Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 65

Thread: For a Racial Capitalism

  1. #21
    Senior Member Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Last Online
    Friday, March 25th, 2016 @ 08:28 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Celt Australian
    Subrace
    Keltic Nordic
    Country
    Australia Australia
    State
    Victoria Victoria
    Location
    Terra Australis
    Gender
    Age
    33
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Guerilla Philosopher
    Politics
    Aristotelian Nationalist
    Religion
    Roman Catholic
    Posts
    1,810
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Moody Lawless
    Aloysha; "Culture is a product of individuals ..."

    Moody Lawless; Individualism is a very late arrival on the social scene.
    The originator of culture was that most prolific of author(s), Anon.
    All culture derives from the Family, not the Individual.
    Capitalism tends to Atomise society.
    'Author' (Anon) is still an individual. Individualism or not, that does not erase the fact individuals exist. You know, individuals, the indivisible point, each man's mind? The effects of the Jews lead to an Atomised society. Or was America atomised before 1913?

    Aloysha; "Greed is the very stuff that motivates individuals - what do you think the will to power is?"

    Moody Lawless; 'Greed' is not synonymous with the will to power in Nietzsche; Nietzsche promoted the Superhuman, not the Supergreedy.
    'Greed is Good' was the Capitalist slogan of the 1980s, based on Thatcherism, Reagonomics and Dawkin's 'Selfish Gene'.
    Greed is doing what one can for self enrichment. Selfishness is looking after one's own interests above all else. Capitalism says serve your own interests without violating the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness of others. Dawkin's Selfish Gene doesn't give a damn about rights, it's naturalistic, it's science. Can you refute Selfish Gene theory?

    Aloysha; "You want to castrate humanity?"

    Moody; So you link Greed with 'castration' - tell me how?
    You're the one who suggested Greed must be suppressed, after acknowledging that it is part of human nature. I said doing this is effectively castrating humanity. Looking after your own kind, ethnic nationalism, territorialism and altruism towards your own kind is also part of human nature. You want to pick and choose what's allowed and what isn't?

    The Nietzschean view is to pursue excellence; his Higher Man is the Noble type, the Warrior, the Artist Tyrant - the man of Honour, not the Greedy Capitalist.
    Read Atlas Shrugged and tell me Hank Rearden, Francisco D'Anconia or John Galt aren't 'Noble'. And, btw, I've typed up a post in Philosophy and Ideology about Selfish Gene theory and the Will to Power you might find interesting.

    Aloysha; You have, as I said before, no idea what you are talking about".

    Moody; Tell me this - how can we as moderators encourage good manners on this forum when you stoop to such a vapid put-down?
    Refute my arguments - if you can.
    Otherwise don't bother to post such ad hominems.
    Now who's whining about ad hominems? "if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the fire." - Moody Lawless, four weeks ago.

    I do not deny you the right to be an Anarchist one week, and a Capitalist the next - but please don't tell me that I don't know what I am talking about, as I ONLY speak on the basis of knowledge; where I don't know, I keep quiet.
    Honesty is a virtue - and one held by Capitalists, in fact. Anarchist one week, capitalist the next? Tell me how I've essentially changed - I've gone from arguing in favour of the sovereign individual in politics one week to arguing in favour of the sovereign individual in economics in another.

    Aloysha; "Tell us what 'fair profits' mean. The idea of exploitation under capitalism is bunk, and Marxist rubbish".

    Moody; You used the word 'exploitation', not I. I said that we oppose 'internationalism' and 'usury'. If you don't know what those things are, then look them up.
    u·su·ry ( P ) Pronunciation Key (yzh-r)
    n. pl. u·su·ries
    The practice of lending money and charging the borrower interest, especially at an exorbitant or illegally high rate.

    I assume that's what you meant?

    "Of late years, however, the opinion that money should be borrowed and repaid, or bought and sold, upon whatever terms the parties should agree to, like any other property, has gained ground everywhere."

    What is wrong with this, if anything?

    Aloysha; "Bankers don't 'control' anything - they only have control so long as loans have yet to be paid off".

    Moody; Some 'only'!
    Are you telling me businesses have not a chance in hell of paying off the loans they borrow?

    Aloysha; "The return [Churchill's disasterous return to the Gold Standard] needed to happen - paper money needs to be tied to something of actual value, otherwise it can be printed at any rate desired ...The reason the Gold Standard was disasterous for Britain is because it was priced at pre-war levels, and so it was undervalued and therefore in high demand".

    Moody; Seeing that you think I don't know what I am talking about, then allow me to quote a graduate of the London University [and a National Socialist]:
    He is refering to Britain's return to Gold Standard in the 1920s, a period he actually lived through;
    "Lord Reading, a Jew more happily described as Rufus Isaacs, brilliant lawyer and rascal of the Marconi scandal, was plotting a return to the Gold Standard. Churchill, after losing several elections, got into the British Government as Chancellor of the Exchequer, and his good understanding with the New York Jews contributed greatly to the restoration of Gold as a measure of all values. There can be no doubt that the Jews of Wall Street pressed heavily for this reactionary measure.
    I think everyone, even the white industrialists, pressed for a return to the Gold Standard. Reactionary? That's exactly it - a reaction against overextended credit which would've led (and did, suprise suprise) to a large scale economic collapse which we know as the Great Depression. Currency needs to be measured against something so savings can be protected from inflation - and that is the purpose of Gold. Placing ultimate currency value in the hands of the Government is dangerous.

    Thus, Churchill, Isaacs, and Prime Minister Baldwin engineered a nefarious deflation with its concommitant restriction of credit.
    The results, however favourable to certain classes of 'rentier' [i.e., parasites], were catastrophic for the working people".
    [Wm. Joyce, 'Twilight Over England', 1941]
    Credit needed to be restricted - by something concrete, not the whims of a Government bureaucrat, in order to protect savings and the foundations of the economy.

    Aloysha; "Gold is esteemed because it has concrete value - it doesn't rust, lasts a long time, doesn't lose its shine and it's universally acceptable, and it's rare. The basis of a currency could be cigarettes or cows or bullets - but Gold is the best for the purpose".

    Moody; The Semitic love of hoarding Gold [making it scarce] was dramatised by Richard Wagner long ago in his Ring Cycle. [irrelevant]
    Again, to go to another authority;
    "What are you going to USE to measure the value of anything? ...
    Unfortunately, the worth of all things depends on whether there is a real scarcity ...
    A single commodity - even GOLD - base for money is not satisfactory.
    STATE AUTHORITY behind the printed note is the best means of establishing a JUST and HONEST currency.
    The Chinese grasped that over 1,000 years ago, as we can see from the Tang State [not Bank] NOTE.
    SOVEREIGNTY inheres in the right to ISSUE money [tickets] and to determine the value thereof".
    [E. Pound, 'What Is Money For?' 1939]
    Why is Gold not satisfactory? Just and honest currency, where the State can borrow out infinite amounts of credit, 'pay it back over time' by taxing the most productive members of society, confiscating wealth, making the entire country bankrupt? Excellent indeed. Recipie for disaster.

    I think this puts the argument with admirable clarity.
    The whole essay by Pound is essential, but just to crown it off;

    "STATAL MONEY based upon national wealth must replace GOLD manipulated by international usurers".
    [ib.,]
    Gold manipulated by international usurers? Ironic, considering State money led to the Great Depression, which was manipulated by Federal Reserve functionaries.

    And you quote the Jew Greenspan with approval?
    Boo hoo, he's Jewish, who cares, really? I'm interested in what's written, not who wrote it.

    Adhere to the values of International Capitalism if you want, but don't pretend that they have anything to do with Racial Nationalism.
    Your Racial Nationalism, anyway.

    Returning to a man who went gladly to the Jews' gallows for his beliefs;
    "Three principles - ruthless competition, free trade at any cost, and the investment of money without any regard to blood, nation or race - are fundamental to international capitalism ..."
    [Wm Joyce ib.,]
    Capitalism kept Europe out of war for 99 years [1815-1914]. Interesting, isn't it? Capitalism permits those three principles to be applied without regard to 'blood, nation or race' and yet people can decide who and who they will not trade with, something that seems to escape you.
    All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream at night, in the dusky recesses of their minds, wake in the day to find that it was vanity. But the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams, with open eyes, to make it possible.

  2. #22
    Senior Member Moody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Tuesday, July 10th, 2012 @ 10:18 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    Albion
    Subrace
    Paleo-Atlantid
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    State
    Essex Essex
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Investigator of Souls
    Politics
    Pan-Germanic Nationalist
    Religion
    Runosophy
    Posts
    1,904
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    9
    Thanked in
    9 Posts

    Post

    Aloysha; "Can you refute Selfish Gene theory?"

    Moody Lawless; It's a fairly old argument now; Dawkins was trying to make genetics comprehensible in a popular form in his book 'The Selfish Gene'.
    DAWKINS HIMSELF refuted the idea that his theory had anything to do with politics.

    Aloysha; "You're the one who suggested Greed must be suppressed, after acknowledging that it is part of human nature".

    Moody; "suppressed" is your word; I am simply saying that there are elements to human nature which should NOT be indulged. After all, it is the lobbyists for homosexuality, lesbianism, race-mixing and even peadophilia who tell us that this is all about removing 'suppression'.
    It is the adopting of an Amoral, Anomic view that makes you say to me: "You want to pick and choose what's allowed and what isn't?"
    Er, yes I do - what's wrong with that?
    Or do you believe in complete anarchy?
    Or is that a silly question ...

    Aloysha; "Read Atlas Shrugged".

    Moody; A book written by Ayn Rand - another Jew!

    Aloysha; "Now who's whining about ad hominems?"

    Moody; No, I am saying to you that as we are both Moderators it behoves us to behave in a civil way to all users of this board, including each other - that is a measure of responsibility.
    You have just asked me to look at a new thread you have made on the 'will to power and selfish-gene' - how can you ask that after claiming that I "don't know what I'm talking about"?
    Withdraw that remark, and I may look at your thread [I read Dawkins' book some time ago] - fair?

    Aloysha; "Tell me how I've essentially changed".

    Moody; I seem to remember you arguing for a revival of Christendom not so long ago; now you rail against "Christian castration".
    A few weeks ago you were telling us that Capitalism and Nationalism were incompatible, saying that Capitalism was essentially Internationalist; now you say that Capitalism IS compatible with Nationalism etc., etc.,
    Then you claimed you were an Anarchist, and now you are promoting Capitalist Jews like Greenspan and Rand, and espousing Gold as an answer to our problems!
    You are even asking 'what is wrong' with International Finance!
    This has got to be wind-up ...

    Aloysha; "I think everyone, even the white industrialists, pressed for a return to the Gold Standard".

    Moody;"Everyone"!
    Let's put this in some historical perspective;
    1905; Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion published.
    "We shall create ... with the aid of Gold, which is in our hands, a universal economic crisis, whereby we shall simultaneously throw upon the streets whole mobs of workers in all the countries of Europe".
    [Protocol 3]
    1922; Mussolini comes to power in Italy.
    "USURY is the cancer of the world, which only the surgeon's knife of Fascism can cout of the life of nations" (Mussolini).
    1923; Hitler's failed Munich Putsch.
    The Nazi economist, Feder's, basic thesis was 'getting away from Gold'.
    - So, not 'everyone'; - to go on;
    1925, May 13: Churchill returns Britain to the Gold Standard [GS].
    1926, May: General Strike in Britain.
    1929, October: London Stock-Exchange feels the first shock-waves from the Wall Street Crash - shares fall sharply.
    1931, September: Britain off GS - £ falls dramatically.
    1932: Unemployment in Britain nearly 3 million.
    1933, Jan: Hitler in power in Germany
    1933, July: 30,000 Jews in Britain march in protest at Hitler's policies.
    Not 'everyone' ...

    Now, what does the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion [written at LEAST 20 years BEFORE Britain's return to the GS - a copy of the Protocols was received by the British Museum on August 10th 1906] say about the GS?;
    "You are aware that the Gold Standard has been the ruin of the states which adopted it, for it has not been able to satisfy the demands for money, the more so that we have removed Gold from circulation as far as possible".
    [Protocol 20]
    Not everyone - only some ...

    Aloysha; "Placing ultimate currency value in the hands of the Government is dangerous".

    Moody; Especially if it is a nasty anti-Semitic autarky-government!
    "A nation whose measure of exchange is at the mercy of forces OUTSIDE the nation, is a nation in peril, it is a nation without national sovereignty".
    [E. Pound, 'What Is Money For?']

    Aloysha; "People can decide who and who they will not trade with, something that seems to escape you".

    Moody; If only it were that simple;
    "In the 1860s one of the Rothschilds was kind enough to admit that the Banking System was contrary to public interest ..."
    [ib.,]

    "The despotism of Capital, which is entirely in our hands".
    [Protocol 1]
    Last edited by Moody; Wednesday, November 19th, 2003 at 08:33 PM.
    Why are there beings at all, & why not rather nothing?
    [Leibniz/Heidegger]

  3. #23
    Senior Member Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Last Online
    Friday, March 25th, 2016 @ 08:28 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Celt Australian
    Subrace
    Keltic Nordic
    Country
    Australia Australia
    State
    Victoria Victoria
    Location
    Terra Australis
    Gender
    Age
    33
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Guerilla Philosopher
    Politics
    Aristotelian Nationalist
    Religion
    Roman Catholic
    Posts
    1,810
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Moody Lawless
    Aloysha; "Can you refute Selfish Gene theory?"

    Moody Lawless; It's a fairly old argument now; Dawkins was trying to make genetics comprehensible in a popular form in his book 'The Selfish Gene'.
    DAWKINS HIMSELF refuted the idea that his theory had anything to do with politics.
    Do explain how he 'refuted' it. Sociobiology?

    Aloysha; "You're the one who suggested Greed must be suppressed, after acknowledging that it is part of human nature".

    Moody; "suppressed" is your word; I am simply saying that there are elements to human nature which should NOT be indulged. After all, it is the lobbyists for homosexuality, lesbianism, race-mixing and even peadophilia who tell us that this is all about removing 'suppression'.
    Race mixing is largely the product of jewish hegemony. Lesbianism is as well, as with homosexuality (which I do not believe is largely biological, I believe teenagers are rather confused about sexuality in their 'first few steps' so to speak and homosexuals take advantage of this, and it is legitimisd by Jewish hegemony), and paedophilia is a product of psychological disorder.

    It is the adopting of an Amoral, Anomic view that makes you say to me: "You want to pick and choose what's allowed and what isn't?"
    Er, yes I do - what's wrong with that?
    Or do you believe in complete anarchy?
    Or is that a silly question ...
    Silly question, yes. What's partial anarchy? There is such a thing as social pressure without the use of violence in order to persuade someone that their way of life is wrong, and anarchism does not prevent this. Suppose there's a homosexual in a community, and people find out, and no one likes homosexuality. People can A) refuse him a job, B) refuse to buy anything from him, C) refuse to use his services, D) make it quite clear that he's not welcome, probably resulting in E) he'll move out.

    Aloysha; "Read Atlas Shrugged".

    Moody; A book written by Ayn Rand - another Jew!
    rofl. That's your objection?

    Moody; No, I am saying to you that as we are both Moderators it behoves us to behave in a civil way to all users of this board, including each other - that is a measure of responsibility.
    You have just asked me to look at a new thread you have made on the 'will to power and selfish-gene' - how can you ask that after claiming that I "don't know what I'm talking about"?
    Withdraw that remark, and I may look at your thread [I read Dawkins' book some time ago] - fair?
    I withdraw that remark. Fair.

    Aloysha; "Tell me how I've essentially changed".

    Moody; I seem to remember you arguing for a revival of Christendom not so long ago; now you rail against "Christian castration".
    The Christianity I was thinking of at the time is the 'Christianity' the soldiers who drove the Turks back from Vienna believed in. I railed against the ethics of Christianity (slave morality) a short while ago in this thread.

    A few weeks ago you were telling us that Capitalism and Nationalism were incompatible, saying that Capitalism was essentially Internationalist; now you say that Capitalism IS compatible with Nationalism etc., etc.,
    Two types of 'nationalism' - European style nationalism, which winds down the fact that Europeans think that one should save all of one's racial/ethnic kin, even the ones who don't want to be saved, and hence force is the solution to everything (it isn't - but it solves a lot, I'll give you that), and Western style nationalism (by this I refer to the type of 'nationalism' Nihilist and myself follow), that one should only be interested in saving those of one's own racial/ethnic kin who are willing to be saved. When the system collapses and riots explode across the white world more will flock to white nationalism (white referring to descendents of European Christendom, for lack of a better way of putting it) - these are the people I say should be saved, not those who actually practice 'love thy enemy'. People are capable of changing their minds.

    Then you claimed you were an Anarchist, and now you are promoting Capitalist
    No contradiction.

    Jews like Greenspan and Rand,
    Irrelevant.

    and espousing Gold as an answer to our problems!
    Let's get this straight. There is a massive difference between Britain's former colonies and Europe. That difference is that the populations of Britain's former colonies (by which I speak of English South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, America), in general, actually do not trust Governments and would rather rely on their own strength. I do not trust Government to manage the value of currency. I do not believe in 'benevolent dictatorships'.

    You are even asking 'what is wrong' with International Finance!
    This has got to be wind-up ...
    What makes you so sure?

    Aloysha; "I think everyone, even the white industrialists, pressed for a return to the Gold Standard".

    Moody;"Everyone"!
    Let's put this in some historical perspective;
    Sure thing.

    1905; Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion published.
    "We shall create ... with the aid of Gold, which is in our hands, a universal economic crisis, whereby we shall simultaneously throw upon the streets whole mobs of workers in all the countries of Europe".
    [Protocol 3]
    1922; Mussolini comes to power in Italy.
    "USURY is the cancer of the world, which only the surgeon's knife of Fascism can cout of the life of nations" (Mussolini).
    1923; Hitler's failed Munich Putsch.
    The Nazi economist, Feder's, basic thesis was 'getting away from Gold'.
    - So, not 'everyone'; - to go on;
    Feder. Right. Tell me how an economy can function without profit and interest. And define usury.

    1925, May 13: Churchill returns Britain to the Gold Standard [GS].
    1926, May: General Strike in Britain.
    The General Strike occured because of massive wage reductions following the privatisation of the mining industries - tell me, if a Government run industry is running at a loss, then it logically follows that if that industry is to continue running, it must continue largely off Government funds. Where do these funds come from? Taxpayers. There's exploitation. Privately owned and run industries generally run a lot more efficiently than nationalised industries.

    1929, October: London Stock-Exchange feels the first shock-waves from the Wall Street Crash - shares fall sharply.
    1931, September: Britain off GS - £ falls dramatically.
    1932: Unemployment in Britain nearly 3 million.
    Non sequitur...

    1933, Jan: Hitler in power in Germany
    So we have Hitler rising to power after massive unemployment as a result of hyper-expansion of Western economics as a result of their currencies no longer being based on the gold standard. Sure - Britain did return to the gold standard, but that does not ignore the fact American investors were using money which was based on unlimited (not gold-limited) credit. Why did Hitler abandon the gold standard? Because after reparations, Germany didn't have any gold left.

    1933, July: 30,000 Jews in Britain march in protest at Hitler's policies.
    Any link between this and gold? Or perhaps because Jews realised that the rise of the NSDAP in Germany threatened their kin in Germany?

    Now, what does the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion [written at LEAST 20 years BEFORE Britain's return to the GS - a copy of the Protocols was received by the British Museum on August 10th 1906] say about the GS?;
    "You are aware that the Gold Standard has been the ruin of the states which adopted it, for it has not been able to satisfy the demands for money, the more so that we have removed Gold from circulation as far as possible".
    [Protocol 20]
    Not everyone - only some ...
    Ha ha ha. Before Britain took on the gold standard, silver was the measure of currency. That's where the 'pound' came from - a pound of silver. Obviously the modern pound doesn't measure up to this, but that's initially where the world came from. What's the difference between changing from silver to gold? A change in metals and the value of those metals.

    Aloysha; "Placing ultimate currency value in the hands of the Government is dangerous".

    Moody; Especially if it is a nasty anti-Semitic autarky-government!
    "A nation whose measure of exchange is at the mercy of forces OUTSIDE the nation, is a nation in peril, it is a nation without national sovereignty".
    [E. Pound, 'What Is Money For?']


    "The most momentous virtue of the gold standard is precisely the fact that it makes the determination of money's purchasing power independent of the ambitions and machinations of political parties and pressure groups. It thus prevents inflationary policies and thereby protects the savings of the common man. But unfortunately this fact is ignored by the millions of Americans who are the owners of many billions of savings accounts, bonds, and insurance policies. Thus the deficit spending and easy money policy of the American government does not find any opposition on the part of the parties that dominate the political life of the nation."
    - Ludwig Von Mises, http://www.mises.org/efandi/ch28.asp

    Aloysha; "People can decide who and who they will not trade with, something that seems to escape you".

    Moody; If only it were that simple;
    "In the 1860s one of the Rothschilds was kind enough to admit that the Banking System was contrary to public interest ..."
    [ib.,]
    Oh yes, contrary to the public interest eh? That's exactly what the Bolsheviks said.

    "The despotism of Capital, which is entirely in our hands".
    [Protocol 1]
    *Yawn*. At that time, Jews did not 'entirely control' Capital, and they still do not, and they aren't ever likely to. The fact is, with a return to the Gold Standard, the abolition of the Federal Reserve, and removal of Affirmitive Action and other State-instituted programs designed to prevent whites from reaching the top and reclaiming their positions, the Jews will lose their near-monopoly over the Western economy and the restoration of white power falls within our reach, without having to enslave anyone.
    All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream at night, in the dusky recesses of their minds, wake in the day to find that it was vanity. But the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams, with open eyes, to make it possible.

  4. #24
    Senior Member Moody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Tuesday, July 10th, 2012 @ 10:18 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    Albion
    Subrace
    Paleo-Atlantid
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    State
    Essex Essex
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Investigator of Souls
    Politics
    Pan-Germanic Nationalist
    Religion
    Runosophy
    Posts
    1,904
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    9
    Thanked in
    9 Posts

    Post The Jews are never irrelevant

    Aloysha; "Do explain how Dawkins 'refuted' the Selfish Gene theory".

    Moody Lawless; I am surprised you ask that in reply to my previous statement; Dawkin's denied that the 'Selfish Gene' was applicable to politics - and you want to apply it to politics.

    I want to avoid going around in circles here, so let's keep to the issue at hand: racialism and capitalism.

    My position is that Capitalist economics and Racial nationalism are incompatible.

    Now, you scoff at my objection to Greenspan and Rand's Jewishness, and, further on, say that the fact of their Jewishness is "irrelevant".

    Well then, so race is irrelevant is it?

    Capitalism regards race as "irrelevant" - very revealing!

    My objection to Greenspan and Rand is anti-Semitic; in case you aren't aware, anti-Semitism is a feature of "racialism" - what we are supposed to be talking about.
    Here I might add a link;
    www.jewwatch.com

    The Semitic nature of Greenspan and Rand's views stand out a mile to me.
    I reject them as an Aryan, as I believe that Jews are essentially hostile to Aryan interests.

    I guess that makes me a racialist/anti-Semite?; correct - that is why I am also not a fan of Greenspan's International Capitalism, or Rand's greed-is-good objectivism.


    Aloysha; "There's No contradiction between capitalism and anarchism".

    Moody; Yes, in that they are both hostile to Racial Nationalism.
    I notice that the vice president of the von Mises Institute [you refer to 'von' Mises later on], is a character called Murray N. Rothbard, a self-proclaimed "New York Jew", who is called an 'Individualist Anarchist'; now, where have I heard that before?

    On to the broader question of economics.
    I have presented my own position on this from the perspective of Fascism and National Socialism.
    You don't agree with those positions; fair enough.
    The trouble is, that brand of Capitalism you promote would itself say that racial nationalism is incompatible with it!
    So who do you present in opposition to the economics of racial nationalism?

    Aloysha;" Ludwig Von Mises".

    Moody; Yes - another Jew!
    A Jew of the mostly Jewish school of Austrian economics ... has no one else smelt a rat yet?
    The same Mises who ruled out all government intervention in economics, the author of 'Liberalismus' - the Jew-king of 'laissez faire'!
    "Mises claimed that Hitler's N-S meant tyranny, and a year after Hitler came to power, he fled from Austria, ending up in the USA".
    [Life and Times of Mises]

    And there he set up his Institute, inspiring the likes of Hayek and the aforementioned Rothbard!
    Incidentally, he married the mother of Gitta Sereny, the 'Nazi Hunter', as David Irving calls her.
    And there you have it - all in the family; International Capitalism and the Holocaust industry!
    And you say that Jewishness is "irrelevant"?

    I fear we have nothing much else to say to one another.
    Why are there beings at all, & why not rather nothing?
    [Leibniz/Heidegger]

  5. #25
    Senior Member Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Last Online
    Friday, March 25th, 2016 @ 08:28 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Celt Australian
    Subrace
    Keltic Nordic
    Country
    Australia Australia
    State
    Victoria Victoria
    Location
    Terra Australis
    Gender
    Age
    33
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Guerilla Philosopher
    Politics
    Aristotelian Nationalist
    Religion
    Roman Catholic
    Posts
    1,810
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Moody Lawless
    Aloysha; "Do explain how Dawkins 'refuted' the Selfish Gene theory".

    Moody Lawless; I am surprised you ask that in reply to my previous statement; Dawkin's denied that the 'Selfish Gene' was applicable to politics - and you want to apply it to politics.
    That's about right. Humans are animals too.

    I want to avoid going around in circles here, so let's keep to the issue at hand: racialism and capitalism.

    My position is that Capitalist economics and Racial nationalism are incompatible.
    Here's where I disagree. I don't think the State is nessecary to intervene in a capitalist system so long as its population, or at least its most influential sections, hold to racialist/ethnic nationalist ideology. If they don't, then the question remains, are they worth saving at all. The State stops you from doing what you intend on doing by using force to prevent you. I don't think this is nessecary. I think it's enough to ostricise someone/build up a culture of racialism and this would do the job.

    Now, you scoff at my objection to Greenspan and Rand's Jewishness, and, further on, say that the fact of their Jewishness is "irrelevant".

    Well then, so race is irrelevant is it?
    I'd listen to a n!gger if he had something worth listening to. Which most don't. Jews are another species altogether. They do have things worth studying and dissecting and adapting towards other purposes, which is exactly what I'm doing. You might find it stunning but there are other values in my life that are part of my politics besides racialism, and anarchism (belief in the sovereign individual) is one of them. If gold is the best way to keep a population's savings from being vapourised at the drop of a hat, then I'm all for it, regardless who claims to stand for it.

    Capitalism regards race as "irrelevant" - very revealing!
    Capitalism leaves it to people to decide what they regard as relevant or not. It is entirely possible that a white capitalist businessman will hire only whites - this is what I am for.

    My objection to Greenspan and Rand is anti-Semitic; in case you aren't aware, anti-Semitism is a feature of "racialism" - what we are supposed to be talking about.
    Here I might add a link;
    www.jewwatch.com
    I know what I'm supposed to be talking about. Here's what I think: I don't care whether a man is a Jew or not so long as there's something I can take from his ideas/theory and adapt towards my own objectives. The Jews are part of the problems, undoubtably, but there's more to it than just Jews, there's the entirety of the upper and upper-middle class - hyper-feminism, mass hedonism, social chaos, multiculturalism and mass migration of racial foreigners into Magna Europa, those are our problems. If/when the chaos comes, the Jews will quite probably be neutralised. But in the process of the chaos, I don't want a 'temporary dictatorship', and I do not want conscription. Here's my reasoning - first, the Bolsheviks were supposed to be a temporary dictatorship. That speaks for itself. And as for conscription, I wouldn't trust anyone in a trench next to me who didn't volunteer.

    The Semitic nature of Greenspan and Rand's views stand out a mile to me.
    I reject them as an Aryan, as I believe that Jews are essentially hostile to Aryan interests.
    I suppose they are, if Aryan is synonymous with dictatorships. But then, that would make the founding fathers of the United States a bunch of Semites, right?

    I guess that makes me a racialist/anti-Semite?;
    I never said you weren't.

    correct - that is why I am also not a fan of Greenspan's International Capitalism, or Rand's greed-is-good objectivism.
    Because it is advantageous to Jews? Greenspan is doing the best he can to delay the collapse of the US economy. Now, if we bring back the gold standard and tighten up on punishment and investigations for corporate fraud, then whites will have a solid chance of becoming economically independent of the Jews without surrendering their rights to a dictatorship. Of course, your dictatorship isn't temporary, it's permanent. At least Stalinism had the (false) promise of it eventually whithering away.

    Aloysha; "There's No contradiction between capitalism and anarchism".

    Moody; Yes, in that they are both hostile to Racial Nationalism.
    You make it very difficult for me to live up to that apology that I wouldn't criticise your knowledge of this area. So I'll repeat it - if you idea of Racial Nationalism is shoving a gun in a person's face to make them act in line with your ideals, then yes, both Capitalism and Anarchism are hostile to Racial Nationalism. That seems to be your case, your objectives, and your beliefs. If your idea of Racial Nationalism is pride, integrity, honesty and association of white people amongst white people and the traditional ways of European culture, then there is no contradiction. The Anarchism just says that ostracism is an option for dealing with people who violate the principles of Racial Nationalism, but not killing them (violence is legitimised when used against those who first intiaite violence), and Capitalism effectively (at the most basic level) says stay true to your word, don't steal and earn your own keep.

    I notice that the vice president of the von Mises Institute [you refer to 'von' Mises later on], is a character called Murray N. Rothbard, a self-proclaimed "New York Jew", who is called an 'Individualist Anarchist'; now, where have I heard that before?
    I don't know where you've heard it before, but it is of no concern to me that he's a New York Jew, I'm interested in what he has to say. Sounds like you'd reject Einstein's theory of relativity simply because he was a Jew and a Communist. I disagree with his politics and I doubt I'd want to associate with him personally or have my daughter (supposing I presently had one) dating him (if he was of equal age - hypothetically), but if I was trying to learn about physics I'd still go and read what he had to say.

    On to the broader question of economics.
    I have presented my own position on this from the perspective of Fascism and National Socialism.
    You don't agree with those positions; fair enough.
    The trouble is, that brand of Capitalism you promote would itself say that racial nationalism is incompatible with it!
    So who do you present in opposition to the economics of racial nationalism?
    Excuse me? Murray Rothbard believes in free association and the abolition of the state altogether, and people can fund/assemble their own means of defence. We know fairly well the State doesn't stop crime anyway. In America, that means if blacks start rioting, whites can shoot back, blacks don't get welfare anymore, whites can buy up more and more land from blacks and leave them to find their own means of existance, whites can join together and assemble their own laws backed by local militias if they choose to - just how do Capitalism and Anarchism contradict voluntarist Racial Nationalism?

    Aloysha;" Ludwig Von Mises".

    Moody; Yes - another Jew!
    A Jew of the mostly Jewish school of Austrian economics ... has no one else smelt a rat yet?
    Say it straight. You accusing me of being a Jew?

    The same Mises who ruled out all government intervention in economics, the author of 'Liberalismus' - the Jew-king of 'laissez faire'!
    Ironic - Max Weber wrote 'Protestantism and the Spirit of Capitalism' - is he Jewish too? LOL. The US economy is falling apart for a reason, and none of your interventionism could possibly save it now.

    "Mises claimed that Hitler's N-S meant tyranny, and a year after Hitler came to power, he fled from Austria, ending up in the USA".
    [Life and Times of Mises]
    And he was right. Hitler wielded the power to abolish the savings of the entire German nation, had the entire internal opposition of his Party executed, abolished the right to strike, and crushed free speech and freedom of association. Hey, sounds like tyranny to me...

    And there he set up his Institute, inspiring the likes of Hayek and the aforementioned Rothbard!
    Incidentally, he married the mother of Gitta Sereny, the 'Nazi Hunter', as David Irving calls her.
    Absolutely fascinating, but all of your statements against Von Mises and Rothbared are riddled with ad hominems and it's got absolutely nothing to do with their ideas.

    And there you have it - all in the family; International Capitalism and the Holocaust industry!
    And you say that Jewishness is "irrelevant"?
    So, amongst other things, he married into the family of a holocaust believer/nazi hunter, therefore all of his ideas on economics are false and malicious by default, specifically in favour of Jews at the expense of whites. ROFL

    I fear we have nothing much else to say to one another.
    I disagree.
    Last edited by Jack; Sunday, November 23rd, 2003 at 10:16 AM.
    All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream at night, in the dusky recesses of their minds, wake in the day to find that it was vanity. But the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams, with open eyes, to make it possible.

  6. #26
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Last Online
    Friday, September 30th, 2005 @ 12:10 PM
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Gender
    Politics
    undecided
    Posts
    90
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post

    Aloysha, my hats off to you man, your vision of racial preservation is practically indistinguishable from my own. I can't even think of anything to add; you have already said it all.

  7. #27
    Senior Member Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Last Online
    Friday, March 25th, 2016 @ 08:28 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Celt Australian
    Subrace
    Keltic Nordic
    Country
    Australia Australia
    State
    Victoria Victoria
    Location
    Terra Australis
    Gender
    Age
    33
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Guerilla Philosopher
    Politics
    Aristotelian Nationalist
    Religion
    Roman Catholic
    Posts
    1,810
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Edric
    Ken you make Racialist Capitalism sound very alluring, but I would combine some form of Worker-Management in it to further motivate the Workers.
    - Edric
    Individuals are free under Capitalism to form syndicates in which every employee owns shares in his own company and elects his own managers.

    Aloysha, my hats off to you man, your vision of racial preservation is practically indistinguishable from my own. I can't even think of anything to add; you have already said it all.
    Deus Ex Nihil
    All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream at night, in the dusky recesses of their minds, wake in the day to find that it was vanity. But the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams, with open eyes, to make it possible.

  8. #28
    Senior Member Moody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Tuesday, July 10th, 2012 @ 10:18 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    Albion
    Subrace
    Paleo-Atlantid
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    State
    Essex Essex
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Investigator of Souls
    Politics
    Pan-Germanic Nationalist
    Religion
    Runosophy
    Posts
    1,904
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    9
    Thanked in
    9 Posts

    Post

    Aloysha;. "I don't think the State is nessecary to intervene in a capitalist system so long as its population, or at least its most influential sections, hold to racialist/ethnic nationalist ideology".

    Moody; Contradiction; you say at first a "capitalist system", and then talk about it having a "racialist ideology". That is two different things - incompatible, as you once said a few weeks ago.
    I would say that people generallly [and Aryans in particular] are naturally racially aware. They naturally gravitate to their own kind etc.,
    However, the forces of Internationalist Capitalism seek to deracinate peoples, and turn them into unrooted Consumers.
    When Aryans have a strong State, these forces cannot touch them. However, as we have seen in the last 60 years or so, with the increase in Western 'democracies', International Finance has been able to conquer such weak governments and then brainwash the peoples therein.

    Aloysha; "I think it's enough to ostricise someone/build up a culture of racialism and this would do the job".

    Moody; Examples? As I have said before, such ad hoc 'cultures' are easy pickings for Global Corporations which have more clout than some nations.
    To test this, just look at where the Jews are in any nation today.


    Aloysha; "I'd listen to a n!gger if he had something worth listening to. Which most don't. Jews are another species altogether. They do have things worth studying and dissecting and adapting towards other purposes, which is exactly what I'm doing".

    Moody; It sounds like they are adapting you; for example, the Aloysha of a few months ago essayed on the race soul of different cultures, noticing how the values of the Semitic and Aryan are very different. That their value standards are written through the core of their cultural productions;
    "The Jewish 'nation' lives parasitically on other nation's and their soil".
    [Schopenhauer, Parerga and Paralipomena']
    The various race souls have their own character and their own roots; it is CULTURE DISTORTION to try and "adapt" Aryan to Semite and vice versa.
    I utterly reject this cultural-race-mixing and abominate it.
    "We ourselves have been guilty - we should not have emancipated the Jews, but as Goethe, Fichte and Herder vainly demanded, should have created insurmountable exceptional laws for them".
    [A.Rosenberg, 'Die Spur des Juden']
    I regard any accomodation with the Jews an act of Judaising.

    Aloysha; "If gold is the best way to keep a population's savings from being vapourised at the drop of a hat, then I'm all for it, regardless who claims to stand for it".

    Moody; Completely unprincipled; the Jewish lust for Gold has been documented since Roman times. This is materialism pure and simple;
    "Wherever the Semitic spirit has breathed, we shall meet with this materialism, where only practical ends are pursued, no idealistic ones. It is to provide for prosperity in this world, and aims particularly at power and wealth".
    [Houston Stewart Chamberlain, 'The Foundations of the 19th Century', 1899]
    By taking this stance you are lining up shoulder to shoulder with the Jew.


    Aloysha; "It is entirely possible that a white capitalist businessman will hire only whites - this is what I am for".

    Moody; Then why are Capitalists exporting jobs out to the Far East?
    The answer is obvious - cheap labour.
    A Capitalist that didn't do that would go under - he would be priced out of the market and his business would collapse.
    Capitalists have always sought to acquire the cheapest labour possible.
    So your "possibility" is as possible as a flying elephant.
    Only a strong State can DEMAND that non-Aryans are to be eliminated form the jobs market and that Aryan business is FORBIDDEN from employing non-Aryans.
    To make this work, the State must set up an autarky, where ALL business is subordinate to the values of Blood and Soil.
    This is not only possible, but has been tried and tested.

    Aloysha; "I don't care whether a man is a Jew or not ..."

    Moody; A startling admission, and in my view, a Race Crime.

    Aloysha; "Now, if we bring back the gold standard and tighten up on punishment and investigations for corporate fraud, then whites will have a solid chance of becoming economically independent of the Jews without surrendering their rights to a dictatorship".

    Moody; The Internationalist Financial system, masterminded by Jews you speak well of, like Greenspan, is in itself a DICTAORSHIP. Not the Dictatorship of the Honour of the Aryan Race, but the Dictatorship of the Money of the Jewish Race.
    All you would be doing is joining their club.
    That shows a complete LACK of racial instincts.

    Aloysha; "It is of no concern to me that Rothbard's a New York Jew, I'm interested in what he has to say".

    Moody; Lack of concern over race and a blindness to the very JEWISH nature of what Rothbard has to say!
    This is a roundabout way of you saying that you agree with Jewish ideas.

    Aloysha; "Sounds like you'd reject Einstein's theory of relativity simply because he was a Jew and a Communist. I disagree with his politics and I doubt I'd want to associate with him personally or have my daughter (supposing I presently had one) dating him (if he was of equal age - hypothetically), but if I was trying to learn about physics I'd still go and read what he had to say".

    Moody; That is intellectual prostitution. Einstein was a Zionist with very naive ideas on politics etc., I don't pretend to know much about Relativity, but it seems here that Einstein was typically Jewish in actually stealing his ideas from others. Of course, the propagandists of this Internationalist Capitalist society have worked overtime to make this Jew into a by-word for 'Genius'!

    Aloysha; "Murray Rothbard believes in free association and the abolition of the state altogether, and people can fund/assemble their own means of defence".

    Moody; In other words, the ideas of this New York Jew are the same as your own.

    Aloysha; "We know fairly well the State doesn't stop crime anyway. In America, that means if blacks start rioting, whites can shoot back, blacks don't get welfare anymore, whites can buy up more and more land from blacks and leave them to find their own means of existance, whites can join together and assemble their own laws backed by local militias if they choose to - just how do Capitalism and Anarchism contradict voluntarist Racial Nationalism?"

    Moody; Firstly, not only would blacks not get welfare, nor would whites!
    A strong Racial Nationalist State can decide to give welfare to needy whites [such as the elderly] and to deny it to non-whites.
    Secondly, without government you are going to have the sort of shoot-out you envisage - sounds anarchistic to me. A strong State, however, can enforce mass deporatations in concert with other recieving States.
    Again, all this has been done before and will be done again - you need a State to do it.
    On the other hand, what you describe is by its very nature multiracial; an endless race-war without proper government.

    Aloysha; "Say it straight. You accusing me of being a Jew?"

    Moody; Are you accusing me of not saying it straight?
    If you promote Jewish ideas [and you have admitted this]; if you don't care whether they are Jewish ideas [and you have admitted this]; if all the authorities you put up and defend are Jews [Rand, Greenspan, Mises, Rothbard] - and you can't deny this ... then what is one to think?
    President Bush is following the Jewish agenda today - does that make him a Jew?
    As good as.
    If I came on here pushing the ideas of the TALMUD - what would you think?



    Aloysha; "Max Weber wrote 'Protestantism and the Spirit of Capitalism' - is he Jewish too?".

    Moody; No, because he was describing a phenomena, he was NOT endorsing it!

    Aloysha; "The US economy is falling apart for a reason, and none of your interventionism could possibly save it now".

    Moody; On the contrary; it is the Internationalist system of which the USA is the main motor that is failing because it is inherently self-destructive. Where do you go once all the markets are exhausted?
    Strong States must set up their own self-contained markets on a national basis and reject Internationalism.

    Aloysha; "And [the Jew Mises] was right. Hitler wielded the power to abolish the savings of the entire German nation, had the entire internal opposition of his Party executed, abolished the right to strike, and crushed free speech and freedom of association. Hey, sounds like tyranny to me..."

    Moody; I disagree with the Jews here; Hitler rescued his nation from the hyper-inflation forced on it by Jewish Internationalist Finance; he executed traitors, got rid of Commie unions in favour of a patriotic Labour Front and made sure that Aryans could speak and associate freely.
    He also got rid of such Jews as Mises.
    Hitler was right.
    Why are there beings at all, & why not rather nothing?
    [Leibniz/Heidegger]

  9. #29
    Senior Member Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Last Online
    Friday, March 25th, 2016 @ 08:28 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Celt Australian
    Subrace
    Keltic Nordic
    Country
    Australia Australia
    State
    Victoria Victoria
    Location
    Terra Australis
    Gender
    Age
    33
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Guerilla Philosopher
    Politics
    Aristotelian Nationalist
    Religion
    Roman Catholic
    Posts
    1,810
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Moody Lawless
    Aloysha;. "I don't think the State is nessecary to intervene in a capitalist system so long as its population, or at least its most influential sections, hold to racialist/ethnic nationalist ideology".

    Moody; Contradiction; you say at first a "capitalist system", and then talk about it having a "racialist ideology". That is two different things - incompatible, as you once said a few weeks ago.
    Not incompatible. Incompatible if you want to control people - compatible if you want to convince people. Here's our differences, which I've posted above:

    Two types of 'nationalism' - European style nationalism, which winds down the fact that Europeans think that one should save all of one's racial/ethnic kin, even the ones who don't want to be saved, and hence force is the solution to everything (it isn't - but it solves a lot, I'll give you that), and Western style nationalism (by this I refer to the type of nationalism Nihilist and myself follow), that one should only be interested in saving those of one's own racial/ethnic kin who are willing to be saved. When the system collapses and riots explode across the white world more will flock to white nationalism (white referring to descendents of European Christendom, for lack of a better way of putting it) - these are the people I say should be saved, not those who actually practice 'love thy enemy'. People are capable of changing their minds.

    I would say that people generallly [and Aryans in particular] are naturally racially aware. They naturally gravitate to their own kind etc.,
    However, the forces of Internationalist Capitalism seek to deracinate peoples, and turn them into unrooted Consumers.
    Incorrect. Jews seek to deracinate people. Capitalism does not automatically equal Jews.

    When Aryans have a strong State, these forces cannot touch them. However, as we have seen in the last 60 years or so, with the increase in Western 'democracies', International Finance has been able to conquer such weak governments and then brainwash the peoples therein.
    Western 'democracies', excuse me? Say it - WELFARE STATE. Jews are deracinating European populations around the world because they control the State and hence the education systems. Were State education systems abolished, this indoctrination would immediately cease because it is of no value whatsoever in equipping people for life, and private schools and universities would close leftist courses such as 'Women's Studies' (of what use is indoctrinating women in feminism going to be if couples write up their own marriage contracts?) because they are of no use whatsoever, except for destruction that can only be achieved through the State.

    Aloysha; "I think it's enough to ostricise someone/build up a culture of racialism and this would do the job".

    Moody; Examples? As I have said before, such ad hoc 'cultures' are easy pickings for Global Corporations which have more clout than some nations.
    To test this, just look at where the Jews are in any nation today.
    You missed out on another part in the equation - look where there's a State that interferes in the affairs of its population. That is the only way the Jews can do what they are doing now.

    Aloysha; "I'd listen to a n!gger if he had something worth listening to. Which most don't. Jews are another species altogether. They do have things worth studying and dissecting and adapting towards other purposes, which is exactly what I'm doing".

    ....
    The various race souls have their own character and their own roots; it is CULTURE DISTORTION to try and "adapt" Aryan to Semite and vice versa.
    ...
    I regard any accomodation with the Jews an act of Judaising.
    Moody judges knowledge by the race/ethnicity of the man who carries it. There's a great chasm between knowledge and spirituality. Knowledge is empirically verifiable theory, and spirituality is attitude towards knowledge. I do not need to adopt Jewish spirituality (which would indeed make me a Jew) to adopt and adapt knowledge Jews have built up and put to use to the destruction of our civilization. That is why I have an open mind to Maxist theory.

    Aloysha; "If gold is the best way to keep a population's savings from being vapourised at the drop of a hat, then I'm all for it, regardless who claims to stand for it".

    Moody; Completely unprincipled; the Jewish lust for Gold has been documented since Roman times.

    This is materialism pure and simple;
    "Wherever the Semitic spirit has breathed, we shall meet with this materialism, where only practical ends are pursued, no idealistic ones. It is to provide for prosperity in this world, and aims particularly at power and wealth".
    [Houston Stewart Chamberlain, 'The Foundations of the 19th Century', 1899]
    By taking this stance you are lining up shoulder to shoulder with the Jew.
    Straw man. Or perhaps I should call you a Marxist because of your hostility to capitalism? Kim Il Sung hates capitalism and advocates a strong racial state (suprise suprise, Kim Il Sung defines a nation by common bloodline and language) - sorta sounds like you, right?

    Moody; Then why are Capitalists exporting jobs out to the Far East?
    The answer is obvious - cheap labour.
    LOL. The answer is sky-high tax rates in white western countries used to support the welfare state and the mass importation of racial foreigners.

    A Capitalist that didn't do that would go under - he would be priced out of the market and his business would collapse.
    Only because the white Western countries make it nessecary to export the jobs.

    Capitalists have always sought to acquire the cheapest labour possible.
    So your "possibility" is as possible as a flying elephant.
    Hardly.

    Only a strong State can DEMAND that non-Aryans are to be eliminated form the jobs market and that Aryan business is FORBIDDEN from employing non-Aryans.
    And cause the collapse of the economy because it is a Strong State™ and Strong States™ require massive funding through taxes which bleed the economy, so you end up with a collapsed, starving economy like North Korea.

    To make this work, the State must set up an autarky, where ALL business is subordinate to the values of Blood and Soil.
    This is not only possible, but has been tried and tested.
    And would've brought NS Germany to its knees if NS Germany hadn't have been smashed by the Allies.

    Aloysha; "I don't care whether a man is a Jew or not ..."

    Moody; A startling admission, and in my view, a Race Crime.
    ROFL. The accumulation of knowledge regardless of sources is a Race Crime™!

    Now, let's quote what I said again, to admend Moody's deliberate distortion (rather Jewish of him) of my statement: "I don't care whether a man is a Jew or not so long as there's something I can take from his ideas/theory and adapt towards my own objectives."

    What's the difference between a Jewish University professor who criticses his psychology student for citing 'The Bell Curve' (written by a Jew btw - better not touch that book, Jews write anti-white stuff by default, right Moody?) and you calling me a Race Criminal™ for saying there's stuff we can learn from the Jews? The Jewish University professor doesn't call his student a criminal.

    Aloysha; "Now, if we bring back the gold standard and tighten up on punishment and investigations for corporate fraud, then whites will have a solid chance of becoming economically independent of the Jews without surrendering their rights to a dictatorship".

    Moody; The Internationalist Financial system, masterminded by Jews you speak well of, like Greenspan, is in itself a DICTAORSHIP.
    I didn't deny this. But then, the Internationalist Financial system isn't based on the gold standard, is it? No, it isn't. What is it for? It's for juggling the 'value' of fake currencies manufactured by the various Federal Reserve organisations around the world who wield total power over the savings of everyone on the planet - manufacture billions of dollars and vapourise the economy. That's what the Jews hold. You merely want to transfer that power to whites. I want to abolish that power altogether because I won't trust anyone, matter what race, ideology or religion, who has the power to do that.

    Not the Dictatorship of the Honour of the Aryan Race, but the Dictatorship of the Money of the Jewish Race.
    All you would be doing is joining their club.
    That shows a complete LACK of racial instincts.
    'Dictatorship of the Honour of the Aryan Race'™, huh? Sorta sounds like the dictatorship of the proletariat. I don't want any dictatorship. I thought you would've figured that out by now, but obviously not. Show me where I voiced approval of the IMF. Moody, slander isn't going to drag me over to your side. So you'd better start arguing rationally.

    Aloysha; "It is of no concern to me that Rothbard's a New York Jew, I'm interested in what he has to say".

    Moody; Lack of concern over race and a blindness to the very JEWISH nature of what Rothbard has to say!
    This is a roundabout way of you saying that you agree with Jewish ideas.
    *Yawn* Freedom and self sufficiency is Jewish?

    Aloysha; "Sounds like you'd reject Einstein's theory of relativity simply because he was a Jew and a Communist. I disagree with his politics and I doubt I'd want to associate with him personally or have my daughter (supposing I presently had one) dating him (if he was of equal age - hypothetically), but if I was trying to learn about physics I'd still go and read what he had to say".

    Moody; That is intellectual prostitution.
    Explain this.

    Einstein was a Zionist with very naive ideas on politics etc.,
    I said this.

    I don't pretend to know much about Relativity,
    Why not? You claimed Quantum Mechanics proved the Law of Non-Contradiction wrong until JohnJoyTree, who's studied Quantum Mechanics for serveral years, objected. I'm still waiting to see your response to him, by the way.

    but it seems here that Einstein was typically Jewish in actually stealing his ideas from others.
    Provide evidence - Anonymous Authority.

    Of course, the propagandists of this Internationalist Capitalist society have worked overtime to make this Jew into a by-word for 'Genius'!
    His race/ethnicity is pretty much irrelevant in a scientific field such as physics. Given that you've admitted not to knowing a great deal about relativity, I'd say this statement is totally irrelevant. Not to mention Marxists are fans of Relativity too, so that throws out your 'International Capitalist society' remark. Oh, but Marxists and International Capitalists are both Jewish controlled movements, you suggest? Then why is it that Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il of North Korea hate capitalism, won't have anything to do with the Jews, and are Marxists and support Einstein's Relativity theory because it integrates well with dialectical materialism? The people at Anti-State.com (an Anarcho-Capitalist site) are hostile to the American Government (Jewish manipulated apparatus of domination over the American population), Israel (Jewish socialist-terrorist country) and self organising (in practice, most probably racially homogenous) communities.

    Aloysha; "Murray Rothbard believes in free association and the abolition of the state altogether, and people can fund/assemble their own means of defence".

    Moody; In other words, the ideas of this New York Jew are the same as your own.
    That is correct.

    Aloysha; "We know fairly well the State doesn't stop crime anyway. In America, that means if blacks start rioting, whites can shoot back, blacks don't get welfare anymore, whites can buy up more and more land from blacks and leave them to find their own means of existance, whites can join together and assemble their own laws backed by local militias if they choose to - just how do Capitalism and Anarchism contradict voluntarist Racial Nationalism?"

    Moody; Firstly, not only would blacks not get welfare, nor would whites!
    America has hardly any whites on welfare. Asides from that, to quote Nathaniel Branden, "If you wish to help the poor, no one will stop you". Capitalism certainly permits (nay, encourages) private superannuation funds - the Australian Government is pushing heavily for this right now.

    A strong Racial Nationalist State can decide to give welfare to needy whites [such as the elderly] and to deny it to non-whites.
    By shoving guns in the faces of productive members of society. Were these needy whites productive members of society they could invest their money and live off the returns, or go to charity organisations, or be supported by their families. But you have no right to shove a gun in my face to loot me to feed a girl who's been kicked out of home because she got pregnant at 13. Ok? I'd probably help her out regardless, but you don't have the right to make me do it.

    Secondly, without government you are going to have the sort of shoot-out you envisage - sounds anarchistic to me.
    There already are 'shoot-outs', it's called WAR. Gang A loots his territory and goes to war against Gang B who does the same. The difference with Anarcho-Capitalism is people voluntarily fund the gangs who, in exchange, protect them. This role is even fulfilled within the mixed-economy Western countries by security companies. And slavery is economically impractical. I assume you object to street shoot outs? Well, under your system, you'll have the same thing - all it means is whites are forced to fund a big gang called the Army directed by a powerful group called the Party who deport/annihilate racial foreigners from a section of territory.

    Or maybe I've put that a bit too blunt.

    A strong State, however, can enforce mass deporatations in concert with other recieving States.
    Organised chaos.

    Again, all this has been done before and will be done again - you need a State to do it.
    Hardly. Assuming blacks - even the ones with jobs - riot and torch private property the day Anarcho-capitalism is declared across the West, private corporations make millions by killing off the looters. Their property, in accordance with the Anarcho-capitalist 'homesteader' theory, is up for grabs to the first person who starts using it, whereby it is recognised as his property. The difference between this and your State warfare followed by property redistribution process is all we need to do is abolish the State, stock up on arms and wait for them to fire the first shot - and then one would only attack those who attacked first. In accordance with genetic similarity theory and selfish gene theory, plus the fact it'd be all over the private media, they'd all (or almost all) rise up. It's perfectly legimitimate and rational, and in accordance with the anarcho-capitalist ethics of the Non Aggression Policy (don't attack them until they attack you).

    On the other hand, what you describe is by its very nature multiracial; an endless race-war
    There are not an infinite number of non-whites and an infinite number of whites in the world. The war won't go on forever.

    without proper government.
    Government is nothing more than a security agency with an illegitimate monopoly over a section of territory, and so wields the power to loot its territory and its inhabitants to assert its self-defined minorities. Anarcho-Capitalism dethrones this security agency from its illegitimate monopoly and leaves the market open for other security organisations.

    Aloysha; "Say it straight. You accusing me of being a Jew?"

    Moody; Are you accusing me of not saying it straight?
    Yes.

    If you promote Jewish ideas [and you have admitted this];
    I take advantage of ideas thought of by Jews which can be used towards the objectives and values I hold, yes.

    if you don't care whether they are Jewish ideas [and you have admitted this];
    I don't care whether they were thought of by Jews, that's correct. If I was arguing in favour of white nationalism against Marxists I'd adopt the terminology of Kim Il Sung who supports racial and national self determination against capitalism.

    if all the authorities you put up and defend are Jews [Rand, Greenspan, Mises, Rothbard] - and you can't deny this ... then what is one to think?
    That I'm a guy trying to learn as much as I can about how things work, and I'm putting my knowledge in service of the aims and values I hold?

    President Bush is following the Jewish agenda today - does that make him a Jew?
    As good as.
    He serves Jewish objectives.

    If I came on here pushing the ideas of the TALMUD - what would you think?
    If you were trying to show how ideas of the Talmud could be utilised towards the struggle for European racial, spiritual and cultural preservation, I would have no objections.

    Aloysha; "Max Weber wrote 'Protestantism and the Spirit of Capitalism' - is he Jewish too?".

    Moody; No, because he was describing a phenomena, he was NOT endorsing it!
    Was Adam Smith a Jew?

    Aloysha; "The US economy is falling apart for a reason, and none of your interventionism could possibly save it now".

    Moody; On the contrary; it is the Internationalist system of which the USA is the main motor that is failing because it is inherently self-destructive. Where do you go once all the markets are exhausted?
    Markets don't 'exhaust'. Markets are conglomerates of individuals with subjective desires and values who work and exchange the products of their work in order to satisfy these desires and values. The US Government cannot afford to tax its population (and keep the economy going at the same time) so that it can support Israel, its own Judeo-American military-imperial policy, and the mass importation and subsidised lives of millions upon millions of racial foreigners.

    Strong States must set up their own self-contained markets on a national basis and reject Internationalism.
    By enslaving their own populations. Great.

    Aloysha; "And [the Jew Mises] was right. Hitler wielded the power to abolish the savings of the entire German nation, had the entire internal opposition of his Party executed, abolished the right to strike, and crushed free speech and freedom of association. Hey, sounds like tyranny to me..."

    Moody; I disagree with the Jews here; Hitler rescued his nation from the hyper-inflation forced on it by Jewish Internationalist Finance;
    Hyperinflation occured because of the Great War reparations payments. The gold standard was abandoned by NS Germany because after the reparations payments they didn't have any gold left.

    he executed traitors,
    Do explain how the Black Front, whose members within the NSDAP were the only people to push some measure of agricultural reform through, were 'traitors'?

    got rid of Commie unions
    Read as: Smashed freedom of association for the workers and the right to self-determined collective bargaining.

    in favour of a patriotic Labour Front
    Crushing freedom of association for workers and their right to self-determined collective bargaining.

    and made sure that Aryans could speak and associate freely.
    One recalls the veiled death threats to Ernst Jünger by the Nazi Party and the censorship of Oswald Spengler's 'Hour of Decision'.

    He also got rid of such Jews as Mises.
    I know.

    Hitler was right.
    Right about what?
    Last edited by Jack; Tuesday, November 25th, 2003 at 08:41 AM.
    All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream at night, in the dusky recesses of their minds, wake in the day to find that it was vanity. But the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams, with open eyes, to make it possible.

  10. #30
    Senior Member Moody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Last Online
    Tuesday, July 10th, 2012 @ 10:18 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    Albion
    Subrace
    Paleo-Atlantid
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    State
    Essex Essex
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Investigator of Souls
    Politics
    Pan-Germanic Nationalist
    Religion
    Runosophy
    Posts
    1,904
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    9
    Thanked in
    9 Posts

    Post On the State etc.,

    Aloysha; "International Capitalism and Nationalism are not incompatible. Incompatible if you want to control people - compatible if you want to convince people.

    Moody Lawless; The suggestion here is that Nationalism wants to "control"; and yet doesn't International Capitalism want to do that?
    Didn't General Wesley Clarke comment during the war against the former Yugoslavia that there shall be no more "ethnically pure" states in Europe?
    Was he working for Nationalism, or for Internationalism?
    And wasn't that military campaign followed by a demand that Yugoslavia privatise its industries?
    And didn't a whole slew of International Capitalists go in there - just as they have gone into Iraq - to get their pickings?
    There you had the weak democratic State doing the bidding of International Capitalism - there you had naked control.
    Of course, if the Internationalists cannot at first "convince", then they bomb from very high altitudes.
    No, I believe in a Nationalism which promotes National sovereignty, and so regards Internationalism as anathema.

    Aloysha; "Here's our differences; Two types of 'nationalism' -
    i) European style nationalism, which winds down the fact that Europeans think that one should save all of one's racial/ethnic kin, even the ones who don't want to be saved, and hence force is the solution to everything (it isn't - but it solves a lot, I'll give you that), and,
    ii) Western style nationalism (by this I refer to the type of nationalism Nihilist and myself follow), that one should only be interested in saving those of one's own racial/ethnic kin who are willing to be saved".

    Moody Lawless; That is an utterly groundless distinction, based on a quasi-religious notion of "saving".
    In all cases the State is the expression of the national idea in concrete terms; it has nothing to do with "saving" lost souls or such.
    The Nation doesn't just consist of those who happen to be alive today - it consists of those who have long ago died, and those who will be born in the future.
    It is the Strong State's job to build a safe and just enviroment for all those generations.
    The distinction between "European" and "Western" is completely fallacious, and I very much doubt if you speak for Nihilist.

    Aloysha; "When the system collapses and riots explode across the white world more will flock to white nationalism (white referring to descendents of European Christendom, for lack of a better way of putting it) - these are the people I say should be saved, not those who actually practice 'love thy enemy'. People are capable of changing their minds".

    Moody; Again, you are talking in religious terms here which is rather inappropriate.
    We may be descendants of Christendom, but we are also descendants of paganism, and we may be antecedents of a secularism.
    To talk in terms of an Armageddonal system collapse, a "flock" towards a Judgemental "saving", and a changing of minds [on the road to Damascus, no doubt], is all very fine, but it doesn't address the real issues of how to build political entities that are able to make any such pipe-dreams a reality.

    Aloysha;"There already are 'shoot-outs', it's called WAR. Gang A loots his territory and goes to war against Gang B who does the same. The difference with Anarcho-Capitalism is people voluntarily fund the gangs who, in exchange, protect them. This role is even fulfilled within the mixed-economy Western countries by security companies. And slavery is economically impractical. I assume you object to street shoot outs? Well, under your system, you'll have the same thing - all it means is whites are forced to fund a big gang called the Army directed by a powerful group called the Party who deport/annihilate racial foreigners from a section of territory".

    Moody Lawless; Gang war-fare in the West is a result of too lax laws, the toleration of drug culture [and its promotion], and the presence of Blacks etc.,
    You are willing to continue this multiracial staus quo [as you will have no State apparatus to change it], and live in an Anarcho fantasy.
    In reality, the Strong Racial State will find itself dealing with such delinquency, and giving it short shrift, just as Mussolini ejected the Mafia from Italy [something the International Capitalist USA cannot/willnot do].
    The big difference is this; The Racial State has the LEGITIMACY of Blood and Soil; groups of anarchists do not.

    Alooysha; "Assuming blacks - even the ones with jobs - riot and torch private property the day Anarcho-capitalism is declared across the West, private corporations make millions by killing off the looters".

    Moody; And there you admit it; the rule of Private Corporations!
    "We" Declare Anarchy!
    Who does? - that group over there!
    But those others don't agree ...
    Why should they - since when does anarchy have any legitimacy?
    Anarchy - or carte blanche for the International Corporations!

    Aloysha; "Their property, in accordance with the Anarcho-capitalist 'homesteader' theory, is up for grabs to the first person who starts using it, whereby it is recognised as his property. The difference between this and your State warfare followed by property redistribution process is all we need to do is abolish the State, stock up on arms and wait for them to fire the first shot - and then one would only attack those who attacked first".

    Moody; You wouldn't even attack first!
    Sure-fire recipe for maintaining the multiracial status quo!

    Aloysha; "In accordance with genetic similarity theory and selfish gene theory, plus the fact it'd be all over the private media, they'd all (or almost all) rise up. It's perfectly legimitimate and rational, and in accordance with the anarcho-capitalist ethics of the Non Aggression Policy (don't attack them until they attack you)".

    Moody; The "private media", as you call it, would be owned by Internationalist Corporations - hey, just as it is now, under International Capitalism!

    Aloysha; "Government is nothing more than a security agency with an illegitimate monopoly over a section of territory, and so wields the power to loot its territory and its inhabitants to assert its self-defined minorities. Anarcho-Capitalism dethrones this security agency from its illegitimate monopoly and leaves the market open for other security organisations".

    Moody; The Racial Nation has full legitimacy based on Blood and Soil [see the threads 'The Nationalist Catechism' and 'The Philosophy of Blood and Soil' for expansion on this.
    It is the Internationalist Capitalist state that is without legitimacy.
    And what do Anarchists base THEIR legitimacy on ...
    Why are there beings at all, & why not rather nothing?
    [Leibniz/Heidegger]

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Just 53% Say Capitalism Better Than Socialism
    By Nachtengel in forum The United States
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Tuesday, August 11th, 2009, 02:07 PM
  2. Capitalism for Dummies
    By Demigorgona in forum Economics, Business, & Finance
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Monday, November 17th, 2008, 08:29 AM
  3. Do you think Capitalism is becoming a culture ?
    By Hanna in forum Economics, Business, & Finance
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: Thursday, February 21st, 2008, 10:45 AM
  4. Capitalism is an absurdity
    By Von Braun in forum Economics, Business, & Finance
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Saturday, December 18th, 2004, 01:29 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •