Full Thread: Survival Essentials
View Single Post
Old May 9th, 2018 #3
notmenomore
Senior Member
 
notmenomore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,012
notmenomore
Default

What Dr. Pierce describes, in a word (a word we most rarely hear anymore today), is the bourgeoisie. Marx defined the term forever, and he got it quite accurately, too. The problem with Marx is that he imagined that a fantastic "dictatorship of the proletariat" would somehow remedy this dysfunctional and "unjust" state of affairs and evolve the world into a "workers' paradise".

Marx's error (if such it was) was to ignore the fundamental nature of the human animal and to believe that a utopian and egalitarian paradise could exist without an elite leadership. Not to worry: the Leninists & Stalinists fixed that problem for him right away. But this doesn't mean that Marx got it wrong about the bourgeois. And the bourgeois is what Pierce is talking about here.

The true enemy of the bourgeois is the racial nationalist. As a de-racinated member of the tribe, Marx was blind to this simple fact, whereas in many other areas Marx's perceptions remain valid. This is the poison that has so sickened many of our White elites: the unavoidable egalitarianism from Marx, combined with his otherwise credible observations on the bourgeois, leads the gullible White to believe (most falsely) that the economy can be perfected in a polyglot society. The truth, of course, is that the only chance of perfecting the economy must lie in a racially perfected society.

The National Socialists understood this precept handily, but under the ministrations of the jew the White westerner cannot now find his way through the noise and chatter to gain this simple and fundamental understanding.
Dr. Pierce struggled mightily with all this, but one of the most germane issues continues in the disconnect existing throughout Marx’s writing. In many areas Marx remains a genius in understanding and explaining many of the societal ingredients (and their economic basis) of advancing culture. Critically, however, the essential Jewishness of Marx’s own character led him to even greater errors. His acolytes and heirs have made of him what they will and to their own ends. We can understand, however, simply that he was both right and wrong. The trick is to correctly align the pieces.

If the bourgeois was Marx’s enemy, the bourgeois is equally the enemy of the White Nationalist. At the same time the Marxist is (perhaps) an even greater enemy. The bourgeois will fight to the final measure, in every possible way, to preserve and maintain its hegemony. And it indeed draws resource and strength from its Marxist poisoning. A most bitter enemy, itz.

Marx fought the bourgeois with propaganda, violence, and logic. His degree of final success is debatable, but what is certain is that his thought altered the fundamental character of the bourgeois itself so that in addition to all its essential aspects it came to include Marxist and egalitarian poison as well.

Today, we must understand that once victory is had of the Marxist egalitarianism and social democracy, the racially destructive aspects of the bourgeois will remain, stronger than ever. And before even the initial defeat of egalitarianism, social democracy, and race-mixing, the full forces of the now-poisoned bourgeoisie will stand at hand and at the ready to defend its own pathology.
__________________
No way out but through the jews.