|
|
|
To the Des Moines Register As Politicians Start to Ignore Iowa Politicians are starting to ignore Iowa. Big surprise given the fact that America is no more. The zombies may wake up but sometimes they need a little help. What follows is my response to a story about Iowa’s loss of political relevance as candidates skip the Ames straw poll. The cost of reproduction has risen by a factor of nearly 4 since I was born in 1954, fertilizing the portfolios of landlords, or more properly, land barons, with the decomposing marriages, fetuses and sometimes bodies of the bulk of the baby boom generation, leaving a demographic hole being filled with imported slaves* by those same landlords. The baronage calls this “progress”, even as, in 1981, when boomers were marrying and entering the market for homes, the price of homes was removed from the consumer price index while introducing CPI factors like “hedonic value” and ”imputed rent” to make it appear “real” earnings have increased over the time period of demographic collapse and loss of ethnic enfranchisement to imported laborers for the baronage. I call it genocide as it is part of a pattern of intentional anti-nationalistic ideology pervading the globalist elites—and it has real-world impacts on entire populations. One consequence of this is the reduction of the importance of places like Iowa. They’re simply too “white bread” to be relevant to politics anymore. The America of my father, a Quaker who left his fellowship to fight the Germans before WW II and then returned to win the National Clean Plowing Championships 2 years running, is no more. It has been viciously attacked and destroyed. Republicans are fooling themselves if they think they can solve this problem by pandering to Mexicans. The real problem is the destruction of their base through making formation of families unaffordable for all born after the early boomers (the early boomers got in on the real estate gravy train): At present, the government functions primarily as a transfer program—transferring wealth from the middle class to the wealthy and subsistence fertility from the middle class to immigrants. This has created the crisis. Ron Paul doesn’t offer a complete solution but he at least recognizes that the US Constitution is a social contract for the control of territory for the citizens of the US, and he recognizes that tax revenue has become captive of special interests. What he doesn’t get yet is that government’s primary service, property rights beyond those of subsistence territory, are the proper source of revenue as a use fee should be paid for those services. Likewise, he doesn’t get the nature of economic rent—that some property rights are more prone to benefit from positive externalities than others—and that even distribution of those positive externalities is a proper role of government. In short, he’s right that the IRS should be abolished but then he needs to recognize that government revenue should consist basically of what modern portfolio theory calls the “risk free asset” component of property rights—essentially charging a fee for the net liquidation value of assets at a rate equal to short term treasuries—with no fees applied to homesteads and tools of the trade for families since these are properties they would have in the absence of government through their own defense of their subsistence territory. Moreover, discretion should not be left in the hands of the government as to the distribution of this revenue—it should—as everyone from Martin Luther King, Jr. to Charles Murray of the AEI has suggested, be evenly distributed to all citizens as a citizens dividend. Put the voting power of those dollars back into the citizens’ hands. Comments:2
Posted by Frank McGuckin on Wed, 20 Jun 2007 12:44 | # kurt9 Can you back up your statements with a well developed argument? 3
Posted by Frank McGuckin on Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:07 | # The libertarian argument against goverment involvement in the economy has never been very impressive. It doesn’t go much beyond chanting big goverment is always bad over and over again. For what it is worth, economist Paul Romer-son of former Colorado governor Buddy Romer-in a series of technical papers argues that the decline in the American economy was brought about by an oversupply of labor which caused a drop in technological inovation. He in fact discussess the crucial role of immigration in causing the decline in American economic growth in these papers. You can clearly see this in robotics technology. Robotics technology has been trying to break out for years. The reason it hasn’t is because immigration policy has provided human slaves to the US economy. If the 1965 immigration refrom act had not been passed, it is very likely that the robotics revolution would be well underway in the US. A robotics revolution would created a demand for skilled labor which tends to demand higher ages. Don’t blame Keynes. It was the massive violation of free market principles that brought about the pc,browser and internet technology. Don’t blame the Greatest Generation. Blame Ted Kennedy, powerfull Jewish organizations and post 1965non-white legal immigrants and their gene-line in the US for the decline in the White American standard of living. American White Males are have having increasing difficulty finding a mate and starting a family because they are being forced to compete with high fertility asian,muslim,hispanic.muslim,carribean and africa males for affordable housing,breeding space. This is kind of obvious. Don’t blame WWII vets and their wives. 4
Posted by Frank McGuckin on Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:38 | # It’s very accurate Fred. In fact, all you have to do is the read the abstracts to the two publications. Romer will very likely recieve the Noble prize for this research. Larger issue. White American racial interests determine economc policy, not the other way around. If you take a lot of the free market/neoclassical nonesense seriously, then one is lead to conclusion that a strong American economy requires the racial annihilation of White. The racial annihilation part isn’t explicitly stated, but it would be a direct consequence of flooding US labor markets with high-fertility asian,muslim,hispanic,carribean and african scab labor. Anybody here in favor of the Sailer/Borjas point system? God how I hate Sailer. 5
Posted by ben tillman on Wed, 20 Jun 2007 14:29 | # “The libertarian argument against goverment involvement in the economy has never been very impressive.” There isn’t a libertarian argument against government involvement in the economy. There’s a libertarian argument against STATE invovement in the economy, which is a corollary of the argument against the existence of the state at all. 6
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 20 Jun 2007 14:41 | # ben: which is a corollary of the argument against the existence of the state at all. Which is a corollary of the argument against the capacity of Jewish host societies to self-organise. At all. 7
Posted by TG on Wed, 20 Jun 2007 14:58 | # “Politicians are starting to ignore Iowa.” Pat Buchanan has a good take on why the STINKING RINO SLOBS, McCain, and Guiliani, are ignoring Iowa. 8
Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 20 Jun 2007 20:16 | # Frank McGuckin writes: The libertarian argument against goverment involvement in the economy has never been very impressive. It doesn’t go much beyond chanting big goverment is always bad over and over again. That’s because the “libertarians” have been overtaken by Jews so you have a massive denial of the way positive externalities become economic rent. Jews thrive on collection of economic rent, whether in the hands of the state or in the hands of the wealthy, and it appears that they started their corruption of the study of economics in service of this game with Ricardo’s poor definition of it. This leaves just a few old guys like Ron Paul who are offering anything approaching genuine libertarianism but these guys don’t have the economic theory to take care of this flaw in libertarian thinking—even though they aren’t actively subversive as are the Jews in the libertarian movement. OF COURSE there is virtual intellectual bankruptcy in the “libertarian” movement. For what it is worth, economist Paul Romer-son of former Colorado governor Buddy Romer-in a series of technical papers argues that the decline in the American economy was brought about by an oversupply of labor which caused a drop in technological inovation. He in fact discussess the crucial role of immigration in causing the decline in American economic growth in these papers. But that begs the question: What’s wrong with the investors? Why are they so corrupt? If you read what I wrote in the article, I described in precise and accurate detail exactly what is wrong with investment and it should be obvious: If you have a “risk free asset” basis for your portfolios you will become a “no brainer” investor. This leads to favoring labor over automation hence falling into the immigration trap. The rest of the technosocialist fallacy has been so thoroughly debunked that its surprising anyone still falls for it. Government bureaucracies are among the worst organizations to manage risky projects. Incentives are everything and incentives start with correcting the investment environment so it stops rewarding rent-seeking either via the risk free asset or via public choice special interest lobbying (ala technosocialism). Read my congressional testimony given in the wake of having successfully drafted, promoted and passed into law PL101-611, forcing NASA to buy launch services from the private sector. You might also be interested in the subsequent fusion technology prize legislation I drafted that was then picked up by a founder of the US Tokamak program. Both of these, as well as The Bowery Prize for Amateur Rocketry and the matching CATS prize were precursors to the Ansari X-Prize that has given NASA and its technosocialist milieu so much heartburn recently by exposing the essential moral, ethical, practical and political bankruptcy of technosocialism. Now I’m not saying prize awards are a panacea. The objectives must be chosen wisely and the criteria set so that judge bias does not corrupt it. Moreover, the net present value of the positive externalities of technological innovation are difficult to match with the prize awards—and this is, as W. D. Hamilton describes in the Innate Social Aptitudes of Man, quite probably at the root of the decline of civilizations:
What I would add to that is that there are forces at work to ensure that the positive externalities, far from being correlated with the innovator, are negatively correlated with the innovator through the collection of economic rent into the hands of rent-seekers rather than innovators. Larger issue. White American racial interests determine economc policy, not the other way around. That’s sort of like saying corporate policy should benefit the bottom line of the stockholders. The answer is: “Duh…. yeah and if the executives, duly elected by the stockholders act in another manner, it is proper for the stockholders to sue and possibly prosecute the executives as well as recover any goods lost to fraud (such as territory).” 9
Posted by Frank McGuckin on Wed, 20 Jun 2007 21:32 | # James There are other ways of organizing econimc activity in a society. A group/tribe of people should be able to experiment and organize the economic activity of a society any way they want to. The Republican/Democratic corporate beltway cockroaches are dedicated to shutting out alternative ways of organizing the economy. The rich guys want to be protected from the free market. Therefor, socialize the cost, privatize the profits. The net neurality issue is example of this. In the meantime, given the existing economic arrangements in American society, if the costs are to be socialized, then so should the profits. Bill Gates can live quite comfortably on 50 million dollars. Actually he can live quite comfortably on 10 million dollars. Not that I give fuck about his welfare. It is not obvious to me that greed and meglamania are the only legitmate and authentic expressions of human nature. I think we can do a lot better. 10
Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 20 Jun 2007 22:22 | # A group/tribe of people should be able to experiment and organize the economic activity of a society any way they want to. Agreed that peaceful society starts with allocating territory to mutually consented experiments in social organization, including economic policy. In practice what that means is some mechanism for dividing up territory. Now, we can leave this up to war and ultimately, from a Malthusian standpoint, that is exactly what we do. However, if we are going to play the “social contract” game, the question arises: How do we fairly allocate land so that competing experiments are fairly compared? My contention is that this peaceful allocation of land must start with the generalized economic rent calculation for the same reason that classical economists associated land value with economic rent. 11
Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 20 Jun 2007 22:29 | # Bill Gates can live quite comfortably on 50 million dollars. Actually he can live quite comfortably on 10 million dollars. Not that I give fuck about his welfare. Its ironic that my principle point of departure from Georgist classical economic thought was motivated by the fact that I had, clear back in 1979, started developing an 8086 operating system precisely because I saw the potential for a monopoly stream of unprecedented proportions—and I abandoned it only after I was offered the (false as it turns out) promise that I could take the PLATO network to the mass market thereby bypassing the entire personal computer era with an early network deployment. By the time I found out I had been conned, Gates had his monopoly position with IBM locked up. Think this through with me for a moment: If we looked at Gates’ ownership of the primary OS for personal computers before the ink was dry on the contract with IBM, it would have had an ENORMOUS liquidation value in the wider marketplace. Neither Microsoft, nor Gates, would have risen to the profound global—and corrupt—- power that they did if they’d been taxed on that liquidation value rather than mere income stream. 12
Posted by Frank McGuckin on Wed, 20 Jun 2007 22:45 | # James I don’t remember the details of Romer’s argument but the he argues something like this:oversupply of labor through immigration;decrease in technological innovation;a move toward rent seeking occupations-investment bankers, corporate lawyers,hedge funds-by people who otherwise would be creating new technologies.This process is self- reenforcing because of incresing returns so there is feedbck and the process is amplified. Look, we really don’t need economist. Ordinary White Americans always knew-and still know -what the economic facts are- much more deeply than any neoclassical economist such as Jorge Borjas. But I suppose if your looking for respectability in the republican/democratic blogsphere like Steve Sailer does(actually it is quite clear that he craves it) you will will always defer to the “deep insights” of the legal immigrant Cuban economist George Borjas whose people have racially/ethnically cleansed Real Americans-the White Native Born kind-out of Miami. Brimelow is enamoured of this piece of garbage from Cuba also. God how I hate Sailer. 13
Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 20 Jun 2007 23:57 | # Romer is getting the cart before the horse. First comes corruption of the investment class—then comes immigration demanded by their “plantation” mentality. This goes clear back to the Constitutional Convention in reaction to Shay’s Rebellion. Where did I mention Borjas or any other neoclassical economist?
14
Posted by Frank McGuckin on Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:23 | # James Ordinary White Americans need a framework to comprehend why the nation they founded and created is being destroyed. Let’s be honest the majority of ordinary White Americans can not comprehend the obvious which is:if the 1965 immigration refrom act had not been passed the probability of 9/11 occuring would have been 0. Once this is understood, there is a very real posibility that immigration enthusiasts such as Rudi Giulliani will be hung from streetlights. Some very obvious and simple ideas have to be restated over and over again, unrelentingly. 15
Posted by ben tillman on Thu, 21 Jun 2007 03:39 | # Which is a corollary of the argument against the capacity of Jewish host societies to self-organise. At all. To the contrary, GW. As one gleans from reading everyone from B. Ginsberg to A.J. Nock to ibn Khaldun, “The State” is a synonym for xenocracy, and in our case judeocracy. 16
Posted by ben tillman on Thu, 21 Jun 2007 06:12 | # “...if the 1965 immigration refrom act had not been passed the probability of 9/11 occuring would have been 0.” True, indeed. 17
Posted by Kurt9 on Thu, 21 Jun 2007 19:30 | # What is wrong with George Borjas? He has several articles as the Center of Immigration Studies where he clearly makes the case that unrestricted immigration has significantly depressed wages. Over on National Review, he is clearly in favor of immigration reform that would bring immigration levels down to managable levels (where the existing immigrants can assimulate into our culture). Are these not the same policies that you people advocate here? I think you people are beating up on a natural ally here. Also, I do not understand why you guys beat up on Steve Sailor, either. He is also clearly on your side with regards to the immigration issue. I think you guys are criticizing the wrong people. 18
Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 21 Jun 2007 19:45 | # The argument about Borjas and Sailer is a red herring. 19
Posted by Frank McGuckin on Thu, 21 Jun 2007 20:10 | # Kurt9 Borjas and Sailer are pushing a point system that would skilled asian immigrtants from asia to continue entering the Amreica. If White Americans are to survive in the nation the created, asian legal immigration must be completly shut down. America does not need to import any asian legal immigrants at all. Doctors, scientists,engineers,computer programmers all can be developed and drawn from the Euro-America population. India and China do not import their doctors, engineers,computer programers and engineers from other nations. India and China both develop home grown talent. The several thousand legal immigrant hindus and sikhs that came into America during the 1960s and early 70s became poitically organized around their racial intetersts and became a force to be reckoned with. They have damaged thousands of White American families. Anyone who cares about the long term survival of White Americans should be opposed to impoorting even one asian legal immigrant. Their intentions towards OUR PEOPLE are not benign. They are our mortal enemy. If you have been reading Steve Salier over the years you would know that he has a soft spot in his heart for asian legal immigrants. Asian legal immigrants are responsible for the destruction of thousands of engineering expereince that resdes/resided in the brains of Native Bron White American Engineers. Let us call this what it is:genocide The hindus,sikhs ,chinese and pakis are actively participating in the economic and racial dispossession of White America. It doesn’t get any more obvioous than this. Vdare.com will focus on a crazy korean kid shooting up a college campus. This is small potatoes compared to the fact that asian legal immigrants are actively participating in the complete economic and racial dispossession of the majority Euro-Americn population. This so goddam obvious. What you get from vdare.com is a lot of beating around the bush when it comes to what legal immigrant asians have in store for OUR PEOPLE. Sailer, not a peep. The point system is a codeword for importing obnoxious and predatory asian legal immigrants into OUR AMERICA. George Borjas testimony before congress was crucial in the passage of the last massive amnesty. White Americans don’t need the blessings of an arrogant-speak to some of his fellow academics"George likes to cite himself a lot in his papers-“cuban legal immigrant economist. Ordinary White Americans, knew what the facts were about immigration way before this piece of garbage from cuba. I depise both Sailer and the legal immigrant from England Brimelow for setting up this piece of garbage from cuba as the oracle on immigration. You got that Brimelow(since you are very likley reading this) Hindu,chinese,sikh,pakistani legal immgrants and their “american” born children expect White Americans to comit racial suicide. I say we deport all asians out of OUR AMERICA. I would also deport George Borjas and his children back to cuba. Look at what his people have done to miami. Not a peep out of Peter Brimelow about this. 20
Posted by Frank McGuckin on Thu, 21 Jun 2007 20:26 | # A red herring? Oh really James. The core idea of this thread you started is how the racial transformation of America is shaping US politics. As Brimelow always says:demographics is destiny. Miami-US territory conquered by Borjas people- is a case study. Has Borjas,Brimelow and Sailer ever publicly expressed a strong opinuion against the cuban conquest of Miami? Ames too white. Miami just right. And of course, let us not forget about that kike cuban congresswoman from miami(conquered US territory) 21
Posted by danielj on Thu, 21 Jun 2007 21:04 | # Let’s be honest the majority of ordinary White Americans can not comprehend the obvious which is:if the 1965 immigration refrom act had not been passed the probability of 9/11 occuring would have been 0. Once this is understood, there is a very real posibility that immigration enthusiasts such as Rudi Giulliani will be hung from streetlights. Not true. There was still a possibility for it to occur. They could have blamed it on white terrorists instead of the brown ones they cooked up. 22
Posted by Frank McGuckin on Thu, 21 Jun 2007 21:16 | # danielj No on here is interested in participating in the collective psychosis of the 9/11 conspiracy nuts. As you are well aware, there are many places on the internet to OD on the various 9/11 conspiracies. Go have some fun. 23
Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 21 Jun 2007 22:34 | # James, applying a punitive tax on ‘liquidation value’ seems profoundly unAmerican and a venal government, tautologically speaking, might well include family farms and other small enterprises in their grasping maw. The eleemosynary Mr Gates has largely avoided taxation of his income because Microsoft doesnt pay dividends, so the many billions held by his Foundation are the result of untaxable stock transfers, the sale of which funds the fortunate Third World beneficiaries of Gates’s hugely misplaced largesse. 24
Posted by TG on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 01:31 | # “No on here is interested in participating in the collective psychosis of the 9/11 conspiracy nuts. “ Frank, 25
Posted by Frank McGuckin on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 01:39 | # I refuse to activate the 9/11 virus. Have the discussion with your fellow true beleivers on the many websites devoted to the the 9/11 conspiracy psychosis. 26
Posted by Lurker on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 02:09 | # I dont know, but is it at least possible that the likes of Sailer & Brimelow maintain this position (point based immigration) to retain some kind of bridgehead into the mainstream. I dont actually see them spending a lot of time on the subject. Most liberal/lefties I know, their heads would explode (anyone seen Scanners?) if they were forced to read a site like this one. But in vdare and Sailer’s site there are just enough traces of liberalism regarding immigration, maybe, to keep some of them from dismissing everything there out of hand. As you all know, once youre made aware of certain realities, its very hard to retreat back to an all encompassing, emotive, liberal world view. Anyone reading vdare/Sailer and took on board what they were saying about hbd/immigration would soon find the arguments in favour of 3rd world immigration the least convincing there. So maybe what Frank is complaining about is in fact only Sailer’s & Brimelow’s sugar coating for the nasty medicine. Im sure they are responsible for ‘waking up’ many people. 27
Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 05:25 | # The core issue being addressed in my post to the Des Moines Register is the proper coordinate system within which to think about libertarian values is freedom of association—specifically the economic rent component of property rights which people normally think of as territory. It’s profoundly tragic that men like McGuckin, Ross and others don’t understand the distinction between “punitive taxes” and use fees since this is the first step away from idiocies like taxes on economic activity—taxes which really are punitive. For example, Al Ross thinks that Gates’ wealth isn’t primarily due to his monopoly position and that a use fee for property rights would be less likely to exempt subsistence assets than the present system’s labyrinthine system of deductions for things like mortgage interest, business expenses and other nightmares through which all citizens are put every time they engage in economic activities. McGuckin distracts from the important nuances of economic policy that allow us to expose the essential nature of freedom of association, to try to interject his opinions about the real agenda of VDARE. This is not productive. 28
Posted by Al Ross on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 06:25 | # James, you (superciliously as usual) presume too much. I made no mention of belief or disbelief in the matter of what is, by your jaundiced lights, Microsoft’s ‘monopoly’ of its market. If indeed such a market position exists, then there is the Sherman anti-trust act which may be invoked against Gate’s firm, as it was against IBM in the 1970’s. I happen to believe that Americans and other ovine citizens placed their necks in a noose when they didnt rise up in anger over the imposition of income tax. Your libertarian values are over-rated, relying, as they do, on the vain hope of sensible, reasonable fellows behaving well enough to ensure a civilized outcome. No chance. 29
Posted by Frank McGuckin on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 12:47 | # I haven’t distracted the discussion. The demographic destiny of the US is the central issue in this thread. Iowa is still too White. Cuban infested Miami has been and continues to be one of the epicenters of the New “America”. Has been for a while.Vdare.com completly ignores the cuban problem in South Florida,while at the same time courts a legal immigrant cuban economist whose trstimony before congress over a decade ago was crucial in passing the last amnesty. I don’t believe forgiving someone who has contributed significantly to the murder of non-hispanic White America. And as far as I can tell, the legal imigrant cuban Borjas- a favorite of Sailer and Legal English immigrant Peter Brimelow- thinks its quite alright that his degenerate people have driven the Native Born White population completly out of miami and other parts of South Florida. Hey legal immigrant Pete-nice home in the Berkshires-what about the cubans in miami? Gates has damaged thousands of White American families already. If this little cockroach has his way, White America will face face complete economic and racial dispossession. This is a great crime. At the very least, a large percentage of his wealth should be confiscated. He would then no longer have the power to damage White American families. 30
Posted by TG on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 15:32 | # “I refuse to activate the 9/11 virus. Have the discussion with your fellow true beleivers on the many websites devoted to the the 9/11 conspiracy psychosis.”—Frank True believers? Not me, I just question the “official” version of what took place on 9-11. Besides, you seem to believe that the Iowa caucuses are being ignored by politicians because Iowa is too White? Obviously you’re unaware of the real reason why Iowa is being ‘ignored’ - a better word would be ‘AVOIDED’ - by the pols. Pat Buchanan hit the nail on the head in this article: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=21055 32
Posted by Frank McGuckin on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 16:31 | # I don’t care if the cubans are of European orgin. I don’t want them here. Miami s no longer an American city. It is a place hostile to White Americans. Miami is spanish speaking and foriegn you retard. 33
Posted by TG on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 17:20 | # “Miami is spanish speaking and foriegn you retard.” Now, now, Frances! Given the choice: Would you rather live in Miami amongst White spanish speaking Cubans, or Detroit amongst ebonic speaking negros? 34
Posted by danielj on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 17:22 | # Spaniards are Euro too Frank. Spanish is a Euro language Frank, rooted in Latin. I don’t wanna talk about 9-11 either, but I certainly don’t want people to try to inject their version of the events that transpired into MR either. I do unlike you, want to keep it out of the discussion. Although I am not sure about this, Cuba had a long history of cooperation with various American administrations and our own politicians are responsible for the “disaster” (or whatever you want to call it) in Miami. 35
Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 18:09 | # Your libertarian values are over-rated, relying, as they do, on the vain hope of sensible, reasonable fellows behaving well enough to ensure a civilized outcome. No chance. No, I’m relying on the relative fairness and nobility of Euroman. A “mirror strategy” to Judaism will not work with a people who are genetically ill equipped to engage in ethnic nepotism, when the war is being waged on terms that place ethnic nepotism at the bottom of the moral heap. Euroman will lose that competition because Euroman is not genetically hypocritical as are those who he admits to his territory under the theocracy of Holocaustianity. What is at the bottom of the moral heap is the violation of freedom of association. Once that is accepted, then those who violate it, such as “civil rights workers” can be pursued and brought to justice with the same vigor now directed at “racists”. The only reason whites would fear fair competition brought about by freedom of association is a fear that whites really are inferior. I suffer from no such fear. How about you? 36
Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 19:04 | # If indeed such a market position exists, then there is the Sherman anti-trust act which may be invoked against Gate’s firm, as it was against IBM in the 1970’s. Yes and MS was indeed flirting with disaster in this area but salvaged its anticompetitive position through a variety of maneuvers. Today, however, pressure has increased to the point that MS is being forced to open up its standards—or at least pay lip service to doing so—out of fear of this, its real secret lock on monopoly power, being exposed in a high profile court case that would bring into question the legitimacy of the gains enjoyed by the world’s richest man. Since he has basically given much of that wealth to Africa and there are many Jews who want the sanctity of their ill-gotten wealth respected, there are powerful forces at work against any such action. Ultimately, the proposal I am making gets around the political maneuvering and lack of technical savvy on the part of the Commerce Department by using the relatively standard economic quantity of “liquidation value” as well as the standard economic quantity of modern portfolio theory’s “risk free interest rate” which is set at short term Treasury debt instrument interest rates. Liquidation value can be easily determined in a similar manner by simply requiring anyone who wishes to gain ownership of the property rights to put up some bid amount stored in escrow as short term Treasury instruments—and the largest such amount sets the lower limit on the liquidation value of the monopoly hence the tax base. Thus the competitors of Gates, not men like yourself obviously, would have forced his liquidation value sky high before the ink was dry on his deal with IBM to distribute MS-DOS on their first PC. The thing keeping them, in this counterfactual historic world, from placing too-high a liquidation value on that deal is the fact that Gates can accept the bid at any time thereby forcing the sale at the bid price. 37
Posted by Frank McGuckin on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 19:09 | # DanielJ America is an English speaking nation. The REAL White Americans down South Florida despise the spanish speaking cubans of miami. Several years ago, the filthy Geraldo Rivera did a two hour documentary on NBC about hispanc America. A big part of this show was devoted to Miami. Julio Iglesias son bragged about the fat that to work in miami ne must be fluent in spanish. Do you approve of this. I’ll say it again:the miami cubans are cockroaches. Miami is foriegn and spanish speaking. Real White Americans were driven out miami by the cuban cockroaches. Miami is a decadent,dangerous and corrupt city. One of the worst. George Borjas is a cuban cockroach. During the Elian Gonzalez affair, the South Florida Anglos wanted to kick the shit out of the cubans. Fistfights broke out between Anglo and Cuban neighbors. Not a peep out of vdare.com about the fact that miami is foriegn and spanish speaking. I can honestly say that I hate the cubans in miami. The last part of your post is accurate. The cuban conquest of miami is a creature of the cold war. There is no reason why America could not have had normal realtions with post-1960 Cuba. Fidel would have done OUR PEOPLE a favor if he had slaughtered the corrupt cuban upper and middle class parasites. And parasites they are. You got that James Fulford you turd. 38
Posted by Frank McGuckin on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 19:15 | # James The real secret of microsofts power is that in the 19th century corprations were given the sme legal standing as live breathing human being. Corporations should not have the same legal standing as a live breathing human being. Actually it is much worse. With all their Ivy league educted lawyers corportions have the rights of a supra-human being.Corporations shouldn’t have any legal standing at all. 39
Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 19:25 | # Sorry, you’re speaking to someone who was developing an 8086 OS in 1979 because I saw the monopoly power. You are calling me a liar or you’re irrationally ignoring my priority here. You should at least be willing to learn something rather than regurgitate some anti-corporate ideology. MS’s monopoly was a direct result of the fact that it controlled the application programming interface or API, for the operating system, which then drove application software developers to standardize on it. Its like letting someone “own” 60hz and collect a tax on everyone who uses 60hz. 40
Posted by TG on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 20:25 | # “Fidel would have done OUR PEOPLE a favor if he had slaughtered the corrupt cuban upper and middle class parasites. And parasites they are. You got that James Fulford you turd.” I suspect you’ve had bad bussiness dealings with some Cubans? Otherwise, why else would you be so irrationally hostile towards White-Cubans? If you were beat out of a bussiness deal, you should just chalk it up to experience and move on. Face it, Frances, the vast majority of Miami Cubans speak English and are White! Here’s a good article by your buddy, Steve Sailor. Enjoy! 41
Posted by Frank McGuckin on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 20:38 | # James I’m just stating a fact. I hope you don’t worship THE CORPORATION. The fact that corporations have the legal standing of human beings is a threat to the well being of humans unless you beleive in the free marketeers and libertarians view corporations are completly benign entities. The Microsoft antitrust case was a fight within corprate America. Other powerfull corporations wanted to get in on the action. It is not so much that I disagree with what your saying. Look, if a protectionist trade is put into place-I would certaintly support this-there have to be mechanisms in place to protect Americans from domestic monopolies. Let me get right to the heart of the issue:I beleive there are very good reasons for believing that the legal standing of corporations as human beings poses a very serious threat to the continued existence of White Americans in the nation they founded,created and died for. The illegitimate legal status of corporations has made corporations, for the most part, an un- accountable psychopathic source of power in Ameican society. This goes a long way to expalining why post -1965 immigration policy persists. 42
Posted by Frank McGuckin on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:13 | # TG I would very much like to see miami ethnically cleansed of the “white” cubans and the black cubans. Cuban Miami is not an option for my White American geneline. Nor is it an option for many other White Amreican genelines.Any honest White Nationalist would understand such an obvious point. The cuban cockroaches have done their part to make sure that cost of reproduction for REAL WHITE AMERICANS escalattes with each passing year. Ethnically cleanse Miami of the cuban cockraoches…SI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Tg,it’s Francis not Frances at least in my familes gene-line past and present. Hey James RELAX!!!!!!!!!!! 43
Posted by TG on Fri, 22 Jun 2007 22:06 | # Frank, One thing I can say for sure is you’re one of the most amusing people that post on this site. Rock on Frank!!!!!!!!! 44
Posted by danielj on Sat, 23 Jun 2007 02:48 | #
I tend to be a pessimist on this one. I think there is some of us that can handle it and some that can’t. I suffer from no such fear for myself, but I worry about our brothers and sisters being dumped immediately into a full on libertarian society. I think we need some sort of “deprogramming” scheme.
No. Spanish is a ridiculously small language that requires minimal cognitive effort. I’ll try to get my hands on that documentary. I’m with you on the VDARE thing - no more leaders, no more “dues”... 45
Posted by a Finn on Sat, 23 Jun 2007 04:23 | # Bowery’s post’s links should be read, if not read already. They are important. Bowery wrote: “No, I’m relying on the relative fairness and nobility of Euroman. A “mirror strategy” to Judaism will not work with a people who are genetically ill equipped to engage in ethnic nepotism, when the war is being waged on terms that place ethnic nepotism at the bottom of the moral heap. Euroman will lose that competition because Euroman is not genetically hypocritical as are those who he admits to his territory under the theocracy of Holocaustianity.” I correct slightly the mistakes in previous: - As far as I know, there is nobody here advocating “mirror strategy” of judaism, but many people see the need to learn important aspects from the jews, muslims etc. - Euromen are well capable of ethnic nepotism (As history shows). Politics often moves forward in waves, and we are in the highest point of largely artificially created tolerance, “human rights”, acceptance, assimilation etc., and they will go down. Next trends rising include ethnic nepotism. We will support those new trends and decrease the old ones. To those in hurry: Big changes in society, even when they advance fastly, are slow compared to human lives. Our ethnic politics must be permanently transferred from generation to generation. - Jews and muslims are genetically more capable of ethnic nepotism than we are (Their predisposition to ethnic nepotism is stronger, and harder to suppress by brains’ frontal lobe’s conscious effort and external influences.) This can be circumvented by using many methods: * Evolution. Let the most liberal Whites mix with other ethnicities and vanish into the grey sea of cosmopolitan anonymity. Those who have more predisposition to ethnic nepotism will survive. * Slightly different tactics for us. We can mold our internal rules more according to our own inclinations. E.g. we can rely less on authoritarian leaders, and more on equal council decisions and individual responsibility to follow always and everywhere our ethnic groups’ rules. Our frontal lobes are better at suppressing and directing our feelings and instincts than jews’ and muslims’ frontal lobes. Let’s use and direct our frontal lobes to suppress universal egalitarianism, liberalism etc., and to increase and strenghten ethnic nepotism (Methods can be taken from psychologists, cultural marxists, dynamic silencing, communists, modern media science, organizational and group behavior science etc.). * People often believe that peoples’ characters are permanently something. It is not so. People have tendencies. Contexts decide the outcomes. Finns are honest. In war they are amazing liars and plotters. Today blacks are criminals. Install KKK -style brutal swift justice, and they follow the law, bow and repeat: “Yes sir. Anything you wish sir.” Whites living in bad ethnic neighborhoods don’t believe in media lies about egalitarianism, multiculturalism, multiethnicity etc. Upwardly mobile poor Whites striving to be part of the liberal establishment mindlessly repeat those same media lies. We must start to manage these contexts more. First in smaller circles and then expanding and all the time strenghtening our contexts. We can and must use novel and innovative context creation in addition to existing methods. * We have one serious weakness, which I see time and time again. Bowery is intelligent man, but like so many our intelligent men, he has tube vision; “One way, my way and no other way.” Happily, this is often easily cured. First we need many strategies and tactics at the same time, they are not mutually exclusive: # We (non-affiliated Whites and members of our [pre-] ethnic groups) must participate in mainstream politics playing by the traditional rules. # We must participate in mainstream politics with our own new innovative cunning rules. # We must build ethnic genetic groups and networks. Our ethnic groups must use ethnic competition methods, part of them new and innovative. # Partly overlapping with previous: We (non-affiliated Whites and members of our [pre-] ethnic groups) must participate all areas and aspects of our societies and influence them to our favor, starting with those areas where we already are (workplaces, freetime, sports, labor unions, activist groups etc.) Secondly, when we present information to each other, the first reaction should not be to fight between our views, but careful contemplation, if the presented ideas or some part of them or modified version of them could be incorporated somehow to our views and used to our advancement. Here Bowery suggests among other things that we should use time of marriage and number of children information, and wishes/costs of marriage and children factors to our advancement in mainstream politics. I agree. I also had this idea in my plans of ethnic community (Children, living, education and good environment cheaply). But information Bowery gave us made my plans about it clearer and stronger. I incorporate his information to my plans explicitly. Some form of “Children, living, education and good environment cheaply” should be used among other things as a part of marketing of the ethnic genetic group. - Etc. Here in the end I ask this from Bowery: I understand all the concepts of your tax model and they doesn’t require explanation. But details of it could mean several things. Could you give an imaginary simplified example of it and compare it to the existing tax model using, say, sums circling around hundred dollars. 46
Posted by Al Ross on Sat, 23 Jun 2007 04:56 | # “The competitors of Gates” are led by that Jewish practitioner of predatory Semitic business practices, Oracle’s Larry Ellison. Perhaps James Bowery is correct and Ellison deserves a break. At least he doesnt waste his money on indigent Africans, preferring instead to spend wisely on a flotilla of megayachts. 47
Posted by a Finn on Sat, 23 Jun 2007 07:28 | # Off topic. Alarm! Read or listen carefully this: http://www.wvwnews.net/category.php?id=11 Then read this: 48
Posted by Al Ross on Sat, 23 Jun 2007 08:08 | # Sadly,it may be too late for the sleepers to awaken, but thank you for the link, AF 49
Posted by a Finn on Sat, 23 Jun 2007 09:03 | # Thank you, Al Ross, but I meant read or listen carefully this: http://www.wvwnews.net/story.php?id=786 The story presently showing on the previous link (id11) is good, of course, but in this new link is crucial information concerning the functioning of the system. 50
Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 23 Jun 2007 17:12 | # A Finn writes: * Evolution. Let the most liberal Whites mix with other ethnicities and vanish into the grey sea of cosmopolitan anonymity. Those who have more predisposition to ethnic nepotism will survive. This is what I mean by mirror strategy to Judaism. While it is true that Jews use indoctrination to achieve some of their ethnic nepotism, the fact is that they wouldn’t have been nearly as successful doing so as a minority in diaspora if they weren’t more strongly genetically predisposed to ethnic nepotism to begin with. (This is, by the way, where I differ from Richard Faussette’s excellent article, “Niche Theory, Population Transfer, and the Origin of the Anti-Semitic Cycle” Occidental Quarterly, Vol 6, Num 4, Winter 2006-2007. The other crucial component is the evolution of virulence via horizontal transmission—virulence that was not bred into Jewish genes at the origin of Judaism. However, Faussette does contribute significantly to our understanding of the historic origins of Judaism.) We do not want to end up like Jews, however “successful” Jews might be. We want our nobler genetic characters to be preserved and Jews provide a model for how people preserve their EGI at the loss of such characters. The reason systems like the Frankfurt School, Hollywood and academia were successful as biological weapons against us is due to the fact that they were attacking our natural tendency for indoctrinability—that is the very thing that sets humans apart as “the moral animal”. Once we allow those with relatively distant EGI control of indoctrination of our youth we allow them to implant seeds of our own dehumanization. What we need is an ethos that honors our self-reliant nature and preserves the nurturance of EGI primarily through the ethos itself rather than through the evolution of group behaviors. In other words, we need to cultivate memes that support those genes that make us who we are: humans—moral animals. * We have one serious weakness, which I see time and time again. Bowery is intelligent man, but like so many our intelligent men, he has tube vision; “One way, my way and no other way.” Happily, this is often easily cured. First we need many strategies and tactics at the same time, they are not mutually exclusive But cultivating a variety of approaches is precisely where my “intolerance” comes from. The difference between a libertarian and an anarchist is that a libertarian is probably best thought of as a minarchist. In other words, he asks: “What is the minimum social contract that allows the maximum latitude in all other contracts?” I’m not ultimately opposed to pure anarchy since that is the “state of Nature” and we must recognize that the state of Nature is what gave rise to us. However, as long as we are going to try to craft societies, it behooves us to consider these questions of minimal constraint consistent with cultivating a diversity of approaches to living. We might disagree on what that minimum (or meta) government is, but don’t think I’m aiming for anything but that. Here in the end I ask this from Bowery: I understand all the concepts of your tax model and they doesn’t require explanation. But details of it could mean several things. Could you give an imaginary simplified example of it and compare it to the existing tax model using, say, sums circling around hundred dollars. I’m not sure what you mean by “sums circling around hundred dollars”. but I can describe the requirements that lead me to my minimum government: 1) People can “vote with their feet” in order to find others that mutually consent to live with them. 2) “Live with” means “on land of adequate carrying capacity” because without land you die. The moment you enter the realm of land allocation you enter the land of economics and the question must be answered: How can one fairly quantify the carrying capacity of various pieces of land so that competing ideas for social organization are given a fair chance? The answer to that question must be part of the minarchy’s minimum social contract, and that’s where my theory of generalized economic rent deriving from the risk free asset comes from. 51
Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 23 Jun 2007 17:21 | # Al Ross writes: “The competitors of Gates” are led by that Jewish practitioner of predatory Semitic business practices, Oracle’s Larry Ellison. Ellison’s main product, Oracle, is another kind of economic rent stream derived from the API of the database rather than the API of the OS. The financial world, not surprisingly, made sure taht API monopoly went to a Jew once they realized that APIs are a way of locking in economic rent streams. The financial sector is worth a lot of money for some strange and mysterious reason that escapes me at the moment, but suffice to say Oracle’s liquidation value, hence tax burden, would be very high. 52
Posted by a Finn on Sun, 24 Jun 2007 17:44 | # To James Bowery: There seems to be meager confusions in your definitions. First, let me make clear, that in ITSELF I don’t care at all about nobility, lofty ideals and such. I care about those things that provide practical value to our people in their lives, to their children and to our people’s permanent existence, togetherness and success. In addition in the latest times it has begun more and more to seem that ideals of nobility (as they are currently defined) are a weight on ethnic nationalists necks. - Jews are very noble, between themselves that is. Towards others they might be sometimes noble if it has practical value to jews (e.g. lessening the hostility/feared hostility of the exploited others, keeping decision makers happy, creating bridges to inside other communities, helping minorities so as to use them as a tools). Generally they are not noble towards outsiders. In Israel, where they don’t have so much non-jews immediately around them (like when they partly by their own will self-segregated to jewish ghettos in Europe) they turn slightly more against each other, but they are still noble between themselves. Even when some rivalries between jewish congregations in Europe produced murders between them, they never lost sight of their togetherness, and nobody helped authorities to solve those murders. They were in some way or another settled between jews. We (European ethnic nationalists) will, whatever happens, including evolution increasing our ethnocentrism, of course be noble between ourselves. This is the case independently of jews. In matter of fact, our nobility between ourselves increases, if our genetic ethnocentrism increases. The only question left then is how noble we are towards those who are benign outsiders. I am advocating greater nobility towards them than jews, but even this involves great risks and dangers. Let’s imagine. We (group A) are friendly and noble towards benign outside group B, and have good economic and other relations with it. Group C comes to the scene and starts to use combination of friendliness; important trade, loans, investments and extortion with them; combination of information, disinformation, propaganda and manipulation; bribing and fawning; infiltration inside them, gathering inside information and manipulating their decisions from inside etc. Soon we find that our nobility and friendliness is paid back by hostility, maybe even war, that for us seems to happen contrary to our good will and without reasons. The best limited real world example of this is how international bankers and media people have created/promoted wars to advance their goals. Secondly, nobility and good will towards outsiders is not often as effective as imagined. E.g. V.S. Naipaul writes how muslims do not feel any thankfulness because of technology, medicines, science, ideas, business etc. that we have invented, manufactured and given or provided to them. Either they feel like it all comes from some imaginery international muslim bazaar or allah has provided it to them. Towards us they feel hostility or indifference at best. Like seen-it-all diplomatic heavyweights say: Nations don’t have friends, nations have interests”. - You seem to be fascinated with what PRODUCES nobility between Europeans, and maybe towards outsiders. For you it has to be lofty conscious and rational moral decisions that produces them. If nobility towards own people are based more on automatic genetic instincts and drives, this is somehow wrong to you. So let me state here: For me, more nobility towards own people and lessening of excess nobility towards outsiders based more on genetics is a beneficial touch of God. This is because: - Nobility towards our own was good in history, is better now and will always be the best in the future, because we will never again live in the kind of evolutionary isolation from other ethnicities, that produced our excessive conscious control of nobility towards our own and universal nobility. As we can we can see in the present situation, they are dangerous qualities. So when I know that more nobility towards our own is always needed in the future, do I want that in every instance when that decision is made by us, people go through cold technical moral assessment, where own people are cold dehumanized parts lacking any intrinsic value, where that decision towards one direction or the other is always uncertain and where it is like the sword of Damocles hanging above us, always threatening to destroy us at any point of time. No. Do I want that our people feel passionate undying love towards their own, where moral decisions are always and immediately certain to defend preserve our own. Do I want that our people feel natural opposition to outsiders, that protects us from genetic mixing and fuels our ethnic competition ability. Do I want that the injurious and energy wasting cold technical moral decision making in this matter disappears from our lives, and the saved energy is used to productive things. Do I want our minds to become more immune to outsiders’ hostile manipulation, influence and propaganda. Do I want that when our people are threatened, powerful fires ignites in our souls to defense our people. Do I want that all this is based on more automatic genetic reactions, moving from generation to generation forever. Oh God in heaven, Yes. By the way, two things. 1. When decisions protecting our people are more automatic and genetic, we can still rationally chew over on other moral decisions. 2. When people are learning to drive cars they have to constantly make cumbersome rational decisions. When they learn to drive properly, all the basic skills become automatic. Should we save here the rational decision making also? - Why would you want to drag “our” liberals with us. They have shown that they hate us passionately. They have sold us for peanuts, and money and personal gain are always more important to them than us. If they could, they would mix us, and many of them mix themselves. They doesn’t care about our interests and work against them constantly. They defend and love outsiders and their interests much more than us. They can never be trusted. They are more dangerous and injurious to us than jews, blacks and muslims combined. They sure are the best examples of our people, who make freezingly cold “rational” moral decisions over us. (Addition. Not all liberals are without hope and we should keep our gates open to them. But many of them are pathologically and highly likely genetically so liberal, that they cannot be helped.) - James Bowery, without you knowing it, you are an extremist. I explain. With your avoidance of learning from the jews, muslims etc. ethnic competition methods, you become dependant on many narrowly defined factors. You need complete separation from other peoples to succeed and survive. Your group does not withstand the sly ethnic competition attacks from ethnic competitors. Slow or fast ethnic mixing is always threatening your group. Your own people (liberals) are always a large threat inside your group. If times become easy, your people soften dangerously. Etc. So you have the same options, that Europeans traditionally have had. If I present your options in a slightly pointed way: 1. Benevolence, rational moral high ground, pompous nobility, slow or sometimes faster degeneration and mixing, ending finally in total mixing of European genes into the international sea of nothingness. 2. When situation becomes intolerable, extremism explodes. Suppression, tight control and violence, sometimes extreme violence. These measures are always temporary and end up changing to strenghtened option 1., which grinds your group again closer to it’s inevitable end. Then 2. Then 1. Etc. Then nothing. You need more options, ethnic competition methods, that keep your group as a whole safe in all conditions and against all opponents. That reduces your need to use extremism, including violence. - Dear European American ethnic nationalists, you have everything necessary in you to succeed and survive. Because of your experiences in history (more multiethnicity in everyday lives) and because of the consequent modifications in your culture, on average you have more survival ability than the average European ethnic nationalists. But often when I look your texts into the eyes, I see death. You want to be noble, so noble, so much more noble and lofty than jews, muslims, blacks, ad infinitum. Was it David Duke, was it your romanticised picture of kings, queens, princes, knights and cowboys, was it your moral intellectual quest to new heights, did you want to separate yourself with this maximally from the rest of the humanity, was it ..... Whatever it was, this evolutionary road to nobility has reached the maximum end of the dead end steet, and thank God and his stars you are not the winners. The winners, the liberals, are invincible in their supreme nobility. They are the noblest towards the whole humanity, the minorities, the gays and lesbians, the legal and illegal immigrants, the foreigners, the animals, the nature and plants, the space aliens, if we meet them, the weather system, the poor and the destitute etc., and because of it they have become their own executioners and end up killing or hurting seriously all towards which they are noble. But it doesn’t matter, because they are the noblest anyone can be. So when Death with his bony hand offers you the shiny and enticing fruit from withered nobility competition tree, don’t take their evolution. We Europeans want that you European Americans exist and succeed, now and forever. 53
Posted by a Finn on Sun, 24 Jun 2007 20:36 | # Addition: I know how much power jews have in America, how they have been in vanguard driving and directing force behind movements, organizations, media etc. that are destructive to us, how they have tipped the scales to our detriment in almost every field etc. But think about for a moment that our liberals would have had a basic ethnic competition ability. Jews would be till the end of times wondering why they are treated in a friendly way when doing legitimate business with us, but never allowed to settle amongst Europeans, let alone owning or influencing Europeans in any way (The same way the israelis treat us). If suddenly liberals gained a basic ethnic competition ability right at this moment, right at this moment jewish power over us would vanish and jews would become ordinary citizens. What I am trying to say is this: Jews have more practical power than us right now, but if both jews and our abilities would be directed in optimal way to ethnic competition, we would have far more international power than them very quickly (Because of our numbers alone, but there are other reasons too). Jews would become a non-threat and maybe even useful to us. Our fate is ultimately in our hands. Expecting jews not to use ethnic competition against us is like going outdoors permanently and expecting that it never rains. 54
Posted by a Finn on Sun, 24 Jun 2007 20:51 | # Addition, I wrote: Because of our numbers alone, but there are other reasons too. Like our inventive, science and engineering ability, our massive geographical spread over the world, we are liked, trusted and needed more by others, we can create stronger international networks etc. 55
Posted by James Bowery on Sun, 24 Jun 2007 23:49 | # A less pheromonal word than “extremist” is “separatist”. In current circumstances one must be an “extremist” to be a “separatist” but in prior times when separatism was the law, the extremists were integrationists. Now that we have terminology confusion somewhat reduced, the problem with your panmictic, integrationist world is that it is ecologically unsustainable. The evolution of virulence guarantees it. Every model of the evolution of communication and cooperation involves some degree of territorial separation so as to impede the flow and evolution of higher virulence. If your goal is to have your descendants become the equivalent of an immunosuppression virus like HIV then you may have a bright idea. If, on the other hand, you consider giving up your neurons to be a poor route to higher EGI then you may wish to reconsider your promotion of mixing human ecologies. 56
Posted by a Finn on Tue, 26 Jun 2007 03:15 | # My answers to James Bowery start with ( - ) “A less pheromonal word than “extremist” is “separatist”. In current circumstances one must be an “extremist” to be a “separatist” but in prior times when separatism was the law, the extremists were integrationists.” - Separatism in all it’s forms has an abysmal real life track record of failure among Europeans. It has been tried in endless ways spanning thousands of years, from Greeks to Romans to all kinds Christian groups/nations small and big to democratic and secular nations (including social democrats of Sweden, today’s “soft Soviet-style totalitarians”) to national socialists to many ethnic separatist socialist groups (Like Finnish ethnic socialists, who wanted to establish ethnically pure socialist nation either in whole of Finland or in Eastern Finland) Time and time again these ended in one way or another, involving among other things pressures from inside/ outside (economic, political, migrational, psychological etc.), competing repressive ideas and always cold, dehumanized, “rational” decisions by ourselves. I appreciate highly any small pockets of separatism, like part of the Mormon groups, but even their permanent existence is questionable, because of slow decay of principles and outside pressures. Mormons have made many damaging concessions to surrounding society, like accepting members and priests from other races (See e.g. Abuse Your Illusions, The disinformation guide to media mirages and establishment lies, edited by Russ Kick, The Disinformation Company Ltd., 2003, p. 339-343). It is educative to read, say, about our pathetic history from middle ages, when e.g. German cities expelled jews “Forever from this town”, and then, knowing the history, 20-50 years later took them back and the same old things happened again leading to cycles. Referring to separatism history, trademark of idiots is that they repeat the same mistakes again and again despite the facts. “Now that we have terminology confusion somewhat reduced, the problem with your panmictic, integrationist world is that it is ecologically unsustainable. The evolution of virulence guarantees it. Every model of the evolution of communication and cooperation involves some degree of territorial separation so as to impede the flow and evolution of higher virulence. If your goal is to have your descendants become the equivalent of an immunosuppression virus like HIV then you may have a bright idea.” - * Hiv virus needs hosts, it can’t reproduce on it’s own. It gives nothing to it’s hosts and takes everything, if not mitigated by medicines, prevented by special mutations in certain cell receptors or prevented from contracting. * Those jews, who are hostile, normally give something to be able to take anything from large part to all, including life. These jews need hosts, their lands, infrastructure, inventions, production and wealth to be able to gain what they gain. Net sum of good and bad things is always highly negative to hosts. These qualities are mostly the product of special powerful money, information and political niches AND at the same time NOT producing the most of the things they need. This enables the, as you say, virulence, to climb to unrestricted, destructive heights, including stark parasitism, strong need to destroy the host (even if it means problems/doom to the exploiter), psychopathological hatred, paranoidism and sociopathism/psychopathism towards outsiders. * The model I am suggesting avoids the former example by our community always producing the most of the things it needs (No need for hosts). This alone is enough to prevent our ethnocentrism turning into a sickness of mind, like in hostile jews. There has to be PARTIAL separation for us. Those who are prone to ethnic non-mixing, conservativism, ethnocentrism and ethnic competition, stay/search their way into ethnic genetic groups. Those who are prone to world hugging, egalitarianism, individualism without groupspirit, internationalism, liberalism etc., flow into cosmopolitan mixed marriages and groups. Among other things this creates permanent non-mixing groups that can compete ethnically efficiently, survive all conditions and pressures and are good enough neighbors to friendly other ethnicities. It will be successful in all aspects, including number of children, education, science, innovations, wealth and power. Evolution can and will be directed to enhance all these success factors also, but ethnic non-mixing is the crucial basis of which all other important aspects and their permanence are dependent. History shows that only permanent non-mixing stems from ethnocentric feelings, not rationality. Personally I don’t care where it comes from, as long as it comes from somewhere, because the benefits of it are so great. Despite our intellectualism, we are dictated to a large extent by our feelings. As psychiatrist Tony(?) D’amato has shown in his studies, even cold rational decision making, like choosing which official papers goes to which stack, requires feelings to succeed. People who have damaged brains’ feeling parts, but have intact rational parts, are almost incapable of making rational decisions. Without feelings special neuropathways used in decision making and consequent action don’t fire (Final completing parts of the rational process). The use of feelings in rationality increases, when people perform tasks involving seemingly neutral social interactions. Etc. By the way those liberals and jews, who are promoting race and ethnic mixing, are unwittingly doing us an essential favor. Living in Israel might start an evolution among the jews to reduce their virulence in the long run towards outsiders. Psychopathological exploiters, when lacking other targets, often turn against fellow jews. It could be surmised, that in some phase, jews turn against them in such a extent (revealing them everywhere; fines; imprisonment; psychopathologizing it in media, business and education; making it unacceptable in social contacts; disadvantage when choosing a husband, wife; disadvantage when making friends; etc.) that it reduces exploiters evolutionary success. Also exploiters might become a burden to jews in international relations. “If, on the other hand, you consider giving up your neurons to be a poor route to higher EGI then you may wish to reconsider your promotion of mixing human ecologies.” - Well, jews have strong ethnocentric feelings, and it has increased their intelligence. Their restraint and caution enables them to control those feelings, and then use them as a fuel. It produces their high intellectual and work energy. Short version of all these things. 57
Posted by a Finn on Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:11 | # It needs to be answered, why those jews, that are hostile, are destructive to their hosts. Wouldn’t it be reasonable for jews to form some kind of permanent relationship with the hosts, caring about them enough, that they provide jews secure living. Wouldn’t it be prudent to form some kind of, at the basic motives, co-operation or symbiosis with the host. Before we start, let me remind, that all jewish power resides in networks, never in single individuals. There are reasons why jewish evolution has not favored co-operation or symbiosis with hosts: - Competition between jews. The most exploitative jews have on average been the most succesful jews. These exploitative jews get the most of the benefits of their actions, despite their giving lots of charity and help to other jews. At the same time the hostility these exploiters create, i.e. the risks, are either dealt evenly among jews (friendly jews don’t get advantage from their friendliness), or often these exploiters have enough resources to escape or prevent the hostilities to be directed at them, leaving the ordinary jews to suffer the consequences of their actions (E.g. jewish usurers buying protection from the medieval European kings, Rothchilds escaping national socialists or jewish communist leaders, who in essence created national socialists and other forces as an opposing force to them). This unfair dealing of risks doesn’t turn ordinary jews against the hostile exploiting jews, on the contrary. This is because: * The charity, support and help they receive from the hostile jews. * When those ordinary jews who had mainly just worked in e.g. small businesses and were not exploiters, suddenly face hostilities caused by the exploitative jews, this seems to confirm their religion’s and culture’s hatreds, fears and paranoidisms directed at non-jews, e.g. “They hate and kill us for no reason”. This increases their support to powerful exploitative jews, hoping that they would help and protect them. * Jewish religion/culture and genetic inclinations in general directs the jewish loyalties, passions and actions to always support their own. * Jews have a propensity to follow authoritarian jewish leaders, who interpret history, current affairs and the future road to them. The most powerful leaders of jews are often the hostile exploiters. So they direct ordinary jews thinking in a way that is propitious to hostile exploiters. - The conditions during the evolution of the jews. In the small forest I see from my windows, male squirrel protects it’s territory. It chases and bites aggressively all competing squirrels trying to enter to it’s territory. The natural limit of it’s territory is sum of the following: * It has to gain more in terms of food energy, than what it loses in energy when it chases the competitors, and the time when observing and chasing the competitors, that is away from food gathering. * It has to be able to get a female partner by displaying it’s ability in holding and protecting the necessary territory * It has to gain enough food for itself and it’s family. * It’s physical and mental abilities. (E.g., it’s physique enables it to hold, say, 30m x 40m woods area here. It’s mental abilities does not enable it to arrange other squirrels working for it, which would enable it to enlarge it’s territory) * It’s competitors abilities and number, sicknesses, predators, weather and other conditions, and changes in the amount and quality of food. And this then is important; nothing in the squirrel’s mind restricts the size of the territory it governs. It takes the absolute maximum territory it can get. If that squirrel would suddenly grow super intelligent brains and other useful qualities, but preserve the same mentality it has now, it would enlarge it’s territory to include the whole world, despite possible negative consequences (because evolution favored in the squirrels history always taking the absolute maximum territory it can get.) Same goes in a way for jews. Their evolution strongly favored hostile exploiters among them, who don’t have any pity, compassion or caring towards the interests of the exploited non-jews. These were increased by these things: * Jews were never rooted permanently culturally, politically, spiritually etc. in non-jewish lands. Most importantly, they avoided genetic assimilation (Often favoring marriages inside their congregations and marriages between relatives). They are ethnocentric internationalists. If they destroyed one place, or the one place withered itself, the hostile exploiters with other jews moved on to the next place. In their history there has always been the next place (and their new hosts) where to move. If there would not have been next place and they would have had to stay in the places they ruined, their evolution would have favored them to care more about their hosts well being, because it would have been necessary to ensure better living and success to jews. * In jewish religion/culture it is INEVITABLE and EXPECTED that states and empires have limited lifetime and then it is time to go. There, only the jewish tribe is everlasting. This creates “Take everything you can while the getting is good, and then move on to the next place” -mentality. - Hosts have to be weakened, so that they can be exploited. This is done by e.g. media propaganda; weakening them politically; immigration; mixing their genes, culture, languages; and arranging there to be multiples of them. This makes the hostile jews more invisible among the numerous groups also. At the same time jews try to maximally increase their money, cultural, media and political power. Ideally there would be numerous competing weak and mixed groups who have roughly the same amount of power. The fairly invisible hostile jews among them then have easily enough power to decide which group/groups have enough power to be seemingly the rulers. The competing groups are played against each other, and take turns in “ruling positions”. The constant conflicts and missing connections between groups create constant possibilities for jews to be expensive, powerful negotiators and middlemen between the groups. Because hosts often resist both the exploitation and manipulation, this creates evolutionary competition between the hosts and hostile jews. In jewish evolutionary history this has led to increasingly stronger and more complex expressions of manipulation and weakening of the hosts. Because of the manipulation and the same reasons described in earlier examples, the hostile exploiters get abundant benefits from it, while at the same time avoiding the negative consequences. Ordinary jews are left holding the manipulators’ sacks of sins, if they don’t escape soon enough. In jews inside evolutionary competition, manipulators on average win ordinary jews. Manipulators numbers and average intensity increases among jews. Also because the worst exploiting manipulators have on average been the most succesful among exploiting manipulators, there haven’t been any evolutionary pressures to limit the intensity of manipulation. - Now, then, when jews are at the height of their power, their hostile jews don’t have any evolutionary developed mental limits on their exploitation and manipulation. They will do it, often maximally, until environment and surrounding people put limits to it. This means that they will destroy their host societies and their own power and maybe themselves (Referring to e.g. muslims in Europe) by among other things promoting immigration and liberalism, if others don’t limit them. 58
Posted by a Finn on Wed, 27 Jun 2007 16:44 | # Addition: Manipulators and exploiters are overlapping categories and coordinated by the same religion/culture/goals and in part by deals. I wrote: Because of the manipulation and the same reasons described in earlier examples, the hostile exploiters get abundant benefits from it, while at the same time avoiding the negative consequences.——> Because of the manipulation and the same reasons described in earlier examples, both the hostile exploiters and manipulators get abundant benefits from them, while at the same time avoiding the negative consequences. 59
Posted by a Finn on Thu, 28 Jun 2007 10:19 | # Addition: All previous does not mean ordinary jews were innocent. Prior to about 1750 in practice all of them belonged to jewish congregations and were integral part of them. After that the large majority of them still belonged to congregations and the most of the rest were part of other jewish networks. Ordinary jews believed in the hatreds and paranoias of jewish religion. They participated in one way or another to it’s activities and networks, including organized crime, forgeries, usury, tax profit extortion, trade and business monopolies, socialism, liberalism, communism, spying, smuggling etc. But the ordinary jews didn’t understand the whole system and they didn’t have the power to change it. They believed what they were being told by authoritarian powerful jewish leaders. Powerful jews understood the whole system and they had the power to change it, including the negative outcomes to jewish communities to positive. Even small changes here and there to change exploitation/manipulation to the direction of normal businesses would have had radical self-strengthening good effects. Jewish religion would have allowed it, because according to it, anything is allowed, as long as it is “Good for the jews”. 60
Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 28 Jun 2007 17:20 | # Referring to separatism history, trademark of idiots is that they repeat the same mistakes again and again despite the facts. Except that it was physical separation, in the form of the Mediterranean, Black Sea, and various mountain ranges—not to mention masculine territoriality—that created Euroman and his various types. Your insult exposes the bankruptcy of your argument. The same insult can be hurled at integrationism’s history of “failure” but with more force. Moreover, I wouldn’t call men like Wilmot Robertson, Frank Salter, the Wright Brothers, Robert Goddard, etc. “idiots”. You know, while trying to read your prose—laden with posturing like the above—I was reminded of a Jew, Carl Zimmer, who is routinely published in mainstream media as a “science journalist”, who wrote an entire book about parasites titled “Parasite Rex”. I have the book. It’s shelved in the “Here’s how Jews want you to think about the world.” section of my library next to Jared Diamond’s “Guns, Germs and Steel”. I refer to it the way a parasitologist might refer to a specimen in his collection. The jacket cover of the book describes it, concluding:
OK, so this Jewish journalist turns his enormous neuronal capacity and “encyclopedic knowledge” to what appears to be a very admirable task: Helping us understand “the laws of Parasite Rex”. So let’s turn now to the index of the book to look for the word “virulence” or “virulent”. Aha! There it is! He addresses it! on page 154 where he ends a paragraph:
Our appetite is whetted: What is the theory of virulence? Well, he doesn’t tell us there. Let’s turn to the index again for the next reference. There it is on page 212!:
There it is again! The reference to the theme of the entire book. But, alas, we are disappointed to find that here, also, he fails to state what the theory of virulence is. So, in the process of providing many hours of reading for his students, laced with vivid descriptions of various parasite host relationship, HE NEVER GETS AROUND TO THE REAL POINT HE PROMISED HE’D MAKE DURING THE ENTIRE COURSE OF THE BOOK. Now, it is entirely understandable why a Jew would not want to talk about the real “laws of Parasite Rex”, such as as you can find in the Majority Rights wiki entry on the evolution of virulence
But how are we to read your prose when you lead with something so lame as “idiots keep trying to separate” and you don’t even state your proposition up front? No, ultimately, neurons turned to works like Zimmer’s “Parasite Rex” are not really functioning anymore. They aren’t constructing coherent thoughts let alone arguments to communicate those thoughts. They are the memetic version of pheromone generators and ultimately, given enough evolutionary time, those dysfunctional neurons would be replaced by physical organs of no higher purpose. 61
Posted by anon on Thu, 28 Jun 2007 19:13 | # James, 62
Posted by a Finn on Fri, 29 Jun 2007 05:44 | # Strange answer, James, like you are answering to someone else than me and to his arguments. “Except that it was physical separation, in the form of the Mediterranean, Black Sea, and various mountain ranges—not to mention masculine territoriality—that created Euroman and his various types.” - I am all for that, we are on the same side. I also highly appreciate all the invaluable separation (by environmental and man made reasons), that has produced Europeans, has kept enough of us Europeans and us Europeans enough. My problem with our separation is this: It is weak and does not last, especially when man made or environmental pressures are directed against it. I want everlasting separation-ability for us, that withstands all situations. “Your insult exposes the bankruptcy of your argument. The same insult can be hurled at integrationism’s history of “failure” but with more force. Moreover, I wouldn’t call men like Wilmot Robertson, Frank Salter, the Wright Brothers, Robert Goddard, etc. “idiots”.” - Hey, I have enough mental Euros to stay in this business. How to practically do this? By ethnic genetic groups, about which I have written many times extensively in Majority Rights -comments sections. But any ethnic separatism -method/reason will assist before ethnic genetic groups become the prevalent method of separation. The present mainstream society does the mixing of those liberals, who have predisposition to mixing. James, Finland and especially Sweden has awful self-hating destructive universal egalitarians. If you insist keeping this kind of people among your group, can we send them all to you? “.... my library next to Jared Diamond’s “Guns, Germs and Steel”. I refer to it the way a parasitologist might refer to a specimen in his collection.” - I have that book too in my library, in Finnish; Tykit, Taudit ja Teräs, Ihmisen yhteiskuntien kohtalot (Terra Cognita, Helsinki, 2004). Lying and stupidity from beginning to end. Funny thing, I saw the translator of that book, Kimmo Pietiläinen, recently in a bookstore. He was introducing and marketing books that he has translated. I criticized the book strongly and suggested he should next translate better scientific explanation, the articles and books of J.P. Rushton. “Virulence evolves in the presence of high transmissibility due to the flight of organisms from damage they have caused by exploiting an environment. This is known as horizontal transmission in the field of evolutionary medicine. Contrast with the evolution of symbiosis and vertical transmission. But how are we to read your prose when you lead with something so lame as “idiots keep trying to separate” and you don’t even state your proposition up front?” - Well. I answered the “separate” -mistake you made and also the “idiot - separate” -mistake. It seems to me that you are confused with this virulence-horizontal-symbiosis-vertical -issue. It has certain congruences with our situation, but also differences. To put it shortly (If necessary I can elaborate further): Horizontal transmission means there is no need for the e.g virus to care much about the host. It just needs enough time to reproduce in the host and then spread to other hosts (Both processes need time, partly overlapping). After it has spread, the host can die and the virus don’t care at all (It’s evolutionary fitness is not affected by the death). This works as long as there is hosts where to spread and reproduce. If the hosts are too rare, virus can hibernate in crystal form or maybe spread to some secondary, less advantageous temporary hosts, until the most suitable hosts have again increased their numbers. With vertical transmission the situation is more complicated. The virus has to care about two additional qualities. 1. The children has to grow to adulthood to have and raise offspring, where the virus spreads to. 2. The children has to be competitive in their environment and against their competitors. If the children would in principle be capable to live to reproducing and past children raising age, but are too weak because of the virus to defend against competitors and cannot get food and shelter, they die. Then dies the virus too. The virus must start to “care” about the hosts, to form a symbiosis to survive, where the hosts helps the virus and virus helps the hosts. The situation in humans is more complicated than in viruses. We can see that jews are somewhere between horizontal and vertical. They were never absolutely horizontal, and never could be. Viruses are imperceptible and can gain access to hosts without conscious perception and grant from hosts. Jews could not gain access to e.g. Christians societies without doing some favors, so that Christians would do conscious decisions to let the jews live in their society. Because jews have lived among us so long, five things have happened to them: 1. In history there were less large scale coordination, co-operation and automatic coherence based on inclinations and culture (Three C’s). E.g. ashkenazis and sefardis; country and culture differences, like U.S. jews and immigrating poor Eastern European jews; congregation and religious differences, like traditional jewish groups and apocalyptic jewish groups or liberal jewish groups. Despite these jews had more effective national and international networks than anybody else. These three C’s have increased in large scale among all jews, but especially among the powerful core jews, creating still more efficient country and worldwide networks. There are still many differences among jews, but they don’t prevent their their three C’s as much as in the past. 2. Jews had to lessen their exploitation. E.g. their usury interests had to decrease to more reasonable general market interests and their participation in organized crime had to decrease and move more to legal businesses. 3. To be able to exploit, the exploiting methods had to increase in complexity. E.g. jews being exploitative counties’ business masters and tax collectors for royals in Polish empire. This had to change to e.g. indirect global market exploitation of devoloping countries. 4. The manipulation and occupying the junctures of information and power had to increase to e.g. protect jews from harm and loss to life and property; to enhance the possibilities of exploitation; to make jews seem more invisible, benign and good; to weaken the hosts resistance; to control the future direction of the society. E.g in medieval times jews had little “media” power compared to the Christians. Now they rule the global media. 5. They had to start giving more to hosts. Science, entertainment, charity, work output. E.g. in medieval times usury producing nothing, but took everything, now more real work; little science before c. 1750, after c. 1750 jews produced many advancements in sciences. These five are partly overlapping. Problem is the net effect was, is and will be, without necessary change, negative and threatening to non-jews (e.g. immigration and liberalism today). Why there is not symbiosis by now? 1. The option of moving on to other countries, both the real and the belief in it in culture/religion. Also the belief in culture/religion to the inevitability of the fall of all non-jewish countries. Real options of destinations might include many asian countries, when e.g. China reaches world dominance in business and always Israel. Compare in viruses: horizontal transmission. 2. Competition between the jews. The ability of the most powerful manipulating and exploiting jews to monitor, direct, coordinate and manipulate the less powerful jews and their actions, and slightly less the non-jews (directly, indirectly and “invisibly”). The most succesful viruses cannot do these to the same extent with the less powerful viruses of the same species and with other species. Societies contain more parts working together, thus working more in blocks. Viruses are not affected to the same extent by the co-operation or lack of it by their hosts. Thus, in every situation, those jews, who can manipulate and exploit the most without ending up in jail, losing property in some way, awaking destructive opposition etc., rule other jews, including those who are more benign and would in due time form symbiosis with the hosts. Bening jews will be prevented/directed by the powerful jews from forming competing societies or groups. Also benign jews will directed to give their work output to manipulating jews. If benign jews form competing symbiotic groups or societies with hosts, the best jewish manipulators can manipulate so many jewish and non-jewish people, and resources against them, that benign symbiotic jews lose competition. Also, ability to manipulate efficiently implies high I.Q., so the manipulating jews can use it to give non-jewish hosts enticing useful things. And: * If the hosts (Western peoples) of the jews has better abilities to invent and produce than other possible hosts (Non-Western peoples) * If non-western peoples partly work for Western peoples + jews because of combined Western and jewish abilities and manipulation. * Then Western peoples earn more money than non-western peoples and it seems that they are doing well compared to them. * Then Western peoples don’t notice so well the monetary losses, immigration, liberalism etc. jews cause. “They are the memetic version of pheromone generators and ultimately, given enough evolutionary time, those dysfunctional neurons would be replaced by physical organs of no higher purpose.” - So, let’s put our cards on the table, and smell if somebody stinks like pheromones. To Anon: E.g. European Americans moving away from areas, where jews etc. have manipulated to be non-European immigrants. 63
Posted by James Bowery on Fri, 29 Jun 2007 16:34 | # It seems to me that you are confused with this virulence-horizontal-symbiosis-vertical -issue. On the contrary, I am un-confused with it. My position has been and remains separation of adults into experimental groups testing propositions about social organization with which they agree. Confusion arises when there are no experimental controls—a direct result of horizontal transmission contaminating groups. It’s really that simple and while there are nuances in evolutionary medicine that I’ve gone into here at MR before, specifically with regard to Jews I don’t find your analysis helpful, in part because I don’t understand what you’re getting at. Yes, send all the Nordics who lack a strong genetic predisposition to form racialist groups to me along with everyone else and I’ll let Godan sort them out with voluntary experiments in social organization, carried out with integrity on separate territories so we can all find out what really works and what doesn’t. 64
Posted by a Finn on Sat, 30 Jun 2007 14:14 | # Before answering James, I make two additions: Jews gain part of their wealth/power from criminal activies: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Milken The word anti-semitism in this article reminds that Wikipedia is in principle open to all writers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Boesky http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guinness_share-trading_fraud Talmud allows all criminal activity, as long as “It is good for the jews” (correction to the writer’s wrong information): http://jewishwhistleblower.blogspot.com/2005/03/joel-cohen-of-stroock-stroock-lavan.html http://jewishwhistleblower.blogspot.com/2005/03/police-uncover-sex-trafficking-ring.html http://www.davidduke.com/general/how-the-jewish-supremacy-in-media-lies-to-us_257.html#more-257 http://jewishwhistleblower.blogspot.com/2005/03/charles-kushner-to-be-sentenced-to.html Etc. But today jews’ success is mostly dependent on more efficient, immediately ready and larger networks, and better methods and co-operation than other groups have in business, politics, media, information gathering etc. Also jews have greater trust and loyalty between members than other groups. Their networks are designed to be seamlessly inside the societies’ systems in important places, and mostly within bounds of law. Some of the laws are designed or influenced by the jews to enable their operations. If their unlawful operations would be taken away from them, they would suffer, but recover fast and be still on top. (Inside information gathering networks, some infiltration and spying being the exceptions) ———————- Manipulative hostile jews have a competitive edge against benign jews also because they can appeal to jewish culture, religion and loyalty. Benign jews, who regard non-jewish hosts to be equal, can be described with jewish culture/religion to be unloyal traitors. Manipulative hostile jews, who almost always side with jews, participate in jewish networks, and help and support jews, are described by jewish religion/culture to be loyal good jews. My answers start with (-). “My position has been and remains separation of adults into experimental groups testing propositions about social organization with which they agree.” - My plan also almost, but I make an addition. We have enough knowledge from history, societies, group evolution, ethnic competition etc., so that we can reduce the alternatives, figuratively, from 10 to 2. Thus we need less experimenting and we can design more. Groups have to be permanent and survive possible wars, ethnic competition decadent times, oppression, propaganda etc. All situations. We can’t make experiments that span thousands of years or experiment much during e.g. oppression. “Confusion arises when there are no experimental controls—a direct result of horizontal transmission contaminating groups.” - If Finns would turn their basic principles into laws, three of them would be: 1. Expect always the worst and all the other possibilities. Prepare to withstand them. 2. When constructing something, don’t say; “I hope it doesn’t break.” Study, design and construct it so, that you can say; “It will endure.” 3. When you have created long lasting optimal situation, don’t expect it to last. Prepare for the worst and all other possibilities. I regard horizontal transmission, i.e. the jews and their ethnic competition methods, to be in certain sense positive to us. Yes, they have negative net effect to us. But this means that we have to construct our groups from the beginning to withstand all their manipulation, problems created by them and their ethnic competition methods in general. This makes us more able in other kinds of situations also. “It’s really that simple and while there are nuances in evolutionary medicine that I’ve gone into here at MR before, specifically with regard to Jews I don’t find your analysis helpful, in part because I don’t understand what you’re getting at.” - Without getting into too much detail: 1. Constitution. Basic principles of the group that cannot be changed by anyone, ever. With advancement of knowledge/science the details of principles might become more accurate, but must still fit into the basic principles (E.g genetic tests becoming more accurate). Constitution includes: Genetic and cultural principles. Principles of co-operation, loyalty, trust and group member kinship. Ingroup-outgroup principles and outlines of ethnic competition methods’ use. Relations to European ethnic groups. It is possible to have religion here, if the members want it and/or find it useful. Evolution principles inside the group; e.g. promoting all to have fairly large child number; promoting the most intelligent to have on average slightly larger number of children; shedding of those that are too liberal, too universally egalitarian and cannot be trusted. Principles of marriage, overlapping with genetic principles. Principles of education in groups’ private schools, and education of group’s principles and methods. Principle; every member of the group studies regularly. Etc. 2. Database and library of methods the group uses or could use to produce what it needs (Jobs). This information increases, develops and changes. Used in studying by all. New methods invented. Anything from farming to businesses to energy production to construction to law professions to machine engineering to other sciences etc. If possible, houses, school etc. build by members Information on how to raise children. Miscelleneous efficient and good methods in things big and small. Pooling buying of things and food. Saving energy. How to produce easily and cheaply something that is normally bought. How to increase the endurance of cars. Alternative “money” and exchange systems to complement the present systems. Etc. 3. Database and library of all known ethnic competition methods (Every method, that gives advantage/advantages over other groups) These are partly overlapping with 2 and 1. This information increases, new methods are invented, sometimes the information changes. These are used in the group’s ethnic competition and protection against other groups’ ethnic competition. When used by us, these are limited by two rules: * Is it good for our ethnic group? (To our particular ethnic group and our ethnic group in general) Answer must be; Yes. * Groups’ principles and methods must not lead to parasitism. Ethnic competition methods include, general categories (partly overlapping): * information gathering methods from everywhere of the surrounding society and from abroad. Information gathering equipment. * information relaying networks, humans and equipment. * Financial and business methods and networks. E.g. business takeovers; share/bond use; market share competition; business information networks; corporate, field of production and country analysis; coordination of our businesses and resources; tax minimizing, etc. * Everything related to medias, medianetworks, efficient influencing of people, advertising etc. How to protect against and resist propaganda, lies, distortions and influencing by our opponents. * Psychological methods in everything they can be used. * Political influence. Coordinating of our voting, pressure/interest/lobbying groups etc. Political financing and gifts. Creation of political relationships and networks. Gathering political information. Political procedures. Political ideologies and theories, and their efficient utilization. We support those who are useful to us, we are not tied to any party or candidates. Etc. * Cultures. How to change them and to what. * Influencing in courts. Lawyer networks and coordination. Etc. * Organizational behavior, structures and operation. * How to increase loyalty and trust. * Spying, infiltration and subversion (all kinds of, including computers, businesses, political parties, affiliations, communities etc.), how to notice them and protect against them. (Whether these have practical utility immediately or not) * Security in all it’s forms. * Etc. General consequences: 4. Tight, growing and efficient community, members forming the same kind of relationships like in good close kinship. Durable. People are loyal to each other and trust each other. Determined striving towards goals. 5. Good, healthy and inspiring living environment for families. Cheap apartments, living and education. Excellent education for all. Intelligent people. 6. Many possibilities for sports, relaxation and free time arranged. 7. Money and power. Etc. “Yes, send all the Nordics who lack a strong genetic predisposition to form racialist groups to me along with everyone else and I’ll let Godan sort them out with voluntary experiments in social organization, carried out with integrity on separate territories so we can all find out what really works and what doesn’t.” - Hey, I said approximately; callous liberals. I’ll guide them to you as soon as it is possible. 65
Posted by a Finn on Sat, 30 Jun 2007 15:18 | # This is good article: http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/charles_murray_still_cant_subtract/ Reducing the payoff of their virulence and increasing the payoff of their benignity is hard without using ethnic genetic groups and ethnic competition methods, because virulence is mostly based on legal, “normal” operations; their culture and their special methods; and their networks and co-operation. Mere separation to different societies does not reduce their international power against the separate society. They could play other societies against it and directly cause problems (Finance, businesses, media, politics, sciences). Separation in itself does not create permanent group (Long term degenerating pressures from the inside and others from outside). I don’t have time to comment more now. 66
Posted by William Pierce on Sun, 10 Feb 2019 06:43 | #
Post a comment:
Next entry: Cultural Instauration: A history of government interest in Subliminal Audio Programming
|
|
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) CommentsThorn 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 '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) Manc commented in entry 'The legacy of Southport' on Tue, 29 Oct 2024 17:21. (View) |
Posted by Kurt9 on Wed, 20 Jun 2007 00:21 | #
This is a very good comment and reminds me of some discussion I had with friends some time ago about the boomers vs. “greatest generation” and the portrayal of each in the media.
The boomers are portrayed as being “narcissistic” and “self-absorbed”, whereas the “greatest” generation is portrayed as being, well, the greatest generation.
I think the boomers, by and large, have gotten a bum rap (I’m a Gen-X). Especially those who came of age in the 70’s. The Boomers got shafted by the stag-flation of the 70’s, which killed the economy and affordable family formation for these people until, really, the mid to late 80’s. As a child growing up in the 70’s, I remember the boomer young people. Yeah, they partied alot and drove around in their hot rods. But they also studied and worked hard, too. My parents had me late in life. Their friends’ kids were mostly boomers, graduating from HS in the early 70’s. None of these “kids” were screw offs or slackers. Most of them busted their asses in school and became sucessful “career” people. I think the boomers were shafted by the stag-flation of the 70’s.
Who created this stag-flation? The voters and politicians of the greatest generation, culminating with President Dick and Arthur Burns (FED chairman) of the early 70’s and the stag-flation that these gentlemen created. However, it goes back further. The stag-flation was the end-game of Keynesian economic policy, which the “greatest” generation supported whole-heartedly from WWII on. It was clear from the beginning that Keynesian economic policy was not long-term sustainable. Is it not possible that the “greatest” generation have some culpability for this?
It took 15 years for the country to recover from the stag-flation and the excesses of Keynesian economic policy. The prime 15 years of the majority of the boomers.