Capitalism: this is really what it looks like.
In the comments section of my last piece on the Jewish hoax of Libertarianism, we were visited by yet another troll pushing this worn-out nonsense theology. As it is my goal to completely crush this destructive way of viewing the social order, I have once again given a response to this enemy agent (note that I do not care if he is a Jew or someone who has been brainwashed by a Jew to behave exactly like a Jew – the effect is the same, and he should be dealt with in the same manner).
A person calling himself “blackacidlizzard” came to evangelize for his faith while purposefully attempting to cause confusion. Note that in his last line, he claims that he was not arguing that an implementation of Libertarian economic policy would result in a positive economic situation in White countries, and attempts to attach a clever insult to his suggestion that by “assuming” that he was promoting Libertarianism because he believes it would have a positive effect, I was putting words in his mouth. Logically, that would mean he was promoting the ideology for some other reason than that he believes it would have a positive effect on the economic order. Just imagine the weaselly audacity of such an argumentative technique – “I never said that what I am promoting as a good system would have a positive effect – that is just the voices in your head.” This is the depths that these Jews (and their minions) are willing to sink to.
It is worthwhile to share a couple quotes from the Eternal Avatar of Truth and Justice, Adolf Hitler. These are from chapter 2 of Mein Kampf (Ford translation), where he is speaking of his debates with the Social Democrats – a Jewish movement, just as Libertarianism is a Jewish movement. Emphasis mine.
This is how I came to understand mankind. Through the years, my views broadened and deepened but there was no need to change my way of thinking. The more I understood the outer nature of Social Democracy, the more I longed to understand the inner core of the doctrine. The official party literature was not very useful here. It is incorrect in both details and in the proof it offers for economic questions. It is also untruthful in its discussion of political aims. Besides, I was especially repelled by the dishonest and unethical manner in which it was presented. Sentences are written using a lot of vague words with unintelligible meanings that are as clever as they are senseless. Only those unconventional types rotting among us could possibly feel at home in this intellectual maze. They scrape some “spiritual experience” from this artsy literary manure, and the message is assisted by the humility of our people who think something is deep and wise just because they don’t understand it.
In the same chapter, he goes on about the pretentious and vile political presentation of the Jews.
The more disputes I had with them, the better acquainted I became with their arguing techniques. First, they would count on the stupidity of their adversaries, and then, if there was no way out, they pretended to be stupid themselves. If all else failed, they claimed they did not understand, or, being challenged, they would instantly jump to another subject and talk about obvious truths. If these were agreed on, they immediately applied them to entirely different matters. When they were caught off guard, they would avoid the conversation and claim they had no knowledge or understanding of the issue. No matter where you seized one of these apostles, your hand grasped slimy ooze, which spurted through your fingers, only to unite again the next moment. If your argument really gave a man a shattering defeat in front of others, he could do nothing but agree. You might suppose that this was one step forward, but how surprised you would be the following day! The next morning you will find that Jew has not even the slightest memory of yesterday and continues to repeat his old mischievous nonsense as if nothing at all had happened. When pressed about the previous conversation, he would pretend astonishment and could remember nothing at all except the truth of his statements, which he felt had been proven the day before.
Frequently I was simply paralyzed. It was hard to know what to admire the most: their fluency or their artistry in lying. Gradually, I began to hate them.
The exact methods presently being used by the Jew Libertarians trying to dictate the narrative of our resistance movement, which you will see an example of below, were used by the Jew Communists trying to dictate the narrative of the White resistance movement in 1920s Germany. These people simply do not stop, and they will not ever abandon a technique that works. This method of using vague and slightly confusing language along with overly-complex sounding gibberish that people take to be meaningful simply because they cannot understand it, mixed in with trigger words, will always work, because it preys on a fundamental psychological mechanism, something which is like a loophole in the human brain that they are able to exploit.
I am a modest man, but surely, it is a rare thing that one is able to dissect these arguments in the way that I have done here on this site. It is my hope that others who are involved in this movement will continue to push this propaganda of truth against the lying Jewish doctrine of Libertarianism, as it has indeed infested our resistance – by way of Alex Jones, Ron Paul and the rest of the shills – to an astonishing degree.
And now, to the vanquishing of the enemy agent.
His words are in bold.
***
You can’t create wealth by fiat, Andre.
You want to smash capitalism as it currently exists? Great, so do we.
You absolutely can create wealth by fiat, that is just gibberish Jew talk.
Who are your “we”?
No. Proclamations and guns can only redistribute wealth, the creation of wealth requires toil in the conversion of matter into useful forms. Perhaps it is better to redistribute wealth by force, that is not my concern. The current redistribution sucks, and it is about as “free market” as Adolf Hitler was “Jewish.”
If you are asking about who I referred to as “we” above: libertarians; right, left, center, or not-on-the-map. William Godwin to Hans Herman Hoppe.
If you are asking who my “we” is in general: Whites who are intelligent and honest.
Yes, we should definitely try the Libertarian program for wealth creation – international free trade and the free movement of labor across national borders might just pull us out of this slump that was caused by “the government” putting all these restrictions on the “free market”! It makes perfect sense!
Sorry man, but your plan just isn’t working. And I know – there is some complicated reason why international free trade and open borders only led to the the crisis it has led to because of “the government,” and why globalization is only a universal exploitative race to the bottom because of certain technical oversights, as well as why our government is something other than a tool of international finance capitalism, but I’ve heard it and I am not impressed – it is all just more Jew gibberish, designed to rot out your brain and trick you into supporting things that are against your own interests and that of your people.
You are no doubt as tired of hearing about how fundamentally Jewish your theology is as I am of saying it, so I won’t again belabor the point.
I will note that a redistribution of wealth would be a very good step in the right direction, and this could be done through policy. There is massive wealth in America, it is just all held by Jews and other capitalists.
Right now, the only way to create wealth would be to shut off this free trade system that you promote. Instead of acknowledging that I’ve already said that, and coming up with a response to it, you instead pretend I didn’t say it and repeat again that libertarianism will somehow create wealth for White people in first world countries. This is like arguing with a Social Democrat in a Munich Beer Hall. If you have some counter-points to make, make them and I will respond, but don’t come on here after I’ve already debunked your cult and simply say “we need libertarianism” without even presenting an argument, it just makes you look like a hasbarat.
Explain how this Jewish cult doctrine of internationalism is even slightly compatible with racial nationalism, or stop evangelizing for it on my website.
I oppose international free trade, so go bark up another tree with that bullshit.
If you consider the US economy a “free market,” you are merely experiencing the myopia of the present day. FDR’s administration was paying farmers to destroy their crops so that market forces would increase the prices they could sell their remaining goods at – and FDR’s America was radically libertarian by today’s standards
Jews are the people of book-writing, they have their noses in every ideology. Racial nationalism, anyone?
Shutting down the flow of labor, capital, and consumables across international borders does not create wealth, it redistributes wealth to the proletariat and enterprenureate of our own political unit. I support it.
“repeat again that libertarianism will somehow create wealth for White people in first world countries.”
Where did I say that?
Oh, right. I didn’t. You’re just arguing with the voices in your head.
If you oppose international free trade, why do you call yourself a “libertarian”? International free trade is one of the prime tenets of that theology. Even those who have gone soft on their open-borders policy – saying that they need to abolish the government before opening up the borders to the hordes – still stick by the international free trade policy. Even Ron Paul supported it – and he is certainly a soft Libertarian.
So, I guess you have created your own version of “Libertarianism” which only you adhere to. That definitely makes it difficult to discuss.
As far as this No True Scotsman “not really free market, blah blah blah” – it is the same noise I hear from the communists about the Soviet Union – “not really true communist, blah blah blah.” The fact is that this is the way your free market system works – resources are centralized by a minority through the free trade system, and then those who have centralized the resources use the power they wield to organize a state apparatus that reinforces that power.
It is exceedingly depressing that I must continue to repeat such simple things to what I presume are grown adults. A child could understand this. An open market demands resource centralization, given that the allocation of resources is based on the capacity of an entity to produce a profit, and the capacity to produce a profit is based on the scale of the operation which is in turn based on amount of resources possessed (this last bit is due to a multitude of glaringly obvious factors that tend to escape the ideological libertarian – these include standardization and the efficiency of production systems which require a large-scale investment; a shoe factory costs thousands of times more to build than a cobbler shop, but produces thousands of times more efficiently).
And yes, the Jews are racially nationalist. They also use electricity, sleep in beds and have two eyes and a nose on their faces. Racial nationalism is a basic protection mechanism for any people. The fact that the Jews are racially nationalist does not somehow mean that racial nationalism is a Jewish concept. It is a natural state, a biological response to the modern world of nation-states. Libertarianism, on the other hand, is an idiotic ideological abstraction which has repeatedly been shown to be absolutely nonviable, and which was created entirely by Jews. There is no analog in the natural world to individualism, or the individual caring first for his own needs above all others. It is alien and unnatural, and only a Jew could have thought it up.
As to the witty remark at the end there – you said:
1. You want to smash “smash capitalism as it currently exists” because it doesn’t create wealth
2. You are a Libertarian
3. You are White
Forgive me for inferring that you were saying that Libertarianism would “create wealth for White people in first world countries.” I am deeply sorry if I have put words in your mouth. Frankly though sir, I have zero interest in playing word games with you. If you are promoting Libertarianism for some other reason than that you think it would be economically helpful to White nations, but yet do not feel a need to tell us what that reason is – perhaps it is a secret – then please, go away from here. I am sure you can find fertile ground to spread this gibberish on one of the “patriot” sites where people enjoy confusing themselves with nonsense. Here at Total Fascism, we are about real solutions to real problems, and we do not have time for endless circular arguments with Jewish propagandists or the victims of Jewish propaganda.
***
Surely, nothing could describe this troll better than “slimy ooze which slips through your fingers.” He says he is a Libertarian, and then when I attack a core principle of this doctrine, he claims he is a different, new type of Libertarian who doesn’t believe in the core tenets of the philosophy. Note that this is after he has cited Hans Herman Hoppe (who he cited with Godwin, no doubt because these two are among the only gentiles involved in this movement) as representative of the doctrine he supports, and Hoppe is a fanatical supporter of unrestricted free trade. I am not aware of a single prominent Libertarian who does not support international free trade – the trolls here in the Total Fascism comments section appear to have invented their own new version of the hoax. And again, this is not some peripheral aspect of the doctrine, it is a core concept – saying “I’m a Libertarian, but I don’t believe in international free trade” would be like saying “I am a Fascist, but I believe in international free trade.” It is ridiculous, but this can just slip through – when he is confronted, suddenly his ideology morphs into something completely different.
Once again: he then actually goes so far as to claim that I am delusional for assuming that he is promoting this doctrine because he believes it will be economically beneficial, implying that he is promoting it for some other reason, which he is apparently unwilling to share – surely if he were willing to share it, he would have done so immediately after dismissing my “baseless assertion” that he was promoting this economic doctrine because he felt it would be good for the economy.
The most important thing to note here is that this troll does as these Jew fiends all do, ceaselessly: he brings up arguments that have already been thoroughly dismissed as defying the most basic forms of logic as if they were unquestionable truths. It cannot ever be laid to rest with these people – once you prove them wrong, they just wait and come back later to say the same things over again.
Spread the Word
All of the old guard “truthers” and even many White Nationalists are still promoting this Jewish scam. I hope that people will go out and tell the truth about this hoax, as once it collapses, the entire false resistance movement led by Alex Jones and the rest of the patriot parrots will collapse with it. They have put everything into this ridiculous scam, and if we can expose it for the unnatural, illogical, elitist hoax that it is, we will gain a lot of ground in our fight to dictate the narrative.
As I’ve demonstrated here, we have the truth on our side. The solution to our economic woes is Total Fascism. By way of authoritarian socialism, we will crush the abusive capitalist system, and return the people’s labor to them. We represent hard justice and fierce action, whereas those in the old “conservative” movement represent a lot of hollow and confusing gibberish and a botched-out scheme to bring back a dead system from a long gone era that never even worked in the first place.
All that is left is for our people in the resistance movement to hear the truth, and they shall flock to us.
Hail Victory.
***
Related:
Regarding Anarcho-Capitalism and Classical Anarchism
Burying the Austrian School Jew Doctrine of Libertarianism
China’s “Market Economy,” Walmart, “Voluntary Exchange” and the Jew Doctrine of Materialism
Andrew I’m familiar with that jew “blackacidlizzard”, and yes he is a troll. Judging from his videos he looks like he’s also a mongrel, maybe a cross of jewish and mexican.
I have no need to talk bad about him as a person. I was merely responding to his ideas.
Here’s one of his videos, notice the very jewish facial feature like the hook nose: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-DdrNPnH8E
Well, looks like someone else came here and covered the bases with more detail and tact than I would.
Why do I call myself a libertarian if I oppose international free trade?
I don’t know, how did you manage to be an anarcho-primitivist and not figure out that the notions of what constitutes “libertarian” are widely contested?
Oh, right, I forgot what website I was on.
“You absolutely can create wealth by fiat”
Only a moron can think that printing money creates wealth. But wait…
Regrettably, that’s not what we’re talking about here, Travis. Even if you have never heard this term, I would think the context would have given it away. Of course, before the dawn of YouTube Libertarianism, anyone who knew what “fiat money” was would have known what the word “fiat” meant.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fiat
But I won’t call you a moron for not knowing that. It’s not my style.
Nice strawman! Let it be wealth! How is that different from printing money? By the way, what were you doing before “the dawn of YouTube Libertarianism”?
No explication yet?
What sort of a response are you soliciting? You misunderstood a statement, attacking something I wasn’t actually saying, and I corrected this misunderstanding. The Libertarian distinction between wealth creation and wealth redistribution is subtle and almost arbitrary, in my perception, especially when you are dealing with international trade. Clearly a mandate to impose large scale tariffs on goods being imported internationally would cause an increase in the wealth of the nation imposing these tariffs, to give a simple example. It seems to me that the increased domestic production and increased domestic labor expenditure and thus wages would be “wealth creation,” but if you want to classify this as “redistribution,” rather than “creation,” that’s fine. I don’t have a desire to engage in a semantic argument.
Honestly, I was feeling today as if my approach in dealing with Libertarian arguments was perhaps too aggressive, too much of an attack, and that I would do better to be less confrontational, appealing to reason as I point out what I view to be fundamental flaws in the Libertarian ideology. My goal is to put all White men on the same side, the side of freedom, justice and the preservation of our heritage and race, and maybe my approach needs some fine tuning. We can argue on the Internet, making ourselves feel smart, literally forever and not get anywhere. We need to be looking for ways to come together. I feel that most Libertarians are genuine, and simply misguided.
http://mjayrosenberg.com/2013/03/19/did-your-favorite-progressive-senator-sign-aipac-letter-to-obama-telling-him-to-stand-up-for-occupation-here-is-the-list/
Rand Paul signs AIPAC letter.
Golden Dawn is “exciting”, however the real progress in Europe is happening in Hungary. Keep an eye on Hungary. Hungary has adopted a new Constitution and told the Jews in the EU to shove it, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/hungary/8989020/Hungarians-rally-over-constitution.html
they have ceased the Holocaust Fraud payments, AND DEMANDED MONEY BACK, http://www.worldjewishcongress.org/en/news/12302/hungarian_government_stops_payments_to_needy_holocaust_survivors_demands_return_of_funds
Hungary now openly honors Admiral Horthy, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/hungary/9784498/Hungarian-town-fails-to-stop-park-being-named-after-Hitler-ally.html,
they are running the gypsies out along with the jew bankers. In the meantine the Greek Prime Minister has has pledged to the World Jewish Congress to adopt laws against “holocaust denial”. Thus far no word from Golden Dawn on this proposal???, while in Hungary these laws are being stuck down, one by one. and one Hungarian MP officially called for the Jews to be accountd for, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/hungary/9706462/Hungary-condemns-far-Right-MP-over-Jewish-list-idea.html
One of the most popular Ron Paul websites is Dailypaul.com, which is not even run by Ron Paul. The Libertarian model is so decentralized that most of the Ron Paul supporters only interact with each other and don’t even know Paul’s views on most issues as they come up each day. In that regard Ron Paul is a background image that unites a group of “like minded individuals”, but they aren’t even like minded because they argue over key issues. For example, most Ron Paul supporters believe 9/11 was an “inside job” and recently there have been more anti-zionist posts on dailypaul website. Ron Paul has stated many times that Bin Laden did 9/11, and that Israel should have their own sovereignty, and although he speaks out about Palestine he will never say the Jews deserve a homeland more along the lines of Alcatraz than Israel. So, right there, many Ron Paul followers don’t even believe what Ron Paul believes. At best, they believe in what he represents, a vague sort of 1776 American icon. What kind of a leader is it when most of his supporters don’t agree with what he has to say? He may respond by saying that that’s freedom, where everyone can unite behind freedom but disagree on minor points, but how does that play in with politics? Most of his supporters wanted him to run third party, but he didn’t, and he lost. But never has he apologized to his supporters for not running third party. He kept an arrogant elitist attitude that running third party is “unfair” and so the only shot is to run republican (which is also unfair to him, but he doesn’t seem to worry about this). Ron Paul’s supporters desperately needed change, to the point where their livelihood was at stake. Whereas, Ron Paul had been doing this for 30 years, another lost election wasn’t going to matter to him. Ron Paul was a horrible leader, but in reality it was his followers who are at fault for giving him the benefit of the doubt. It is a forgiveable offense of course because the real instigator of all of this is Alex Jones, who says himself and Ron Paul agrees, that Ron Paul’s main fan base came from Alex Jones. So in the spirit of forgiveness, the victim is never truly at fault. But if someone still plays into the Ron Paul libertarian dream, they are surely being foolish at this point. How many more times does he have to lose to show you he’ll never win?
That is why the Libertarians are switching their tactics, by playing Rand Paul, who has admitted to not even being a libertarian. It is up to people like us to warn against this continuing menace, because Rand Paul is picking up all the people who didn’t like Ron’s ideas but are still confused, in that Rand Paul is more neoconish than his father. Rand is compromising by going more establishment, even visiting Israel, a sure sign of his untrustworthy nature. The real movement I think should embrace a greater truth, namely racial awareness, which is clearly what the American people are favoring at this point. While not everyone in the country is anti-Jew, most republicans are anti-black because of Obama, and although that is a start, it’s really just a distraction of the Jewish problem which causes this type of white/black race wars. Rand Paul is throwing everything towards sucking up to the likes of Fox news and established neocons like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, it’s disgusting to even think about, at the very least Ron Paul was his own man, he was not much of a leader, but because he had intelligence and charisma people followed him just because he had admirable qualities. Rand on the other hand is young and energetic, much like his father was in earlier television interviews, but Rand’s ideology is half libertarian, half neocon. He is playing the game by questioning Hillary Clinton but not working to expose real truths like with 9/11. He filibusters the Senate because he wants Obama to clearly address who he can bomb, so he does, by saying “combatants,” in essence HELPING the establishment by creating a sort of generic problem-reaction-solution. Rand is also young and motivated, which will drag more supporters towards his cause. Rand is also young enough so he can run in 2016, 2020, 2024, etc, so in other words a never ending “hope fest” where the libertarian dream is just around the corner. But I think that won’t even happen because enough people are waking up.
For once, we need a candidate who will at least run and will support the full truth. Yes, the odds are stacked against him, but he will try, and he should not back down on any truth, if we are going to lose I’d rather lose gloriously by telling the truth. Local elections are good and obviously necessary, but a presidential run will unite the entire movement, everyone in every state. Even if there are more than one canidate at first I say the more the merrier, but if one gains real momentum obviously the lesser ones should concede to the more likely to win, but that is perhaps a long term goal.
I will be 34 years old in 2016, and 35 is the Constitutional minimum (unless you are good at cheating like Obama), so I can not do it. I am issuing a challenge for anyone who can and is capable. I know Andrew is younger than me but I know he would do it if he was old enough. This way we can at least get warmed up, because by 2020 I know there will be many people 35 or older who will want at least the chance. So get to it anyone who is reading this and of age, we need you!
Great comments. I sent you an email. You should give me a call. I seem to have lost your number.
Got it, I responded.
I am an anticommunist libertarian, but currently a member of Golden Dawn in Greece, so I can say I know and have done more for this ideology than most of you and I’d like to express my sorrow for this site which although is dedicated to the cause of empowering the White Race (so to speak) is not at all dedicated to learning anything during the process.
This narrative is bosh if there isn’t a firm ideology to back it up. So talking about a narrative is talking about nothing. And even referring the word narrative sounds foolish.
The first thing we do when talking to others (even though some of us just want to fight them and kill them for there is something Jewish in them) is to know their political positions. The first thing there is to learn in this case, just by googling and having some knowledge, is that this blackadiclizzard boy is a mutualist and a racialist. His youtube channel by the same name and his gibberish here proves it. This means he (says he) is as pro-white as you (racially aware people have no big differences on the aspect of race) but his economic approach is different, and I shall say, weird.
You, Andrew, seem 1) not to care to find and learn who are you talking to 2) not to know what mutualism even means. This is a recipe for failure. And so your economic arguments are not good.
The nazi regime was not a socialist regime, it was basically keynesian. In theory there was an ideological fraction that was full socialist but politically it took the form of strasserism. (Do you know that ideology? I suggest to you not to go into this path). Hitler was not a strasserite, in fact he killed there faggots.
Now, if you want to defend that fiat money is good, you have to have some (keynesian) arguments about it. This position though, i think, is blatantly wrong. GD current position is that money has to have some guarantee, not meaning metals, but a revitalized national production. So Golden Dawn is against dropping the euro and issuing a fiat money right now. In other words production first. The Austrian School and the Chicago school (i don’t like the second) have plenty of argument of what would the unintended consequences be if you artificially boost demand. This problem cannot be solved by anathematizing them all as Jews. You said that fiat money is good. What is this economically? It is keynesianism. Who is the best proponent of this school now? Krugman, a Jew. Who was Keynes who first though it? An antinazi with many Jewish friends. See…
And there’s another one argument which is overly stupid. You say that “the individual caring first for his own needs above all others” is an alien idea with no analog in the natural world. Wtf?! 99% of the people on the Earth would say that you’re crazy or stupid. And putting it that way shows how not well-read you are. Indeed nationalism and socialism espouse the idea that one should not care first for himself, but no one would dare to say that thing you wrote. EVERYWHERE we see, as nationalists, this phenomenon, and your “narrative” should urge people to overcome this phenomenon which penetrates our lives. But arguing that it doesn’t exist. If we’re living in a world where everyone is putting the others before himself then why are you striving to accomplish what? It seems you don’t know well what nationalism and socialism really means.
(I’m not saying that I agree to this idea “caring first for others”, I am saying how this idea is related to socialism and nationalism)
And coming to a third argument that I saw and I think it is wrong. About this concentration thing you write. It is true that concentrated big wealth is better than wealth in tiny pieces, but how is this bad if each and every person concentrates the wealth that he and his ancestor created? Jews create wealth and concentrate it in a big factory. They have the factory. You and your ancestors do the same. Where in the fuck do you see any theft, injustice, or something to be fixed? Let’s imagine your ancestors were boors and I have a factory and you don’t. Is there anything to be fixed? I personally don’t see it this way. And asking people to see it this way is asking them to think like parasites.
To my opinion redistribution is theft. And now we come to a final point I want to make. You, as many other nationalists think that libertarianism and free trade is an ideology which comes with niggers pissing at your porch. I don’t see anything like that. People can be denied entrance in a country or even deported, while goods can come in or go out. What is your problem with me trading a good which I made with another good that a nigger or a Jew made in their countries? Transportation of a good is not immigration of an individual.
Anyways, this site cannot convert any significant number of people to anything and its narrative is not good. The fusion of white nationalism and libertarianism is to me a good think and can be a consistent ideology. Every time in history that fascism rose as a movement this was partly due to a reaction of the middle class (traditionally pro-free market class) to some event or threat. Without the middle class you’re doomed. And rethinking such things as natural and as age-old and as well sounding as free trade is something that will help your movement influence politics.
My channel on youtube is marmiteman6 (not 4) , twitter: PlaceInTheSun2 , so please don’t make articles on how you responded to comments, it’s too amateurish, and if you want to talk about narrative don’t do it in public cause people will think you’re about to fool them with pretty words. Narrative, propaganda, spamming, do them but never admit you did them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Germanic_law
read it and weep.
Chris J says:
March 18, 2013 at 5:54 am
one solution; annihilation
And that is exactly what the parasites intend on doing — to us!
now take note, libertine.
your kind are the destroyers of hierarchy and history, and has been known of for years; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memoirs_Illustrating_the_History_of_Jacobinism
your doctrines are responsible for all of the chaos and distruction of the last 200 years
ps http://news.yahoo.com/3-300-old-egyptian-cemetery-reveals-commoners-plight-165850133.html
just one sample
The retoric of freemarkets is an intellectual cloak, to conseal the realpolitik of human social systems.
The genious of civilization is the imposition of will by an elite with a vision of material ideals…an elite that causes the vast crowds to erect monumental stones by a plan, be that project a machu pichu,a stonehenge, pyramids or metropolises of skyscrapers.
They are tribal chieftans that jealously guard and protect fertile valleys and pastorage, watersheds and sources of ores and other raw materials, tribal chieftans held in check and unified by a strongman and his bloodthirsty enterage.
The strawboss of the order of strongmen are the witchdoctors and preists…where strongmen can bind the body of the masses with dungeons, chains and spears, the doctor of the spirit hold the spirit and mind of men in check with promises of otherworldly relief from the pains and disapointments of material existance, the velvet glove that conseals the mailed fist of the tyranny of the strong.
The millions exist as fuel for the creation of an earthbound paradise for the alpha men and their kinsmen, servants and slaves whos lives are sacraficed for the pleasure of strongmen.
The millions are the herd that strongmen shepard, and do drive to stampede the foes of the strongmen, and to work for the pleasure of the strongmen.
Libertarianism is wool that the fainthearted and dreamy cover their eyes with, to hide the truth of reality from their egotist spirit. Its the hoodwink imposed by the usurper
to drive men from the camp of the strongman, to sap the strength of an imposed order and sow anarchy and Nihilism.
Here is truth for the libertarian;
You were born to suffer for the pleasure of others.
More racism
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/18/republicans-want-to-end-perception-as-stuffy-old-men/
“GOP is too old, too white”
I would say the GOP is “too jewish”.
Good article. Libertarians like to frame their arguments in really simple logical syllogisms which appear like they make sense at first, but when compared to reality they break down. This is why they are still analogizing modern economies with island barter trade and whatnot. These kinds of things make sense when all you need to compete with the big boys is a hammer, a handsaw, and some elbow grease. Today their “perfect competition” model is useless, yet they still rely on it as if any old guy could start up his own semiconductor factory in his basement or launch a few satellites into space and bring down AT&T if they start price gouging everyone.
A real big problem is that libertarians are usually above average intelligence people (as are Marxists), so they are able to frame arguments that sound good to the slightly above average layman. The people who read a few books and try to educate themselves above the level of the common high school graduate can fall for these arguments because, though they are curious enough to look into general ideas about a subject, they do not delve deep enough to familiarize themselves with the finer details. They can be compared to a person who has only completed the basic college calculus sequence yet tries to argue about quantum field theory. You can tell they understand some basic ideas, but they are ignorant of vast piles of information that would be necessary for real understanding.
Holy crap.
“Perfect competition” is a libertarian model?
LOL, no. It is a Chicago School model, the most libertarian big name from the Chicago School was Milton Friedman, and hardcore right-libertarians hate Milton Friedman more than left-tards do.
“Perfect competition” is an economic model and an unreachable moral ideal used to justify interference by a centralized authority. You know, like communism.
And YOU want to paint your OPPONENTS as not bothering to examine the finer details? For fuck’s sake, both you and Andre are doing little more than parroting superficial, falsehood-filled talking points from social democrats and Marxists.
Pathetic.
Probably, my approach here was wrong.
I disagree with basically everything about Libertarianism, but I understand that most of you are genuine, and thus I should be using a more respectful approach. There really is no point in simply arguing with one another endlessly about details.
I will write a different sort of article about my views on Libertarianism in the near future.
Ok. I will attempt to reciprocate this de-escelation of linguistic violence.
You ask in this post why I would start an argument if I am not promoting the system being talked about.
For the same reason I, an atheist and ethical subjectivist, argue against theological and moral non-cognitivism: they are inaccurate. Only through understanding reality can a proper direction be determined.
If you want to sincerely tackle libertarianism, you will have to learn more about it, and not from the usual suspect critics who seem to be your primary source of information.
one solution; annihilation
hail victory
The distinction between “wealth” being “created” and being “redistributed” is a part of neoclassical analysis in general, not just libertarianism. “Wealth” is treated as a substance which is conserved even as the goods it actually refers to are consumed or destroyed; the only way it can be “created” rather than pulled from the existing pool is through an increase in GDP.
This is, at best, an abstraction suited for models. “Wealth” (valued goods and services) in the real sense is being continually created and destroyed, even while GDP remains constant.
My criticisms of capitalism tend to go beyond conventional economics, and are intertwined with my criticisms of materialism. Here are some of my fundamental issues, in no particular order:
1. I’m not a Utilitarian, and don’t see any reason to base a nation’s economy on the maximization of pleasure for the masses.
2. I don’t believe that “consumers” are capable of maximizing their happiness through their purchase decisions anyways.
3. The “Free Market” is, apparently, allowed to further emiserate people by stimulating desires in them for products that they don’t own (which is, according to the Utilitarian framework, the exact opposite of producing desired products).
4. The idea of “individual rights” being the foundation of morality has long since been disproven by history, biology, and evolutionary theory.
5. The uncreated resources necessary to the production of material goods are neither infinite nor equally accessible, and are in fact usually made “property” through conquest.
That is a rather brilliant comment. Thank you. The bit about the “free market” having leave to create artificial desire for unattainable products being the diametric opposite of the stated goals of the market system is particularly scathing. It is something I am going to have to run through my head for a while.
To be perfectly honest (I am sure it is apparent anyway), my understanding of this stuff is mostly observational (intuitive, really). I am not an expert on economics. I think the flaws are obvious, and something which a non-expert is in some ways more qualified than an expert to comment on.
The bottom line is that the old pre-industrial concept of a free market as a means to self-reliance and independent livelihood has been superimposed over this rather new image of man as a heathenish consumer of material products, and the result is that the vast majority are incapable of accomplishing either goal: they are not self-reliant, nor are they able to endlessly consume products.
The Ford translation of Mein Kampf is very inferior; seems to me a dumbed down version. I can’t even recognize Adolf Hitler in your quotes although I’m familiar with the passages. AH was a master of language and this sounds like a very common person speaking. I understand Ford doesn’t know German well, has made all kinds of embarrassing mistakes that even I would not make (who doesn’t know German except barely) … and his English is bad too. In short, Ford is unqualified.
Please don’t use this translation, even for yourself. You won’t go wrong with the Murphy. It’s plenty inspiring.
I have read both, but don’t currently have a copy of the Murphy translation. I personally like the Ford translation best. I think Bill Finck actually agrees with me on that, but don’t quote me. You are correct in saying that the Murphy sounds more poetic, but I think the plain language is more effective when drawing quotes.
Just FYI, I checked with Bill Finck and he has never recommended the Ford translation since he has never read it. His wife has it and uses it, he says.
He may have mixed up the Reynal-Hitchcock translation, as quoted by translator George Held on his site, http://mk.christogenea.org/content/page-219 — saying, in conversation, it was the Ford translation. I’m doing a little research on this and will talk about it on my Heretics’ Hour program tonight. Everyone is welcome to call in during the 2nd hour if they can add to what we know.
Okay, I must have been confused about that, though I definitely remember hearing him mention it in some positive context.
The difference might be like the difference between the KJV and the NAS Bible translations – one is more poetic and possibly more technically accurate, while the other is in more direct language that is easier for modern audiences to digest.
I will be traveling soon, and I might get the Murphy translation to take with me, if I can find a paperback. The Ford translation I have here has been printed and bound from a pdf file, and is much too bulky for traveling.
I don’t want to appear overly argumentative about this, but we might as well have the discussion. I am sure you correctly remembered what Bill Finck said, but he did relate to me that, upon checking, he mixed up a Reynal-Hitchcock translation quote, and others on his MK site, with Ford — when in fact, he doesn’t mention Ford there at all. His wife has the Ford translation and he is aware that she likes it and it is the one she reads.
I don’t dispute that people like it. But I thought about the Bible comparison and don’t think it’s apt. The Bible, a compilation written by many unknown people from so long ago, in various languages, and gathered together as to what was acceptable at the time, is a totally different animal than Mein Kampf, written by one man whom we know, and also have other writings by him, and speeches, all in a single language. It is quite a tricky, or delicate, business to simplify and “put into more direct language” for a modern audience (meaning a “dumbed-down” [not their fault!] populace who can’t or don’t want to read) and still keep the personality and style of the author intact.
If the more important goal, for practical reasons, is to get Hitler’s real thoughts and “Weltanschuuang” across to as many people as possible, then such a “more direct, easier to read” translation should be identified as such, so that when a person says, “I have read Mein Kampf,” whichever version/translation they have read must needs be identified.
That is the least we can do to protect the integrity and intellectual standing of the real man, the real human being Adolf Hitler. I’m not in favor of turning him into a God or into a Myth where we find “the sayings of Adolf” as soundbites which invariable become changed and distorted and no one knows the difference. God help us in this so-called modern age. Are we reverting back to the days before the printing press, when the masses were given pictures to look at, and only the spoken word? As in video and film? Something to ponder, I think.
I disable the comment section of my own blog Andre, I have neither the time nor inclination to counter the equalitarian and moronic rubbish of the jews and their puppets, that it (the blog) is discussed elsewhere among the enemy simply confirms that my analayis is having an effect!
Yeah, I hear that. But I feel it is necessary to respond to these people.
When they’re all dead, the problem will be gone.
It’a a simple fact that force will be needed to change the corruption of are government and many other things.TRUTH is the only thing thats important because truth is FACTS not the lies we are brainwashed into beliveing.As I said already if the brainwashed masses new the hole TRUTH the Jew would be lucky to even live a couple days.Hitler wanted them to leave Eroupe thats all,and the way are countrys are today run by these Jews we can see how wise Adolf Hitler really was.America,France,Britan and my country Canada all took the wrong side in WW2.They fought and killed their own race for a race of people that hate us all with a passion.I fully belive what Earnest Zundel said to the Jewish reporter,”what ever you call the holocast you have 1 in your future”.
Yes.