Hitler vs the Capitalists, Was He Right?

[tirannis]

Hitler Vs the capitalists, was he right?
I expect this has already be written about, if so them please discard this…

Something most people don’t seam to realise is that the money and credits we use are not from our governments, they are created by the central banks as a loan to their governments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_banks
quote from there...
A central bank, reserve bank, or monetary authority is a banking institution granted the exclusive privilege to lend a government its currency.

This means that for every pound [for example] created there is an ‘invisible’ interest added onto it, and the loan is of all the money currently circulating. This means there is never enough money to pay back the loan [all money + interest], it puts our nations into debt [the national debt [or part of it]] and our taxes are used by our governments to pay back the banks. An example is where a couple of years ago the bank of England issued and circulated a few extra millions of pounds, it was on the news but I don’t think anyone realised what it meant.
Essentially that money as a loan means that the banks effectively reached into our pockets and stole some of our money, yet when we get our wallets out there appears to be the same amount of money there. It’s a slight of hand trick which boosted the banks finances at our expense ~ even after we had part nationalised them also at our expense [that is why Britain is in so much debt].

For all the conservatives talk of stopping immigrations, what we must first remember is that they are outright capitalist, and this means that the growth of the economy has to be maintained; this inevitably means an increase in immigrants and general populations. Because of the way banks work, economies ‘have’ to grow in order to pay back the loan of money which is greater than what currently exists.

I believe this is the fundamental reason why Hitler hated the banks, ok so he didn’t like Jews and in Germany at that time, the banks were largely Jew owned, which means that much of the hard earned money made by Germans was feeding the capitalist machine [banks]. Hitler is not the only one who despised this outrageous act of theft, President Kennedy issued many billions of dollars without a debt attached to them [and probably paid for it with his life], and then after his death the banks called all that money in and replaced it with their own debt money.

I only recently found out how all this works and I find it very strange to see Kennedy and Hitler in agreement on this issue [even though it would never be said in public]. It seams to me that the whole drive towards corporate enterprise is fuelled by this, to the detriment of small businesses who can never compete in a market with such a veracious appetite for stolen wealth and power.

This is not free markets, it is serfdom! it’s a way to make 1% of households own 47% of the wealth, and 80% of households own only 7% of the wealth.

I am not so sure that socialism is the answer especially when combined with fascism [as Hitler thought], I don’t go much on the attitude of herding people around like sheep and breeding people as one sees fit. If we are supposed to be strong Germanic peoples they why opt for something that makes us completely feeble!
Equally I don’t see why one group [e.g. jews, aristocracies] should dominate others especially via the banking method ~ not that they should be killed, but if you have a group of people who will always be looking at ripping of your fellow countrymen, then they have to be stopped. The Jew’s really aren’t so innocent.

I personally think market anarchism is the way forwards [free markets but where the banks are national] though with a strong person at its head. A father should want the best for all his children yes!

[velvet]

This can never be repeated often enough, very good post!


I'll add a movie which sheds light on some more details, and how critique of the banks is shouted down with accusations of anti-semitism (even though the analyst didnt mention Jews in his initial work with one word). This interview is about the results of his investigation that he did after that accusation.

Bernd Senf - Geldsystem und Weltfinanzkrise


Here in another channel that has some partly good docus about such topics
Secret TV

Both sources are German though.

[Bittereinder]

Personally I believe a country should be its own banker, If money can be made from debt (as is currently the case) then imagine what could be if countries had a clean slate, their own resources and work force as its capital, because it is the only things which is real which is bought with money. The artificial nature of the world economy, which exist so that money can be freely extorted from all people who have the slightest ambition in life, will ensure that all races and indeed the "human race" (for lack of a beter word) or its most advanced and best adapted components never reach their potential nature has placed in them/us.

Other countries/nations will still have need of recourses it does not poses itself and thus trade will alwys be there, however if the government is for its people in the true sense, then the benefits will go directly to the citizens, more than enough foreigners and the likes have received first world education, send them back where they came from so they can be the leaders of skilled occupation's and that which they still lack they will have to teach themselves. There are ways to ensure skills being transferred to other races without allowing interbreeding and incompatible assimilation.

Family's works like an economy, pooling recourses so as to maximize the resources at their disposal so should a homogenous nation state, be they Germanics or whatever. If other races cannot get their houses in order and use the potential of its land and human resources then it deserves to starve, die from aids and whatever their uncivilized behaviour expose them to, it is no use allowing these burdens on not only us but on the earth itself to go on existing if they cannot at least fend for themselves, it is a sick implanted moral complication that make people believe they are responsible for the welfare of others they have no connection with.

I am for personal ownership with strict governmental control, the kind that ensures that the people, whom the government should be an extension of, get preferential treatment where business and land ownership is concerned so as to secure the welfare of its people. All these things can only occur in a homogenous nation state. We should not pay for other people's healthcare or housing or primal sexual habits.

Because the world economy is causing ALL the threats facing Germanics and indeed the races of the world today, would it not be self preserving to first find an alternative to the current thievery which keeps us and the rest of the world on our knees.

[tirannis]

velvet, hi;

Yes I agree how important this is, I have added aspects many times to threads at other forums, and as you say people tend to rebuke it by mentioning the jews. However, I found that if I take out any mention of Hitler and just attack capitalism, then they have no answer for it. For many years people have been in blissful ignorance not realising this is how it all works, nor that the war was actually capitalism Vs Nazism.

Simply put, Hitler was a soldier; the basic function of a military is to stop foreigners from taking the piss out of your fellow countrymen. This is exactly what the Jews were doing, and just because they were in germany already it doesn’t mean they arent enemies. If they weren’t ‘Jews’ [a self defining group more than a race these days] and simply settled in germany they wouldn’t have had such a problem.

Sorry I don’t speak german ~ for the links. If you can post specific data then I will be sure to pass the info elsewhere, the net is a good thing eh! They cannot hide in misinformation anymore.

[tirannis]

Grimner, hi

Personally I believe a country should be its own banker, If money can be made from debt (as is currently the case) then imagine what could be if countries had a clean slate

Absolutely, let us not forget that banks are also international, so the moneys they extrapolate from us doesn’t just feed our own economies, it goes to whoever owns the investments. They may be called central banks and have names like ‘the bank of England’ but on the bank of englands own site it says that 99.7% of all money is ‘publically owned’ ~ and that is an important thing to note. Your state may [as englands does] ‘own’ the bank, but not its money!

If other races cannot get their houses in order and use the potential of its land and human resources then it deserves to starve, die from aids and whatever their uncivilized behaviour expose them to

that’s a tad unfair for example with Africans they havent been civilised for long and really don’t have the expertise. Equally, malaria and other diseases cannot be helped in such climates, not for as long as capitalism is screwing their countries blind so they cannot help themselves. We cannot really complain about being ripped of if we then turn around and do it to other, that’s just a duplicity that will weaken our arguments! Really I don’t think the language of hate is beneficial at all, these things make us weak [our arguments fail on this point] and give our enemies the impetus of their supposed righteousness.

Be clever - be strong!

I am for personal ownership with strict governmental control, the kind that ensures that the people, whom the government should be an extension of, get preferential treatment where business and land ownership is concerned so as to secure the welfare of its people.

I agree except for the personal ownership, what the people earn is from the wealth pool of their nation, as soon as you individualise it then people can take their wealth anywhere [out of the country] and it gives capitalists the excuse for multi-nationalism and from that multiculturalism.

would it not be self preserving to first find an alternative to the current thievery which keeps us and the rest of the world on our knees.

Exactly! Make the banks national, replace the stock market with ‘national cooperatives’ ~ or some manner of socialism. This way businesses self invest and the nation acts as a father and invest in its children. There has to be accountability for the father, or any power and this is why you have to get the model right.

[SaxonPagan]

Thanks for the video link, Velvet

I managed to get through about 80 of the 120 minutes on offer and this guy certainly has the capitalist banking system sussed! Mind you, he never once mentioned the "J" word but I just kept mentally substituting this for "bankers"

[Mouse Shadow]

I agree except for the personal ownership, what the people earn is from the wealth pool of their nation, as soon as you individualise it then people can take their wealth anywhere [out of the country] and it gives capitalists the excuse for multi-nationalism and from that multiculturalism.
.

So what, you're asking us to fight 'capitalism' and embrace communism now? MEH? Sorry, but the way I see it, is communism, capitalism, EU, New World Dollars, whatever are just a means for acquisition.

Fundamentally, if the system is good and run by honest people, citizens WILL benefit, no matter what operative is established.

However, the reason Hitler, me or anyone else hates the systems is because corrupters get in and trick people out of hard earned wealth.

We are just like little squirrels putting away our nuts for winter, or building the infrastructure to make more nuts. Or pay smart squirrels to dream up advanced nut making technology.

Spews enter the equation, who are predatorily evil and rewrite the honest ways of economics.

It's not the economic system, it’s the vile worms who are poisonous to any economy. They wheedle in tricks and lies to their advantage and squeal anti-semitism-holocaust when they get caught.

Hey, if communism worked and people became genuinely glad about it, I'm sure we'd want it too. But, it's a dick. You can't pool resources with it and it undoes the bond humans have with their plot of squirrel land.

I doubt 'Capitalism' as you want to make out, is inherently bad, it's the freak-sh*t liars and cheats that make it rotten. Capitalism in it's basic sense is a great method of collecting resources and buying/making/creating huge advancements to humankind.

We have only the spew maggots and sociopath betrayers to blame for ruining, twisting and stealing EVERYTHING we hold dear and valuable. They wreck the entire world because of WHAT they are.

Not us vs capitalism, or whatever, it’s always been us vs evil, greedy retards.

To me, this seems like a diversion away from the root problem.

What I WOULD like to know is how we can develop a monetary system outside their control. Something they would fear to touch or have any association with.

[Bittereinder]

that’s a tad unfair for example with Africans they havent been civilised for long and really don’t have the expertise. Equally, malaria and other diseases cannot be helped in such climates, not for as long as capitalism is screwing their countries blind so they cannot help themselves. We cannot really complain about being ripped of if we then turn around and do it to other, that’s just a duplicity that will weaken our arguments! Really I don’t think the language of hate is beneficial at all, these things make us weak [our arguments fail on this point] and give our enemies the impetus of their supposed righteousness.

The short comings of Africans is certainly not to be found in how long they have been civilized, not even remotely... Their problem is where they find themselves in evolutionary terms. They have not the skills/expertise because they have not developed it themselves within their own evolutionary path, even if a more advanced civilization has placed the tools of civilization at their disposal ie. Education, infrastructure, farming etc. they cannot seem to grasp the use and maintenance of these tools to civilization. I am not asking them to split the atom or go to the moon... Malaria was nearly eradicated in South-Africa and large parts of Zimbabwe and Mozambique, aids can be managed if only they would stop mating like bunny's. Blacks and all animals live for the now, preparing for the future or as Mouseshadow put it: collecting chestnuts for winter does not occur naturally in their racial mind.

The more aid people dump on Africans the more harm they do to Africans because they cannot develop the required evolutionary mechanism to find equilibrium with their environment. such as consuming all available recourses and breading like rats in the fat years and languishing in poverty/famine in the lean years. This "equilibrium" is something that comes natural to every other race except blacks. They alwys end up living beyond their means and if they are not left to find and advance their own way of securing their future well being this would be a crime against them.

I agree except for the personal ownership, what the people earn is from the wealth pool of their nation, as soon as you individualise it then people can take their wealth anywhere [out of the country] and it gives capitalists the excuse for multi-nationalism and from that multiculturalism.

Exactly! Make the banks national, replace the stock market with ‘national cooperatives’ ~ or some manner of socialism. This way businesses self invest and the nation acts as a father and invest in its children. There has to be accountability for the father, or any power and this is why you have to get the model right.

In a homogenous nation state money from the economy would not be siphoned off because the people participating in the economy will be born from and live in their own country with no ties to another land. Banking should be a mechanism used by the state to assist its citizens in moving money and supplying credit at a much reduced rate to advance housing and land ownership of the indigenous people, and whatever interest is charged should be used like tax would be, in a publicly accountable fashion.

I see realism you see racism?

PS: I live in Africa...

[Agrippa]

The Plutocratic Oligarchy overtook England with one of the first Central Banks, the Bank of England in the time of William of Orange, just look at page 11 of this thread:

Brits Believe Mixed-Race People Are the 'Most Attractive and Successful'


Talking about the Anglo-Jewish Plutocracy, everything they did was only possible by their control of the credits and creation of money. Even the control over the media and business was often based on "friendly credits" among them, which they could make because Jews and allied gentiles, like almost the whole British upper class, gave the money.

Capitalism and even ownership is a principle problem for every community, collective (Gemeinschaft) - and the base of individiualised, corrupted societies (Gesellschaft) which the Plutocracy prefers obviously, because than those who own - and who can buy more than those controlling the creation of money (?!) control the whole society.

A very good documentary with just some small mistakes - typically for English speakers if dealing with National Socialism and Hitler, about the issue:
The Money Masters - How International Bankers Gained Control of America


To watch this is a must!

Debt based money controlled by private banks and private ownership, individualised inheritance is no matter of course, it was produced and changed society step by step, made it much easier for certain ideologies (Materialist, Individualised Liberalism and Cultural Marxism) to enter our societies and the Plutocracy to gain control over us.

You control or even destroy the fractional-reserve banking system we have now, or you get controlled or even destroyed by the bankers which form a new elite and with their corporations build up a Re-Feudalised world system in which the mass is just their slave and our people will be changed or annihilated, by transforming our cultural (memetic) and biological (genetic) code.

[velvet]

I doubt 'Capitalism' as you want to make out, is inherently bad, it's the freak-sh*t liars and cheats that make it rotten. Capitalism in it's basic sense is a great method of collecting resources and buying/making/creating huge advancements to humankind.

I have to disagree. Capitalism in itself is flawed, maybe even "evil". The word itself says: the capital is what generates "wealth", ie more capital.

The problem with capital is that is in an artificial construct. Now you can go and base the worth of capital in gold ("real" worth) or like Hitler, make it dependend on the actual work power (IMHO the best system) of the nation. But at the end of the day, capital stays an artificial substitute for real worth, keep that in mind.

So, in this sense, capitalism, ie when you run the economy to gain more capital, is in and by itself... maybe evil is the wrong word, but it is a construct that needs constant watch for not transgressing its borders and becoming an end in itself. Capital, money is not the same as wealth.

Fundamentally, if the system is good and run by honest people, citizens WILL benefit, no matter what operative is established.

Capitalism can never be "good", no matter how you build the system. Capital will always strive to control the system to get rid of its limitation to generate more capital (not necessarily more wealth).

It's not the economic system, it’s the vile worms who are poisonous to any economy. They wheedle in tricks and lies to their advantage and squeal anti-semitism-holocaust when they get caught.

Yes, the problem lies also in the current economic system, because the economy serves capitalism. It is about generating more money, not about generating "wealth" and even less it is about generating "the benefits of civilisation" for the people running this economy.

And there long ago ceased to be a difference between capitalism and economy, ie the "system".

When you want the earned goodies for the hard working people, it is simply not enough to only change the monetary system and then think all will be fine. The economy is capitalism, it is not designed to leave the goodies with the hard working people. Capitalism and the current economy is designed to deliver all the nuts to the "smart" squirrels (who arent necessarily smart but simply managed to put themselves at the receiving end of the chain).

Hey, if communism worked and people became genuinely glad about it, I'm sure we'd want it too. But, it's a dick. You can't pool resources with it and it undoes the bond humans have with their plot of squirrel land.

Let's forget for a moment that "communism" usually is connected to Marx and Jews and leftist politics and dictatur and what not all and let's have a look on the foundation, the basic idea. The basic idea of communism is the "community" of people, a unity that works and lives for their common wealth.

National Socialism contains a lot of "communist" ideas as well, and it is this very basic of the community, and even your own ideal that people care for each other, dont cheat each other etc. This is just as much Communism as it is National Socialism (where the community is still the very basic and that what is most cared about, because otherwise the community doesnt work).

One core point of Communism is that the banking is national, just as it is in NS. The monetary system is bound to the nation and the community forming it, it is "common wealth and property".

Core technologies such as electricity, heatsystem supplies, water, etc are in both systems controlled by the state and cannot be private. Why? Because a private enterprise "must" always strive for maximising its wins, which will at one point or another cut off certain groups of your community from access to these core technologies, and with that, cut them off the access to the "benefits of civilisation", which in turn will lead to the inevitable class struggle, which both Communism and NS tried, with their own means, to limit or ideally to eradicate.

The flaws of Communism was the twisted ideal that everyone is the same, has the same worth and is totally equal, regardless of his talents or the lack thereof, which in turn requires the leveling of everyone and everything to the lowest common denominator.

NS allowed for the classes and differencies in people to exist, to benefit according to their own merits. It is just another form of "communism", as both systems want to create an ideal community in which everyone finds his place.

Returning to the economy nurturing this community, certain core technologies must be owned and controlled by the state, ie the body of people making up this state (the state shall serve the people, not vice versa), to enable everyone in turn to access these core technologies and to be part of the community, so that class differencies do not lead to class struggle for the basics of life (and yes, in the information age also TV, radio, the internet are basics of life).

These core technologies, health care, the monetary system of a state, even the banks themselves must/should be non-profit, in order to give private people and their businesses the same starting conditions and opportunities, on which they then can build up according to their own talents and merits.

In Capitalism, everything is profit orientated and opportunities do only exist for people who own already a lot of capital, so this is a system that is designed to push out step by step ever more groups (classes) of people from access to this capital. Capitalism strives for monopoly, because concurrence is bad for your own capital.

And most of all, Capitalism is by design anti-community, anti-social. The capital or the people owning capital see everyone as enemy, or at least bitter concurrence in the struggle to gain more capital (because this is what capitalism is about, only). This generates the ellbow-society we have. Capitalism cements the very anti-social behavior of the (misunderstood) "only the strongest survive", which by design is a selfish view point.

But civilisation, the idea of community is about a common success, a success gained by every member of this community, which in turn must produce benefits for every member of this community. You cannot expect people to work for the success of others or the "benefit" of the (still artificial construct) community, without that they get something in return. This generates asocial, even anti-social behavior. So, for a community to work for everyone by everyone a certain level of "communism" is required. In this regard National Socialism doesnt differ from "Communism" that much, no matter whether you call is communism or socialism.

At the end of the day these systems are designed to distribute certain basics of life to every member of your community. And when you do it good and a real community comes about, this community will, with all its class diversity and talents diversity, be a good community, because there is no need to see one or another group as your predator and all can contribute according to their abilities.

And this "can" means the same as "is allowed to". Capitalism sets the requirements, and when you fail to meet these requirements (we have a mockery for this in German that you read basically in every single job vacancy: they search for a "eierlegende Wollmichsau" (oviparous wool- and milk giving sow), even for street cleaners), you are useless and in turn you lose access to core technologies and basics of life. You are not allowed to contribute according to your abilities and talents, you either function or are useless. There is no middle ground. And "you", as a human, a character dont play a role. Capitalism is anti-social and insofar indeed "evil".

Not us vs capitalism, or whatever, it’s always been us vs evil, greedy retards.

To me, this seems like a diversion away from the root problem.

What I WOULD like to know is how we can develop a monetary system outside their control. Something they would fear to touch or have any association with.

The answer is National Socialism. Base the money in actual work power of your nation. This is an "internal" worth more than everything else. Base trade in actual worth trade and not in "money trade" (when you export a cow to another nation, get something in return that is worth a cow and not the "price" of a cow). Basically, take out the opportunity to steal on the trade market. Work with real worths. Your money serves as an state-internal trade mean, that benefits your people. Your money might not be worth anything for another nation, your products or resources are of potential interest for another nation and vice versa.

The state (ie the body of people of your nation) issues the money, controlls the money. The banks are owned and run non-profit by the state as well. At the point where money generates more money it starts to become artificial, ie non-real, money itself becomes deceive.

When your money is internal and not meant for trade with others, there is no point where deceivers can attach themselves to, no matter whether from internal or external.

But most important, and actually self-evident, why would external people, institutes, banks, trademarkets, whatever, have or should have access to your internal systems? When you allow others to define your economy, by "demanding" that you produce certain products for export, by demanding that you "have" to import certain products from external, or by the interims mean "money" put pressure on you to do or not do certain things, you have basically lost control over your own economy.

Only real worths, goods, products etc should be traded. You see what you get, there is no way to deceive, cheat or sell you stuff you dont need for the sake of "trade" as is the case now in Capitalism. You, ie the state, must make sure that you only trade with people/other states that you want to trade with for the conditions you set or both can agree upon (a certain level of compromise maybe cant be fully avoided).

And kick out foreign people, ideally from your entire nation, but at least block them from access to "core positions". Imagine that system, I cant see how anyone foreign, spew or not, would be able to attach themselves into this system.

This is what Hitler tried and almost succeeded with, and this, this taking out of attachments points for foreign control, is why NS Germany was and is so much hated. Hitler spoiled their game "Capitalism" and tried to set the rules himself.