This week’s Second Look will focus on Mussolini and Fascist Italy.
Discussing the path to power of Il Duce, the conspiracies involving the
creation of Fascism, the relationship with NS Germany, and much more.
Calls encouraged, and thank you for listening.
Like Lugh, Will seems to have some good ideas but lacks in presentation skills. I listened to some shows Will did in the past with Kyle on word connections and that was interesting because Kyle helped keep him on track. A lot of intelligent people are not able to put their ideas in a coherent package that works on radio. I hope Will can develop his radio presence. The problem I find with talk radio is that the host is either really smooth with delivery but lacks substance or is really hard to follow but has original ideas.
Anon, thank you for the comments, I feel much the same way. My oratory was not the level I would have liked it have been on tonight. First time back on radio in about 6-8 months. I will do my best to improve on my speaking in the future. Thank you for the listenership.
Sorry, but I don't understand this push to talk about Hitler/Mussolini ad nauseam. What is the point? Hitler himself said that National Socialism was not for export. Mussolini didn't have anywhere close to the power that governments have today. After all, he had to contend with the Catholic Church and the King of Italy. Both Italy and Germany were racially unified countries at that time. We are not living in that situation now in most of the western world.
The point is to learn from the only governments in the 20th century that successfully defeated the usurocracy, however shortlived this success ended-up being.
Plus due to all the Alex Jones / Ron Paul BS and frustration, all of these guys, including ZCF, have become Prothink--come-latelies-minus-the-C.I.-lunacy and consider Republics freemasonic Jew systems and also hate libertarianism and consider it a 'Jew' system, completely ignoring the most economically prosperous period in the history of the world, the post-Jackson / pre-1910 USA, the very economic prosperity, the residual remnants of which were the deciding factor in kicking everybody's ass in WWI and WWII both and then kicking everybody else's ass for the rest of the 20th century, in service of the Jews since 1913.
Economic facts of the past are irrelevant to them; Americans having the highest standard of living in the world is also irrelevant; the 'capitalist' system succeeded only by 'exploiting' the working class. The fact that Americans also kicked out the usurocracy is also ignored since it doesn't fit their agendas.
Some of these nutbag dictator wannabes, not the Renegade guys, but that foozball Andre at Total Fascism, Rich from Truth Militia's buddy, was on Carolyn Yeager's show the other day advocating THE DEATH PENALTY for homosexuals, something medieval Iran has and Hitler never had.
Their master-plan is similar to the white nationalists,which is to wait until society goes to shits and then lead all the frustrated and directionless white masses who finally rudely awakened in either deporting all non-whites from the territorial USA or giving them small territories of their own completely segregated and separated from the majority white regions by racial laws.
That's basically their goal but they all bicker about how to go about achieving it. They also like to drool about all the 'traitors' to the cause (basically any individualists out there who dare disagree with them) they will get to execute or punish once they're in power.
Most of the growth came from the Gilded Age. America's economic growth largely came from utilization of untapped natural resources due to new technologies combined with inventors like Tesla and guys like Ford. They also had an influx of Europe's top intellectuals and scientists etc due to the wars and imperialism in Europe at the time. If anything it was Aryan man getting back to his true self, which I think is the more important thing here in the long run.. not following these semetic religions or falling into economic traps. As the NSDAP showed though, you can forego the need for the backing of natural resources if you construct an economy that's free of the fluff and the banks. I doubt Jackson contributed much to the growth, he mostly just killed Indians and sold their land to pay off the Rothschild.
Statistics reveal otherwise; the growth was absolutely steady and spectacular as proven by the purchasing power of the dollar:
"Between 1820 and 1910 the American dollar RETAINED its purchasing power. In other words, a dollar was still worth a dollar 90 years later.
Within six years of the Federal Reserve Bank being established, the prices between 1914 and 1920 increased by 56 percent !
Since then, there have been 18 recessions, 2 depressions if you count the current one, and the dollar has lost 97% of its value !" --Stephen Goodson
To say that the Rothschild kabbal or 'Freemasons' working for them, willingly let the dollar completely retain its value for a FULL 90 YEARS, is absurd. They were trying to claw back control of the central bank all along, they put the claw in by the civil war and then finagled control by 1913.
As for 'The Aryan man' getting back to his true self, nobody's saying that non-Aryans built Europe or America, only that the American system was ECONOMICALLY superior to all the Euopean systems it came from and certainly LASTED the longest time before it was co-opted. All the European high culture did not free them from enough usury to be half as successful as the USA. Military strength is directly proportional to economic strength.
All the great inventors of Europe put together couldn't create enough military strength for Germany to or any other European country to beat the U.S. in any war. This is not because USURY was funding all of them and decided to fund the U.S. military more but because USURY was not sucking the economic blood off of one of them, namely the 19th century USA.
So, if you want to say Hitler's way of getting rid of usury was better, since it was socialistic and people were better taken care of, fine, but to say that the American individualism / Libertarianism 'failed' and produced the shit anti-culture of today is totally dishonest. It did not fail, it was sabotaged, just like NS Germany and Fascist Italy were destroyed by war.
"Between 1820 and 1910 the American dollar RETAINED its purchasing power. In other words, a dollar was still worth a dollar 90 years later."
This isn't true, for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1837 This was then followed by the Civil War.
And America needed France, Russia and Britian, who's combined empires spanned probably most of the world's land mass at that time. And they came in last and didn't do as much as the others.. hell, Canada did more then them in BOTH wars.
Libertarianism is a joke anyway, Pre1913 America was closer to fascism then "Paulism" anyway. They had strict restrictions on banks, monopolies, corporate greed etc. As well as laws that promoted growth.
If you are so pro Jacksonism, maybe you think America should go kill everyone in Alberta and take over the oil sands.
The system based on 19th century economics was growth based in a new unsettled territory hence gave spectacular results. At 300 million people both AI and robotics taking jobs in the future I don't think growth based is wise. Suburu builds a car now with no human inputs. I think past capitalism will have to be left behind. RBG
National Socialist racial thinking is a mixed bag. Parts of National Socialist racial thinking are wholly admirable, other parts despicable and supremacist. The first part of the following paragraph, for example, is wholly admirable. The second part, calling other non-European races 'inferior' and the mixing of blood the 'greatest crime' is supremacist and despicable because it automatically assumes that no other other races are capable of a 'noble soul' :
"Race means to be able to think in a certain way. He who has courage, loyalty and honor, the mark of the German, has the race that should rule in Germany, even if he does not have the physical characteristics of the “Nordic” race. The unity of the noble and a noble body is the goal to which we strive. But we despise those whose noble body carries an ignoble soul. §A variety of related European races have merged in Germany. One trunk grew from these roots. Each race gave its best strength. Each contributed to the German soul We Germans have a fighting spirit, a look to the horizon, the “desire to do a thing for its own sake” of the Nordic race. Another racial soul gave us our cozy old cities and our depth. Yet another racial soul gave us mastery of the magical realm of music. Yet another gave us our ability to organize, and our silent obedience. §We can not hold it against anyone if he carries a variety of racial lines, for the German soul does as well, and created out of it the immeasurable riches which it possesses above all other nations. The greatness of our Reich grew out of this soul. §But the Nordic race must dominate in Germany and shape the soul of each German. It must win out in the breast of each individual. Today our ideal is not the artist or the citizen, but the hero. §Our highest treasure is the soul that we have been given.
He who mixes his blood with that of foreign inferior races ruins the blood and soul that have been given to him to pass on in purity to his children. He makes his children impure and miserable, and commits the greatest crime that he as a National Socialist can commit. §But he who follows the laws of race fulfills the great commandment that only like should be brought together with like, keeping apart those things like fire and water which do not mix."
@ Lugh wrote: "Libertarianism is a joke anyway, Pre1913 America was closer to fascism then "Paulism" anyway. They had strict restrictions on banks, monopolies, corporate greed etc. As well as laws that promoted growth."
The 19th century wasn't the age of Libertarianism by any means; it was just the RELATIVELY freest of system practiced anywhere, for the individual, as a result of Libertarian concepts (not called 'libertarian' but liberal at the time) written into law which were always interfered with other opposing concepts, but not nearly as much as they were in the post 1913 years. A free system did not mean, no 'duties' to the community or your fellow man, in fact, it paradoxically increased these duties. As de Tocqueville wrote:
"I am aware that many of my contemporaries maintain that nations are never their own masters here below, and that they necessarily obey some insurmountable and unintelligent power, arising from anterior events, from their race, or from the soil and climate of their country. Such principles are false and cowardly; such principles can never produce aught but feeble men and pusillanimous nations. Providence has not created mankind entirely independent or entirely free. It is true that around every man a fatal circle is traced beyond which he cannot pass; but within the wide verge of that circle he is powerful and free; as it is with man, so with communities. The nations of our time cannot prevent the conditions of men from becoming equal, but it depends upon themselves whether the principle of equality is to lead them to servitude or freedom, to knowledge or barbarism, to prosperity or wretchedness." The principle of equality is not egalitarianism but 'equality before the law,' equal rights to unequal results that tend equalize physical conditions of people in general, the class distinctions etc. There's no denying that conditions were less unequal between classes in America than in Europe. There's no such thing as equality in nature but there is equalization of certain conditions that happens naturally. The unique thing about National Socialism was that it was a 'socialism' that emphasized inequality and did not seek to equalize but only to correct injustice, same as what Libertarianism, when practiced without compromise, does. Free choice and movement, as long as it's not criminal choice and movement, preserves checks and balances better than direct government intervention which brings the moral prejudice of one group, that of the ruling government faction into the picture. The ruling government faction is only as effective as its supreme leader is 'right-thinking' or moral. In a free system, no such burden of channeling 'right and wrong' is imposed on anyone, only the burden of what the immoral or 'wrong' choice automatically assumes in nature or the economy growing out of nature and human action, when those who see the value of the right way reject it and ostracize it freely.
For example: if you were Fuhrer, how much pornography would you allow ? Would you ban all naked photos of the human body as pornographic ? Would you draw the line at Playboy, Penthouse, Hustler, Swank, Barely 18, Homo porn, etc ? Where would this line be ? Would you draw the line at blow-jobs ? Would you throw guys like Celtic Rectal in prison for talking about butt-sex all the time ? Would you draw the line at nudist books and nude parades like Hitler did or would you draw the line at all pornography and nudity that the Hayes code did in the United States ? And how do you make sure that your successor draws a similar line which is fair and firm and doesn't go overboard in one direction or another ? In other words, how do you legislate a whole people's morality ?
In Libertarian thinking, people's moral degeneracy is their own business UNTIL it demonstrates damage on others. No one is legally or forcefully prevented from being different but no one escapes the wrath of ostracism either since people are allowed to discriminate for any reason on their own property. They are not allowed to go beat the shit out of a guy they don't like, as long as he keeps his degeneracy to himself, but they are allowed to discriminate.
If there's demonstrable damage to the community of individuals, as in 'corporate greed' then there's always IMMEDIATE punishment, initiated force and fraud is NEVER TOLERATED, but if there's no damage but only superior productive ability and the envy of those who cannot match it, then that's tough shit and there is NO RESTRICTION on that productivity to appease this envy, as there is under all types of socialism except Hitler's National Socialism. Hitler did not restrict superior productive ability or ambition only 'greed,' 'greed' being that ambition which damages not 'the community,' a concept divorced from reality, but the community of distinct individuals, which is what actually exists. So, in that sense, Hitler and Mussolini were more similar to Jefferson than otherwise assumed as only Ezra Pound, Wyndham Lewis and a few others identified at the time.
NS was designed in a way that allowed you to go far and have great "freedom" as long as you were a moral upstanding person. As to the matter of porn.. if a child sees a scat video or something and it scars them for life, is that not infringing on their liberty and hurting their future? Furthermore, NS Germany's policy on degeneracy was a reflection on what they did to them under Weimar. There were many who were poisoned to the soul with degeneracy, much like America is today.. and this is most definitely not an easy addiction to kick. NS also followed Libertarian concepts like no land tax, and give interest free loans to home buyers but then they would take it a step further and knock chunks off that loan for every subsequent child. NS does seem more natural, in that if a pack of gazelle does not follow a strict code of nature they risk being destroyed. Having a few sacrifices for the sake of your nation is not a bad thing.. all great nations have done this. Plus in a Libertarian society, with Jews... it's like having a rapist at a nudist colony for the blind..
"Plus in a Libertarian society, with Jews... it's like having a rapist at a nudist colony for the blind.."
Depends on the kind of Libertarianism you have. If it's ANTI-USURY first-&-foremost and anti-all-group-rights, STARTING with civil rights, then you can be as white-separatist as you want to the limit of the fruits of your labor and productive ability. What you can't do is enforce UNEARNED PRIVILEGES based on race.
If one-thousand white separatists come together and buy up property in one area, then THAT amalgamated property becomes literally THEIR TOWN and they can discriminate against whatever or whomever they want in their area. If they don't want blacks in their town, they just put a sorry-no-blacks-allowed sign in front of the town and that's it. If you trespass their property, you're not shot at or anything like, it's like someone trying to enter a black-tie party with T-shirt and jeans on and they're just escorted out. If they come back and start shit, then they're the one's initiating the force and you defending your property.
What you CAN'T do is force the town that springs up right friggin next to them to be the EXACT OPPOSITE where a sorry-no-whites-allowed sign is posted and another one where a non-racist-zone sign is posted.
The only thing Jews can do in a society like this is buy up property with PRODUCTIVE WORK and when they do PRODUCTIVE WORK, then they are no longer Jews. If they buy up lots of property with productive work to then try to INITIATE FORCE & FRAUD again inside those areas, then they become criminals on their own property, just like you would be if you raped somebody in your house. If it turns into a rogue state of douchebag criminals then the national goverment whose only job is to defend against initiatory force steps in with a coalition of all non-criminal states and kicks their ass in.
In Libertarianism it's ONE-PARTY = ONE-PRINCIPLE. The overriding principle is of the non-initiation of force / fraud & immediate self-defense force and punishment for any form of initiated force or fraud that can actually be demonstrated as damage (physical or psychological). You can't enforce your own level of degeneracy or lack of it on anyone else. What you can do is FREELY OSTRACIZE anyone you want.
Like Lugh, Will seems to have some good ideas but lacks in presentation skills.
ReplyDeleteI listened to some shows Will did in the past with Kyle on word connections and that was interesting because Kyle helped keep him on track.
A lot of intelligent people are not able to put their ideas in a coherent package that works on radio. I hope Will can develop his radio presence.
The problem I find with talk radio is that the host is either really smooth with delivery but lacks substance or is really hard to follow but has original ideas.
Thanks for linking to my work zapoper/mamishit.
ReplyDeleteAnon, thank you for the comments, I feel much the same way. My oratory was not the level I would have liked it have been on tonight. First time back on radio in about 6-8 months. I will do my best to improve on my speaking in the future. Thank you for the listenership.
Sorry, but I don't understand this push to talk about Hitler/Mussolini ad nauseam. What is the point? Hitler himself said that National Socialism was not for export. Mussolini didn't have anywhere close to the power that governments have today. After all, he had to contend with the Catholic Church and the King of Italy. Both Italy and Germany were racially unified countries at that time. We are not living in that situation now in most of the western world.
ReplyDeleteGreat job Will. I liked your show, great info. The presentation will come in time!
ReplyDelete@Scorpio
ReplyDeleteThe point is to learn from the only governments in the 20th century that successfully defeated the usurocracy, however shortlived this success ended-up being.
Plus due to all the Alex Jones / Ron Paul BS and frustration, all of these guys, including ZCF, have become Prothink--come-latelies-minus-the-C.I.-lunacy and consider Republics freemasonic Jew systems and also hate libertarianism and consider it a 'Jew' system, completely ignoring the most economically prosperous period in the history of the world, the post-Jackson / pre-1910 USA, the very economic prosperity, the residual remnants of which were the deciding factor in kicking everybody's ass in WWI and WWII both and then kicking everybody else's ass for the rest of the 20th century, in service of the Jews since 1913.
Economic facts of the past are irrelevant to them; Americans having the highest standard of living in the world is also irrelevant; the 'capitalist' system succeeded only by 'exploiting' the working class. The fact that Americans also kicked out the usurocracy is also ignored since it doesn't fit their agendas.
Some of these nutbag dictator wannabes, not the Renegade guys, but that foozball Andre at Total Fascism, Rich from Truth Militia's buddy, was on Carolyn Yeager's show the other day advocating THE DEATH PENALTY for homosexuals, something medieval Iran has and Hitler never had.
Their master-plan is similar to the white nationalists,which is to wait until society goes to shits and then lead all the frustrated and directionless white masses who finally rudely awakened in either deporting all non-whites from the territorial USA or giving them small territories of their own completely segregated and separated from the majority white regions by racial laws.
That's basically their goal but they all bicker about how to go about achieving it. They also like to drool about all the 'traitors' to the cause (basically any individualists out there who dare disagree with them) they will get to execute or punish once they're in power.
Most of the growth came from the Gilded Age. America's economic growth largely came from utilization of untapped natural resources due to new technologies combined with inventors like Tesla and guys like Ford. They also had an influx of Europe's top intellectuals and scientists etc due to the wars and imperialism in Europe at the time.
ReplyDeleteIf anything it was Aryan man getting back to his true self, which I think is the more important thing here in the long run.. not following these semetic religions or falling into economic traps.
As the NSDAP showed though, you can forego the need for the backing of natural resources if you construct an economy that's free of the fluff and the banks.
I doubt Jackson contributed much to the growth, he mostly just killed Indians and sold their land to pay off the Rothschild.
Iconoclast Radio - Interviews 'Deep Shit' Satanist Dev Samael Deval (John Alan Martinson Jr.) - 04 / 13 / 2010
ReplyDeletehttp://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-80448/TS-347983.mp3
Funny as shit blast from the past
@Most of the growth came from the Gilded Age.
ReplyDeleteStatistics reveal otherwise; the growth was absolutely steady and spectacular as proven by the purchasing power of the dollar:
"Between 1820 and 1910 the American dollar RETAINED its purchasing power. In other words, a dollar was still worth a dollar 90 years later.
Within six years of the Federal Reserve Bank being established, the prices between 1914 and 1920 increased by 56 percent !
Since then, there have been 18 recessions, 2 depressions if you count the current one, and the dollar has lost 97% of its value !" --Stephen Goodson
To say that the Rothschild kabbal or 'Freemasons' working for them, willingly let the dollar completely retain its value for a FULL 90 YEARS, is absurd. They were trying to claw back control of the central bank all along, they put the claw in by the civil war and then finagled control by 1913.
As for 'The Aryan man' getting back to his true self, nobody's saying that non-Aryans built Europe or America, only that the American system was ECONOMICALLY superior to all the Euopean systems it came from and certainly LASTED the longest time before it was co-opted. All the European high culture did not free them from enough usury to be half as successful as the USA. Military strength is directly proportional to economic strength.
All the great inventors of Europe put together couldn't create enough military strength for Germany to or any other European country to beat the U.S. in any war. This is not because USURY was funding all of them and decided to fund the U.S. military more but because USURY was not sucking the economic blood off of one of them, namely the 19th century USA.
So, if you want to say Hitler's way of getting rid of usury was better, since it was socialistic and people were better taken care of, fine, but to say that the American individualism / Libertarianism 'failed' and produced the shit anti-culture of today is totally dishonest. It did not fail, it was sabotaged, just like NS Germany and Fascist Italy were destroyed by war.
"Between 1820 and 1910 the American dollar RETAINED its purchasing power. In other words, a dollar was still worth a dollar 90 years later."
ReplyDeleteThis isn't true, for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1837
This was then followed by the Civil War.
And America needed France, Russia and Britian, who's combined empires spanned probably most of the world's land mass at that time. And they came in last and didn't do as much as the others.. hell, Canada did more then them in BOTH wars.
Libertarianism is a joke anyway, Pre1913 America was closer to fascism then "Paulism" anyway. They had strict restrictions on banks, monopolies, corporate greed etc. As well as laws that promoted growth.
If you are so pro Jacksonism, maybe you think America should go kill everyone in Alberta and take over the oil sands.
The system based on 19th century economics was growth based in a new unsettled territory hence gave spectacular results. At 300 million people both AI and robotics taking jobs in the future I don't think growth based is wise. Suburu builds a car now with no human inputs. I think past capitalism will have to be left behind. RBG
ReplyDeleteceltic rebel paints a disturbing homosexual portrait, on super bowl sunday http://pastebin.ru/ubgiQUdN
ReplyDelete@Lugh
ReplyDeleteNational Socialist racial thinking is a mixed bag. Parts of National Socialist racial thinking are wholly admirable, other parts despicable and supremacist. The first part of the following paragraph, for example, is wholly admirable. The second part, calling other non-European races 'inferior' and the mixing of blood the 'greatest crime' is supremacist and despicable because it automatically assumes that no other other races are capable of a 'noble soul' :
"Race means to be able to think in a certain way. He who has courage, loyalty and honor, the mark of the German, has the race that should rule in Germany, even if he does not have the physical characteristics of the “Nordic” race. The unity of the noble and a noble body is the goal to which we strive. But we despise those whose noble body carries an ignoble soul. §A variety of related European races have merged in Germany. One trunk grew from these roots. Each race gave its best strength. Each contributed to the German soul We Germans have a fighting spirit, a look to the horizon, the “desire to do a thing for its own sake” of the Nordic race. Another racial soul gave us our cozy old cities and our depth. Yet another racial soul gave us mastery of the magical realm of music. Yet another gave us our ability to organize, and our silent obedience. §We can not hold it against anyone if he carries a variety of racial lines, for the German soul does as well, and created out of it the immeasurable riches which it possesses above all other nations. The greatness of our Reich grew out of this soul. §But the Nordic race must dominate in Germany and shape the soul of each German. It must win out in the breast of each individual. Today our ideal is not the artist or the citizen, but the hero. §Our highest treasure is the soul that we have been given.
He who mixes his blood with that of foreign inferior races ruins the blood and soul that have been given to him to pass on in purity to his children. He makes his children impure and miserable, and commits the greatest crime that he as a National Socialist can commit. §But he who follows the laws of race fulfills the great commandment that only like should be brought together with like, keeping apart those things like fire and water which do not mix."
http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/glauben.htm
@ Lugh wrote: "Libertarianism is a joke anyway, Pre1913 America was closer to fascism then "Paulism" anyway. They had strict restrictions on banks, monopolies, corporate greed etc. As well as laws that promoted growth."
ReplyDeleteThe 19th century wasn't the age of Libertarianism by any means; it was just the RELATIVELY freest of system practiced anywhere, for the individual, as a result of Libertarian concepts (not called 'libertarian' but liberal at the time) written into law which were always interfered with other opposing concepts, but not nearly as much as they were in the post 1913 years. A free system did not mean, no 'duties' to the community or your fellow man, in fact, it paradoxically increased these duties. As de Tocqueville wrote:
"I am aware that many of my contemporaries maintain that nations are never their own masters here below, and that they necessarily obey some insurmountable and unintelligent power, arising from anterior events, from their race, or from the soil and climate of their country.
Such principles are false and cowardly; such principles can never produce aught but feeble men and pusillanimous nations. Providence has not created mankind entirely independent or entirely free. It is true that around every man a fatal circle is traced beyond which he cannot pass; but within the wide verge of that circle he is powerful and free; as it is with man, so with communities.
The nations of our time cannot prevent the conditions of men from becoming equal, but it depends upon themselves whether the principle of equality is to lead them to servitude or freedom, to knowledge or barbarism, to prosperity or wretchedness."
The principle of equality is not egalitarianism but 'equality before the law,' equal rights to unequal results that tend equalize physical conditions of people in general, the class distinctions etc. There's no denying that conditions were less unequal between classes in America than in Europe. There's no such thing as equality in nature but there is equalization of certain conditions that happens naturally. The unique thing about National Socialism was that it was a 'socialism' that emphasized inequality and did not seek to equalize but only to correct injustice, same as what Libertarianism, when practiced without compromise, does. Free choice and movement, as long as it's not criminal choice and movement, preserves checks and balances better than direct government intervention which brings the moral prejudice of one group, that of the ruling government faction into the picture. The ruling government faction is only as effective as its supreme leader is 'right-thinking' or moral. In a free system, no such burden of channeling 'right and wrong' is imposed on anyone, only the burden of what the immoral or 'wrong' choice automatically assumes in nature or the economy growing out of nature and human action, when those who see the value of the right way reject it and ostracize it freely.
For example: if you were Fuhrer, how much pornography would you allow ? Would you ban all naked photos of the human body as pornographic ? Would you draw the line at Playboy, Penthouse, Hustler, Swank, Barely 18, Homo porn, etc ? Where would this line be ? Would you draw the line at blow-jobs ? Would you throw guys like Celtic Rectal in prison for talking about butt-sex all the time ? Would you draw the line at nudist books and nude parades like Hitler did or would you draw the line at all pornography and nudity that the Hayes code did in the United States ? And how do you make sure that your successor draws a similar line which is fair and firm and doesn't go overboard in one direction or another ? In other words, how do you legislate a whole people's morality ?
ReplyDeleteIn Libertarian thinking, people's moral degeneracy is their own business UNTIL it demonstrates damage on others. No one is legally or forcefully prevented from being different but no one escapes the wrath of ostracism either since people are allowed to discriminate for any reason on their own property. They are not allowed to go beat the shit out of a guy they don't like, as long as he keeps his degeneracy to himself, but they are allowed to discriminate.
If there's demonstrable damage to the community of individuals, as in 'corporate greed' then there's always IMMEDIATE punishment, initiated force and fraud is NEVER TOLERATED, but if there's no damage but only superior productive ability and the envy of those who cannot match it, then that's tough shit and there is NO RESTRICTION on that productivity to appease this envy, as there is under all types of socialism except Hitler's National Socialism. Hitler did not restrict superior productive ability or ambition only 'greed,' 'greed' being that ambition which damages not 'the community,' a concept divorced from reality, but the community of distinct individuals, which is what actually exists. So, in that sense, Hitler and Mussolini were more similar to Jefferson than otherwise assumed as only Ezra Pound, Wyndham Lewis and a few others identified at the time.
NS was designed in a way that allowed you to go far and have great "freedom" as long as you were a moral upstanding person.
ReplyDeleteAs to the matter of porn.. if a child sees a scat video or something and it scars them for life, is that not infringing on their liberty and hurting their future? Furthermore, NS Germany's policy on degeneracy was a reflection on what they did to them under Weimar. There were many who were poisoned to the soul with degeneracy, much like America is today.. and this is most definitely not an easy addiction to kick.
NS also followed Libertarian concepts like no land tax, and give interest free loans to home buyers but then they would take it a step further and knock chunks off that loan for every subsequent child.
NS does seem more natural, in that if a pack of gazelle does not follow a strict code of nature they risk being destroyed.
Having a few sacrifices for the sake of your nation is not a bad thing.. all great nations have done this.
Plus in a Libertarian society, with Jews... it's like having a rapist at a nudist colony for the blind..
@Lugh
ReplyDelete"Plus in a Libertarian society, with Jews... it's like having a rapist at a nudist colony for the blind.."
Depends on the kind of Libertarianism you have. If it's ANTI-USURY first-&-foremost and anti-all-group-rights, STARTING with civil rights, then you can be as white-separatist as you want to the limit of the fruits of your labor and productive ability. What you can't do is enforce UNEARNED PRIVILEGES based on race.
If one-thousand white separatists come together and buy up property in one area, then THAT amalgamated property becomes literally THEIR TOWN and they can discriminate against whatever or whomever they want in their area. If they don't want blacks in their town, they just put a sorry-no-blacks-allowed sign in front of the town and that's it. If you trespass their property, you're not shot at or anything like, it's like someone trying to enter a black-tie party with T-shirt and jeans on and they're just escorted out. If they come back and start shit, then they're the one's initiating the force and you defending your property.
What you CAN'T do is force the town that springs up right friggin next to them to be the EXACT OPPOSITE where a sorry-no-whites-allowed sign is posted and another one where a non-racist-zone sign is posted.
The only thing Jews can do in a society like this is buy up property with PRODUCTIVE WORK and when they do PRODUCTIVE WORK, then they are no longer Jews. If they buy up lots of property with productive work to then try to INITIATE FORCE & FRAUD again inside those areas, then they become criminals on their own property, just like you would be if you raped somebody in your house. If it turns into a rogue state of douchebag criminals then the national goverment whose only job is to defend against initiatory force steps in with a coalition of all non-criminal states and kicks their ass in.
In Libertarianism it's ONE-PARTY = ONE-PRINCIPLE. The overriding principle is of the non-initiation of force / fraud & immediate self-defense force and punishment for any form of initiated force or fraud that can actually be demonstrated as damage (physical or psychological). You can't enforce your own level of degeneracy or lack of it on anyone else. What you can do is FREELY OSTRACIZE anyone you want.