#1 Capitalism Is An Abject Failure Thread

[Joe_Smith]

Gary North is a con artist and libertarian fanatic. It's like using an article by Karl Marx to make a point about capitalism.

Technological advances are a simple fact of Aryan nature and independent of capitalism. There were many remarkable technological achievements in the USSR, such as nuclear powered plants and space travel, it doesn't mean living under communism didn't suck ass for a lot of people.

Progress is non-existent. The world isn't progressive, that's ironically a Marxist myth (historical materialism). Every single phenomenon happening today has a historical parallel, as world events are cyclical in their scope.

Growth? Planned economies like the USSR grew at insanely fast rates while great depression era capitalist economies were shrinking with equal momentum. So what?

Freedom? You can't define it, so it doesn't mean jack shit. William Wallace, Che Guevara, and Thomas Pain all talked about freedom, yet their definitions were all completely different.

Technology? The Third Reich has far more advanced technology than the plutocratic/capitalist west. Everything from stealth technology, synthetic fuel, to rockets, to automatic rifles are based on Nationalsocialist work. There was more innovation, pound for pound, in 12 years of racial socialism than in hundreds of years of capitalism.

[Joe_Smith]

Originally Posted by Sam Emerson

Bottom line: Real socialism (which no European country practices today) is the worst system ever. Rule by gangsters is better than socialism. Monarchy is better than socialism. Anarchy is better than socialism. Socialism means the rulers get to decide everything. What you eat. What you read. Where you live. Where you work.

I don't care if the bureaucrats are Whites or Jews, it still sucks.

So food monopolies like Monsanto and big agribusiness don't decide what you eat? Big jew publishing companies don't decide what you read? Fickle and fleeting job pressures of capitalism don't decide where you live?

No matter what system you live in, someone else holding factors outside of your power is deciding more or less a lot of your life.

The public would've loved to further develop Tesla's tower, a marvel that would've harnessed unlimited energy from the atmosphere. But the big oil companies got together and bulldozered it! The Romans and Greeks wouldn't have done that. Probably neither the Feudal Monarchs. But under the dictatorship of money, IE capitalism, that's what a "free market" really looks like

[Sam Emerson]

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

Technological advances are a simple fact of Aryan nature and independent of capitalism.

Progress is non-existent.

It's impressive how totally full of shit you are.

[Sam Emerson]

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

So food monopolies like Monsanto and big agribusiness don't decide what you eat? Big jew publishing companies don't decide what you read?

In capitalist America I can buy corporate food or organic food grown on small farms. It's my choice. There's no monopoly on food. Big Jew publishing isn't deciding what I'm reading now. Publishing is more open today than it's ever been thanks to the internet and cheap mobile readers.

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

No matter what system you live in, someone else holding factors outside of your power is deciding more or less a lot of your life.

So might as well go all the way and have a totalitarian state, is that it? No thanks, some choice is better than no choice at all.

[Sam Emerson]

These are projects or businesses that can charge monopoly prices where state intervention can help the consumer.

Bridges
Roads
Electricity
Water

These are businesses that only enjoy monopoly power because of government regulations.

Medicine
Pharmaceutical companies
Entertainment (using copyright)
Software (same problem)
Broadcasting (FCC licensing)
Lawyers

Some technologies have a temporary monopoly because of patents, but it's short lived. The "monopoly" of Walmart in a small town where local retailers have gone out of business is undermined by Amazon and other online sellers and the ability to drive to another retailer.

Increasing wealth and technology (plenty of automobiles for example) make it much harder to create local monopolies. It's been a long time since anyone owed their soul to the company store.

[Fico]

Capitalisam today is product of ideology liberalism known as "liberal capitalism",so If we know this we can conclude why he is "abject failure". Liberal capitalism is for liberals,people who don't care about its own race,state and folk and who look always their interests but not interests group of people who is ther part,he don't look the "common good" then just "own good". Liberal capitalists isn't substantially If they will sell bad product or not,only what is substantially for them is that product must be sold,for example "junk food",If people eat this way today capitalist wouldn't continue produce this trash? If reigned shortage of water why today capitalist woudn't lifted the price of water? If today capitalist see good opportunity for be wealth,why he wouldn't married for other race who have more wealth than he have? There are many other example but I think that this is enough.

How capitalism can work? Only If people cange liberalism as ideology with some ideology who includes its own race,state and volk. Same mean is with socialism (not socialism who promote Marx). All others are in power of state who must hold rule as organization of people who folloe ideology who includes of race,state and folk. Easy for tell but hard for do,all is on ideology.

[Joe_Smith]

Originally Posted by Fico

Capitalisam today is product of ideology liberalism known as "liberal capitalism",so If we know this we can conclude why he is "abject failure". Liberal capitalism is for liberals,people who don't care about its own race,state and folk and who look always their interests but not interests group of people who is ther part,he don't look the "common good" then just "own good". Liberal capitalists isn't substantially If they will sell bad product or not,only what is substantially for them is that product must be sold,for example "junk food",If people eat this way today capitalist wouldn't continue produce this trash? If reigned shortage of water why today capitalist woudn't lifted the price of water? If today capitalist see good opportunity for be wealth,why he wouldn't married for other race who have more wealth than he have? There are many other example but I think that this is enough.

How capitalism can work? Only If people cange liberalism as ideology with some ideology who includes its own race,state and volk. Same mean is with socialism (not socialism who promote Marx). All others are in power of state who must hold rule as organization of people who folloe ideology who includes of race,state and folk. Easy for tell but hard for do,all is on ideology.

Most people in America, including those on the "hard right", really have no clue what a dystopia they live in. Sam Emerson probably doesn't even own a passport. If you go to less materialistic and more socialistic countries first hand, you'll realize the societies and men capitalism builds are sick and barely worthy of life.

Libertarians are assholes. Libertarians pretending to be racial nationalists are one of the reasons organizing will never go anywhere. Libertarian thought attracts people like Jared Taylor, Pat Buchanan, and Sam Francis, so why does Alex Linder complain when that's all American WN has to offer?

[313Chris]

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

Most people in America, including those on the "hard right", really have no clue what a dystopia they live in.

Put a sock in it. Every white person in America can see damn well that the America of their fathers and grandfathers has been usurped and destroyed, and every white person in America is righteously furious about it. And the blame sure as hell doesn't lie with capitialism.

You don't have a clue how lucky you are that you live in a country that tolerates your endless mouthiness and protects your right be so.

Sam Emerson probably doesn't even own a passport. If you go to less materialistic and more socialistic countries first hand, you'll realize the societies and men capitalism builds are sick and barely worthy of life.

I own a passport and I've spent plenty of time in socialist countries like Japan and Canada, and neither society is any bit healthier than America's, be it in terms of economic stability or spiritual health. You're the one who comes off with a superficial comprehension of the rest of the world. Just how many fuckin' stamps are on your passport, comrade Joe?

Libertarians are assholes. Libertarians pretending to be racial nationalists are one of the reasons organizing will never go anywhere. Libertarian thought attracts people like Jared Taylor, Pat Buchanan, and Sam Francis, so why does Alex Linder complain when that's all American WN has to offer?

Adolescent malcontented boys (you) who romanticize authoritarian socialist rule without ever having experienced living under it, are assholes. Communists pretending to be racial nationalists (you) and subvert racial nationalism to your backward worldview, might almost be a reason organizing will never go anywhere, but truthfully you're too insignificant to affect anything either way.

[Joe_Smith]

Originally Posted by 313Chris

Put a sock in it. Every white person in America can see damn well that the America of their fathers and grandfathers has been usurped and destroyed, and every white person in America is righteously furious about it. And the blame sure as hell doesn't lie with capitialism.

Most white people in America don't see themselves as a white person, and outside of rural areas, don't even see themselves as Americans. People see themselves as individuals pursuing happiness, with everyone around them, including their racial kin, being obstacles in this pursuit.

You prefer having the aristocracy of the sword replaced by Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian?

You don't have a clue how lucky you are that you live in a country that tolerates your endless mouthiness and protects your right be so.

Why don't you dig up Ronald Reagan and blow him already.

I own a passport and I've spent plenty of time in socialist countries like Japan and Canada, and neither society is any bit healthier than America's, be it in terms of economic stability or spiritual health. You're the one who comes off with a superficial comprehension of the rest of the world. Just how many fuckin' stamps are on your passport, comrade Joe?

So you'd rather be a white person in America over a Japanese in Japan? As bad as Japan as (they are, after all, underneath a Zionist occupation), it's still a healthier society than anything in the West.

When times are tough in Japan, immigrants get booted out and jobs "Japanese don't want to do" are done by...Japanese. In America, the majority of "job growth" goes to non-white immigrants, in both the blue collar and white collar fields.

Adolescent malcontented boys (you) who romanticize authoritarian socialist rule without ever having experienced living under it, are assholes. Communists pretending to be racial nationalists (you) and subvert racial nationalism to your backward worldview, might almost be a reason organizing will never go anywhere, but truthfully you're too insignificant to affect anything either way.

By your definition, Mussolini was a communist pretending to be racial nationalist. Who do you think is dumber, the man who put into motion a rebirth of Western civilization, or 313Chris a person who has a flag of Detroit as their avatar?

Our definitions of freedom are different. Your definition of freedom is probably the freedom to be covered in tattoos (judging from how dumb you sound, I'm going to guess this is you) and watch Asian porn. My definition of freedom is freedom from job instability, freedom from exploitation, and freedom from living for nothing except to work.

[313Chris]

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

Most white people in America don't see themselves as a white person, and outside of rural areas, don't even see themselves as Americans.

Really? Unemployed little rodent. Then why do whites reliably prefer to live in white communities? Why did so many white Americans show up at the southwestern border recently, waving American flags, and protesting the federally-enforced invasion of America by brown people? Your big useless mouth is open so much of the fuckin' time that it's blocking your own eyesight. Idiot.

People see themselves as individuals pursuing happiness, with everyone around them, including their racial kin, being obstacles in this pursuit.

Because people are individuals, you little stupid shit. They aren't insects in a hive, with their every action directed by a queen, despite how much you wish it was so.

You're damn right people are pursuing happiness. It's right and normal and it's what our founding fathers intended. Pursuit, shit-for-brains, not entitlement. You want something? Go out and work for it. Can't find work? Then adapt. Hustle. Find a fucking way. That's what white men and women have been doing since the last ice age. Try it sometime, Joe. Instead of crying for The State to change your red diaper for you.

You prefer having the aristocracy of the sword replaced by Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian?

Why don't you dig up Ronald Reagan and blow him already.

You can shove your obnoxious similes up your mothers ass sideways. Quasi-semitic little fuckstain. Come run that shit mouth of yours directly in front of me. I'll gladly put you out of your misery.

So you'd rather be a white person in America over a Japanese in Japan?

You're damn right I would, cocksucker. If you'd spent a couple years in Japan like I have, you'd understand why. But you live in your parents' basement, so you can't speak to a fuckin' thing.

As bad as Japan as (they are, after all, underneath a Zionist occupation), it's still a healthier society than anything in the West.

No they aren't, and no it's not. Japan want's the US military to stay situated there, so they don't have to allocate huge sums of tax revenue for a defense budget. Dumbass.

And if you'd ever spent time in the country which you're making uninformed statements about, you 'd know that sexual perversion, pedophilia and child sexual abuse is utterly rampant in Japan, often going unreported, that Japan has the 8th highest suicide rate in the world (America is #33, fuckwit) and that the Japs have for all intents stopped reproducing. But do go on. Really, no one is laughing at your stupid ass.

When times are tough in Japan, immigrants get booted out and jobs "Japanese don't want to do" are done by...Japanese.

Wrong again, genius. When the times are tough in Japan, they open immigration to ethnic Japanese from Brazil and Argentina, or failing that, they bring it in from the third world like everyone else. Iraqi's for example, are everywhere in Japan, and there's an entire neighborhood in Tokyo that's been taken over by niggers. Get out of your house and get some fresh air.

In America, the majority of "job growth" goes to non-white immigrants, in both the blue collar and white collar fields.

So fuckin' what? Lazy little bastard. Show some initiative and work for yourself. You want everything guaranteed to you, you self-entitled white nigger? Fine. I don't, and neither does any other self-respecting white person.

By your definition, Mussolini was a communist pretending to be racial nationalist.

Fuck Mussolini, and fuck you. Mussolini was a vainglorious buffoon who got kicked out of the Communist party, so he invented one of his own. I piss on everything he stood for, and I piss on your phony persona too.

Who do you think is dumber, the man who put into motion a rebirth of Western civilization, or 313Chris a person who has a flag of Detroit as their avatar?

Mussolini got his ass handed to him by the country you despise, and then got hanged by his own countrymen. 313Chris works hard, fights hard, earns decent money and enjoys his life. And your laughable avatar looks like it came from some comic book. Another reason nobody takes you seriously.

Our definitions of freedom are different.

You neither know what freedom is, or could ever appreciate it, because your a communist.

Your definition of freedom is probably the freedom to be covered in tattoos (judging from how dumb you sound, I'm going to guess this is you) and watch Asian porn.

Oh go fuck yourself already. I'd absolutely love to put that worthless mouth of yours through the fuckin' pavement, but then I remind myself, boy, that you're projecting your own dysfunctional personal lifestyle onto the person standing in disagreement with you.

My definition of freedom is freedom from job instability, freedom from exploitation, and freedom from living for nothing except to work.

Yeah, you want the "freedom" to be the forever foot-licking subject to some perfumed, inbred, trash who wear's faggoty jewels on his head. We get it.

[Joe_Smith]

Originally Posted by 313Chris

Really? Unemployed little rodent. Then why do whites reliably prefer to live in white communities?

The problem is whites in America don't lay down roots in any of these white communities. When they are infested with muds, they just pick up and move. People in this society move like gypsies, how many times have you moved?

When you don't lay down any roots or appreciate your surroundings and community in a way other than "if I live in a white area I won't be shot at" your community isn't going to stay that way for very long.

Why did so many white Americans show up at the southwestern border recently, waving American flags, and protesting the federally-enforced invasion of America by brown people?

Ask them if it has anything to do with their race and they'll deny it. In fact, if highly intelligent and attractive French people were pouring over the border tomorrow fleeing the nigger invasion of their country, they'd all come out against the "frogs" just to show how the Snapple Iced Tea Party isn't "racist".

Those MS-13 members are going to be in America, settle down on their dime in their communities, and they won't do a damn thing about it. This is thanks to a combination of being stupid and being a coward, two traits capitalism favors. You see, when people make feel-good abstractions like "the pursuit of happiness" their ideology, Jews can make examples of them by disrupting their immediate pursuit of happiness (which usually means, making money for soulless people). When Aryans come together as a group based on something tangible and real, and think tribally (AKA socialist) like Jews, then the game changes.

Your big useless mouth is open so much of the fuckin' time that it's blocking your own eyesight. Idiot.

Yeah, I'm talking to you. If that is so devastating to your micro self-esteem you try to raise up with money, why are you engaging me in conversation? Why not just go hang out with a therapist you can pay to nod their head and tell you how bright you are?

Because people are individuals, you little stupid shit. They aren't insects in a hive, with their every action directed by a queen, despite how much you wish it was so.

I know people aren't insects in a hive, that's why I'm an anti-capitalist. I don't know where you get that only socialism has hierarchies and division of labor, capitalism's are stricter and far less fluid.

If you're an anarchist, then stop wasting my time. If you're a person who lives in reality, than you'd realize all systems have hierarchies and pyramid shaped power structures, especially capitalism. The question here isn't if, but how we will choose leaders. I think it should be based on merit, you think it should be that 999 nigger from the awful Godfather's Pizza.

You're damn right people are pursuing happiness. It's right and normal and it's what our founding fathers intended. Pursuit, shit-for-brains, not entitlement. You want something? Go out and work for it. Can't find work? Then adapt. Hustle. Find a fucking way. That's what white men and women have been doing since the last ice age. Try it sometime, Joe. Instead of crying for The State to change your red diaper for you.

I am finding a way and am working, but that isn't the point. It's not that I don't have it in me to adapt and survive. It's that it doesn't have to be that way, and all that energy and time wasted "hustling" could be used for things that actually make life worth living. Few craftsmen and farmers had to "hustle" in 17th century Europe.

Blaming the 10's of millions of whites who are unemployed and actually trying to find work is some real anti-social bullshit. It also shows how you live in your own little bubble and actually think the world revolves around whatever little scam you got working for you. As soon as a narcissistic man-baby like you loses your job and start eating through your savings with no solution in sight, then suddenly I doubt you'll be complaining about socialism. Why? Because you're a mental midget and a selfish moron. While you're riding a, in today's economy, rare small scale boom of capitalism in your own life, you don't give a shit about other whites. But when things dry up, suddenly you'll be expecting everyone to help. I've met dozens of people like you in my life.

I doubt you've ever turned down an unemployment check, Chrissy poo. Just like your kike role model Ayn Rand who collected social security checks.

You can shove your obnoxious similes up your mothers ass sideways. Quasi-semitic little fuckstain. Come run that shit mouth of yours directly in front of me. I'll gladly put you out of your misery.

Take it easy B-Rabbit. It's really terrifying to have someone challenge me to a fight on an internet forum, but since this is a big boy thread, I think you should use your indoor voice.

It's great to have internet Vin Diesels irrationally lashing out at people, by and large, on "their" side. I really hope you believe in all that patriotarded crap you spout because it'll eventually bring you away from nationalist politics and send you to go disrupt our foes with your weed like existence. It would be amusing for you to get flashbacks about what uncle Mike did to your no-no places behind the shed that hot 4th of July in 83' and then going postal at the Republican Party Convention.

No they aren't, and no it's not. Japan want's the US military to stay situated there, so they don't have to allocate huge sums of tax revenue for a defense budget. Dumbass.

They don't want ZOG in their country. ZOG wants ZOG in their country. Japan has made multiple attempts to create an army, but occupation accords don't let them. The United States doesn't want a re-armed Japan because that would upset it's domination in East Asia and possibly. Japan wants an army, it's China and South Korea who don't.

But feel free to keep believing in Chuck Norris' interpretation of world events.

And if you'd ever spent time in the country which you're making uninformed statements about, you 'd know that sexual perversion, pedophilia and child sexual abuse is utterly rampant in Japan, often going unreported, that Japan has the 8th highest suicide rate in the world (America is #33, fuckwit) and that the Japs have for all intents stopped reproducing. But do go on. Really, no one is laughing at your stupid ass.

Haiti has the second lowest suicide rate (109). America is also, alongside Russia, the world's top distributor but especially consumer of child pornography. There's no doubt Japs are weird, especially that tentacle porn crap, but to pretend pedophilia and kiddy porn are more prevalent there than in the Kwa is completely unfounded.

The reproduction issue is a symptom of feminism in Japan, and feminism as much as it pains bolsheviks, is an inevitable product of capitalism.

Wrong again, genius. When the times are tough in Japan, they open immigration to ethnic Japanese from Brazil and Argentina, or failing that, they bring it in from the third world like everyone else. Iraqi's for example, are everywhere in Japan, and there's an entire neighborhood in Tokyo that's been taken over by niggers. Get out of your house and get some fresh air.

So what? There's niggers everywhere on earth except maybe Antarctica, but I bet America's "diverse" work force will help bring some color to those poor penguins.

Japan is still infinite times more homogenous than most countries in Europe and definitely far more than any country in the new world.

So fuckin' what? Lazy little bastard. Show some initiative and work for yourself. You want everything guaranteed to you, you self-entitled white nigger? Fine. I don't, and neither does any other self-respecting white person.

Work for yourself? You mean do what every heroic WOP and mick in the Northeast does, which is buy a van and hire some Mexicans to shamelessly rip off old ladies needing help changing a sheetrock board? I could do that tomorrow if I wanted to . But unlike you, I live my beliefs even if it hurts my pocket book. Hypocrisy is the most Jewish, and hence most despicable, trait that a man can have.

Fuck Mussolini, and fuck you. Mussolini was a vainglorious buffoon who got kicked out of the Communist party, so he invented one of his own. I piss on everything he stood for, and I piss on your phony persona too.

HEY BROOO SAY THAT TO MUSSOLINIS FACE BRAHH I BET YOU WOULDNT DO THAT IF YOU LIVED IN THE 30's BRAHH HED LIKE KICK YOUR ASS BRAHH.

Mussolini got his ass handed to him by the country you despise, and then got hanged by his own countrymen. 313Chris works hard, fights hard, earns decent money and enjoys his life. And your laughable avatar looks like it came from some comic book. Another reason nobody takes you seriously.

Oh wow America, virtually untouched by the war, unites with the Soviet Union, Britain and France, gets on top of the dogpile on top of Italy and Germany, and still almost loses.

Kwans can't differentiate between real heroes and Hollywood heroes, and you're a great example of that. Put down the Tom Clancy and read some actual food for thought: http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goeb35.htm

You neither know what freedom is, or could ever appreciate it, because your a communist.

Define freedom. I've asked 10 times in this thread alone, and still nobody can define it. You don't have an argument, you just have vacant pretty words, like a broad.

Oh go fuck yourself already. I'd absolutely love to put that worthless mouth of yours through the fuckin' pavement, but then I remind myself, boy, that you're projecting your own dysfunctional personal lifestyle onto the person standing in disagreement with you.

It's ok Chris, I won't let Uncle Mike hurt you anymore. What he did behind that shed to your private place was not your fault. "Projection" and other unfounded kike babble don't exist.

Yeah, you want the "freedom" to be the forever foot-licking subject to some perfumed, inbred, trash who wear's faggoty jewels on his head. We get it.

As bad as your exagerration is, that's still better than being a subject of Lloyd Blankfein and Sumner Redstone.

[Sam Emerson]

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

Define freedom. I've asked 10 times in this thread alone, and still nobody can define it.

Self determination. A slave with a totalitarian master (Mao or Stalin for example) has almost none, and would have absolutely none if the master had the power to control their thoughts. Hypothetically the richest man in the world living in a country he owned would have the most. Short of that the most freedom an ordinary person has is to live in a country with the smallest possible government with other people who respect property.

Freedom requires reciprocity. You can't be free in a town (or country) full of meddling busybodies. You can't be free in a town full of criminals either.

All of this freedom is relative, of course. If you have two towns with identical populations and laws except one prohibits alcohol and one does not the town without prohibition is freer.

Libertarians want a freedom that doesn't factor in race. If you factor race in and look at the history of freedom only Whites have the respect for life and property and inclination to mind their own business freedom requires. All other races are too violent (niggers) and dishonest (Asians) to create the culture of reciprocal respect that is the foundation of a relatively free society.

Getting back to the world's richest man, if socialism could make everyone wealthier than they are under capitalism then it might be argued that by giving up some self determination you would gain more resources and thus more choice in other parts of your life. This was Karl Marx's dream, a rich collective society where people could do what they wanted most of the time, freed from the misery of factory labor.

It didn't work out.

Historically capitalist economies have not only exercised less control over people's personal lives, they've also provided more resources per capita even to the least productive.

For maximum freedom a mostly capitalist all-White society is best.

[Joe_Smith]

Here is a chart demonstrating that there is no correlation between CEO compensation and actual performance. Another Jewish/capitalist lie busted (chart in link):

http://www.businessweek.com/articles...-pretty-random

With all the public chatter about exorbitant executive compensation and income inequality, it’s useful to look at the relationship between chief executive officer pay and corporate performance. Typically, when the subject of their big pay packages arises, CEOs—usually through their spokespeople—say they are paid for performance. Does data back that up?

An analysis of compensation data publicly released by Equilar shows little correlation between CEO pay and company performance. Equilar ranked the salaries of 200 highly paid CEOs. When compared to metrics such as revenue, profitability, and stock return, the scattering of data looks pretty random, as though performance doesn’t matter. The comparison makes it look as if there is zero relationship between pay and performance.

Check the comparison of the ranking of the 200 CEOs Equilar looked at to their company’s stock returns, as seen on the chart below. The trend line—the average of how much a CEO’s ranking is affected by stock performance—shows that a CEO’s income ranking is only 1 percent based on the company’s stock return. That means that 99 percent of the ranking has nothing to do with performance at all. (The size and profitability of companies didn’t affect the random patterns.)

If “pay for performance” was really a factor in compensating this group of CEOs, we’d see compensation and stock performance moving in tandem. The points on the chart would be arranged in a straight, diagonal line. They certainly wouldn’t look like this:

[Joe_Smith]

Originally Posted by Sam Emerson

Self determination.

You can't define an empty, abstract buzz word with yet another empty, abstract buzz word.

A slave with a totalitarian master (Mao or Stalin for example) has almost none, and would have absolutely none if the master had the power to control their thoughts.

What difference does it make if your totalitarian master is a political leader or your boss? Usually people's bosses tell them how to dress, act, and think about things, and if you don't conform you lose your access to housing, food, and other necessities.

Mao and Stalin are extreme examples , but if you look at the Bolsheviks that came after that they weren't as harsh. You can be a dissident in Cuba, for example, you'll just be shut out from a lot of opportunities and demonized by society. The same shit happens in a capitalist society depending on interests, etc, so how is that any different?

Without a 3rd party, the state, working as a mediator between workers and employees, they're going to continue trying to fuck each other over (and in unrestrained capitalism, the fucking is going in one direction).

Hypothetically the richest man in the world living in a country he owned would have the most.

This is the fantasy of all angry nerds who call themselves libertarians, and it's a fantasy that will never come true.

Short of that the most freedom an ordinary person has is to live in a country with the smallest possible government with other people who respect property.

What's your point? In East Germany people owned property, often even summer houses to compliment their regular ones. What does government have to do with respecting private property, if even many commies did it?

I think government regulating obscenity is good. Government advancing expensive yet very relevant projects private enterprise won't touch is good. Government safety nets (with the footnote of also providing opportunities to become productive again if possible) for people to rebound are good. These are issues private enterprise won't touch, because it is an individual body independent of the collective well-being.

There's a lot of people out there, some of them whites, who if they saw you hanging from a cliff would step on your fingers for the hell of it. If the government were to do that, in a non-Jewish society, it would simply be shot at or voted out, because it is an open, transparent body, not a private individual.

Freedom requires reciprocity. You can't be free in a town (or country) full of meddling busybodies. You can't be free in a town full of criminals either.

Every town before, during, and one day after capitalism will be full of meddling busybodies. What does this have to do with the state?

All of this freedom is relative, of course. If you have two towns with identical populations and laws except one prohibits alcohol and one does not the town without prohibition is freer.

Why? I don't believe in prohibition at all, but what if one of the towns has a serious problem with alcoholism and the other one doesn't?

Libertarians want a freedom that doesn't factor in race. If you factor race in and look at the history of freedom only Whites have the respect for life and property and inclination to mind their own business freedom requires. All other races are too violent (niggers) and dishonest (Asians) to create the culture of reciprocal respect that is the foundation of a relatively free society.

If you look at history, going back to even cro-magnon times, Whites are natural socialists.

If people of European descent are this great, then what would be your problem with such great and trustworthy people wielding the power of a state? And if you think a state corrupts man, why would you trust this same man to run your society (including its politics) via capital? No matter what, someone's going to be running society, and someone's going to be intervening in your daily life.

Would you prefer it be Plato's Guardians or Wall Street? Whose got more incentive to cut corners?

Getting back to the world's richest man, if socialism could make everyone wealthier than they are under capitalism then it might be argued that by giving up some self determination you would gain more resources and thus more choice in other parts of your life. This was Karl Marx's dream, a rich collective society where people could do what they wanted most of the time, freed from the misery of factory labor.

People in Sweden live, economically speaking, better than Americans. Same with people in other far more regulated economies like Australia. I could even make the argument that, despite the whacky liberalism and Jewish thought-crime laws, Canadians as a whole probably live less stressful (at least job-related) and not much less economically prosperous lives.

Karl Marx's "dream" was not something he came up with. It was the reality before the industrial revolution. How do you justify that despite massive leaps in technology and increases in outputs, wages have dropped and we are working more hours? If that's "progress", you can have it.

It didn't work out.

Historically capitalist economies have not only exercised less control over people's personal lives, they've also provided more resources per capita even to the least productive.

Tell that to the 19th century Irish who lost half their population due to starvation because British plutocrats, who believed in the same bunk economic theories as you do, thought giving them the (rotting) corn in the stockades for free would "upset market forces" and risk slightly hurting their profits.

Capitalism has killed as many millions of white people as communism. The good times are "ok" for many people under capitalism, but the "good times" of the 60's and 70's were ok for many people in North Korea as well. That doesn't mean anything. We're not talking about the high points, we're talking about how both capitalism and communism have failed because the latter couldn't survive the low-points, and the former will soon fully collapse once the trillions in backed up usury that keep this awful system running can no longer sustain it.

For maximum freedom a mostly capitalist all-White society is best.

90% of whites on earth don't agree with you, and never will. Some baby-boomers who listen to neo-con kikes like Michael Savage or Rush Limbaugh might support it temporarily...until they lose their jobs or get late on their mortgage, then they'll want the nanny state again. How many millions of whites in the Midwest etc actually voted for a nigger over a white Romney under the false impression that the nigger was going to do something about the economy and crack down on Wall Street? This (utterly failed) attempt to combine libertarianism with European nationalism is a hare-brained philosophy that only exists in America. It's in the same category as Christian Zionism or putting ketchup on spaghetti, two other ridiculous products of "American ingenuity".

If, IF, there is ever a white revolution in America, you better bet your ass economic anarchists who don't like Jews because they're business compettition won't be leading it. If you want to be on the wrong side of history, then that's your problem. I just hope that when others make gains you'll help them or get out of their way.

[Joe_Smith]

Want to see how capitalism is anti-white? Take a look at this Op-Ed from Sheldon Adelson (Jew), Bill Gates, and Warren Buffet, all who instead of giving raises or expanding their businesses, spend millions to advocate for more muds to take our STEM jobs (statistically 3/4 of all Americans with STEM degrees don't have jobs in the field, yet 50% of all new STEM job openings are going to H1-B transplants). Why? Because it's good for their profits. As corrupt and Jewish as Congress, even they were reasonable enough to know that they're close to hitting the straw that will break the camel's back and rejected this proposal.

Can you say someone like Bill Gates or Warren Buffett, with their billions upon billions, is being paid off or intimidated into doing this by Jews? You can argue that in a racial state something like this would be illegal. But that's not an argument, since in a socialist racial state it would be illegal too.

The fact is capitalism is a system that puts short-term individual profits above race. And that is why these are incompatible. Capitalists will use left wing rhetoric or right-wing, but in the end they're all rationalizations for the advancement of jewish political objectives or because it is good for business.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/11/op...form.html?_r=0

Break the Immigration Impasse

Sheldon Adelson, Warren Buffett and Bill Gates on Immigration Reform

AMERICAN citizens are paying 535 people to take care of the legislative needs of the country. We are getting shortchanged. Here’s an example: On June 10, an incumbent congressman in Virginia lost a primary election in which his opponent garnered only 36,105 votes. Immediately, many Washington legislators threw up their hands and declared that this one event would produce paralysis in the United States Congress for at least five months. In particular, they are telling us that immigration reform — long overdue — is now hopeless.

Americans deserve better than this.

The three of us vary in our politics and would differ also in our preferences 2 billionaires and a kike about the details of an immigration reform bill. But we could without doubt come together to draft a bill acceptable to each of us. We hope that fact holds a lesson: You don’t have to agree on everything in order to cooperate on matters about which you are reasonably close to agreement. It’s time that this brand of thinking finds its way to Washington.

Most Americans believe that our country has a clear and present interest in enacting immigration legislation that is both humane to immigrants living here and a contribution to the well-being of our citizens. Reaching these goals is possible. Our present policy, however, fails badly on both counts.

We believe it borders on insanity to train intelligent and motivated people in our universities — often subsidizing their education — and then to deport them when they graduate. Many of these people, of course, want to return to their home country — and that’s fine. But for those who wish to stay and work in computer science or technology, fields badly in need of their services, let’s roll out the welcome mat. Then why is microsoft laying off 18,000 employees?


A “talented graduate” reform was included in a bill that the Senate approved last year by a 68-to-32 vote. It would remove the worldwide cap on the number of visas that could be awarded to legal immigrants who had earned a graduate degree in science, technology, engineering or mathematics from an accredited institution of higher education in the United States, provided they had an offer of employment. The bill also included a sensible plan that would have allowed illegal residents to obtain citizenship, though only after they had earned the right to do so.

Americans are a forgiving and generous people, and who among us is not happy that their forebears — whatever their motivation or means of entry — made it to our soil?

For the future, the United States should take all steps to ensure that every prospective immigrant follows all rules and that people breaking these rules, including any facilitators, are severely punished. No one wants a replay of the present mess.


We also believe that America’s self-interest should be reflected in our immigration policy. For example, the EB-5 “immigrant investor program,” created by Congress in 1990, was intended to allow a limited number of foreigners with financial resources or unique abilities to move to our country, bringing with them substantial and enduring purchasing power. Reports of fraud have surfaced with this program, and we believe it should be reformed to prevent abuse but also expanded to become more effective. People willing to invest in America and create jobs deserve the opportunity to do so. All hail the holy job creators Do we need them? Take their billions and send them to revel in the "talent" of Pakistan, any strong white state will run their businesses far better anyway.

Their citizenship could be provisional — dependent, for example, on their making investments of a certain size in new businesses or homes. Expanded investments of that kind would help us jolt the demand side of our economy. These immigrants would impose minimal social costs on the United States, compared with the resources they would contribute. New citizens like these would make hefty deposits in our economy, not withdrawals.

Whatever the precise provisions of a law, it’s time for the House to draft and pass a bill that reflects both our country’s humanity and its self-interest. Differences with the Senate should be hammered out by members of a conference committee, committed to a deal.

A Congress that does nothing about these problems is extending an irrational policy by default; that is, if lawmakers don’t act to change it, it stays the way it is, irrational. The current stalemate — in which greater pride is attached to thwarting the opposition than to advancing the nation’s interests — is depressing to most Americans and virtually all of its business managers. So fucking what. You're lucky your workers don't hang you The impasse certainly depresses the three of us.

Signs of a more productive attitude in Washington — which passage of a well-designed immigration bill would provide — might well lift spirits and thereby stimulate the economy. You don't say? I guess he believes in Sam Emerson's philosophy that if something is good for Bill Gates' pocket, it is indirectly good for the race. So what if Gates sits on billions worth of capital and does nothing with it (except giving it to subsidize more niggers in the world) while simultaneously laying off thousands of Americans. It’s time for 535 of America’s citizens to remember what they owe to the 318 million who employ them

So what's the justification? We all know why the Zionist Adelson is here, but why Gates and Buffet? Would a Jewish boycott hurt them? Who can bribe a billionaire?

The fact is they just don't give a shit. Rich people want to become richer, and if someone doesn't put them in their place and show them how overrated they are, they'll keep on pushing. If the German state created a public corporation as a competitor to Microsoft tomorrow, the repetitive and uncreative Microsoft would go out of business and Bill Gates would have no platform to try and destroy his race to enrich himself.

I'm willing to bet that if the Nazis came back and took over Microsoft and replaced every billionaire CEO, they would do a much better job and create much more than the overpriced Windows rehashes Microsoft's monopoly sells you. Kike-alike speculators (IE, cheat and steal) like Warren Buffet who in a rational society would be high school math teachers, would be forced to get real jobs and not be allowed to live their parasitical existence on the white man's dime.

[Joe_Smith]

A little anecdote pertaining to this thread:

The woman I've had in my life for years is German. One thing I noticed about Germans is how they're so much more analytical than Americans. They see things from a wide variety of angles, what could go wrong, and plan accordingly- no arrogant ego bullshit included . Furthermore, in their equation, they usually factor in others, what they may need or want, etc. In other words, Germans are socialists, since planning and interest in collective well-being (IE racialism) is socialist. Even with the burden of a vicious Jewish occupation on their shoulders, Germans still are outdoing America and Britain in virtually every sector except that America has more millionaires and billionaires . The average German is more satisfied, less stressed, more productive, even-tempered, and more economically stable than the average American and British.

Anglos and their cultural followers do the opposite. Instead, they feel, "that will never happen to me, I'm too damned smart! If something bad happens to someone else, it's because they're not as smart as me!". In 1879, Anglos became the first European race in human history to be defeated by a bunch of nigger spearchuckers, at the Battle of Isandlwana. This was, according to some historians, because the 24th Quartermaster, Bloomfield, didn't want to share ammo with troops that were actually engaging the Zulus, stating: "For heaven's sake, don't take that, man, for it belongs to our Battalion." That's the kind of incoherence that brings down civilizations, even when the challenge is a bunch of groids using Roman tactics in the 19th century.

[Marin]

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

Capitalism has killed as many millions of white people as communism. The good times are "ok" for many people under capitalism, but the "good times" of the 60's and 70's were ok for many people in North Korea as well. That doesn't mean anything. We're not talking about the high points, we're talking about how both capitalism and communism have failed because the latter couldn't survive the low-points, and the former will soon fully collapse once the trillions in backed up usury that keep this awful system running can no longer sustain it.

And how has North Korea contributed to the world in any measure?, they are not just starving and miserable people, they dont produce anything of value.

If you look around, people in the west do want to buy a samsung TV and want to drive a Hyundai car, this is the difference between a productive society like South Korea today and their comrades in the north.

[Sam Emerson]

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

Anglos and their cultural followers do the opposite. Instead, they feel, "that will never happen to me, I'm too damned smart! If something bad happens to someone else, it's because they're not as smart as me!". In 1879, Anglos became the first European race in human history to be defeated by a bunch of nigger spearchuckers, at the Battle of Isandlwana. This was, according to some historians, because the 24th Quartermaster, Bloomfield, didn't want to share ammo with troops that were actually engaging the Zulus, stating: "For heaven's sake, don't take that, man, for it belongs to our Battalion." That's the kind of incoherence that brings down civilizations, even when the challenge is a bunch of groids using Roman tactics in the 19th century.

You're going to use the military record of the British in the 19th century to argue against capitalism? Because they lost a particular battle?

At the time they had the greatest empire since Rome. But other than that, great point!

[Sam Emerson]

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

So what's the justification? We all know why the Zionist Adelson is here, but why Gates and Buffet? Would a Jewish boycott hurt them? Who can bribe a billionaire?

Billionaires. You don't think a Jewish boycott can hurt Gates and Buffett? What if Microsoft couldn't advertise on television, in magazines or on Google and Facebook? What if every story about Microsoft was as biased against their products as the Jew media was against Craig Cobb? How long would they stay in business? What if every stock Buffett held was sold off all at once? There are enough wealthy Jews to manipulate the entire stock market.

The advantage of capitalism is we can use many of the same tactics if we get organized. Under communism we'd be shot for having this discussion.

[Sam Emerson]

Originally Posted by Joe_Smith

What difference does it make if your totalitarian master is a political leader or your boss?

The difference between being fired and being shot.

Your entire reply conflates tribalism with socialism. Whites need more tribalism, which is local and genetic, not socialism, which is bureaucratic. A tribe has reciprocal relationships governed by personal knowledge. Under socialism there's a lazy bureaucrat parasite following thousands of pages of regulations written 2000 miles away by other bureaucrat parasite scum, and everything of any significance you want to do must be approved by these vermin.

That's slavery.