|
|
|
Myth and self-interest in the creation of a white American republic 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:
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:
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:
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:
“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.
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:
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: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.
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.
6
Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on Sun, 09 Aug 2009 18:58 | #
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 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 | #
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. 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 | #
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’
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 | #
Let us not forget that Thomas Jefferson was an Agrarian type as well! Was he some proto-nazi too?!?!?!
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.
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.
ROTHFLMAO. What a pile of shite! 18
Posted by weston on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 04:32 | #
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 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. 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. 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 | #
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
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. 26
Posted by Valerian on Mon, 10 Aug 2009 20:44 | # John Bonaccorsi ,
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 There are Americans, there are Jews and there are Italians. Pretty much sums up the common wisdom around here, even among the Huddled Masses.
28
Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on Tue, 11 Aug 2009 07:08 | #
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. 33
Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on Wed, 12 Aug 2009 06:00 | #
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 | #
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 | # 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.”
37
Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 12 Aug 2009 17:46 | # From the WikiPedia article on Charles Murray:
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 | #
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 | #
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” 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 | #
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:
There were detractors, of course.
47
Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on Thu, 13 Aug 2009 00:26 | #
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 | #
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?
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 | #
“...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. —— 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:
62
Posted by GenoType on Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:08 | #
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 | #
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.
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.
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.
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. 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!!! 68
Posted by GenoType on Wed, 19 Aug 2009 01:39 | #
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. 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 | #
Actually I’m 90th percentile in terms of height and strongly built. And I’ve never been particularly obsequious either.
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 | #
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:
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
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:
? 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 | #
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:
88
Posted by Q on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 00:01 | #
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 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:
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”:
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?
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:
...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 | #
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 | #
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 | #
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 | #
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 | #
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 | #
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 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:
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 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 | #
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.
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 | #
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:
Next entry: Press Call
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) |
Posted by 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.