Posted by John Bonaccorsi on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 08:45 | #

So what’s that first painting called?  Loser with Flag?  Any people that needs something like that to be inspired to preserve itself is doomed.


20

Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 11:06 | #

Any people that needs something like that to be inspired to preserve itself is doomed.

Any people who cannot find the will to expel the Jew from its midst is doomed.


21

Posted by the Narrator... on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 15:45 | #

The vexing thing about it all (and the thing that keeps the left in a cold sweat) is the fact that a reputable few leaders inside the military and government (as in governors, generals etc….) could lead a relatively small portion of Whites into a re-assertion of dominance and control in North America and have it all settled by Christmas.
Our racial competitors are not, never have been and never will be that much of an actual real time threat. Their relative assention has taken place at both the encouragement of and apathy on, the part of many Whites.

I was watching a program on tv the other day about “wild dogs” in parts of the country. Dogs that were domesticated breeds but which have reverted to their more predatory nature and become a menace to society through their attack pack behavior. Researchers were studying them in places where they are most a problem. Two of the places visited in the program were Detroit (90% black) and east- St. Louis (97% black). Naturally the researchers were White.

But those places were menacing to look at. And I don’t mean the locals. I mean the actual physical places. The entire environment was draped in dread.

It’s as though when Whites leave an area and minorities grow in numbers, the entire place sinks into ruin and depravity. The air, the soil, the animals, the tress….all of it becomes twisted and evil (for lack of a better word). It becomes deplorable and an abomination to all that is good and worthy in this world.

That “sense” is descending on most of the country right now. Has been for a while. Whites know something is horribly amiss. That’s why the media, government, churches etc…etc… have gone into double time to assure them that things are just fine, varying between attempts to placate and bully.

But how will they react.

I would say that the average White American has two gears of debating a disagreeable interlocutor

Gear 1 is to ignore.
Gear 2 is a right hook.

That is what the left is right now worrying over as they go for the jugular in pushing their anti-White agenda.

Will White America continue to ignore it all, or will it come back with a sudden, collective right hook?

That’s why I don’t believe White America can be steered or directed incrementally through a political or ideological movement. It will react suddenly or not at all. It will come as a sudden tsunami or dissipate on the oceans of civilizational apathy.

The perplexing thing is though that either reaction could prove equally disastrous.


...


22

Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 19:04 | #

Desmond, EGI has a lot to answer for.  Including “inclusion”.


23

Posted by Desmond Jones on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 20:06 | #

Like your oft-repeated but never-supported contention that “white” is a 20th century Jewish construct?

Elementary, my dear Weston; If everyone was equally “white” then when the severe restrictions in 1924 upon southern and eastern Europeans? If everyone was viewed as equally “white” then why the need for the Boasian fraud of phenotype plasticity?


24

Posted by Desmond Jones on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 20:16 | #

GW,

If a myth is necessary, Tony Soprano [aka David Chase] provides a better myth;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Chase

Anthony ‘Tony’ Soprano Sr.: Excuse me, let me tell you something… When America opened up the floodgates and let all us Italians in, what do you think they were doing it for? ‘Cause they were trying to save us from poverty? No, they did it because they needed us. They needed us to build their cities and dig their subways, and to make them richer. The Carnegies and The Rockerfellers: they needed worker bees and there we were. But some of us didn’t want to swarm around their hive and lose who we were. We wanted to stay Italian and preserve the things that meant something to us: honor and family and loyalty… and some of us wanted a piece of the action. Now we weren’t educated like the Americans, but we had the BALLS to take what we wanted! And those other folks, those other… the, the JP Morgans, they were crooks and killers too, but that was the business right? The American Way.

In the late 90s David Chase [birth name David Del Cesare] is telling America that we Italians won’t swallow your assimilation crap. We are Italian and we are proud of it.


25

Posted by torgrim on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 20:37 | #

Narrator said; “I would say that the average White American has two gears of debating a disagreeable interloculor.”

Agreed, and having been there, it is understandable when one is engaged with the verbosity of the self selected elite, be they in media, academia or government, or random encounters in public affairs.

When subjected to the “word fight”, the average White American would say to himself, this is bullshit and is it worth my time to engage, or would it be more productive to ignore and engage in, “feet on the ground action”....However, with no option given the White American as in the ability to create a sense of order, the change will be sudden.
You see, the White American generally does not see his kind as dispossessed quite yet, “he” still believes that this is still his territory, “his” is a phantom created and held in place by the self selected elites.


26

Posted by Valerian on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 20:44 | #

John Bonaccorsi ,

So what’s that first painting called?  Loser with Flag?  Any people that needs something like that to be inspired to preserve itself is doomed.

Explain your argumentation and reasons for the above mentioned statement.


27

Posted by Joe of the Mountain on Tue, 11 Aug 2009 03:57 | #

Guessedworker, I take it you are not a Philadelphian or from the US midatlantic region wink

There are Americans, there are Jews and there are Italians.  Pretty much sums up the common wisdom around here, even among the Huddled Masses.

Posted by Desmond Jones on August 10, 2009, 07:16 PM | #

GW,

If a myth is necessary, Tony Soprano [aka David Chase] provides a better myth;

In the late 90s David Chase [birth name David Del Cesare] is telling America that we Italians won’t swallow your assimilation crap. We are Italian and we are proud of it.


28

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on Tue, 11 Aug 2009 07:08 | #

At the risk of being too unidimensional I must ask you, Mark Ijsseldijk, what do you think of
Citizen’s Dividends To Capture Parliamentary Governments?

I like this idea and I hope that you are correct about it’s efficacy.  Not that I don’t think it could work, but responses are hard to predict in the political milieu.  I don’t know what percentage of the white citizenry (ones not in the political caste) is comprised of the suicidal Marxist-Liberal-Christian axis, but those types will in some cases be energetic foes.  But would the rank and file citizenry find something to leap at here?  Quite, and more so as our standard of living continues to fall.

It’s strength is that it cannot be called overtly ‘racist’ by the political caste because the racial thing is under the surface.  It is obvious to you and I that this plan will benefit white people, but it will not be easy to smear in the sense that it is essentially meritocratic - the Dividend is after all earned and is not an entitlement.  They can’t very well deny meritocracy (in the event of populist sentiment in favor of the plan) without exposing themselves, can they?

Since I am American we shall have to leave it to our European brethren to implement this.

I’d like to write more but it is late and I must go to bed.


29

Posted by White Preservationist on Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:07 | #

Captainchaos:“Any people who cannot find the will to expel the Jew from its midst is doomed.”

Unfortunately, wholesale expulsion is not a feasible solution to the Jewish Problem at this point.

Please read the short essay “The End of Jewish Migration” by Dr. von Leers for a decent explanation why.


30

Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 11 Aug 2009 16:42 | #

Joe of the Mountain,

I take it you are not a Philadelphian or from the US midatlantic region

Nope.  Long ways east of there.

Since I’m not American I don’t get too involved in the Italian debate.  The question is whether the gain to northern European genetic interests by excluding Mediterraneans exceeds the gain in getting a project off the ground without damaging public division by including them.  And there appears to be no way to quantify either gain, so the question is moot.


31

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 11 Aug 2009 17:30 | #

Mark Ijsseldijk: Since I am American we shall have to leave it to our European brethren to implement this.

Indeed.  Our two-party trap locks us into a political dead-end here. 

And, although Charles Murray of the American Enterprise Institute advocated something that nearly qualifies as a citizen’s dividend, he hamstrung the idea by predicating it on the false “prosperity” of the of the US economy rather than recognizing the economic reality that wealth centralization is destroying the country.  So he can’t very well come out now and claim it will break up the resulting debt-deflation ice-jam.


32

Posted by Desmond Jones on Tue, 11 Aug 2009 22:20 | #

The Italian debate didn’t seem like a moot point to the British in June 1940. wink


33

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on Wed, 12 Aug 2009 06:00 | #

And, although Charles Murray of the American Enterprise Institute advocated something that nearly qualifies as a citizen’s dividend, he hamstrung the idea by predicating it on the false “prosperity” of the of the US economy rather than recognizing the economic reality that wealth centralization is destroying the country.  So he can’t very well come out now and claim it will break up the resulting debt-deflation ice-jam.

Murray is an interesting fellow, definitely a race-realist.  But it creeps me out that he works for the same organization that employs, for example, John Bolton and Richard Perle (a Zionist Jew - twice caught leaking US intelligence to Israel - who still has an inner ring office in the Pentagon and does consulting for them even though he is no longer an official employee).

The AEI has many members who are billionaires which tells you why Mr. Murray can only go so far with his ideas.  He is after all a member of the establishment.  Indeed, there are few organizations in the establishment which are as well-funded or have as much clout as the AEI.  It’s like a who’s who of influential past and present politicos, businessmen and academics/intellectuals.  All wrapped up in a zealously pro-Israel Neocon-Zionist package.


34

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on Wed, 12 Aug 2009 06:02 | #

The AEI has many members who are billionaires

I don’t know the actual number in fact, perhaps not “many”.  But a few billionaires and many high millionaires definitely.


35

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on Wed, 12 Aug 2009 06:06 | #

Here is an appraisal of the AEI’s history and membership.


36

Posted by ATBOTL on Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:26 | #

Charles Murray is a Jewish supremecist.  He has openly written that he considers Jews a superior master race.  He isn’t pro-white at all.  Lots of “race realists” are like that.  Many “race realists” are Asians who are hostile to whites.  There are black race realists too.  Let’s stop using that term.  It’s too broad.  Anyone who acknowledges non-trivial racial differences is a race realist.  White people who care about the well being of our people are “white nationalists,” “pro-whites” or something else, but not just “race realists.” 


I believe the reason why Charles Murray is backed by some factions of establishment Jews is that they wish to have an outlet for higher IQ, educated whites who are upset about black social pathology.  They don’t want David Duke to be the only person talking about this stuff.  So Murray is like Rush Limbaugh for people with above average intelligence who are specifically concerned with race.  Look at how little influence “The Bell Curve” ultimately had.  The reality that black low IQ largely explains black failure is still totally absent from the mainstream discourse.  If the AEI really wanted the conculsions of “The Bell Curve” to become well known, they would have done more to promote the idea.  Instead they spend their greatest efforts on Israel oriented projects in the middle east.


37

Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 12 Aug 2009 17:46 | #

From the WikiPedia article on Charles Murray:

Murray left for the Peace Corps in Thailand in 1965, staying abroad for a formative six years.[9] At the beginning of this period, the young Murray kindled a romance with his Thai Buddhist language instructor (in Hawaii), Suchart Dej-Udom, the daughter of a wealthy Thai businessman, who was “born with one hand and a mind sharp enough to outscore the rest of the country on the college entrance exam.”[6] Murray subsequently proposed by mail from Thailand, and their marriage began the following year, a move that Murray now considers youthful rebellion.[6] “I’m getting married to a one-handed Thai Buddhist,” he said.[6] “This was not the daughter-in-law that would have normally presented itself to an Iowa couple.”[6]

Murray credits his time in the Peace Corps in Thailand with his lifelong interest in Asia.[10] “There are aspects of Asian culture as it is lived that I still prefer to Western culture, 30 years after I last lived in Thailand,” says Murray.[10] “Two of my children are half-Asian. Apart from those personal aspects, I have always thought that the Chinese and Japanese civilizations had elements that represented the apex of human accomplishment in certain domains.”[10]

I would not cast John Derbyshire as the Jewish extended phenotype that Charles Murray clearly has become.  Murray’s story is closer to that of George Gilder:  A second-rate intellect taken under the wing of the neocons who use them to marginalize first rate intellects of their people.  This is a _really_ old strategy going back to the original court Jews.  Derbyshire is a Jewish extended phenotype but not as abjectly subservient.  I actually find Derbyshire more interesting for that reason—or should I say, less uninteresting.

Ultimately, I like to point out Charles Murray’s book “In Our Hands” not because I think it is the right thing to do, although it is closer to it than anything else now making the rounds in the beltway, but because it demonstrates so clearly that Jews control politics, for if it were not so, then why wouldn’t the Republican National Committee take Murray’s plan and demolish the Democratic party and the lion’s share of their bureaucratic apparatus for ever in the next election? 

No, they dare not do that, for it might impinge on phase 3 of the cycle of Jewish virulence: the centralization of wealth in preparation for horizontal transmission.

Murray is the cricket.


38

Posted by Euro on Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:01 | #

  A second-rate intellect taken under the wing of the neocons who use them to marginalize first rate intellects of their people.

I’m not sure I understand this,James.Why would they want to marginalize the best among their own people?

P.S. curious to know your thoughts on the video I posted on the MMORPG and the Slaughter of the Innocents thread.Do you think it might portend anything?


39

Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:09 | #

Euro:  I should have said it more clearly:

“A second-rate intellect taken under the wing of the neocons who use them to marginalize first rate intellects of their own, Euro-people. “

That makes the referent of “their” clear to Murray, Gilder et al.


40

Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:06 | #

Dasein asks: How would your proposal prevent the community from choosing to have non-White cognitive elites, or non-Whites who would accept a fraction of the citizen’s dividend?

NW cognitive elites make their way in the world by occupying anti-competitive niches:  Life-credentialism (academic degrees and life-professional licenses like MDs), nepotism, civil service, military, monopoly positions (more generally, funding government from economic activity taxes rather than net asset tax) etc.  It is their niche—a niche once reserved by Jews for their second-rate Euros serving as Jewish extended phenotypes—extended phenotypes that are all but used up by now.  It was bad enough when people like George Gilder, any Euro political “leader”, Charles Murray, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, etc. were running things into the ground.  These “crickets” were high maintenance even though they presented the right “protein coat” for the worm in the cricket.  A population that is seriously interested in maximizing its citizen’s dividend isn’t going to buy into a foreign protein protecting the worm in those positions.  Its just too obvious that things were better before the NW cognitive elites started showing up.  Indeed, I think the game Jews may be trying to play is to give the populace a red-herring (NW cognitive elites) to take its revenge out on while the worm (virulent Jewish germline) horizontally transmits, with the loot it stole, to Asia.


41

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:25 | #

No, they dare not do that, for it might impinge on phase 3 of the cycle of Jewish virulence: the centralization of wealth in preparation for horizontal transmission.

Yes, the Republicans are controlled by Jewish interests so transparently - they dare not ever implement the “pro-liberty” policies that they gas about.  But that is nothing new, in fact it dates to the days of people like William F. Buckley at least.  The post-War brand of “Cold War” Republicans were mostly Jewish ideologues of various stripes with white double-agent front men like Nixon, Reagan and both Bushes to take the blame.

The decaying GOP is a micro-example of what Jewish influence does to civilizations.


42

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:27 | #

They’ve already horizontally transmitted to the Democrats, just a few months after losing power.


43

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:32 | #

They’ve already horizontally transmitted to the Democrats, just a few months after losing power.

“They” of course being the Neocon/war hawk Jews.  Several have bought into the Dems.


44

Posted by Euro on Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:45 | #

I wish they would hurry up and horizontally transmit already.


45

Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 12 Aug 2009 21:53 | #

Rogue cells or foreign invaders would normally be killed by the host immune system.

Unless they were somehow beneficial to the host or a sub-host group like the Polish arenda system.


46

Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 12 Aug 2009 22:32 | #

Or Napoleon:

“My primary desire was to liberate the Jews and make them full citizens. I wanted to confer upon them all the legal rights of equality, liberty and fraternity as was enjoyed by the Catholics and Protestants. It is my wish that the Jews be treated like brothers as if we were all part of Judaism. As an added benefit, I thought that this would bring to France many riches because the Jews are numerous and they would come in large numbers to our country where they would enjoy more privileges than in any other nation. Without the events of 1814, most of the Jews of Europe would have come to France where equality, fraternity and liberty awaited them and where they can serve the country like everyone else.”

There were detractors, of course.

“This is not the way to solve the Jewish question. I will never accept any proposaIs that will obligate the Jewish people to leave France, because to me the Jews are the same as any other citizen in our country. It takes weakness to chase them out of the country, but it takes strength to assimilate them.”


47

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on Thu, 13 Aug 2009 00:26 | #

or a sub-host group like the Polish arenda system.

Or Napoleon

Count Oliver Cromwell as an example of the above as well, welcoming Jewish influence in England starting in the mid-1600s.


48

Posted by Captainchaos on Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:23 | #

A population that is seriously interested in maximizing its citizen’s dividend isn’t going to buy into a foreign protein protecting the worm in those positions.

Why wouldn’t the lemmings simply spend their “dividend” on beer, cigarettes and more Jewsmedia fodder?  In what way will having their “dividend” mailed to them monthly, or whatever, inspire the kind of group cohesion which gave Jews to win out at the capitalist game even before the advent of the New Deal?

second-rate Euros

What would you estimate Charles Murray’s IQ is (we already know what his race traitor quotient is - high)?


49

Posted by Frank on Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:45 | #

CC,

IQ doesn’t equate high performance on its own. A person still has to train himself with good habits and discipline. And he has to be calm and happy, etc.

Take Dawkins and give him woman trouble (and you know he has woman trouble), and he’ll not be thinking clearly.


50

Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:55 | #

CC, if you want to scare quote “dividend” then you obviously don’t have what it takes to understand Euromen or their civilizations.  Don’t feel bad, few “leaders” do so I don’t hold you in the kind of contempt that I hold them.  You are powerless to impose your ignorance on our people.

Start watching this video at 24:30 for potential relief of some of your ignorance.


51

Posted by Captainchaos on Thu, 13 Aug 2009 03:24 | #

Alright James, I see your point regarding what should be the appeal of a citizen’s dividend for common folks in that economic activity (i.e., sales tax on the necessities of life which Warren points out are becoming increasingly burdensome) in obtaining the necessities would not be taxed.  But, and this goes to my point, will our people go for it in light of their decadence?  What government services will still be in place as financed, or not, with the taxes collected on in-place liquidation value of property?  Will our people be willing to go without such things as road repair, safety inspections, public schools, police, etc.? Will each dividend paid be of equal value?  Will the tax on in-place liquidation value of property be a flat rate, i.e., 10% of the in-place liquidation value of a million dollar mansion versus that of a fifty thousand dollar home?  That being the case, won’t the rich object that their dividend is too small given that they are taxed disproportionately in terms of absolute monetary contribution to the dividend pot, given that the dividend payed to each citizen is of equal value?


52

Posted by Captainchaos on Thu, 13 Aug 2009 03:42 | #

Correction: Warren points out that the costs in paying for the necessities of life are becoming increasingly burdensome, she did not mention sales tax that I recall - that was my extrapolation.


53

Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 13 Aug 2009 06:34 | #

The common slander against Euromen in this age of their genocide is that they’re spoiled boomers, so their time is naturally over.

Warren has the hard numbers debunking that slander.

For just one example:

The 1970 family with one income and a wife available at home for the kids and in reserve had more after-necessities disposable income than did the two-income family of recent times, where the wife was not at home for the kids.  Moreover, the volatility of the family’s two-income sum is much higher than the 1970 family.

So, of course people ceased having children.  You cease having children and the barrier to responsible behavior is exceedingly high:  You must overcome the Jewish brainwashing against valuing your extended family—your ethny.  That takes a depth of love, intelligence and integrity beyond the reach of all but a gifted few.

I’m not denying that the advent of birth control technology had a lot to do with this.  Clearly it was synergystic and its timing precise.

As for the government services left after the “transfer programs” are replaced by the citizen’s dividend:

Since people will have the money back in their hands, they’ll naturally want a lot more competition for provision of what once were government monopolies.  The value of this is obvious in the case of schools where many people will simply homeschool their children.  Some of these government monopolies, such as police, are natural monopolies due to the practical constraints of defending and patrolling territory.  All that means is that people will demand diversity in places to live under different kinds of police departments.  The same applies to things like zoning laws.

As to tax revenue, that is a somewhat separable issue, but I would simply point out that it is ridiculous to tax economic activity when the primary function of the social contract is to protect property rights—with economic activity being founded on and derivative from those property rights.  It is plainly ridiculous to tax economic activity once you understand this.  Sure, of course, yes, people sitting on lots of land or other assets will want to have people sacrificing their lives to defend their property rights and do it all for free—that’s the nature of greed.  I’m sure a lot of people who pay insurance companies premiums for their property insurance would like it if the insurance company would stop paying dividends to their stockholders and indeed stop charging premiums altogether because, well, its nice to have lots of stuff that is secure without having to worry about it or pay for its protection.  “Gimme Gimme Gimme” says that little monkey inside us all, including Ludwig von Mises:


54

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on Thu, 13 Aug 2009 18:28 | #

“Gimme Gimme Gimme” says that little monkey inside us all, including Ludwig von Mises

“...Typical of the low morals of the cowardly libertarian, who affects to prize nothing so much as individuals rights. The real but undisclosed libertarian principle is me first, me last and me all me places me in me between me me me.”

-Alex Linder


55

Posted by GenoType on Sat, 15 Aug 2009 18:59 | #

CC,

Michael O’Meara’s TOQ article, linked to above, is far better than MRs commentary which, as usual, dwindles away into esoteric nonsense. 

Ignorance of the history of Drang Nach Osten is so profound it’s hardly worth the time required to educate.  It’s like remedial Calculus tutoring for someone who can’t reliably add and subtract to 20.  Drang Nach Osten was never about the eastward expansion of any particular staat, of which the Germans had many.  It was about the expansion of an entire people.  These migrated as far east as the lower Volga River valley beginning in Catherine the Great’s time.  A generation later an equally vast Drang Nach Westen began, although it was never widely called by this name.  Even today the largest identifiable racial mass in North America remains whites of German descent (despite the lies of international Jewish war criminals and assorted Freemasons).

——

Still, O’Meara’s TOQ article misses a most important, big picture point.  One of the crucial failures in American history was never extirpating the Judeo-Masonic “British” presence in “Canada.”  This would be the North American staat’s own highest racial strategic imperative.  We could call this drang nach nordwärts

——

White staats are merely the product of smaller - (ahem) local - communities working together towards common goals.  These communities are composed of smaller groups called “businesses,” “community groups,” “neighborhoods,” and “families” all of which are defined by and organized for the attainment of specific and achievable economic goals through the physical application of knowledge, skill and ability, a/k/a, (dare I name it?) “work.”

We are reaping the rewards of egoistic, work-averse, parasitic thought.  Creating another Internet Thule Society to rule the mythos is one thing.  Physically setting out on a pilgrimage which must be taken one step and milestone at a time is something else.  Stripped of obfuscating “esoteric” nonsense, both methods of racial salvation remain fundamentally and ineradicably opposed.  Self-referencing egoism, libertarian rationalizations, and appeals to easy money are signposts of gentile conmen, political hobbyists of all stripes “looking for a good (self-validating) read,” and other dupes of judeoeconomics - including conservative intellects who inaccurately call themselves white nationalists.

——

James Bowery’s “citizen’s dividend” twist on Milton Friedman’s negative income tax proposal is not worth debate.  Not that this will give pause.


56

Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 15 Aug 2009 21:07 | #

GT,

It should not surprise that GW filters European nationalism through the prism of English nationalism knowingly.  And wishes to come to a philosophy which sanctions the thoughts and actions of those of European descent as consistent with what he perceives to be what is highest in the nature of the English.  So that the English phenotype, edified and therefore adaptive, becomes the extended phenotype of the West.  Isn’t that what National Socialist Germans wanted to do?  So I cannot blame him.  The English are a great people, look at the world they built, what a disaster it would be for them to perish.  Germanism I think is a needed for balance though.  And I do not necessarily believe GW’s esoterica is mutually exclusive to doing it for real, in the real.  After all, look at the power and pull liberalism has on the minds of our people - that is the power ideas have.  As for Majority Rights, what can one say, the best minds (certainly the most intelligent, however “impractical”) are gathered hear.  And there is tremendous latitude granted, which I like very much.  Hell, even that crypto-Jewish crackpot Diamed (“The Jews are entirely blameless!” LOL!) got a chance at bat - which was useful if only to teach us what to look out for.  Freedom has its merits, and GW is no hypocrite when it comes to that.


57

Posted by James Bowery on Sun, 16 Aug 2009 00:14 | #

Milton Friedman’s negative income tax proposal is not original—it is a mutilation of Thomas Paine’s Agrarian Justice.  GT took the Jewish bait, hook, line and sinker and helped them continue their mutilation of crucial ideals.

GT’s folks are going to destroy themselves under the weight of neofeudalism by rejecting neoallodialism.

This would be the case even if they didn’t destroy themselves by placing engineering above science.  The engineer who despises the scientist is doomed to be destroyed by superior technology.


58

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on Sun, 16 Aug 2009 03:24 | #

GT’s posts are informative and well-reasoned but are filled with needless hostility.  For Christ’s sake, GT, we’re on the same side…Aren’t we?


59

Posted by genosnipe on Sun, 16 Aug 2009 04:26 | #

“We could call this drang nach nordwärts.”

I love Pseudodeutscher. Drang nach Norden, Drang nordwärts.

“Drang Nach Osten was never about the eastward expansion of any particular staat, of which the Germans had many.  It was about the expansion of an entire people.”

That is the romantic view, and as with all myths it obscures history. Politically these spaces were opened up to German “expansion” by elites —the Deutscher Orden, the Pomeranian nobility, the Brandenburg Margraves, Nazis / RKFDV - RMfdbO. No mysterious Volksdrang at work, just sheer imperialist will; and Germans were enticed the other way, to North America, by cheap farmland which was advertised by real estate agents, and the bourgeois ‘48ers moved to South America after the failure of March Revolution. Lastly, ethnic German communities in the east were characteristically small with the exception of a few cities, which was the pretext for Hitler’s own “drang” that way. It was never an “entire people”, which is obv. absurd. You WANT it to have been so because you’ve absorbed romantic German propaganda. But that doesn’t make it so. No “entire people” in history ever felt a “Drang nach” anywhere unless there were good reasons for leaving home.

“Stripped of obfuscating “esoteric” nonsense,”

This is all you have on offer too; it just looks different, hard-headed. We’re supposed to be impressed by the sprinkling of German words and easy Fascist sociology (corporatismo). In fact, I think I put you in your place once before about this. Looks like you don’t learn.


60

Posted by genosnipe on Sun, 16 Aug 2009 04:33 | #

“GT’s posts are informative and well-reasoned but are filled with needless hostility.”

Every WN forum has two or three stuck-up pseudo-Germans. GenoType fills the void left by Friedrich Braun. To these two, everything in the world must be interpreted by pushing it through the sieve of Nazi rhetoric. No leap of illogic is too great for guys like this. Check out this stunning non sequitur:

It was about the expansion of an entire people.  These migrated as far east as the lower Volga River valley beginning in Catherine the Great’s time.

An “entire people” migrated as far as the lower Volga River valley, you see. No matter the tens-of-millions left behind in “Germany”! An entire people was busy moving to Russia under the spell of the mysterious DRANG.


61

Posted by Q on Sun, 16 Aug 2009 20:21 | #

Here’s a little somthing to cheer y’all up:

Corporations Are Now After Our Very Beings
Cognitive capitalism—just when we thought there were no new ways to get screwed


By Joe Bageant?

A few years ago, compliments of the George W. Bush administration, I got an education in political reality. The kind of education that makes you get drunk at night and scream and bitch at every shred of national news:

“Do you see how these capitalist bastards have made so much money killing babies in Iraq? And how they are have brainwashed us and gouged us for every human need, from health care to drinking water?” I’d rage to my wife.

“It’s just the way things are,” she said. “It’s only a system.”

My good wife often thinks I have slipped my moorings. But she never says right out loud that I’m crazy because, let’s face it, honesty in marriage only goes so far. Furthermore, I’d be the first to proclaim that she’s right.

Full essay continued:

http://www.joebageant.com/joe/2009/08/corporations-are-now-after-our-very-beings.html#more


62

Posted by GenoType on Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:08 | #

This would be the case even if they didn’t destroy themselves by placing engineering above science.  The engineer who despises the scientist is doomed to be destroyed by superior technology.

Not something of concern to a population whose entire economy consists of paying Mestizos to cut their grass, reading monthly brokerage statements, and opening containers loaded in China.  Such needn’t worry about the above paradigm. More can be said but purveyors of tacit nonsense can’t be persuaded.


63

Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 17 Aug 2009 20:43 | #

GT snipes: More can be said but purveyors of tacit nonsense can’t be persuaded.

Retreat to epithet, abandoning anything resembling arguments for your position.  The only thing better would be to admit your error and get on with communication, but that wouldn’t serve your purpose, whatever that is.

And if you think the only opposition to your neofeudalism is going to be Kwa’s neofeudalism, think again.


64

Posted by GenoType on Tue, 18 Aug 2009 04:47 | #

GT’s folks are going to destroy themselves under the weight of neofeudalism by rejecting neoallodialism.

Impressive! crap from a faux racialist looking for recognition and dollars.

I am not intellectually intimidated by you, James.  Neither am I put off by inadequate, worshipful pensioners who mimic – as parrots do – the verbal machinations of genuine sophists and classists because they are put off by my criticism of deductive knowledge, of tacit nonsense passed off as such, the inflated egos of insubstantial males, the immorality of easy money, and the faux racialism of disenfranchised classists who would sell out the race’s bottom economic groups the moment it became expedient to do so.

This would be the case even if they didn’t destroy themselves by placing engineering above science.  The engineer who despises the scientist is doomed to be destroyed by superior technology.

Given my ancestry, which includes soldiers and scientists, you are mistaken to assume that I oppose scientists merely because many (or most) of those alive today feel they are above criticism or at least project that attitude, publicly, as a defense mechanism to protect inflated, insubstantial egos or compensate for lifetimes spent in the development of thin, bowed shoulders and female handshakes.

GT snipes: More can be said but purveyors of tacit nonsense can’t be persuaded.

Retreat to epithet, abandoning anything resembling arguments for your position.

This from a perennial, self-referencing sniper sitting astride the edge of an unbalanced lean-to who routinely seeks self-confirmation and carries inside a lifetime of resentment toward schoolboy slights.

Confident men are not shaped by lifetime resentment toward the school bully.  They eventually learned how to beat his ass mano a mano.

And if you think the only opposition to your neofeudalism is going to be Kwa’s neofeudalism, think again.

Neofeudalism?  You’re grasping James.  I’m not one of your fawning circle of fools.

Your Citizen’s Dividend is but a twist on Milton Friedman’s negative income tax and Steve Sailer’s Citizenism.  You’re a sometimes libertarian with too much time on his hands promoting, on a so-called “racialist” website, a multiracial citizen’s bribe in the hope of attracting easy money from conservative fools.  Your conservatism is strictly classist, financially-motivated, and your racialism is fake.

How do you like them apples?


65

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 18 Aug 2009 06:35 | #

Ironic you calling me classist since I am the one saying that people are entitled—indeed possess allodial title—to a dividend accruing from their having entered into the social contract otherwise known as “civilization”—and funding said dividend from taxation of the liquidation value of wealth.  The only “classes” allowed under such a system are derived directly from creativity founded on the human capital of quality genes, education and what might be called divine gifts.  To call that a “twist on Milton Friedman’s negative income tax” rather than a refinement of Thomas Paine’s Agrarian Justice, even after I provided the cite for you to refresh your memory on the topic, is simply willful ignorance.

Such allodialism as proposed is anathema to the feudal mindset of men like Milton Friedman as well as those who use Steve Sailer’s “citizenism” as a cover for their feudal invasion of the US.  They would run screaming from any society that implemented something like my proposal since they would not be able to perch atop and feed on us—the only way they can “compete”. Indeed, to the extent that you oppose the distribution of economic rent in dividends to the parties to the social contract, it is you who are classist for it is precisely from such unearned concentration of rents that classes arise as artifacts of injustice.

Calling me a faux racialist is, well, just silly.

And since you are impugning my honor with your “mano a mano” rhetoric, decency requires 2 things from you forthwith:

1) Reveal your identity in a manner as explicit and clear as I.
2) Explain how my appreciation for formal combat between individuals as described by the Valorian Society’s “Seven Points of Agreement Between Individuals” is symptomatic rather than simply an honestly held opinion and preference.


66

Posted by Q on Tue, 18 Aug 2009 23:13 | #

James Bowery’s “Citizens Dividend” and Geno Freak’s “microcomunity” solutions have equal weight when it comes to solving the predicament Whites find themselves in.

Now you two put away your crayolas and wash your hands. Supper is almost ready.

I SAID NOW!!!


67

Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 18 Aug 2009 23:48 | #

Is Q always this obnoxious?


68

Posted by GenoType on Wed, 19 Aug 2009 01:39 | #

Reveal your identity in a manner as explicit and clear as I.


The classic challenge of the intentionally unproductive and disruptive paid police/SPLC/ADL agent-provocateur.  At some point in his ‘net career virtually every subsequently revealed informant has issued the above challenge to individuals not kow-towing the line.

But then, allowance must be made for the occasional libertarian hairball of large forehead and Citizenist political disposition, dependent upon the system now and forever, who has permanently destroyed his prospects of re-entering his scientific field in the mainstream by publicly associating his name with racists and anti-semites - all in the hope of receiving donations to supplement a part-time $8.00 p/hr IT income.

Other hallmarks of such individuals are no visible means of support (except part-time cyber work) and very limited ties to a living local community, leading to frequent changes of residence over large distances.

James should either clearly and explicitly retract or endure well-founded suspicions about his real motives.

All cyber entertainment aside, James wouldn’t enjoy mano a mano contact.  Not with me.  Not in this world.  Not ever.  Neither would his coterie of narrow-shouldered yes men of bowed spine, protruding bellies, and deficient character.


69

Posted by danielj on Wed, 19 Aug 2009 01:56 | #

All cyber entertainment aside, James wouldn’t enjoy mano a mano contact.  Not with me.  Not in this world.  Not ever.  Neither would his coterie of narrow-shouldered yes men of bowed spine, protruding bellies, and deficient character.

Posture… Counter-posture… Both of you are better than this…


70

Posted by GenoType on Wed, 19 Aug 2009 02:04 | #

James the Claymore swinging yeoman! 

A real yeoman of yesteryear would push aside you and your urban dependent fellows of curved spine, excess vestigial fat, easy money dividends, and deficient character without breaking a sweat. 

Neo-feudalism.  Project much, James?

And the Citizen’s Dividend is not a twist on Steve Sailer and Mr. Free To Choose’s negative income tax because there are antecedents?  Bullshit.  It is what it is - a bribe of limited worth intended for the edification of foolish disenfranchised classists with money to spare for Mr James Bowery, an $8.00 p/hr. scientific genius who is going to “save the white race!”

Work will save the 10% of Euromen worthy of survival.  The remaining 90%?  Human sheep.  Some would have us believe they are of value.  Indeed, they are.  To Negroes.  As wet holes.  And food.


71

Posted by danielj on Wed, 19 Aug 2009 02:43 | #

Work will save the 10% of Euromen worthy of survival.

Arbeit macht frei!

I kind of agree with this but I have to spend time urbanized while I save up money for land…


72

Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 19 Aug 2009 03:53 | #

I had said: Reveal your identity in a manner as explicit and clear as I.

To which GT retorted: The classic challenge of the intentionally unproductive and disruptive paid police/SPLC/ADL agent-provocateur. 

Perhaps, but in this situation it is not I who violated the common sense restriction that the pseudonymous should place on themselves.

I have never, not once, attacked GT’s approach and indeed have some priority in those areas—nor have I attacked or even questioned GT’s character until his recent outbursts, although given our relative identifiability I would be on solid ethical ground to do so.

His recent aggressive behavior is truly puzzling and raises legitimate questions of character at least as wide ranging as those he purports to raise about others.

Anyone have any idea what really set him off?  It seemed to have been something related to my request for insights from those with more familiarity with Heiddeger than I but his “explanation” for his subsequent outbursts (that such estoteric queries were a waste of time)  seems quite inadequate given how little investment was made in that particular line of inquiry.


73

Posted by Q on Wed, 19 Aug 2009 18:53 | #

“Anyone have any idea what really set him off?”

James,

I think GT is frustrated as hell because his microcommunity project has been of little interest thus far amongst WN’s. He should realize his microcommuity ideas are NOT lacking of value, its just their time has not yet come. At present there isn’t enough incentive to engage in his endeavor. However, as the economy tanks and social conditions deteriorate, there will come a time when necessity shall provide that incentive to form microcommunities. Therefore GT should continue to develop his ideas and post them under the Practic section of this site.

As an aside, the commentator “White Preservationist” posted this video over a Occidental Decent. It’s well worth a watch. Enjoy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaV2rNXtlXs&feature=channel_page


74

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on Wed, 19 Aug 2009 19:29 | #

Neither would his coterie of narrow-shouldered yes men
-GT

Actually I’m 90th percentile in terms of height and strongly built.  And I’ve never been particularly obsequious either.

of bowed spine, protruding bellies, and deficient character.

Bla, bla, bla.  And your character is well represented by your continued biliousness. 

Forgive me if I don’t take you all that seriously.


75

Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 19 Aug 2009 20:10 | #

Q writes: I think GT is frustrated as hell because his microcommunity project has been of little interest thus far amongst WN’s.

Well that is entirely plausible but why did _I_ set him off? Or was he going off on others even before my Heiddeger query?

He should realize his microcommuity ideas are NOT lacking of value, its just their time has not yet come.

I would go further than that and say that microcommunities are more essential to our racial survival than any of the political remedies I have discussed, save the Actuarial Militia which is only “political” at the local level and is constructed to minimize politics at that level.  I might differ with GT in the details and emphasis but not the general approach he is quite properly pursuing. 

At one point I even recommended his (and Macguire’s) project as something worthy of investment if they could put something together like a business plan.

VERY strange.

All explanations I can come up with stretch credulity.


76

Posted by Q on Thu, 20 Aug 2009 01:09 | #

“VERY strange.

All explanations I can come up with stretch credulity.”

Looking in from the outside, James, I advise you not to take his resentment personally. Remember, he targeted Fred Scrooby with his misplaced hostility for the longest time before Fred finally started to ignore him. You, James, are his latest target.

Actually, GT is quite comical when you, yourself, are not the target of his anger, but I can understand your concern over his unprovoked attacks.


77

Posted by GenoType on Thu, 20 Aug 2009 04:57 | #

DanielJ,

It’s interesting that you have chosen to quote me and not James’. 

To classists and wannabes, Bowery included, the tacit represents intellect.  Classist purveyors of intellect would have you believe that intellect never postures or conveys ad hominem.  To the contrary, sites like MR are replete with tacit insults, snubs, and challenge – all of which are combined with elements of plausible denial.

Tacit insults followed by a quick retreat to an adult female’s skirt if the mark picks up on it is partly how classist weaklings of all stripes survive childhood.  Personal disdain toward physical experience, a desire to prove intellectual superiority, egoism, tacit insults from a distance or within a protected environment, resentment toward the advocacy of mental and physical balance, intellectual intimidation, getting “inferior” others to do more than their share of life’s heavy lifting and dying, dishonesty from all points – these are, among other things, trademarks of the unbalanced, esoterically-inclined intellect of Europid persuasion.

Bowery and ilk do not enjoy being called on this from a distance.  They would enjoy it less up close and personal by a man who doesn’t physically wince or mince words.

Bowery and Linder are intelligent.  Still, at best, both are system-dependent fools paying the price for associating themselves with racism and antisemitism on the Internet.  At worst, they are SPLC agents.  Their public “bravery” is but a pose used to impress and solicit donations from pensioned widow and widower “paytriots,” leftovers from an Old segregated America which no longer exists, and having one foot in the grave with sacks of cash stashed somewhere.  If fools, ego demands that I be challenged to prematurely destroy myself, like them, or shut the fuck up.  If the agents, then I must be shut up for what I represent, politically, is a consumer product warning affixed to 50 years of a failed conservative classism which uses race as a hook. 

The enemy doesn’t fear the failed faux racial nationalism of Bowery & Associates.  They fear mine, if it should develop, for it is the real thing.  This I can promise you.


78

Posted by GenoType on Thu, 20 Aug 2009 06:01 | #

Straining credulity is the intellectually mighty practitioner of tacit snubs and insults posing as victim.  Perplexing that is, to readers unfamiliar with the method. 

Genuinely perplexing, however, is when said individual makes common cause with MR’s resident drunken fool and hypocritical Xtian of epic proportions, Q aka Onlooker, .357, .357 Dave, Dave Johns, etc.  Yes, Scrooby made cause with Q.  That I can understand.  But James Bowery?  A rather convenient alliance, I think.  Q is unable to comprehend 90% of Bowery’s writing and Bowery knows it.

Quoting myself:

Not something of concern to a population whose entire economy consists of paying Mestizos to cut their grass, reading monthly brokerage statements and opening containers loaded in China.  Such needn’t worry about the above paradigm.


This was pitched over Bowery’s head.  Not hard to do, actually.  My point was that a society losing its skilled workers and engineers by the thousands each week needn’t worry about whether engineers or scientists are more important.

Aloidalism.  Yeomanry.  This is Bowery’s latest effort at stuffing a strawmen he can conquer.  Apparently his definition of the yeoman is the hobby farmer (fringe suburbanites with one acre and a huge garden?) subsisting on Department of Agriculture cash subsidies or the Citizens’ Bribe.  Subsidies, that is, based upon currency brought to us by that Rothschild-Freemason institution called the Federal Reserve and stock market “earnings” of “winners” representing the loss of real wealth by “losers.” It is not surprising that on a website devoted to tacit nonsense and the preservation of judeoeconomics, A is A-not.  Bowery would have us believe that the Federal Reserve, its currency, the stock market, and his Citizens’ Bribe do not represent holdings of or by the King (or government, jews, insert whatever).  He would have us believe that advocates of genuine independence through the creation of alternative systems with the collaboration of family, kin, and friends are Neo-Feudalists. Both notions are laughable.  The first is intended to bolster the egos of this forum’s thin-shelled, easy money, computer-strapped indigents.  The second is ultimately intended to equate what I advocate with the grass and leaves once used in pre-industrial outhouses.

—-

Bowery and coterie of bent spine, stooped shouldered, pot bellied, disabled, and retired pensioners of poor character can not and have not ever represented the type of yeomen who stood at the Battle of Crecy.  The ideal we, my friends and I, present is closer to the original by magnitudes.  We even have ideas for equipping them for modern conditions, as some of you may have ascertained.  But developing this critical path for genuinely worthy yeomen and physically working through it to obtain independence is actually the last thing James Bowery & Associates has in mind.

The genuine yeoman I speak of is defined behaviorally in addition to a genetically amenable political definition.  Behavioral standards are included because genetics alone is insufficient.  The unworthy Europid deserves, at best, to stay in his darkening suburbs surrounded by Section 8 apartments and homes, completely dependent upon the judeoeconomic system in which he enthusiastically collaborates and the preservation of which he enthusiastically supports, enjoying his homeowner equity, pension or, as has become increasingly common, the prospect of a deferred retirement plan. 

Alternative systems, local populist movements led by genuine sociopolitical entrepreneurs rather than business types who typically risk other people’s wealth and employ third-world labor.  Ten percent of Euroman’s best.  Balanced mentally and physically.  That is all that’s required.  The rest?  Let them hire Mexican mercenaries.


79

Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 20 Aug 2009 07:22 | #

Well perhaps this latest polemic sheds a little light.

The Citizen’s Dividend is, indeed, targeted at salvaging a much larger portion of Euromen along with their infrastructure, than is the microcommunity project.  The Citizen’s Dividend is a higher risk, higher payoff investment that should not detract from microcommunity investment—not even when the microcommunity project is promoted by someone as obnoxious as GenoType.  It is higher risk in the sense that for average folk choosing where to spend their time, they had better not hope to influence the platform of political parties like the BNP.  But were government managerial class control of transfer programs replaced by a Citizen’s Dividend, a huge population of Euromen would use the cash stream to flee the high priced real estate areas in which they are currently trapped, and head for the country-side to start up microcommunities as part of a re-established landed yeomanry.  As things stand, they must continue as slaves to their urban masters while GenoType taunts them from his more comfortable position as a land owner.  I find GenoType’s abuse of people who are victims of the enemy, conscious of their unfortunate state, to be really perverse, sadistic and downright evil since it actually reduces the chances that some of the best will be able to recover their independence.

As for GenoType’s imputations about my character, all people have to do is go back in the decreasingly accessible Usenet Archives and judge for themselves whether it consists of little more than stuffing a series of strawmen.  For example, here is a 1994 post of mine including the history of the killing of “St” Olaf (Olaf the Lawbreaker who ran around the countryside with a gang of armed thugs in violation of Norse law) by yeoman farmers.  I ask you—does this 15 year old post qualify as part of my “latest” shift in posture?

Eternal Asatru and Counterfeit Christianity

 
Jim Bowery  

Dec 17 1994, 6:18 pm

The following appeared in VOR TRU #45 for Summer 2243 R.E.

“Eternal Asatru and Counterfeit Christianity”

Part II, by Thor Sannhet

“A people which takes no pride in the noble achievements of remote
ancestors will never achieve anything worthy to be remembered by noble
descendants.—Thomas Macaulay, History of England From the Accession
of James II, p. 1526

“In the final analysis, people get the religion they deserve.  If they
betray their indigenous deities, their Gods will turn their backs on
them.  Errant people lay themselves open to predation by alien interests
who can gain control within their political, economic and religious
institutions, distort their indigenous culture, and subvert their
capacity to survive as a people.  Even Proverbs (29:18) states that,
‘Where there is no vision, the people perish [or cast off restraint]’”
—T. Sannhet

“SHADOW” CONTRIBUTORS TO EARLY CHRISTIANITY

I would be remiss to not mention other theories about the origin of
Christianity.  An excellent summary of them is found in “The Essene-
Christian Faith:  A study in the Sources of Western Religion” by Dr.
Martin A. Larson (Costa Mesa, CA Noontide Press, 1822 1/2 Newport Blvd.;
1989).  One of the great gaps in the New Testament is the total omission
of the Essene Movement, the third major force in Palestine besides the
Pharisees and Sadducees.  The Jewish historian Josephus (37?-100 AD),
author of “The Jewish War” and a book on Jewish antiquities, provided
detailed coverage of all three movements in his works.  Interestingly
enough, although Josephus provided a detailed history of Palestine from
Herod’s predecessors until the end of the Jewish War (66-73 AD), the
closest he came to anything suggesting Jesus in Greek manuscripts of his
work is the brief passage at the beginning of Chapter 7 “Judea under
Roman Rule” of “The Jewish War”.

“The territory of Archelaus was brought under direct Roman rule, and a
man of equestrian rank at Rome, Coponius, was sent as a procurator with
authority from Caesar to inflict the death penalty.  In his time a
Galilaean named Judas tried to stir the natives to revolt, saying they
would be cowards if they submitted to paying taxes to the Romans, and
after serving God alone accepted human masters.  This man was a rabbi
with a sect of his own, and was quite unlike the others.”  (page 133,
New York: Dorset Press, 1970).

There was a Slavonic version of “The Jewish War” translated into old
Russian around 1250 AD with passages about Christianity that have no
parallel in the Greek version.  According to the English scholar E. Mary
Smallwood, the questionable Slavonic text gives “highly garbled accounts
of John the Baptist and the ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus
Christ (neither of them referred to by name), and a picture of the early
church as a faith-healing movement.  There are basically three possible
interpretations of them:  that Josephus, who is likely to have been
aware of the main facts of Christ’s life and of the existence of the
Church as a schismatic sect, wrote them; that they are wholesale
interpretations (by whom? hardly by a Christian, since such travesties
of the New Testament tradition would have done little to promote belief
or to enhance the prestige of the Church); or that they are elaborations
of shorter, less sensational passages written by Josephus.”  (page 470,
Appendix F, Smallwood on “The Jewish War”).

Is a rabbi who encourages a tax revolt the same person as Jesus Christ
who says, “Render therefore to Ceasar the things that are Caesar’s, and
to God the things that are God’s”?  (Matthew 22:21-22).  If Josephus is
willing to devote over five pages to describe the Essenes in “The Jewish
War”, why would he devote a few vague sentences to the “Greatest Story
Ever Told,” if in fact that is what he was talking about?

The Dead Sea scrolls also validate the existence of the Essenes but do
not specifically mention the Jesus of the Gospels.  Justus of Tiberias,
a native of Galilee, wrote a history covering the period in which Jesus
allegedly lived; although his works have perished, they were read by
Photius, a 9th century Christian bishop in Constantinople, who said “He
(Justus) makes not the least mention of the appearance of Christ, or
what things happened to him, or the wonderful work that he did.”
(Jackson 1988).  Dr. Madalyn O’Hair of the American Atheist [PO Box
140195] has concluded that there was in all likelihood no historical
Jesus, just a compilation of many myths from other religions that were
spun around a largely fictitious story of a Jewish messiah and tenants
of Judaism.  In 1988 “American Atheist” published a paper titled “Did
Jesus Exist?” by Frank Zindler that explained a number of arguments and
contradictions within the Gospels that cause him to doubt the existence
of Jesus.  “Pagan Christs”, by J. M. Robertson, first published in 1903,
also doubts a historical Jesus.

Several points need to be made about the way in which Christianity
infiltrated Rome and competed with mystery religions that had similar
characteristics:  (a) The elements that pagan religions share in common
with Christianity suggest the extent to which Christianity was a
“copycat” or “fabricated” religion that stole ideas from them or filled
a similar “niche” in the “psychological market” of the various peoples
in the Empire (b) The Italic invaders whose descendants created the
Roman Republic were a semi-Nordic/Nordic people who traced their
ancestry from the north.  The same was true of the golden-haired Dorians
and Ionians who were the predecessors of the Greeks of the classical
era.  As the Romans and Greeks became more prosperous, alien peoples
were imported as labor or immigrated to share in their prosperity and
interbred with them.  As their prosperous civilizations reduced the
rigors of survival, the dysgenic decay process described in “Why
Civilizations Self-Destruct” by Dr. Elmer Pendell (Cape Canaveral, FL:
Howard Allen, Box 76; 1977) set in and degraded the innate competency
and fitness level of their population.  This step down the evolutionary
scale had already had a major impact prior to the alleged time of
Christ.  Hence it is not surprising that so many Romans gravitated away
from the heroic Greco-Roman religion, which is a cousin of Asatru, to
the more mystical religions of mercy. However, while the other pagan
religions stressed sentimental themes, Christianity was unique in its
use of sentimentality and mysticism to promote revolutionary themes,
mass movement propaganda, and class resentment.  (One might recollect
how the beggar Lazarus goes to heaven and the rich man goes to Hades in
Luke 16:19-31).  (c) Christianity was unique compared to the other
religions of mercy through its attempts to graft its adherents to Jewish
tribal history.  Although the Jews are portrayed as accessories to the
crucifixion, the New Testament also dignifies them as a special people
chosen by God and as the heroes of the Old Testament.  Furthermore, they
can be saved through the Christian doctrine of redemption, and hence
must be tolerated.  Ultimately the Jewish people gained more than they
lost with this theology.  (d) None of the merciful pagan religions ever
elicited the kind of hostile reaction that Christianity provoked on the
part of the Roman emperors.  Most Bible movies portray anti-Christian
emperors as wicked people; however, since Sir Edward Gibbon offered the
view in his classic work “The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire” that
Christianity was a major cause of the fall of Rome, many intellectuals
have taken a less moralistic viewpoint.

“The Western Heritage”, by Kagan, Ozment, and Turner (New York:
Macmillan, 1983), describes a pagan competitor of Christianity called
Manichaeism.  It was “...an especially potent rival of Christianity.
Named for its founder, Mani, a Persian who lived in the third century
A.D., it contained aspects of various religious traditions, including
Zoroastrianism from Persia and both Judaism and Christianity.  The
Manichaeans pictured a world in which light and darkness, good and evil,
were constantly at war.  Good was spiritual and evil was material;
because human beings were made of matter, their bodies were a prison of
evil and darkness, but they also contained an element of light and good.
The ‘Father of Goodness’ had sent Mani, among other prophets, to free
humanity and gain its salvation.  To achieve salvation, humans must want
to reach the realm of light and to abandon all physical desires.”
Mithraism was another important competitor to Christianity that was
transmitted into the Roman world in the first century B.C. and spread
almost as rapidly as its arch rival Christianity.  The deity Mithra was
quite old, going back to the very ancient Vedas of the Indo-European
invaders of the Indus valley.  Mithraism was favored by a number of
Roman Emperors prior to the conversion of the Emperor Constantine to
Christianity.  Considered to be a pagan “mystery religion”, which had
rituals that were often conducted in secret, it had a doctrine of heaven
and hell, a battle between good and evil, the concept of the
resurrection of the flesh, and other similarities to Christianity.
However, it seemed to be restricted to males, was more state-oriented,
and had degrees of initiation.

According to “The Western Heritage”, some other pagan cults of mercy
thrived in Rome, such as the cult of Sarapis, which began as worship of
an Egyptian combination of deities Osiris-Apis, and also a cult of
Cybele, the Great Mother, that came from Asia Minor and Isis in Egypt.
“In the troubled time of the 4th and 5th centuries, people sought
powerful, personal deities who would bring them safety and prosperity in
this world and immortality in the next… Each [cult] had become popular
by the third century by virtue of its universality and intensely
personal qualities.  Anyone, regardless of class, race, or condition,
could join and observe and take part of the rituals…which included
dramatic reenactments of the suffering, death, and resurrection of the
god.  The mystery cults invited each initiate into a common fellowship
and morality, encouraged prayer directly to the god without priestly
intervention, and held out the hope of eternal life.” (p. 235).
Christianity originated as a cult comprised of only Jewish adherents
until it became reconfigured for export to the Gentile world.  It is
important to understand the resources available to Jewish people as well
as their role in the Roman Empire during the formative stages of
Christianity.  Contrary to the impression created by the Gospels that
the Jewish people were a pastoral people concentrated in Palestine, the
bulk of them were actually quiet the opposite:  heavily urbanized, well-
established in trade, and scattered about the Roman Empire and
Babylonia.  According to rabbi Lewis Browne in “Stranger That Fiction”,
“The scattering of the Jews through foreign lands—the Diaspora as it is
usually called—had already been in process for many centuries before
the fall of Jerusalem (70 A.D.).  Perhaps as early as the days of
Solomon there were little colonies of Hebrew traders in strange lands.
Certainly there were many after the destruction of the Northern Kingdom
in 722 B.C., and still more after the destruction of the Southern
Kingdom in 586 B.C.  Indeed, some scholars say that from the last date
on, there were always more Jews living outside the borders of Palestine
than within them.”  (pages 160-161).  According to Isaac Asimov, “The
Jews never really returned from Babylon en masse.  Even after the
rebuilding of the Temple and the walls of Jerusalem, important
communities of Jews remained in the cities of Babylonia.  These
persisted throughout Biblical times and well beyond.  After the
destruction of the second Temple by the Romans in A.D. 70, Babylonia
became the center of Jewish intellectual life for a thousand years.”
(page 576, Asimov’s Guide to the Bible, New York: Avenel Books, 1969).
The substantial Jewish presence throughout the Roman empire was noted by
Romans such as Cicero (106-43 B.C.) and at times their presence was
resented.  Josephus devoted an entire book in rebuttal to an anti-
Semitic tract written by a Greek named Apion (Robertson, p. 157).  A
large self-governing Jewish community existed in Alexandria, Egypt,
where the greatest library held works on the known religions of the day.
According to Lewis Browne, “One of the greatest writers of the
Hellenistic world was an Alexandrian Jew named Philo, and his work
influenced the thought of all early Christian scholars.”  (Browne, page
161)

Many Jewish leaders such as Saul of Tarsus (Paul) were very well
educated and could speak many languages.  Traveling back and forth to
Egypt from Palestine was not too difficult for anyone who wanted to
access the great library.  It was certainly far easier than Paul’s
journeys to Rome or the continuous intercourse between Babylonia and
Jerusalem. In Matthew 2:14-15 we even read about how the parents of
Jesus went to Egypt to flee Herod.  In other words, if a group of people
wanted to fabricate a religion, all of the intellectual resources were
certainly available in abundance during the alleged time of Christ.
The Essenes provided an important element of the Christianity puzzle
because they provided a highly disciplined and radicalized cadre that
was spring-loaded to document and disseminate new religious ideology.
The Essenes were an ascetic Jewish community, much like Christian monks
in a later period, devoted to writing scripture and living an anti-
materialist, faith-oriented interpretation of religion.  They shared all
of their property, swore themselves to lives of poverty, and supported
themselves with various crafts.  Their hard frugality and self-
supporting work caused them to accumulate considerable wealth, which was
kept in common and cached in various areas of Palestine, much like the
Dead Sea scrolls that they produced.

Dr. Larson points out that the Essene concept was nothing new;  the
Greek philosopher and pagan Pythagoras, synthesized a religious system
that emphasized renunciation, celibacy, and Communism in the 6th Century
B.C. (Larson, page 11).  Pythagorean communities spread across the
Mediterranean.  It bears mentioning that Buddhist orders based upon
similar lifestyle principles spread from India in the centuries before
the alleged time of Christ as well.  According to Dr. Larson, “About 105
B.C., the Essenes incorporated the doctrines and practices of the
Pythagoreans into their own system and superimposed these upon the
Zoroastrianism which they had already adopted about seventy years
earlier.  By so doing, they became the transmission belt by which the
principle elements of Egyptian, Persian, Indian, and Greek mystery
religions became integral portions of the western faith.”
John the Baptist, if he in fact was a real person rather than a
fictitious character, was more than likely an Essene.  Needless to say,
there was no love lost between the Essenes and the nationalistic
Pharisees and Sadducees.  These latter groups viewed the Essenes as a
subversive and traitorous fifth column whose focus on mysticism was
subverting their worldly nationalistic goals of throwing off the Roman
yoke and restoring an autonomous Jewish state.  The Pharisees and
Saduccees were looking for a hardy nationalistic hero similar to King
David or Judas “The Hammer” Maccabeus.  They had less love for a
pacifistic, literal-equalitarian movement than the John Birch Society in
the 1960’s felt for the Chicago Seven or the hippie movement.
We see similar conflict and polarization today between secular Jews and
Orthodox Jews in Israel.  Many of the orthodox Jews insist on a strictly
kosher lifestyle and communal values.  Most Kibbutz’s are deep in the
red financially because of their inefficient communal operations.  Many
Orthodox Jews advocate pacifism.  Some Orthodox Jews refuse military
service, and even in Brooklyn today one can find Lubavitch Jews who
believe that secular Zionism is wrong and that a supernatural return of
a messiah should precede any physical return of the Jewish people to the
promised land.  As the saying goes, “The more things change, the more
they stay the same.”

A problem with Nietzschaen-Ravage fabrication theory is that it
typically takes too much control over media and other resources to pull
off a big lie all at once.  Paul himself could have hardly “theologized”
vast segments of the Mediterranean within his lifetime.  More often what
happens is that propagandists will embellish a small truth and
continuously add on to it over time with exaggerations so that the truth
content slips from 100% down to less than 20%.  I observe a related
phenomenon while working on a project that involved researching the
antiquities of indigenous peoples.  Tribesmen who lack a written
tradition will usually provide reasonably accurate and realistic
versions of events that occurred during their lifetimes.  However, as
they go back in time to the deeds of their grandparents and great
grandparents, the episodes and personalities become increasingly
fantastic and even supernatural in character.  The accounts written
about Jesus came along after his alleged lifetime and have many
contradictions.  According to John Jackson in “Pagan Origins of the
Christ Myth”:

“The dates of origin of the Four Gospels have been estimated as follows:
Mark—A.D. 70 to 100; Luke—about A.D. 100; Matthew—A.D. 100-110;
John—sometime between A.D. 100 and 160.  That these Gospel stories
are replete with inaccuracies and contradictions is obvious to all who
read with a discerning eye.  In Matthew 2:1, we are told that Jesus
Christ was born “in the days of Herod.”  But in Luke 2:2, we are told
that the Christ child first saw the light of day, “when Cyrenius was
governor of Syria.”  There is here a discrepancy of at least ten years,
for Herod died in the year 4. B.C. while Cyrenius or Quirinius, as the
is known in Roman history, did not become governor of Syria until the
year A.D. 7 ...Matthew 1:6-16 lists twenty eight generations from David
to Jesus while Luke 3:23-38 tabulates forty three…

There may have been an actual person who existed prior to the alleged
time of Jesus who inspired the Christ myth.  According to Dr. Larson’s
book “The Essene-Christian Faith”, “An Essene Teacher of Righteousness,
born about 95-90 B.C., during the reign of King Alexander Jannaeus,
became the revered head and prophet of the Essene Order; he was slain or
executed by the Jewish authorities about 70 or 69 B.C.; his followers
believed that he was actually God himself, appearing briefly as a man
among men and that he was resurrected and returned to heaven on the
third day, and would, in due course, send a divine representative for
the purpose of establishing the Kingdom of Saints on earth.”  Dr. Larson
provides more details regarding this leader, based upon “The Damascus
Document” found in Old Cairo in 1896 by Solomon Schechter, that tells
the story know as the “Toledoth Yeshu”.  According to Dr. Larson,
although this legend is not found in the Talmud or the Orthodox Jewish
tradition, it was known to Celsius, an anti-Christian Platonist who
composed his “True Discourse” about 170 A.D.

There are some interesting similarities between the life of Yeshu and
that of Jesus.  Yeshu’s father went into self-imposed exile to Egypt
when Yeshu was a baby.  At an early age Yeshu engaged in an impudent
discussion with Jewish sages, saying that Moses could not have been the
greatest of prophets if he had to seek the counsel of Jethro, the pagan
priest.  Yeshu was able to discover the letters of the ineffable name of
Yahweh in the Temple in Jerusalem, and by copying and then memorizing
them, was able to cure cripples and lepers by uttering them.  Some Jews
worshipped him as a Messiah, others denounced him as a sorcerer.
According to the story, he revived a corpse and used a millstone as a
boat in the Sea of Galilee.  Yeshu gained the favor of Queen Hellene of
the Jewish nation, but met his demise when he was faced by an antagonist
in court that worked feats of magic.  Yeshu became “defiled” by his
opponent, and both of them fell down powerless and forgot the letters of
the ineffable Name.  In order to relearn the letters of the ineffable
Name, Yeshu returned to Jerusalem with 310 adherents on the eve of the
Passover.  He rode into the city on an ass and entered the Temple with
his disciples, who had sworn not to reveal his identity.  However, a
follower, Juda Iskarito, betrayed him by bowing to him.  He was seized
by the authorities in the Temple, and was subsequently put to death by
hanging from a tree on the eve of the Passover Sabbath.  On the first
day of the week, followers went to Queen Hellene and said that Yeshu was
the Messiah and had risen to heaven.  The Queen demanded that the sages
produce the body.  A gardener, who foresaw the deception of Yeshu’s
followers, produced the body, which was tied to the tail of a horse and
dragged before the Queen.  Although the Queen became disillusioned, many
of Yeshu’s followers kept their faith.  Fore thirty years the followers
of Yeshu created commotion in Israel by claiming that Yeshu was indeed
the Messiah and had risen to heaven.  (Larson, pages 151-154).
The messianic aspect of the Toledoth Yeshu story is part of a continuing
pattern in Jewish history.  The messianic tradition goes back to Moses,
portrayed in the Old Testament as a military-messianic leader who
delivers his people from bondage.  Then there are the leaders of the
Book of Judges who fight the Philistines and other oppressors.  Some
leaders, such as Isaiah, were more messianic.  Other leaders like Judas
“the Hammer” Maccabeus were more militaristic.  “The Hammer” led a
revolt that resulted in recapture of the Temple in 165 B.C.  This became
the basis of the annual Feast of Lights called Hanukkah.
There were also Jewish leaders who continually added on to the body of
Jewish scripture.  The Old Testament was not enough.  The Babylonian
Talmud was created in the 5th Century A.D.  Even later came more
mystical works such as the Zohar and Kabbalah.  According to Lewis
Browne in “Stranger than Fiction”, (page 258), the Zohar was created in
the 13th century by “a Spanish Jew named Moses de Leon, who sponsored
the book, claimed it had been written by a wonder working rabbi eleven
hundred years earlier, and that the manuscript had lain hidden away all
the intervening years in a mysterious cave.  In all probability,
however, he had compiled it himself from stolen manuscripts lifted by
him from Hindu, Persian, and Hebrew writings.”  Brown mentions men like
Sabbatai Zevi (1622-1676), who “was one of the many ‘false messiahs’ who
appeared among the Jews generation after generation, excited them with
wild and impossible hopes, and then came to some bad end.” (page 264).
He also mentions Baal Shem Tov, born in an Eastern European settlement
around 1700.  According to Browne (page 287), “a strange and wondrous
man was he—one who in his whole life and work seems to have been a
true brother to that other ‘Kind Master,’ Jesus of Nazareth.  And like
Jesus, very little is definitely known about Baal Shem Tov, for he too
left no writings.  Only naive and confused legends remain to tell us of
his life, and it is not easy to decide just what in them is fact and
what is fancy.”

The concept that the Toledoth Yeshu story was “doctored up” into the
Gospels would be consistent with the later activities of men like Moses
de Leon.  It would also be consistent with the opinions of members of
the Jesus Seminar about the fabricated nature of Scripture.  There is
also evidence that a very good literary environment for “doctoring”
existed during the first and second century AD.  A number of writings
from that period have been rejected by Christian authorities, such as
the Gnostic scriptures and “The Lost Books of the Bible and the
Forgotten Books of Eden.”  The latter phrase is the title of a volume
(New York: New American Library/Penguin, first published in 1926 and
more recently in 1974 in paperback) that includes such books as “Mary”,
“Protevangelion”, “I Infancy”, “II Infancy”, “Christ and Abgarus”,
“Nicodemus”, “The Apostles’ Creed”, “Laodiceans”, “Paul and Seneca”,
“Paul and Thecla”, and fifteen other books.  Other books, such as
“Tobit”, “Judith”, “1 Maccabees”, and “2 Maccabees” appeared in the
Catholic Apocrypha but have been excluded from Protestant Bibles.  An
environment that generated so many books that were later declared
counterfeit by various Christian churches leaves us with a question
about the credibility of what is deemed authentic.

Speaking of counterfeit books, Isaaic Asimov, in “Asimov’s Guide to the
Bible”, says that the Old Testament book of Esther “can only be
described as a piece of historical fiction.”  Asimov notes that the
Greek historian Herodotus makes no mention of the incidents described in
the Book of Ester regarding the reign of Ahasuerus/Xerxes (519?-465
B.C.).  He points out that “...Esther may have been written as late as
130 B.C. and it breathes air of nationalism one would expect of that
period in which the Jews were finally living in an independent kingdom
again after having undergone a period of savage persecution.  It is
propbably the chauvinistic nationalism of the book that made it so
popular among Jews as to force its inclusion in the Biblical cannon.”
(The book of Esther, incidentally, is also the basis of the annual
Jewish Purim celebration).  Given that so much spurious literature
originated between 200 BC and 200 AD, perhaps it would be a wonder if
the story of Jesus were NOT a fabrication.

A SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY ABOUT THE ORIGIN OF CHRISTIANITY
Dr. Marvin Harris, one of America’s leading anthropologists, gives us
another important piece of the Christian jigsaw puzzle in his book Cows,
Pigs, Wars, and Witches:  The Riddle of Culture (New York:  Random
House, 1989 paperback verison).  He interprets the sayings of Jesus in
the Gospels to be a coded form of a military-messianic movement, which
he attempts to define in anthropological terms.  For every pacifist
saying attributed to Jesus, such as, “Blessed are the peacemakers”
(Matthew 5:9), one can find a militant phrase, “Think not that I am come
to send peace on earth, I come not to send peace but a sword” (Matthew
10:34).  Another example:  “All that take the sword shall perish with
the sword” (Matthew 26:52) compares with “He that hath no sword, let him
sell his garments and buy one” (Luke 22:26).  Also:  “Love thine
enemies; do good to them that hate you” (Luke 6:27) compares with “And
when he made a scourge of small cords, he drove them out of the
temple…and poured out the changer’s money and overthrew the tables.”
(John 2:15)  (Harris, page 190).

According to Harris, this ambiguity allowed Jewish people who lived
throughout the Roman empire to interface more readily with Gentiles than
when they practiced straight Judaism.  “The primary converts to this new
religion—if not in number, certainly in influence—continued to be
urban Jews scattered all over eastern Mediterranean.  Contrary to
legend, Christianity made no headway at all among the great mass of
peasants and slaves who constituted the bulk of the population of the
empire.  As the historian Salo W. Baron points out, paganus, the Latin
word for ‘peasant,’ became for the Christians a synonym for “heathen”.
[The word “heathen”, incidentally, means ‘from the heath or country’.]
Christianity was eminently the religion of the displaced ethnic
urbanites.  ‘In cities where Jews had often amounted to one third of the
population and more, this, so to speak, new variety of Judaism marched
triumphantly ahead.’” (Harris, page 202).

Hence, we shatter another myth propagated by Bible movies, namely that
Christianity was spearheaded by the oppressed underclasses fed up with
Roman wickedness.  We can now better explain how Jewish apostles such as
Paul could travel around the Roman empire and find support.  We see all
of the elements of any successful revolutionary effort:  a highly
disciplined cadre (such as the Essenes), an organizational nexus (the
early disciples, led by Paul), revolutionary documentation and
manifestos (the Old Testament, combined with the various forms of Essene
and Christian New Testament literature), and a combination of money
power and ethnic in-group cohesion and out-group antagonism held by
Jewish communities as well as by various disaffected Gentile groups
through out the Roman Empire.  Certainly an important exacerbation of
the ethnic antagonism was the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
Much of the human interest material and parables of the Gospels came
from over a hundred years of missionary experience on the part of the
Essenes and other mystical teachers.

THE FIRST ESTATE FRANCHISE THEORY

All of the aforementioned theories help explain how Christianity could
grow to take control of Rome.  One remaining theory, which I call the
“First Estate Franchise” theory, helps to explain how Christianity
spread to Nordic countries.

The Christianization of Scandinavia required several centuries and
encountered considerable resistance.  The Vikings were a different
people from most of the urban dwellers in the decadent Roman world.  In
many cases the Christianization process was a very bloody affair that
was engineered only after considerable intrigue, persistence,
incremental accommodations, and deception planning.  An important factor
was the ability of the church bureaucracy to continually fling
missionaries and conquering armies at the heathens.  It could also
immediately supply the funds and expertise to build churches at each
mission post, offer religious literature, provide “pre-packaged” ritual
and vestments, and staff posts with dedicated personnel.  In contrast,
the heathens practiced a very intuitive and decentralized form of
religion in which they had no bureaucracy or centers of learning with
which to create effective counter measures to Christian propaganda and
franchise expansion.  The most effective intellectual counter measures
began with the Enlightenment, which began in European universities in
the 17th century, but this was too late to save the Vikings.
The Viking era began with the Viking raid on the Lindisfarne Priory, a
Christian propaganda center, in 793 AD.  Iceland succumbed to
Christianity through a “democratic” process in the year 1000 AD, thanks
in part to some muscle supplied by the King of Norway.  The last hold
out was the pagan temple in Uppsala, Sweden, that lasted until the
twelfth century.  The Viking era was effectively over in 1066 at the
conclusion of a three way fratricidal war for control of England among
Viking-descended kings and their armies.  This war resulted in the
triumph of William of Normandy and the deaths of Kind Harald Godwinson
of England and King Harald Hardrada of Norway.  By this time all of the
kings and armies involved in the power struggle had become
Christianized.

Christian rulers pressured Viking leaders to convert in order to obtain
treaty concessions or the financial backing to raise armies.  A good
example was Olaf Tryggvason, King of Norway, who was supplied with a
large sum of Danegold (protection money) by the English along with a new
faith in 994 AD.  He used his new muscle to pressure the Icelanders into
conversion and impose his new faith on Norway.  Norway quickly reverted
to paganism after he died, but subsequent Christian Kings such as the
(not so saintly) St. Olaf was killed in the battle of Stiklastader in
1030 fighting against an army of yeoman Norse farmers near Trondheim
Norway.  The farmers were unimpressed with his “Christian” leadership or
the crosses worn by Olaf’s men on their helmets.  Unfortunately by then
even the farmers themselves had become heavily infiltrated by
Christianity.  In order to fight Olaf, they had to accept both the
support and hegemony of Christianized Danes.  Worse yet, after the
victory the Danes tried to tax the farmers so heavily that the Norwegian
public began to view Olaf as a martyr and nationalist hero.  This
dignified Olaf’s Christian trappings and helped to elevate him to
sainthood.  Some scholars put the year 1030 rather than 1066, as the end
of the Viking era.

The clergy, or First Estate, helped the rulers and nobility, or Second
Estate to stay in power.  Their ability to collect tithes and taxes was
unknown in the times of decentralized pagan religion.  Christian
ideology created a thoroughly indoctrinated and radicalized army of
priests fanatically dedicated to supporting the system, complete with a
centralized hierarchy.  It was a ruthless system from the genetic
viewpoint, because whole armies of very capable men were forced into
celibacy and did not pass on their genes, thereby fostering dysgenic
decay.  The confessor system created a centralized intelligence network
or “KGB” for each arch Bishop, who in turn whispered in the ear of their
King.

The “value added” by this new form of religious domination was
questioned by Soledad de Montalvo in “The Church’s Holy War Against
Hygiene” (American Atheist, Feb. 1989).  After Christians gained
monopolistic religious power in Rome, they continued their “war against
the flesh.”  The Roman baths and other measures taken by “clean living”
pagans were neglected.  Sanitary standards dropped precipitously through
out Europe, as Christians were exhorted, “All those who have been washed
[baptized] in Jesus Christ need no further purifications.”  Vermin
infestation became prevalent.  According to Montalvo, “Christians were
forced to pay tithes to a rapacious clergy and the equally rapacious
aristocracy and for centuries the ordinary standard of living in all
Christian countries was actually lower than it had been in Neolithic
times.  Between the ninth and eleventh centuries, famines killed off
half the population of Europe.”

If anything, the First Estate became too effective and too powerful, a
kind of sorcerer’s apprentice that threatened to get completely out of
control.  The more secure dominion that European rulers gained initially
was offset by terrible power struggles further down the line.  In
English history, Henry II’s knights cut down Thomas Becket in Canterbury
Cathedral as a result of the First Estate vs. Second Estate power
struggle Henry VIII beheaded Sir Thomas Moore in another power struggle.
The English struggle between the First and Second Estate ended with a
victory for the Second Estate when King Henry VIII seceded from Rome and
declared himself the head of the Protestant Church of England.  Because
Henry had the English Channel as a moat and a strong army and navy as
well, the Pope could only retaliate by condemning Henry to eternal
damnation.  A subsequent Pope authorized the unsuccessful invasion
effort of the Spanish Armada.

In France, the First Estate gained the upper hand in the 17th Century.
Cardinal de Richelieu, made famous in Dumas’ classic “The Three
Musketeers”, became more powerful than King Louis XIII.  The major break
in the power of the Church had to wait until the French Revolution.
SUMMARY
Which theory is more correct?  The Nietzschean/Ravage conspiratorial
theory?  The theory that the Toledoth Yeshu story was the seed crystal
behind the Gospel accounts of Christ?  The theory of Dr. Harris that
Christianity was really a military/messianic movement in coded form to
help Jewish communities adapt to gentile surroundings while maintaining
a messianic dream?  The “pagan Christ” theory that Christianity
extracted elements of various pagan resurrection mythologies (some of
which were Indo-European in origin) to become a superior form of
“religious software” that would tend to spread on its own among Indo-
European peoples?  The First Estate franchise theory, that Christianity
provided a valuable tool for rulers to dominate and control the peoples
under them?

My best guess is:  all of the above.  Each provides, in varying degrees,
insight into contributing factors behind the evolution of Christianity
among different individuals and peoples at different times.  However,
each insight provides only a part of the truth rather than the whole.

————————————————————————————-

[The following notice appears in VOR TRU—JB]
VOR TRU (Our Faith) is a journal devoted to the old Norse
and Germanic religion of Asatru, and is dedicated to the
restoration of that Faith as epitomized during the
pre-Christian era in Europe.  VOR TRU is published by
and for the Asatru Alliance of Independent Kindreds.
Subscriptions are $12 per year with first class postage
in North America, and $16 per year with surface postage
overseas, airmail overseas is $25 per year.  Please
make all payments in U.S. funds to VOR TRU by cash,
check or money order, to

VOR TRU
Post Office Box 961
Payson, AZ 85547 U.S.A.

————————————————————————————-

[Notice:  I am not organizationally affiliated with the
authors or publications that I quote—JB]


The promotion of politics exterminates apolitical genes in the population.
  The promotion of frontiers gives apolitical genes a route to survival.
            Change the tools and you change the rules.


80

Posted by Q on Thu, 20 Aug 2009 14:04 | #

Geno Freak wrote: “The ideal we, my friends and I, present is closer to the original by magnitudes.”

You acually have friends? Well, I guess if pen pals whom reside in prison qualify as friends I’m sure you have plenty of those. Particularly Charlie Manson—your intellectual inspiration, lover and soul mate. But hey, you go Geno Freak! LET me not to the marriage of true psychos admit impediments.

BTW - It is clearly evident you, Geno Freak, sorely lack any leadership qualities whatsoever. Maybe its time to lower your sights and apply for a position as assistant manager of a trailer park. That’s about as close to becoming a ‘community organizer’ as you’re going to get.


81

Posted by Frank on Thu, 20 Aug 2009 16:12 | #

GenoType,

bow shouldered wimps are pit vipers in the court room.

If you’re looking for reassurance: “They fear mine, if it should develop, for it is the real thing.  This I can promise you. ” Yes.

Q wrote:

Particularly Charlie Manson—your intellectual inspiration, lover and soul mate.

?


82

Posted by Q on Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:17 | #

Frank,

Haven’t you been paying attention to GT’s angry unhinged lectures? You need not stray from this thread to recognise certain similarities between Manson’s and GT’s personalities. Maybe you, Frank, see a gifted advanced thinker, but I see a pseudo-intellectual with metal patient stamped on his forehead. No offence to pseudo-intellectuals of course.


83

Posted by Frank on Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:42 | #

People are people, but I’m more inclined towards his political strategy, though it shouldn’t be an “either this or that”.


84

Posted by Euro on Thu, 20 Aug 2009 19:04 | #

The Italic invaders whose descendants created the
Roman Republic were a semi-Nordic/Nordic people who traced their
ancestry from the north.  The same was true of the golden-haired Dorians
and Ionians who were the predecessors of the Greeks of the classical
era.  As the Romans and Greeks became more prosperous, alien peoples
were imported as labor or immigrated to share in their prosperity and
interbred with them.  As their prosperous civilizations reduced the
rigors of survival, the dysgenic decay process described in “Why
Civilizations Self-Destruct” by Dr. Elmer Pendell (Cape Canaveral, FL:
Howard Allen, Box 76; 1977) set in and degraded the innate competency
and fitness level of their population.  This step down the evolutionary
scale had already had a major impact prior to the alleged time of
Christ.

 

Dont tell me you’re one of those ridiculous “Nordicists,“James.Please,say it aint so.


85

Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 20 Aug 2009 19:04 | #

Q writes: I see a pseudo-intellectual with metal patient stamped on his forehead.

No.  Too much valid content has passed GT’s keyboard.  At worst, I suspect he’s suffering from something like <a href=“http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TC9-4FH0W95-3&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=986121270&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_versi>methamphetamine synergy with steroid aggression</a>, although that can present with delusions.


86

Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 20 Aug 2009 19:11 | #

Euro, “Nordicist” is a bit like “racist” so I’m not going there.

What I will say is that I tend to agree with WD Hamilton in his “Innate Social Aptitudes of Man” when he writes:

The incursions of barbaric pastoralists seem to do civilizations less harm in the long run than one might expect. Indeed, two dark ages and renaissances in Europe suggest a recurring pattern in which a renaissance follows an incursion by about 800 years. It may even be suggested that certain genes or traditions of pastoralists revitalize the conquered people with an ingredient of progress which tends to die out in a large panmictic population for the reasons already discussed. I have in mind altruism itself, or the part of the altruism which is perhaps better described as self-sacrificial daring. By the time of the renaissance it may be that the mixing of genes and cultures (or of cultures alone if these are the only vehicles, which I doubt) has continued long enough to bring the old mercantile thoughtfulness and the infused daring into conjunction in a few individuals who then find courage for all kinds of inventive innovation against the resistance of established thought and practice. Often, however, the cost in fitness of such altruism and sublimated pugnacity to the individuals concerned is by no means metaphorical, and the benefits to fitness, such as they are, go to a mass of individuals whose genetic correlation with the innovator must be slight indeed. Thus civilization probably slowly reduces its altruism of all kinds, including the kinds needed for cultural creativity (see also Eshel 1972).


87

Posted by Frank on Thu, 20 Aug 2009 19:27 | #

Euro,

have you seen this site: First Americans?


88

Posted by Q on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 00:01 | #

“At worst, I suspect he’s suffering from something like methamphetamine synergy with steroid aggression, although that can present with delusions.”


Hahahahaha!

Dem dar trailer park blue-bloods can sure be rowdy and uncouth at times.


89

Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 00:42 | #

Speaking as one of the “white trash”: it can happen to the best of us.


90

Posted by Drifter on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 00:51 | #

The elements that pagan religions share in common
with Christianity suggest the extent to which Christianity was a
“copycat” or “fabricated” religion that stole ideas from them or filled
a similar “niche” in the “psychological market” of the various peoples
in the Empire

The Sun and The Son: the halo is a Sol symbol with an apostle’s, a saint’s, or Christ’s face blocking it. Worship of the Sun (Son) continues. Wotan hung from a tree for wisdom, Jesus hung from a “tree” for salvation. There are many parallels.


91

Posted by Q on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 01:14 | #

James,

You are definitely NOT part of the white trash community. Far from it. White trash is measured by its quality of mind. You, James, are amongst the upper middle class—minus the money. But the money situation is probably a temporary situation. Unless you join GT’s road to poverty.


92

Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 02:53 | #

GT,

Could you expand upon the role of Freemasons in our racial decline please. 

P.S. I appreciate your ‘practical’ approach, it provides me with concrete goals I can focus on.  A related question: how, besides achieving system independence, does one become a effective sociopolitical entrepreneur?


93

Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 03:31 | #

A wealthy acquaintance of mine, in response to my discussion of putting on computer cracking contests at Silicon Valley raves to get attention from girls for “geeks” during the dot-con boom, said that he thought, “Money is the best measure of virtual dick-length”.  When it comes to screwing people, there is a sense in which he was prophetic.  Money is hardly a badge of honor and “white trash” is hardly a badge of shame.


94

Posted by GenoType on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 21:53 | #

Bowery’s left with posting reams of meaningless drivel, denying his intellectual posturing and the tacit put-downs of myself and others, explaining his online challenge for me to out myself, and claiming that his “plan” will save the largest number.  No shit, James?  You wanna save sheep?  I’m soothed.  Where may I send the donation? 

The antecedents for Bowery’s citizen’s bribe, defensively drawn from his ass, allow him to retain some measure of credit for the citizen’s bribe, or so he believes, despite key similarities to Dr. Milton “Free To Choose” Friedman’s negative income tax and Steve Sailer’s citizenism.  This is important to him because it misdirects attention from key points, helps to prop ego and public perception of himself, and enhances prospects for gaining financial support from pensioned paytriots having one foot in the grave.  But the fact is the alleged antecedents of Bowery’s citizen’s bribe are irrelevant.  Compare Friedman’s negative income tax with Bowery’s citizen’s bribe.  Digested shit is shit regardless of whether it comes from humans or birds.  The problem is this disenfranchised classist posing as a claymore-wielding “yeomen” would have our desperate lower-class eat this shit.  After all, what are they but cannon-fodder?

Bowery’s pose as a yeoman for the 21st century is based upon an economic rationalizations of the libertarian variety.  Among other things these rationalizations allow us to ignore inconvenient history and the very real behavioral deficiencies of Bowery’s targeted 21st century “yeoman” audience.  Such narrow focus prevents us from seeing the big picture and is easily exploited by self-serving classists posing as racial nationalists and anti-nationalist propagandists. Both groups are determined to derail attempts to develop and follow critically important paths for genuine white independence.  Suckering and succoring sheep is what libertarian economics is all about.

Accepting Bowery’s ‘yeomanry for the 21st century’ ultimately requires acceptance of the following premise:

Aloidal title to property is possible under a system where currency (or its value) is held of or by the King.

The premise is false. 

Bowery calls himself “the yeoman.”  With Scottish claymore enhancing the image, one might take him for an authentic reproduction. Nothing could be further from the truth.  The concept of “aloidal” title to property is libertarian fiction fit for online Renaissance Faires.

Debating all this is mere time-wasting for the “esoterically-inclined.”  Time wasting is what classists of conservative/libertarian bent do best.

I, on the other hand, am called a neo-feudalist for emphasizing local groups, small “informal” communities, alternate production and distribution, local barter and alternate currencies (read: decentralized), development of alternative energy resources on local scales, local political populism and civil legitimacy, and a rural and fringe suburban socio-political-economic strategy which emphasizes the manly virtues and independence.

When are you folks going to get serious?  I think never.  Work is too hard and tacit nonsense is too much fun.


95

Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 22:38 | #

GT apparently hallucinates: ...enhances prospects for gaining financial support from pensioned paytriots having one foot in the grave. 

It’s stuff like this that makes me think either GT is hallucinating or he is encountering someone posing as me behind the scenes.  Is there some guy posing as me running around raising money from the senile or is GT suffering from delusions?


96

Posted by GenoType on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 22:41 | #

Consumer Product Warning:

Money is hardly a badge of honor and “white trash” is hardly a badge of shame.

Do you buy this, folks?

This is Mr. Scientist with rocket and IT affiliations.  This is Mr. Stock Market with wealthy friends.  This is Mr. Political Insider affiliated with Ron Paul and the Republican Party!  This is Mr. Will Do IT Work For 8 Bucks p/Hr.  This is also Mr. Plato, King of Tacit Put-Downs.  MR’s king of intellectual intimidation.  The record is here and clear.  Citations are not required.  Those capable of understanding the tacit snubs, insults, and posturing of classists and classist wannabes can search it out. 

Bowery’s memory of slight is long.  Indeed, he does have a “plan” for white trash.  Has anybody here the intelligence and experiential knowledge to ascertain it?


97

Posted by Q on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 22:43 | #

GT,

With all (ahem) due respect, can you please answer Captainchaos’ question: “how, besides achieving system independence, does one become a effective sociopolitical entrepreneur?”


98

Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 23:57 | #

Does anyone have questions about my positions, based on GT’s criticisms (which seem too riddled with ad hominem and incoherence for response)?


99

Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 22 Aug 2009 00:25 | #

James,

Perhaps it is that I am somewhat slow on the uptake (perhaps a product of my having thirty less IQ points than you), but I don’t see how having implemented the citizen’s dividend will galvanize our people to kick the racially alien interlopers - who are our fellow “citizens” - out of our lands.

And could you expand on how, if, we don’t do it your way, we will be greeted with the unwelcoming future of having devolved into the Mole People of atrophied genitals?


100

Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 22 Aug 2009 02:36 | #

You won’t be a mole person with atrophied genitals if you don’t do it my way.  Just don’t make me do it your way, ok?

As to the citizens’ dividend:

If you have 3 guys sitting around a table dividing up loot on the basis of an inheritance, and two of them are brothers but the third one was “adopted” late in life by senile parents who left a third of the whole estate to the lately adopted “son” (who was supplying the parents with heroin), how likely do you think it is that the inheritance proceedings are going to stay out of court?

Now compare that to a situation where the recently adopted “son” is the only guy even contacted by the executor of the estate because the executor was in on the deal, and the 2 sons end up dead in a gutter somewhere because they were evicted and ended up mugged by some ethnic gangs in their low rent part of town…

What the citizen’s dividend does is put everyone at the table where as right now, only “protected groups” are at the table by virtue of having the entire political machinery of the West, including “community organizers” making sure that government spending goes to those “protected groups” while the rest of us flounder around thinking each of us is in our individual hell.

Which reminds me of another “yeoman” passage which I quoted as part of my “recent posturing”:

Newsgroups: soc.culture.scottish
From: “Jim Bowery” <jim_bowerydespam…@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 15:25:03 -0800
Subject: Re: Jews, Scots and Masonry


From “The Scotch-Irish: A Social History” by James G. Leyburn, chapter 7
“Causes of the Scottish Migration” section “A. Economic” on page 99:

Men move to new homes because of the attractions offered and because of the
unsatisfactory life they are presently living, and sometimes for both
reasons as well as for personal ones.  As the folk saying has it, the donkey
moves because of the carrot before and the stick behind.  Both carrot and
stick operated to move thousands of Scots across into northern Ireland in
the seventeenth century.

There was no doubt, at home or abroad, that life in Scotland was hard and
poor for most of its population.  Incentives to emigrate must have been
powerful if, as the estimates indicate, there were forty thousand
able-bodied Scots living in Ulster after the first thirty years of the
colonization project.  Into the general state of Scottish economic
backwardness had appeared, in the years just before 1610, a new cause of
hardship which, now that opportunity offered, was often determinative for
the prospective emigrant.  This new cause was the increasing hardship
occasioned by the spread of a form of land tenure, the “feu” which had the
effect of dispossessing many farmers of their traditional lands.

A “feu” is a device whereby the landlord may acquire money in reasonably
large sums: his tenant agrees to pay a fixed rent each year, with no
obligations of services; in return the landlord gives him lease for as long
as he pays his rent.  On the surface, it seems to be sound, practical and
even democratic, for it gives security to the farmer who rents the land,
enables him now with free conscience to make improvements, and rids him of
interruptions to his own labors to work on the landlord’s property.  The
appeal of the “feu” to the landlord is clear: he has a fixed and increased
income, for the payments of his tenants for the extended lease are fairly
heavy; and he has fewer farmers to deal with and fewer quarrels to settle.
It was the average humble farmer who was hit by the new device.  The
situation in Scotland resembled the hardships of English farmers in a later
period when landlords began to enclose land traditionally held, so that the
squire might raise sheep for the profitable woolen industry.  With the
introduction of the “feu” (a definite, if unintentional, breach in the
feudal system), Scottish tenants now saw lands which for generations had
been leased to their families let out to others.  If, by moving to some
other locality, the dispossessed farmer could still find no land to rent, he
was almost inevitably reduced to the position of becoming, at a great blow
to his pride, a mere laborer or subtenant.  Many of the dispossessed found
their way to the towns, to increase there the already grim number of
beggars.  Grant speaks eloquently of the hardships of dispossession as “only
one note in the great minor chord of misery that rings through so many
contemporary descriptions of the country-folk.”  Sir David Lindsay of the
Mount, who flourished during the reign of James V (1513-42), lamented the
fact that the tenure of “feuing” encouraged the dispossession of smaller
tenants by those who were able to pay more.  “Kindly tenants” and old
possessors were everywhere suffering, for in 1566 the proposal was made in
Parliament that “no mailer, farmer, or other occupier of lands, who pay
their order may be taken for the relief of the poor and “the better
forthsetting of the king’s service.”

The position of kindly tenants became steadily weaker.  If they had been the
ones who were able to pay the feu-fees, Scotland might have developed
something approximating the yeoman class in England
; but kindly tenants were
as little able to discover the money—were, indeed, quite as
poverty-stricken—as other tenants.  The “feus”, therefore, were chiefly
acquired by great landholders, especially by ambitious lairds, in order to
extend their estates; and the enlarged farms were now worked by hired
laborers who had lost their status and independence as tenants.

There are no figures by which the number of dispossessed may be estimated
for the Lowlands.  The process had gone on so slowly that it seemed to most
farmers to be their individual problem, their personal crisis
.  There was no
national movement of resistance to a development whose rationality was
evident.  By 1610, when the Plantation of Ulster was announced, many Scots
felt not only the stick of poverty, lawlessness, and insecurity, to which
they had grown accustomed; there was now the new goad of loss of status.  It
was, of course, not merely the dispossessed who were attracted to the
generous lands visible across the Channel from the shores of southwestern
Scotland.  The old Scottish readiness to go abroad to seek one’s fortune was
stimulated by the advertisements of the planters.  Country-folk far and wide
entered upon the migration.

Any Scot who had the inclination might now take the short journey across to
Ulster and there, on easy terms, acquire a holding of land reputed to be far
more fertile and productive than any he was likely to know in his own
country.  More than this, he would be encouraged in his enterprise: the
native Irish were to be driven back into the hills or expelled altogether,
and there would be the protection of the English army, with a promise of
peace and law.  All this was a powerful attraction to men who wanted to
better their lot.

Men: Discover your DNA patrilineage:
http://www.oxfordancestors.com/order.html#order_Y-Line
Jim’s page: http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery


101

Posted by Silv on Sat, 22 Aug 2009 19:53 | #

GT: Do you buy this, folks?

Sure. People routinely experience changes of heart.  Bowery’s, however temporary, isn’t inconsistent with feeling his talents merited greater socioeconomic standing than he has managed to attain.  Holding him to any higher standard sets the bar too high for anyone to clear, which is probably something worth bearing in mind if those microcommunities plan to attract any mere humans.


102

Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 22 Aug 2009 20:45 | #

I already showed my opinion about the Yeomanry to go back to 1994 and I can easily prove goes back to at least 1982.  If the “change of heart” went back to Jan 30, 1954 would we then assume that I had a prenatal experience of envy, Silver?

Videotex Networking and the American Pioneer

I wrote the following article during my tenure as the chief
architect for the mass-market videotex experiment conducted
by AT&T;and Knight-Ridder News called “Viewtron”—a service
of the joint-venture company, Viewdata Corporation of America.

As can be sensed in the article, I had encountered some fairly
frustrating situations and was about to be told by the
corporate authorities that my telecomputing architecture,
which would have provided a dynamically downloaded Forth
graphics protocol in 1983 evolving into a distributed
Smalltalk-like environment beginning around 1985, would be
abandoned due to a corporate commitment to stick with Tandem
Computers as the mainframe vendor—a choice which I had
asserted would not be adequate for my architecture.  (At least
Postscript survived.)  I was subsequently offered the head
telecomputing software position at Prodigy by IBM and
turned it down when they indicated they would not support my
architecture either, due to a committment to limit merchant
access to their network to only those who had a special
status with the service provider (IBM/CBS/Sears).  The distributed
Smalltalk system was specifically designed to allow the sort
of grassroots commerce now emerging in the world wide web—
particularly as people recognize JavaScript is similar to the
Self programming language and the Common Lisp Object System.
This wasn’t in keeping with IBM’s philosophy at that time since
they had yet to be humbled by Bill Gates.

My independent attempt at developing this sort of service was
squashed by the U.S. government when it provided UUCP/Usenet
service to a competitor in San Diego and would not offer me
the same subsidy via MILnet—a network that was not for
public access, by law, and which was exclusively for military
use.  My complaints to DoD investigators resulted in continual
“We’re looking into it.” replies.

——————————————————————————————————-
                Videotex Networking
                    and
                The American Pioneer


                by Jim Bowery
                (circa 1982)


With the precipitous drop in the price of information technology,
computer-based communication has come within the technical and
economic reach of the mass-market.  The term generally used for this
mass-market is “videotex” because it reduces the cost of entry into
the home by using the most ubiquitous video display device, the
television screen, to deliver its service.

The central importance of this new market is that it brings the
capital cost of establishing a publication with nation-wide
distribution to within the reach of the mass-market as well.  This
means that anyone who is a “consumer” of information on this new
technology can also be a “producer” of information.  The distinction
between editorial staff and readership need no longer be a function of
who has how much money, but rather, who has the greatest consumer
appeal.  The last time an event of this magnitude took place was the
invention of the offset printer which brought the cost of publication
to within the reach of small businesses.  That democratization of
cultural evolution was protected in our constitution under freedom of
the press.  Freedom of speech was intended for the masses.  In this
new technology, the distinction between press and speech is beginning
to blur.  Some individuals and institutions see this as removing the
new media from either of the constitutional protections rather than
giving it both.  They see a great danger in allowing the uncensored
ideas of individuals to spread across the entire nation within seconds
at a cost of only a few cents.  A direct quote from a person with
authority in the management of this new technology:  “We view videotex
as ‘we the institutions’ providing ‘you the people’ with information.”
I wonder what our founding fathers would have thought of a statement
like that.

Mass-media influences cultural evolution in profound ways.  Rather
that assuming a paternalistic posture, we should be objective about
these influences in making policy and technology decisions about the
new media.  It is important to try and preserve the positive aspects
of extant media while eliminating its deficits.  On the positive side,
mass-media is very effective at eliminating “noise” or totally
uninteresting information compared to, say, CB radio.  This is
accomplished via responsible editorial staffs and market forces. On
the negative side, much “signal” or vital information is eliminated
along with the noise.  A good example of this is the way mass-media
attends to relatively temporal things like territorial wars, nuclear
arms, economic ills, social stratification ... etc. to the utter
exclusion of attending to the underlying cause of these events:  our
limits to growth.  The need for “news” is understandable, but how long
should we talk about which shade of yellow Joe’s eye is, how his wife
and her lover feel about it and whether he will wear sun-glasses out
of embarrassment before we start talking about a cure for jaundice?

Mass-media has failed to give appropriate coverage to the most
significant and interesting issue facing us because of the close tie
between institutional culture and editorial policy.  Institutional
evolution selects people-oriented people—individuals with great
personal force.  These people are consumed with their social
orientation to the point that they ignore or cannot understand
information not relating in fairly direct ways to politics or the
psychological aspects of economics.  Since institutional evolution is
reflected in who has authority over what, editorial authority
eventually reflects the biases of this group.  They cannot understand
life, except as something that generates politics and “human interest”
stories.  They may even, at some level of awareness, work to maintain
our limits to growth since it places their skills at a premium.  In a
people-saturated environment (one at its limits to growth)
people-oriented people are winners.

Actually, this is an ancient problem that keeps rearing its ugly head
in many places in many forms.  In my industry its called the “Whiz
Kids vs. MBAs” syndrome.  Others have termed it “Western Cowboys vs.
Eastern Bankers”.  The list is without end.  I prefer to view it as a
more stable historical pattern:  “Pioneers vs. Feudalists”.

Pioneers are skilled at manipulating unpeopled environments to suit
their needs whereas feudalists are skilled at manipulating peopled
environments to suit their needs.  Although, these are not necessarily
exclusive traits, people do seem to specialize toward one end or the
other simply because both skills require tremendous discipline to
master and people have limited time to invest in learning.

Pioneers want to be left alone to do their work and enjoy its fruits.
Feudalists say “no man is an island” and feel the pioneer is a “hick”
or worse, an escapist.  Feudalists view themselves as lords and
pioneers as serfs.  Pioneers view feudalists as either irrelevant or
as some sort of inevitable creeping crud devouring everything in its
path.  At their best, feudalists represent the stable balance and
harmony exhibited by Eastern philosophy.  At their worst, feudalists
represent the tyrannical predation of pioneers unable to escape
domination.  At their best, pioneers represent the freedom, diversity
and respect for the individual represented by Western philosophy.  At
their worst, pioneers represent the inefficient, destructive
exploitation of virgin environs.

The Atlantic and Pacific Oceans selected pioneers for the New World.
The Pioneer is in our cultural and our blood.  But now that our
frontier resources have vanished, the “creeping crud” of feudalism is
catching up with us.  This change in perspective is making itself felt
in all aspects of our society:  big corporations, big government and
institutional mass-media.  As the disease progresses, we find ourselves
looking and behaving more and more like one big company town.  Soviet
Russia has already succumbed to this disease.  The only weapon we have
that is truly effective against it is our greatest strength:  innovation.

I firmly believe that, except to the extent that they have been silenced by
the media’s endless barrage of feudalistic values, the American people
are pioneers to their core.  They are starved to share these values
with each other but they cannot because there is no mode of
communication that will support their values.  Videotex may not be as
efficient at replicating and distributing information as broadcast,
but it does provide, for the first time in history, a means of
removing the editorial monopoly from feudalists and allowing pioneers
to share their own values.  There will be a battle over this “privilege”
(although one would think freedom of the press and speech should be
rights).  The outcome of this battle of editorial freedom vs. control in
videotex may well determine whether or not civilization ends in a war
over resources, continues with the American people spear-heading an
explosion into the high frontier or, pipe-dream of pipe-dreams, slides
into world-wide feudalism hoping to control nuclear arms and
“equitably” distribute our dwindling terrestrial resources.

There is a tremendous danger that careless promotion of deregulation
will be dogmatically (or purposefully) extended to the point that
there may form an unregulated monopoly over the information replicated
across the nation-wide videotex network, now underdevelopment.  If
this happens, the prophecies of a despotic, “cashless-society” are
quite likely to become a reality.  My opinion is that this nightmare
will eventually be realized but not before the American pioneers have
had a chance to reach each other and organize.  I base this hope on
the fact that the first people to participate in the videotex network
will represent some of the most pioneering of Americans, since
videotex is a new “territory”.

The question at hand is this:  How do we mold the early videotex
environment so that noise is suppressed without limiting the free flow
of information between customers?

The first obstacle is, of course, legal.  As the knights of U.S.
feudalism, corporate lawyers have a penchant for finding ways of
stomping out innovation and diversity in any way possible.  In the
case of videotex, the attempt is to keep feudal control of information
by making videotex system ownership imply liability for information
transmitted over it.  For example, if a libelous communication takes
place, corporate lawyers for the plaintiff will bring suit against the
carrier rather than the individual responsible for the communication.
The rationalizations for this clearly unreasonable and contrived
position are quite numerous.  Without a common carrier status, the
carrier will be treading on virgin ground legally and thus be
unprotected by precedent.  Indeed, the stakes are high enough that the
competitor could easily afford to fabricate an event ideal for the
purposes of such a suit.  This means the first legal precedent could
be in favor of holding the carrier responsible for the communications
transmitted over its network, thus forcing (or giving an excuse for)
the carrier to inspect, edit and censor all communications except,
perhaps, simple person-to-person or “electronic mail”.  This, in turn,
would put editorial control right back in the hands of the feudalists.
Potential carriers’ own lawyers are already hard at work worrying
everyone about such a suit.  They would like to win the battle against
diversity before it begins.  This is unlikely because videotex is
still driven by technology and therefore by pioneers.

The question then becomes:  How do we best protect against such
“legal” tactics?  The answer seems to be an early emphasis on secure
identification of the source of communications so that there can be no
question as to the individual responsible.  This would preempt an
attempt to hold the carrier liable.  Anonymous communications, like
Delphi conferencing, could even be supported as long as some
individual would be willing to attach his/her name to the
communication before distributing it.  This would be similar, legally,
to a “letters to the editor” column where a writer remains anonymous.
Another measure could be to require that only individuals of legal age
be allowed to author publishable communications.  Yet another measure
could be to require anyone who wishes to write and publish information
on the network to put in writing, in an agreement separate from the
standard customer agreement, that they are liable for any and all
communications originating under their name on the network.  This
would preempt the “stolen password” excuse for holding the carrier
liable.

Beyond the secure identification of communication sources, there is
the necessity of editorial services.  Not everyone is going to want to
filter through everything published by everyone on the network.  An
infrastructure of editorial staffs is that filter.  In exchange for
their service the editorial staff gets to promote their view of the
world and, if they are in enough demand, charge money for access to
their list of approved articles.  On a videotex network, there is
little capital involved in establishing an editorial staff.  All that
is required is a terminal and a file on the network which may have an
intrinsic cost as low as $5/month if it represents a publication with
“only” around 100 articles.  The rest is up to the customers.  If they
like a publication, they will read it.  If they don’t they won’t.  A
customer could ask to see all articles approved by staffs A or B
inclusive, or only those articles approved by both A and B, etc.  This
sort of customer selection could involve as many editorial staffs as
desired in any logical combination.  An editorial staff could review
other editorial staffs as well as individual articles, forming
hierarchies to handle the mass of articles that would be submitted
every day.  This sort of editorial mechanism would not only provide a
very efficient way of filtering out poor and questionable
communications without inhibiting diversity, it would add a layer of
liability for publications that would further insulate carriers from
liability and therefore from a monopoly over communications.
...


103

Posted by Q on Sun, 23 Aug 2009 00:03 | #

Silver, Fred Scrooby, Guessdworker= axis of intelligence. CC too.

GT, Castro, Jane Fonda = axis of idiots. I-DEE-ITS!


104

Posted by James Bowery on Sun, 23 Aug 2009 14:02 | #

Now you’re talking my “white trash”, Fred!  Those are the Bowery’s.  Its those kind of folks I had in mind in 1982 when I was referring to “pioneers”.  I don’t think anyone would confuse East Tennessee folk like us with what “Q” above refers to as “upper middle class”.

In my 1982 paper, the passage:

If this happens, the prophecies of a despotic, “cashless-society” are
quite likely to become a reality.  My opinion is that this nightmare
will eventually be realized but not before the American pioneers have
had a chance to reach each other and organize.  I base this hope on
the fact that the first people to participate in the videotex network
will represent some of the most pioneering of Americans, since
videotex is a new “territory”.

...was motivated by my early thinking along the lines of an agrarian distributed barter system that would come into play eventually as the network revolution played itself out (resulting in part from my responsibility in 1982 for doing the encryption of “shop at home” services in the VIEWTRON system).  This is part of the reason I later convinced Dan Brumleve to apply his computer cracking skills to implementing a distributed barter system called “dBarter” that won the prize for most promising software at the 2001 Hackers Conference in Santa Rosa. 

But I have to admit, the history of the state of Franklin is something that didn’t make it down as family lore—so I need to do a more detailed autopsy on the death of that experiment in human ecology.  Although, I do know from family lore there were several cases where Cherokee massacred settlers—women and children—including Bowery’s in those counties, I suspect Franklin’s failure had to do more with the tax base than the Indian attacks.  You just can’t tax homesteads, the assets _or_ the supporting activities, and get away with it unless you have something like a citizen’s dividend to liquidate it.  That is what Shay’s Rebellion was about as well.

PS:  If only I’d known of GT’s prior work in electronic barter in 1982, or of Q, CC and Silver in 1982, they might have provided me with the “leadership” I so clearly needed to avoid ending up with fears of Mole People with atrophied genitalia!


105

Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 23 Aug 2009 17:13 | #

fears of Mole People with atrophied genitalia!

Fighting needs to be coupled with fucking to the greatest degree possible, within the existing realm of the prescriptive Boweriverse of course.  So, the victor in a contest of single combat to the death should be given all the females under the control of the sovereign he has just dispatched.  Some of which he will give to Muslims as a placatory gesture, if he so chooses.


106

Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 23 Aug 2009 17:38 | #

If only I’d known of GT’s prior work

I think GT is right, 90% of Whites do deserve to be left to the niggers who will in turn fuck them and eat them, though not necessarily in that order.  Everything we ever needed to know about morality was indeed conveyed in the Turner Diaries.  Yet it is all the stuff of such a rarefied ethos I’m having trouble deciding.  No matter, I’m sure Diamed would give his thumbs up to either proposal.  Who says at least some Jews can’t be spiritually White?


107

Posted by Q on Sun, 23 Aug 2009 18:47 | #

Re: barter system. Times and laws have changed .. and not for the better. As for microcommunities, all it would take is for one pissed-off asshole to drop a dime to the IRS which would destroy the whole operation.

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc420.html

James,

Your “Citizens Dividend” idea has much merit. The only problem is it requires people in power to implement it. The current power structure has too much invested in the welfare system as it exists. Too many peoples’ income and fortunes are built upon and around it—especially the negroes. A ‘Citizen Dividend’ would in effect knock the keystone right out and cause the whole welfare structure to collapse. Which in turn would spark riots from coast to coast. That would be bad for bussiness; therefore. the big money men (whom control the government) won’t allow such sweeping changes to the social order.


108

Posted by James Bowery on Sun, 23 Aug 2009 19:19 | #

I really have only one question for you, Q:

Why won’t the BNP use the citizen’s dividend plank to take over the UK and, more generally, the New Right parties use it to take over the EU?


109

Posted by Q on Sun, 23 Aug 2009 20:13 | #

Why won’t the BNP use the citizen’s dividend plank to take over the UK and, more generally, the New Right parties use it to take over the EU?

James,

All I can say about that is they certainly should. Unlike our two party system—which would surly block such attempts—they have the political avenues in which to advance that plank. So there is no good reason for them not to.

Except, of course, there is a certain group of interlopers (mainly Jews) whom will fund a media campaign along with back channel lobbying (i.e. bribes and threats) designed to overwhelm and discredit the proponents of a ‘Citizen Dividend’.


110

Posted by Mark IJsseldijk on Sun, 23 Aug 2009 20:22 | #

90% of Whites do deserve to be left to the niggers who will in turn fuck them and eat them, though not necessarily in that order.

Careful, Cap’n.  You’re starting to sound like Pastor “Slay All Whiggers” Lindstedt.


111

Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 23 Aug 2009 20:46 | #

You’re starting to sound like Pastor “Slay All Whiggers” Lindstedt.

I was being sarcastic.


112

Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 24 Aug 2009 00:06 | #

Q responds to my very specific question: “All I can say about that is they certainly should.”

Unfortunate that is all you can say.  Please meditate on my question put directly to you for it is important that you should come up with what you believe to be the answer.  I repeat it for clarity:

“Why won’t the BNP use the citizen’s dividend plank to take over the UK and, more generally, the New Right parties use it to take over the EU?”


113

Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 24 Aug 2009 02:04 | #

Why won’t the BNP use the citizen’s dividend plank to take over the UK and, more generally, the New Right parties use it to take over the EU?”

Several reasons:

1.) They have not yet humbled themselves before Bowery’s omniscience.

2.) The seek to sway the minds of the lemmings, and the lemmings are conventional people.

3.) The citizen’s dividend, as opposed to the existing dispensation of the use of taxes, comes across as a bit of kookiness which emerged straight of of left field.

4.) Conventional people (the people they are trying to sway) don’t respond terribly positively to what they perceive as kookiness.

5.) The lemmings are decadent, and like the nanny state.  They don’t want it dismantled in favor of actually having to manage their own money and lives.  Pulling the lever for the BNP, and donating anonymously to it, are much easier.

6.) The overriding issue, the meta-issue, at hand is not erecting a new economic dispensation (i.e., a citizen’s dividend as opposed to the nanny state), it is galvanizing a sufficient number of our people to the cause of securing the existence of our race to effect said.  Political and intellectual leaders probably figure, to the degree they are aware of the citizen’s dividend and have considered it at all, that the direct approach which promises to rock the boat as little as possible is most effective.

Basically for all the reasons GT rants about: “Lazy, greedy, stupid human sheep that don’t deserve my pearls nor to survive for that matter!”

Any questions?


114

Posted by Q on Mon, 24 Aug 2009 02:20 | #

“Why won’t the BNP use the citizen’s dividend plank to take over the UK and, more generally, the New Right parties use it to take over the EU?”

Unfortunately change in politics is invariably a slow and painful process. Change requires a groundswell of support and more importantly, people in power to effect change. Right now the BNP is only beginning to acquire power. Hopefully the BNP will exponentially increase their power as they become more and more successful at the ballot box. Bowden articulates how that works at the end of this speech.

Question: To your knowledge has any of the BNP handlers engaged in focus group research as to the marketability of Citizens Dividend? Have any polls been taken to see how popular the idea is within the general public? What percentage of the general population understands what a Citizen’s Dividend is, yet alone
ever heard of it?

First and foremost the BNP needs to gain more seats/power. Then a massive education campaign or public service announcements on the subject of Citizen’s Dividend needs to be disseminated to the working native Brits and EU members. But as things stand, it is too premature to propose such a radical plan.

Now, James, I would like hear why you think the BNP, et Al, are not proposing Citizen’s Dividend? Or are they and I am just unaware?


115

Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 24 Aug 2009 05:05 | #

If anyone wants to know why there is no point in communicating with Captainchaos, let alone directing serious questions to him:

Posted by Mark IJsseldijk on August 23, 2009, 11:22 AM | #

CC wrote: 90% of Whites do deserve to be left to the niggers who will in turn fuck them and eat them, though not necessarily in that order.

Careful, Cap’n.  You’re starting to sound like Pastor “Slay All Whiggers” Lindstedt.

Posted by Captainchaos on August 23, 2009, 11:46 AM | #

MI wrote: You’re starting to sound like Pastor “Slay All Whiggers” Lindstedt.

I was being sarcastic.

Posted by Captainchaos on August 23, 2009, 05:04 PM | #

...Lazy, greedy, stupid human sheep that don’t deserve my pearls nor to survive for that matter!

Definitely a minus for MR.


116

Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 24 Aug 2009 05:09 | #

Q asks: What percentage of the general population understands what a Citizen’s Dividend is, yet alone
ever heard of it?

That’s a bit like asking “What percent of the general population understands what 1000€/month deposited straight into the bank account of every resident adult citizen (rather than giving it to immigrants and political favorites) is, let alone what a € is?”

Thank you for demonstrating your intellectual class, Q.

As for my explanation for why the BNP and EU New Right won’t focus their energies on the Citizen’s Dividend:

Politics attracts second and third rate leadership—generally acting as a lightning rod to ground real talent.  You’re dead wrong about the people not getting the idea.  They’re desperate for it right now—starting prior to the bailouts of their creditors last year in fact.  It’s a slam dunk hanging over the hoop—defying gravity by waiting there with the West down one point and seconds left in the game. 

And the BNP and New Right parties of the EU will piss it away anyway because they have people even less worthy of leadership than you in charge.

The only good reason to involve one’s self in politics, as I have said repeatedly of the Ron Paul campaign, is that one meets people one can network with to form resilient communities.  (GT’s moniker, “microcommunities” is a conflation with “microstates”.)


117

Posted by Frank on Mon, 24 Aug 2009 05:59 | #

James Bowery,

1000 / month is enough to live off of. I acknowledge it’d be difficult, but it could be done nevertheless. Blacks and Mexicans would sit around having babies while whites would struggle for a middle class standard of living. And much of it would be consumed as opposed to invested, so the economy would be weakened. And you’d still have people who fall ill in need of medical services, and thus draw sympathy.

Have you done the figures anywhere as to which services would be replaced and what amounts are involved?

I like (Jewish) Hartman’s proposal: BTT. Add to that limits on the wealthiest people - e.g. cap ceo salaries as Japan does, even consider restructuring the corporate system to allow for liability, reform the media system (no monopolies), and reform the banking and financial system (no gambling, no Federal Reserve, no lending of money that isn’t there, no usury, etc.)


118

Posted by Frank on Mon, 24 Aug 2009 06:03 | #

Giving people money might be a cunning strategy for winning them over, but I fear there’d be no taking it away from them once given. Ideally, people would be made self sufficient, and those who need a handler could find help at the local level. And ideally, wealth would not be over concentrated - some standard would be set.

That’s the difference between the (perhaps impossible) ideal of distributism and socialism. Distributism though should (by my definition) take the entirety into account, but such policies (imo) should be best for the overall state under normal circumstances (though during unusual circumstances different policies might be ideal).


119

Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 24 Aug 2009 06:09 | #

First of all, Frank, it is only 1000€ if they get rid of the parasites—it is more like 600€ if they don’t cut the parasites out of CITIZENSHIP.

But more fundamentally, you don’t get the name of the game, Frank:

Pay your people from public coffers so they have enough time to engage in political action to protect their interests.

Whites can’t protect their interests because their life is being drained from them by “protected groups” paid from the public coffers—drained to the point that guys like CC and GT just want to kill them as lifeless zombies.  They’re not zombies.  They’re victims of parasites that need the hemorrhage slowed enough that they can see more clearly the suckers attached to them, draining the life from the body politic.

As for health care and compassion:

Dump them off at the doors of the preachers and priests that import them.

As for “self sufficiency”: What do you call it when a land owner lives off the rent he collects from his tenants?  The Citizen’s Dividend is called a “dividend”, not because of the need for a rhetorical slight of hand (the way “entitlement” is used to justify paying parasites to eat out the substance of the posterity of the founders of the US)—but because man enters into a social contract with other men and in the process gives up his right to kill another for enough land to support himself and his children.  Moreover, modern technology has made it more than reasonable to expect that men should have the same kind of leisure that only accrued to slave-owning classes in prior history.


120

Posted by Mark IJsseldijk on Mon, 24 Aug 2009 07:51 | #

James,

What’s to stop a few anonymous Euro activists from spreading this idea among the rank-and-file citizenry esp. those most affected by the present economic dystopia?  Whether in the form of pamphlets or a bit of demagogue-ism away from prying eyes, the dividend idea could be shopped directly to the folk - cutting out the middlemen as it were.  Is this so unfeasible that Euro common folk need rely upon careerists, er, “leaders” to shop the idea?  No indeed, they can do it themselves if they gather the initiative.

I’m sure it could be framed in language accessible enough that the man on the street could see clearly what it means for them.

There are a few questions (viz. political action; legal barriers from EU members and Brussels alike) on this matter still, however.  I’m just too tired to get into them tonight.


121

Posted by Q on Mon, 24 Aug 2009 14:48 | #

Bottom line. Citizen’s Dividend is a half-baked, short sighted, solution to a complex social/economic/racial problem destined to remain within the confines of think-tanks.

The fact is: most of the general population never heard of it. (Note: I never said they are not capable of understanding it, on the contrary.) But once they become familiar with the details, the obvious negatives will become evident; thus, they will duly reject it due to the inevitable social upheaval it will ignite. Surly you’re familiar with the Law of Unintended Consequences?

There are just too many people—a majority I venture to say—that depend on, and enjoy ‘handout-heaven’. Let’s face it, most people are statists, pure and simple. If you can change the prevailing statist mindset, then meaningful reform can take effect within the corrupt and racially biased welfare-state.


122

Posted by Frank on Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:13 | #

Pay your people from public coffers so they have enough time to engage in political action to protect their interests.

Ideally we’d have an aristocracy to run the state, and the ignorant wouldn’t need to worry about voting if they didn’t want to pursue the hurdles in their path to voting rights.

Talk of social contract and other ideological claims are solely for argumentative purposes and shouldn’t actually be believed. Ideologies that are in the ethnic interest should be taken up over those that are not. They’re useful for pursuing ethnic interests (which I do not equate with EGI - though the two are nearly equal there’s a material difference and for me at least EGI is only useful as an ideology itself).

I never signed a social contract, though I was born a Southerner and as such I have a duty to that nation as well as its origin nations in Europe. My ancestors helped carve out the South, but we were conquered and then tamed and brainwashed and made to forget who we are. I’m a dereconstructed residue who’s awakened to find he’s a serf in his own homeland enthralled to invaders, the remnant Yankees who mixed with them, and his people’s former slaves.


123

Posted by Frank on Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:24 | #

An aristocracy couldn’t work in America today, but my intent was to remind of how ridiculous mass democracy is. The nation should be run by the best, and there’s no sense in giving each “individual” an equal say. The best (most virtuous) should rule in the interests of the whole.

It just so happens that in America at the present a mass movement is more in white interests, but that’s only temporary. In the long term, the masses will fall prey to demagogues and greed.

Whites can’t protect their interests because their life is being drained from them by “protected groups” paid from the public coffers

I suspect the opposite is true. We’ve grown wealthy and soft. As the middle class shrinks and as discrimination against whites, esp white males, becomes more painful and apparent, more will stand up against it. The problem isn’t a lack of power so much as a lack of will.


124

Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 24 Aug 2009 18:59 | #

Mark IJsseldijk writes: What’s to stop a few anonymous Euro activists from spreading this idea among the rank-and-file citizenry esp. those most affected by the present economic dystopia?

What is to stop them is the need for a party apparatus as a vehicle—and it is clear that even guys like “Q”, who are both head and shoulders above the party leadership and in a financial position to influence them—are incapable of perceiving the reality of trillion dollar bailouts of financial institutions being just as “half baked” as sending out monthly subsistence checks to all resident citizens.  In other words, the best hope of influencing the BNP leadership—head and shoulders above the BNP leadership—has shit-for-brains.

The only way the grassroots can influence party leadership is basically to threaten violence.


125

Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 24 Aug 2009 23:48 | #

guys like CC and GT just want to kill them as lifeless zombies.

Get this through your head Bowery: I was satirizing some of the more extreme, morally depraved things you and GT have recommended.  Yet the reasons I gave as to why no political or intellectual leaders have adopted your citizen’s dividend ought to be taken seriously.


126

Posted by Frank on Tue, 25 Aug 2009 01:40 | #

James, I might not be won over by your plan, but it sounds better than paying 260 pounds per household for membership in the EU!

If you want to win folks over, just draw the numbers. No matter how foolish the plan, if you make it into an appealing proposal many will be won over just from the confidence and promise of it… Whether or not it’s a good idea probably doesn’t matter as much as whether the presentation is good.



Post a comment:


Name: (required)

Email: (required but not displayed)

URL: (optional)

Note: You should copy your comment to the clipboard or paste it somewhere before submitting it, so that it will not be lost if the session times out.

Remember me


Next entry: Press Call
Previous entry: MMORPG and the Slaughter of the Innocents

image of the day

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Categories

Contributors

Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer.

Links

Endorsement 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

Comments

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Sun, 22 Dec 2024 01:03. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'The Indian/Chinese IQ puzzle continued for comments after 1000' on Sat, 21 Dec 2024 16:14. (View)

anonymous commented in entry 'The Indian/Chinese IQ puzzle continued for comments after 1000' on Fri, 20 Dec 2024 21:12. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 19 Dec 2024 01:13. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 19 Dec 2024 01:11. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 21:35. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 20:51. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 19:49. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 18:47. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 23:29. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 22:01. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 19:52. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 18:17. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 14:23. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Sun, 08 Dec 2024 14:19. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Fri, 06 Dec 2024 20:13. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Fri, 06 Dec 2024 01:08. (View)

James Marr commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Wed, 04 Dec 2024 19:00. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Mon, 02 Dec 2024 23:41. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'The journey to The Hague revisited, part 1' on Sat, 30 Nov 2024 21:20. (View)

James Bowery commented in entry 'The journey to The Hague revisited, part 1' on Sat, 30 Nov 2024 17:56. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Sat, 30 Nov 2024 13:34. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Sat, 30 Nov 2024 04:44. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Fri, 29 Nov 2024 01:45. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Thu, 28 Nov 2024 23:49. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Thu, 28 Nov 2024 01:33. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Thu, 28 Nov 2024 00:02. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Wed, 27 Nov 2024 17:12. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Wed, 27 Nov 2024 12:53. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Olukemi Olufunto Adegoke Badenoch wins Tory leadership election' on Wed, 27 Nov 2024 04:56. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Tue, 26 Nov 2024 02:10. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Mon, 25 Nov 2024 02:05. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sun, 24 Nov 2024 19:32. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Sat, 23 Nov 2024 01:32. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Fri, 22 Nov 2024 00:28. (View)

affection-tone