Mary Mitchell, a black columnist from the Chicago Sun Times, has the upteenth article about the really scary racism of the Tea Party protestors opposed to Obamacare. Hardly a day goes by now without fresh accusations of “racism” from the Left.
The myth continues to circulate that Rep. John Lewis and Rep. Emanuel Cleaver were verbally assaulted with racial slurs at the Tea Party rally last Saturday. The whole episode was videotaped and posted to YouTube. I heard a lot of booing and chants of “kill the bill,” but “nigger” wasn’t used a single time. We’ve reached the point where the mainstream media can impudently tell us bald-faced lies whenever the subject is whiteness and race.
The term “racist” is evolving again. Originally, a “racist” was an individual who subscribed to a vertical hierarchy of superior and inferior races. By the 1970s, “racism” had come to mean any act of racial discrimination. In the 1980s and 1990s, “racist” was redefined a third time as a White person who takes pride in his racial and cultural heritage. In the Obamanation, the term “racist” has become synonymous with “angry White man.” All you have to do to get labeled a “racist” these days is be a White male who is really angry about something.
I’ve taken the temperature of the conservatives behind the Tea Party movement. The vast majority of them are truly innocent of any charge of “racism.” They are not White Nationalists by any stretch of the imagination. I’ve met some of these people and my honest impression is that they really believe their own bullshit about limited government. It is not a code word for restricting the access of blacks and Hispanics to social services.
The White conservatives behind the Tea Parties crave black acceptance. There are few things they enjoy more than the company and affirmation of non-Whites who share their ideological views. If Alan Keyes or J.C. Watts was President of the United States, there wouldn’t be a Tea Party movement. They would be slobbering all over the black Ronald Reagan. Ideas are what matter to these people, not color.
I can’t stress enough how alien this type of mindset is to the folkish racialist. Most of us are opposed to Obamacare for a very simple reason: it means taking money out of our community and restributing it to aliens who are hostile to our ethnic interests. In a racially homogeneous society, many White Nationalists (myself included) would support government regulation of healthcare. In contrast, the Tea Party brigades loathe France and are horrified by Scandinavian socialism.
The Left’s attacks on the Tea Party movement reflect one of the most powerful arguments for White Nationalism: you might not be interested in race, but race-based groups are interested in you. White Americans live in a racially polarized society whether they like it or not. Non-Whites give lip service to the ideal of colorblindness, but they form countless race-based organizations to advance their racial interests in politics.
I hope the Tea Party folks wise up and realize they will be called “racists” no matter what they do. There will never be a colorblind multiracial utopian society. Barack Hussein Obama proves it. Only White people have been suckered into swallowing this fantasy. “Racism” is merely a moral battering ram that Jews and non-Whites cynically use to increase their wealth and power relative to White Americans. The term has no other meaning.
A colorblind society requires reciprocity. How can America move beyond race when racially conscious commentators like Mary Mitchell are allowed to foment racial hatred against Whites and nurse old racial grievances?
The White conservatives behind the Tea Parties crave black acceptance. There are few things they enjoy more than the company and affirmation of non-Whites who share their ideological views.
Yeah, but think about it for a sec; this is just white guilt over black failure, and the concomitant heretical thoughts that whites just can’t help holding. This is why whites so readily worship black celebs; they’re the few negroes that most whites can contemplate going beyond tolerating. It’s how whites assuage their feelings about blacks in general.
And take it from a guy who was raised a race-realist; whites try out all sorts of things on their lips that never make it further up the skull.
Look no further than Lloyd Marcus, the black Tea Party champion. This guy makes them feel really good inside. This one black man in a sea of White confirms to them that black people are “just like them.”
Nope. He provides them with cover. Look, whites are racially insane. No doubt about it, they’re a mass of racial pathologies and the typical white is certifiably racially insane. But that doesn’t mean they think blacks are “just like them” or truly worship blacks. It means the whole thing is a mess of contradictions, sublimations, projections, and every other kind of psychobabble you’d care to throw around.
These are the most persuasive that come to mind.
The biggest in my mind is it’s contrary to limited government. Good government is great, but it’s just a shift change away from bad government. Ergo, limited government is a good idea. Limited government means the people itself is responsible for its own success, always a good idea. Socialism distorts this and removes responsibility from the people, who then go to flab and wonder why some group that takes responsibility for itself is kicking their ass.
I’m with you White Preservationist, to achieve a White racial state, we need to do almost everything collectively to get there. Organization is basic, and a collective sense of racial and ethnic identity are essential. Ethno-socialism, tempered by sensible eugenics, is something for a future racial state to adjudicate. Meanwhile, we have to remove the racial blinders from the myriad clueless Whites, and ignite their dormant racial senses. The purpose of a government is to protect and promote the vital racial interests of the people who created it, period. The health and well being of White people are as essential as a fire department or an army. These things will have to be tempered with commons sense, in the common racial interest, if we can demographically survive to implement it.
It’s a sad state of affairs – all this talk from “conservatives” about limited government, the dangers of socialism, personal responsibility, and how the “successful” deserve their extra share, etc. We’ve even had Social Security talked about as if it’s old white people stealing from younger whites.
Not a single word about the Federal Reserve, or our socialist banking system, and how that functions as the biggest wealth transfer scheme in history.
As usual the whites are bamboozled, pointing fingers at each other, then at the poor darkies (as if they own anything). Meanwhile, Goldman Sachs is getting free money from the Fed.
Wake up sheeple!
I think that the National Socialism model, that was established under the Third Reich, was reflective of the drastic situation of the times. – Denise
—
I think you all will find this article of great interest –
The purpose of a government is to protect and promote the vital racial interests of the people who created it, period. The health and well being of White people are as essential as a fire department or an army. These things will have to be tempered with commons sense, in the common racial interest, if we can demographically survive to implement it.
—
“Meanwhile, Goldman Sachs is getting free money from the Fed.”
I was going to go there, but got sidetracked. Capitalism takes a lot of heat from WNs. And rightly so, if by ‘capitalism’ you’re thinking of Goldman Sachs. But GS really isn’t capitalism. GS is a jewed-up travesty of capitalism .Capitalism, or at least free markets, encapsule the idea of free competition.
In a free market, if there’s a field that’s profitable, there’s always a guy looking to cut a piece outta yer pie. GS is, at heart, a gov’t-sponsored entity. A free market would mean that GS goes bankrupt. In a true free market, a GS couldn’t even actually ever have grown as big as it got if it weren’t for gov’t sponsorship, in the form of raising the difficulty of entry — or gov’t bailout.
Virtually any billion-dollar corp got that way by buying off a politician somewhere.
When I was a kid, I used to read a newspaper my dad subscribed to called the Utah Independent, which was aimed at small entrepreneurs. It made the point that you, independent businessman, have 3 enemies: Big gov’t, big business and big labor.
An ethnostate with all us Whites competiting with each other — free of Jews’ cheating and system-rigging — because, after all, we Whites are, by and large, a people of integrity, honesty and fairness , and only doing collectively that which we each cannot do each for ourselves, will recreate the kind of healthy White society with the healthy productive White people we had in the ’50s, even better this time, that we can go back to the moon and beyond.
Or, all the mestizoes, with the Jews’ encouragement, eventually decide to outlaw White skin.
Stark choice.
/agree with post 55. We need to stay focused on the biggest problems and not get sidetracked attacking our own people.
Social Security is a pretty big problem.
The Reddit thread is generating comments. I’ve submitted the article to Digg and delicious as well.
http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/bi9v4/racism_and_obamacare/
White Preservationist: “Pro-White/White specific ethnosocialism = good and hopefully ‘the wave of the future”. I am with you 100% on that idea. No German citizen during the Nazi regime was in want for medical care, or for a job, and that was a Socialist country for certain, but with a difference, it was racially based Socialism. There is more than one KIND of Socialism, and the Socialism of Obama is just thinly veiled Marxism.
BARB; “Also, there were many (12 is it?) workers for each one SS recipient. By the time I retire it’ll be 2 workers per SS recipient. The young people won’t be able to carry that burden.”
That is true, but why is it so? I suggest to you that you can blame the rampant capitalism of the US government (where and when it suits them) of our so-called “Republic”, which is in truth, a Plutocracy (c’mon, you know it is!). I suggest also that the Congressmen and Congresswomen, Senators and the rest have a vested interest in job exportation because they own stock in companies that produce goods in countries like China. Additionally, these people are only the visible front for our government, the people who pull their strings (the estimated 60,000 “very wealthy” whose money buys influence) are the real rulers of our country. The elections, such as they are, are a dog and pony show for the masses (which pol was it, btw that said that “the masses are asses”?). That is your “capitalist” Republic, and it cares not one whit about the people. The social programs that are put into place are to placate the poor masses, many of them are unnecessary and counterproductive, but I maintain that SS was and is a good idea. I of course know nothing about your father’s situation, but I do know plenty of people who are on SS and just barely making it, thank you, and some are not (surely you have heard of some of the senior citizens; “Old Farts” to you, i guess, who have to choose between their meds and dog food?). By the way, I too, was born near the end of the baby boomer period and I may not collect SS either, but I am not bitter toward those older people who have arrived at that point, good for them! I would also add that I have friends who work in the mental health industry and I can tell you for a fact that there are YOUNG people, who claim to be “mentally ill”, (though they are able bodied and could work, but do not want to) who have been put on SSI (which comes from the Social Security “Trust Fund”) and are collecting checks.I can also assure you that some of these young people are “playing the system” as we used to call it. It is precisely because SS has been used to fund all sorts of ancillary social programs that it was not originally intended for, as well as foreign wars, that it has been in trouble for so many years.
I was born at the end of the baby boomer period as well, and I may very well not get to collect it either, but I do not begrudge those who paid into it and have arrived at the age at which they can collect it.
I maintain that it was a good idea, and the reason that it hasn’t worked as intended is because of a thoroughly corrupt government
“By the time I retire it’ll be 2 workers per SS recipient. The young people won’t be able to carry that burden.”
That is true, but why is it so”
Hi, Curt
It is so because there were not enough babies born to make enough workers to keep the ratio at around 12 workers / 1 recipient.
There were not enough babies born because
(a) SS acts as a de-motivator (Many Whites thought, I don’t HAVE to have kids to care for me in my old age. So why should I? They cost money and trouble.)
And
(b) The taxes (both direct and inflation-tax) to pay for SS (and all theother social programs) disables the ability to afford to have kids. Since the ’70s, the average blue-collar Dad can’t bring home enough in real purchasing power to support a stay-at-home Mom with the kids in a nice, safe, White neighborhood with good schools. So the wife must work to help pay for the safe neighborhood, and since she must work and working mother is simply not doable in reality, White women have nearly ceased having kids.
And
(c) SS has broken the extended family by allowing the grandparents to maintain separate housing from the childbearing-age adults. So Mom no longer has the help of her mother in her home, watching the kids if she must work.
So, not enough working-age White adults around when us at the tail end of the Baby Boomers and younger retire, to give us SS. We will be forced to move in, like it or not, with our own kids. I hope you WNs have some. You do, right?
Again, corrupt (White) politicians misdirecting SS funds is an argument against SS. There will always be a few corrupt Whites — and they will seek power. They will turn the money away from funding social programs towards their own invented evils. While much of America’s current problems can be attributed to Jewish cheating, even in a pure ethnostate, we will still have to be on guard.
Curt, you know srs. who are choosing between dog food and medicine. Your heart goes out to our White srs. in such a circumstance.
You know young people who are pretending to be disabled. You are disgusted at them.
But *I* know beautiful White little children who cry every day in daycare because they miss their mothers.
*I* know smart White women who wanted kids but didn’t have them because they couldn’t stand the thought of leaving their precious baby with indifferent strangers and couldn’t bear the thought of living in a slum surrounded by dangerous Negroes and Mestizoes, but couldn’t pay the rent in a White neighborhood and also buy food with the husband’s salary.
THOSE are my people that my heart goes out to.
Meanwhile, I know srs. who live like kings and spend their SS check, taken from fertile White couples, as a fun-fund. All the while telling themselves they’re “entitled.” I am disgusted at them.
I have an idea to save Social Security.
Confiscate Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, et al. Problem solved.
We’re all counting dollars as if they are anything more than pieces of paper. Are we saying that we don’t have enough Federal Reserve Notes to send checks to elderly white people that paid into SS their whole lives? And if we keep sending them checks, we’ll go bankrupt?
Old people have houses with mortgages. Print whatever money is needed to keep the old people in their houses. What is the problem? We have all the wealth needed to support the elderly in class and style. What is the problem? Some New York Banker says the pension doesn’t have enough money? So what? Print some more.
For all the hard nosed libertarian conservative types, who will give speeches about “fiscal conservatism” – are you kidding? Grow up.
Money is a game, everyone cheats. Stop with your long winded lectures about your boring ass ideology. Who controls the assets? Who controls the real estate, the houses, the physical wealth? Who has the gas to fuel the cars, who controls the power plants, etc? That’s all that matters.
Autistic freaks obsessing over “dollars” on the computer screen. You know the video games have “electronic money” that’s hardly different than your Federal Reserve money. How is a dollar different than an airline travel mile?
When the Bankers file papers with the county sheriff to confiscate real estate, and the sheriff complies, go check twitter for your bank balance.
If you want to know what your medical care will be like under Obamacare, go to the nearest VA hospital. Ask one of the many veterans in one of the many waiting rooms how great the service and care is with VA. Then ask how much their medical costs have escalated over recent years. Then go home and cry your freakin eyes out.
@Barb—Those IOU’s are called bonds. The Jews would love to get their hands on them.
Btw, That greasy Greek Peterson, his real name isn’t Peterson, and his Jew pals at Blackstone are the biggest bunch of crooked Jew slime going!
>Those IOU’s are called bonds.
Yes, the idiot Republicans are saying “but those aren’t real bonds, the Jews in Wall Street said that real bonds are what they sell!”
Don’t you know, our serious, conservative types will give us long winded speeches about why “Social Security IOUs” are really worth nothing, but Goldman Sachs Credit Default Swaps have priority over paying old white people Social Security.
This is a conservative, Republican problem. Conservatives – especially the Ayn Rand Libertarian types – think that New York Bankers don’t just add dollars to their account when needed.
When you are at the poker table and you don’t know who the sucker is – it’s you.
Bloomberg Terminals were the first MMORPG – and the only people stupid enough to believe it’s a fair “free market” (lol) are the FOX-tards and their even more gullible intellectual Rand-tards.
Darkies have lottery tickets and white sheeple have 401ks and second mortgages from the Wall Street Bucket Shop.
LOL
H. Rock White,
If childbearing occurred because of economic incentives, and a government safety net eliminated this incentive, one would expect the groups that depend most heavily on social security to show the greatest loss in fertility. However…
The Bell Curve, p.344
“The falling birth rate is a well known and widely studied feature of the demographic transition. What is less well known, but seems to be true among Western cultures that have passed through the demographic transition, is that declines in lifetime fertility occur disproportionately among the educated women and women of higher social status…”
Furthermore, if your hypothesis were true, there should be a massive drop in birth rates immediately following 1935. Instead, the opposite happened.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005067.html
Now, while the decrease in fertility in the West has been going on for a long time, I still maintain that easily obtained contraceptives played a part in it.
The reason why the population growth of the United States has been maintained for the past 40 years is because of immigration and the fertility of immigrant groups. It’s true that 1965 was when contraceptives were first legally permissible, but that was also the same year that immigration was opened to non-European nations in great numbers. The White population of the United States has grown by about 100% since 1940. The ‘Hispanic’ population has grown by 1000% in the same time period. The constant flow of immigrants would negate the drop in fertility caused by modern contraception methods.
http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0056/twps0056.html
Finally, the idea that low-IQ low-income groups have large families as part of a natural ‘social security scheme’ is just silly. This implies that they have the foresight to plan ahead by 20 or 30 years. They don’t. These people can barely connect the dots between DUI conviction and jail-time. And yet they have the wisdom to keep pumping out kids because they know they’ll need help paying their car insurance in 20 years. Riiiiight.
There can (and should) be certain social and even welfare policies within a healthy market society that are perfectly reasonable and just, in order to keep economy at the service of the Nation and the greater good – not the other way around, as is happening today in the age of supra-national, self-serving corporations that have become the parasites of this planet, making it head straight to its doom.
The Gordon-Gecko-style greed and egotism (basically a sociopathic thing) should be kept under control – and let all the brainless Ayn-Rand-followers bitch and whine about that and how “the herd” cuts down their superhuman expansion of bellies and moneybags as much as they want. This is not about the cutting down of human creativity and the titanism of the (moneymaking) “Genius”, as Ayn would have it, but of what the Germans call “the inner schweinehund”. There is no reason, no orderly or human principle within the market alone and isolated. The Ayn Rand school is just Jewish greed and materialism camouflaged and embellished as philosophy.
Also certain regulations are reasonable to prevent a class struggle and the exploitation of the poor and the working class, a prevention that is certainly not guaranteed only because the exploiter and the exploited are both White. Greed and egotism are universal human traits. This is exactly why Nationalsocialism emphasized the idea of the “Volksgemeinschaft” (which is hard to translate: The Confraternity of the People perhaps graps it best.) The idea behind this was to stop class struggle and class resentment without the general, radical abolishment of classes, as Marxists envisioned. Latter thing was (rightly) recognized to be impossible and alien to human nature. So the idea was to inspire a class solidarity by emphasizing and propagating racial (or rather “völkisch”) unity as the higher value that stood above class. Thus the social hierarchy as inherited from the Second Empire of 1871 was softened and class barriers made more flexible. That was one of the more “socialist” traits of National Socialism, and one of the major keys to the stunning, class-crossing and class-integrating success of the party among workers as well as petty to upper bourgeois, industrialists and aristocrats. (It was also the key to the equally stunning economical progress and military success of the Third Reich, as it allowed talents to cross class barriers and gave them more opportunities to develop.)
Socialism in its historical, left-wing forms however is a different thing, as its basic assumptions are universally egalitarian, thus false.
Inequality is a fact, and it appears both in horizontal and vertical forms, and always comes in the plural. Like a cross that divides the identity of the individual and several sectors. There are inequalities of all kinds. There is certainly no such thing as absolute equality within a race, people or tribe. They are divided, as all others, in the clever and the stupid, the weak and the strong, the ugly and the beautiful, the gifted, the mediocre and the useless, the ethically upright and the criminally corrupt, the meek and the violent, the just and the ruthless. Always remember when Black comedian Chris Rock said in a famous must-see routine, “There is a civil war going on between Black people and between Niggers.”
The elite classes of different ethnic groups often have more in common with each other than with people from lower classes (in a qualitative sense) from their own ethnic groups. I generally regard the Black race(s) as culturally inferior to the White race(s), for which there is plenty of striking evidence throughout history. However that doesnt make any random piece of White trash automatically superior to any random Black man, and it doesnt make any White scum automatically my brother or earn him my respect.
That certainly doesn’t mean that there is such a thing as a “natural” vertical loyality. (Loyalities exist in plural too, and should be put into hierarchical order too.) In fact throughout history it is almost always the elites that war each other (while they might not be those actually fighting on the battlefield – their inferiors do the job for them). Post-WWI-socialism came also as a consequence of the notion that the ruling classes of Europe (the aristocrats and plutocrats) were corrupted and had betrayed and sacrificed the lower ones of their nations on each side of the battlefield. And there was much truth to it: not only communists and socialists saw things that way, but also people like Ezra Pound (“There died a myriad of them, for a botched civilization, for an old hag gone in the teeth…”), Céline, Drieu la Rochelle, or many German Nationalsocialists for that matter, who didnt exactly want the Hohenzollern back. (Blood against Gold, said Spengler. But thats a bit of a different story.)
There can be supra-national and even supra-racial friendship and respect between people of any class, but the loyality to one’s nation and people (race, tribe, ethnic group whatever, if they appear in a unified form) should be put above that in case of serious conflict (like war). Anything else would be treason, as no man is an island, and even the most elitist aristocrat (take the word “aristocrat” as a more general notion here) is sitting on the shoulders of his Nation, which includes those classes that are unlike him in almost any respect.
(Jean Renoir’s film classic “The Great Illusion” from 1937 is an excellent illustration of the vertical and horizontal dividings and loyalities that cross our world. Watch out for the Jewish character in the film who is presented in an interesting, and I’d say quite accurate way in respect to assimilation to the nation he lives in.)
“Originally, a “racist” was an individual who subscribed to a vertical hierarchy of superior and inferior races.”
Originally, in 1938, “racism” was a pejorative. There was never a time when “racism” was neutral, academic language accurately describing the opinions people actually held.
http://www.amren.com/ar/1999/05/#article1
Furthermore, if your hypothesis were true, there should be a massive drop in birth rates immediately following 1935. Instead, the opposite happened.
That was more to do with the end of the Depression and WWII in the US. Anyways, I was referring more to the countries with full social security systems in Europe, as describe by Pat Buchanan in ‘The Death of the West’
Finally, the idea that low-IQ low-income groups have large families as part of a natural ’social security scheme’ is just silly.
Who said that? I didn’t, and neither did Buchanan.
Best to not have the gov’t-run social programs and leave the $ in the people’s hands so they can contribute to well-run, accountable charities to look after the poor. (Because in a charity, the people running it will personally know the recipients and shame/refuse aid to layabouts.)
100% correct.
“Furthermore, if your hypothesis were true, there should be a massive drop in birth rates immediately following 1935.”
Sam,
That’s completely false.
The hypothesis that social security led to falling birthrates does not imply that the drop in birthrates would occur right after social security came online.
There’s something called cultural selection, and there’s something called folk wisdom.
Both cultural selection and folk wisdom pushed people strongly to have children in the days before Social Security.
After Social Security came into being, it took decades for Centuries of Pro-Children cultural selection and folk wisdom in the White Race to be stripped away.
White People who grew up without Social Security grew up in a much more Pro-Children Ethos than White People who grew up in a society with the default assumption that the State will take care of the old people just fine.
It’s like with Roe V. Wade: People who grew up after Roe V. Wade are much more sexually promiscuous than people who grew up before it, because they came of age in a society with the default assumption that an Abortion Doctor can take care of girls who get unwanted babies put in their bellies by impulsive sex.
With both Social Security and Roe V. Wade, the grave negative consequence was delayed until years after, because of relatively slow rate of cultural evolution.
“there should be a massive drop in birth rates immediately following 1935”
No. Massive social change takes time. It took time to overcome the natural phenomenon of grandparents pushing the kids to provide them with grandchildren, it took time for it to become socially acceptable for the young people to say, out loud, why have kids? And most of all, it took time for the ravages of inflation (from all the years of paying out SS and other social benefits) to sufficiently destroy the purchasing power of a blue-collar man’s pay, such that he could no longer support a family in a safe neighborhood on his lone income.
“Those IOU’s are called bonds. The Jews would love to get their hands on them.”
No argument there. But what are those bonds, really? They are a call on the future productivity of the young people around when they get called, that is, a plan to tax, to confiscate the wealth those young people create. There won’t be enough White young people to create enough goods and services for gov’t to confiscate in order to give to all the oldsters around who wanting to be served something to eat, etc., to make that the SS check be able to actually buy something.
Now, if the jews got hold of those bonds, then the jews, being few in number, could confiscate enough wealth from the few young people to make a real difference to them.
Money printing just makes the dollar you’ve got in your pocket buy less. Because, while the number of dollars floating around has increased, the amount of goods to buy with it has not. The amount of goods only increases if somebody does some actual producing. And there won’t be enough productive White people. (Mestizoes are no answer because aside from the fact they hate our guts, they aren’t productive.)
The only way out of SS collapsing is for a game changer technology to be invented, some form of exceedingly cheap energy or something.
I’m not a Randian. I don’t agree with the notion of the free flow of goods and people across borders. Int’l corporations are an unholy construct beholden to no human decency or values and loyal to none other than its own bottom line.
Ah, but within our own borders, free flow of goods between White people, sure. Our people are a people of decency, integrity and loyalty — and that’s why free markets work for us. At least until the jews move in and start cheating.
Future historians will look back on 2010 and recognize it as a tipping point year.
1) The overt successful denial of race realists’ right to peacefully assemble and speak by the political left with the tacit approval of the federal government and major media.
2) Passage of Obamacare and concomitant extreme polarization in politics.
3) This year will see Social Security begin to pay out more in benefits this year than it takes in contributions. http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/03/social-security-to-pay-more-in-benefits-this-year-than-it-takes-in/1
4) This year will see non-white births begin to outnumber white births. http://www.wvwnews.net/story.php?id=8656
What is to be done? I would like to see a white ethno-state in which individual liberty and property rights are respected, and the currency is based on gold.
Hunter Wallace good to see your article getting some positive comments on reddit. Including this guy:
“What a fascinating read. While I disagree with his positions, he sounds more thoughtful than most of the anti-HCR crowd. How off the rails is your movement when the White Supremacist calls you out on acting crazy?
He’s uses the false cliché White Supremacist, but you know why it was “fascinating” to him? Because deep down I bet he agreed with you on some points. Your article is effective because it’s civil and calm in tone but blunt, honest, and strongly argued. No “hate” in sight. You even mentioned Jews. We stand on solid ground, our position as White advocates and nationalists makes perfect sense, especially in the current climate where Whites are attacked from all angles in many areas of society.
Many White people out there agree with us, we just need to reach them and articles like your will help.
“Money printing just makes the dollar you’ve got in your pocket buy less. ”
The inflation-deflation game, it suckers white people *every time* – just like niggers with their lottery tickets – you don’t understand the math.
Hint – we’ve printed TRILLIONS of dollars in the last two years. Have prices skyrocketed? Nope. Why not?
Because they printed TRILLIONS of dollars and didn’t give any to YOU. Oops. All those inflationary dollars are safely on the balance sheets of New York Banks. Inflation? Yep – for THEIR assets – not yours.
But con-tards are still clinging to their checkers while everyone else is playing chess.
GROW UP.
The elite classes of different ethnic groups often have more in common with each other than with people from lower classes (in a qualitative sense) from their own ethnic groups. … – V.
Except, of course, for the Jews –
Barb;
” It is so because there were not enough babies born to make enough workers to keep the ratio at around 12 workers / 1 recipient.”
No, there are far more people in the US now than there were when I (or you, for that matter) were born. The problem is, as you pointed out -workers. There are far fewer decent paying jobs than there were just a few years ago (I addressed this when I mentioned the capitalistic piracy of exporting our jobs).
“SS acts as a de-motivator (Many Whites thought, I don’t HAVE to have kids to care for me in my old age. So why should I? They cost money and trouble.)”
No, SS was supposed to act as a safety net, but got hijacked for paying other social programs, and as I said, wars. Also, with the advent of feminism, career women chose not to have children because they felt it would hinder them in the pursuit of the almighty dollar.
”
” So the wife must work to help pay for the safe neighborhood…” The “safe neighborhoods” are disappearing because the undesirables follow whites wherever they go. Also, the “working white wife of a blue collar man” phenomenon started back in WW2, and grew as women decided that they wanted “careers of their own”, rather than be a stay-at-home mom. This was long before before needing two incomes to be in a safe neighborhood became an issue.
” SS has broken the extended family by allowing the grandparents to maintain separate housing from the childbearing-age adults. So Mom no longer has the help of her mother in her home, watching the kids if she must work.”
Close-knit extended families are not a White phenomenon, sad to say. That is more of an Asian/Indian phenomenon. It has always been the norm for children to “grow up and move OUT of the home”, in Western cultures. Aside from that consideration, most grandparents who care for their daughter’s children do so out of concern for them, not the desire to be saddled with raising a child in their old age.
“So, not enough working-age White adults around when us at the tail end of the Baby Boomers and younger retire, to give us SS. We will be forced to move in, like it or not, with our own kids. I hope you WNs have some. You do, right?”
-As a matter of fact, by 96 year old mother lives with my wife and I in our home now, and has been for the last 12 years. We have been caring for her, SS would hardly cover the expense, even if she were able to care for herself.
Have you considered that the elderly ones that you have encountered who are “well off”, living “like kings” as you said, are collecting SS inspite of having other incomes? This is one of the major flaws of SS, that a person who was say, a professional (I knew a housing contractor in this category) and paid into SS will collect it when he reaches retirement age regardless of his other funds? Most SS recipients are not in that category. Have you considered all the former blue collar workers who worked for corporations like Bethlehem Steel, Ambridge, and others who THOUGHT that they were going to be able to live off their “union pensions” only to be sold out and loose their medical benefits as well after they retired because those companies went out of business or were sold to foreign interests? Those people have only their SS checks to keep them alive and check it out, they are not living “like kings” off your dime.
So “your concern” lies solely with those children in day care centers who “cry for their mothers” when they are left there. Being raised by an industrial concern is sad, but you can thank the feminist movement and the rotten “capitalist Republic” that we live in for that. Don’t blame the one and only social safety net that Whites have left to them. By the way, when and if you do reach retirement age and, by the Grace of God, or something similar, the system is still intact, I wonder if you will be standing in line at the SS office to receive “your entitlement” that the “young will be paying for”? It sounds to me like you feel that once a person reaches age 65 (or whatever), they should just “disappear off the face of the earth”. You too, will someday be old, and maybe, just maybe like so many others that I have seen, you will find that your children aren’t really very concerned about you.
At this point, lets just agree that we disagree. Im about finished with this topic. And I apologize to all others for the length of this post.
“No, there are far more people in the US now than there were when I (or you, for that matter) were born.”
How is that relevant? There’s more people now because we aren’t getting rid of the really old people, due to the average lifespan just getting longer and longer every year.
The ratio of young people to old people keeps getting so relatively speaking there’s WAY more old people and less young people.
“Close-knit extended families are not a White phenomenon, sad to say. That is more of an Asian/Indian phenomenon. It has always been the norm for children to ‘grow up and move OUT of the home’, in Western cultures.”
But then the parent would move in with the child once said child got established, and/or the parent retired from work. Because of Social Security, old people nowadays can afford to live out their retirements being no use to anyone, sucking out the hard earned wealth of the young like a pack of vampire bats.
At least if your parent is living with you, you can get some benefit from their wisdom, you can get some benefit from their savings as they chip in to help the family get by, you can get some benefit from them providing childcare.
When your parent is living in Florida or whatever, what good is their continued existence doing you?
And why ON EARTH should you be forced by the State to pay for that continued existence?
“Aside from that consideration, most grandparents who care for their daughter’s children do so out of concern for them, not the desire to be saddled with raising a child in their old age.”
How do you know that? Biology teaches us that only reason a female mammal lives past menopause is to care for her grandchildren.
That’s why Humans and Elephants, two creatures where the old actually have some wisdom to pass on to the grandchildren, are just about the only beings where Females don’t die as soon as they lose the ability to produce offspring.
” Also, the ‘working white wife of a blue collar man’ phenomenon started back in WW2″
Yeah right, WWII is to blame even though no such problem resulted from similar levels of male deployment in World War One! Even though the real increase in Female Workforce Participation Rates started about 1960, as the first generation to grow up in a Social Securitized Society came of age.
“and grew as women decided that they wanted ‘careers of their own’, rather than be a stay-at-home mom.”
How do you know they did it because they wanted to? The whole point here is that a lot of White Woman were forced into the workforce by economic concerns.
Because their husbands lost massive amounts of wealth to inflation, inflation that was used to pay for the monstrosity that is Social Security.
“This was long before before needing two incomes to be in a safe neighborhood became an issue.”
In the aftermath of World War II, Female Workforce Participation Rates were NOTHING compared to what they are now.
Also, the vast majority of the limited number of females at work were UNMARRIED and hadn’t yet found a husband.
“So “your concern” lies solely with those children in day care centers who “cry for their mothers” when they are left there. Being raised by an industrial concern is sad, but you can thank the feminist movement and the rotten “capitalist Republic” that we live in for that.”
We had a Feminist Movement in the early 20th Century, and it was strong enough to force massive changes in the political structure of American Society. And we had a capitalist Republic back then too.
And yet we didn’t have children being raised by daycare centers.
“You too, will someday be old, and maybe, just maybe like so many others that I have seen, you will find that your children aren’t really very concerned about you.”
Children nowadays are sometimes unconcerned about their progenitors because there’s no taboo against failing to care for your elderly parents.
And there’s no taboo because the people who would enforce such a taboo know that the parent can just mooch off the State instead.
If Social Security was abolished, the Taboo against failing to care for your elderly parent would be revived.
The only thing that suppressed it in the first place was Social Security.
“How is that relevant? There’s more people now because we aren’t getting rid of the really old people,”
-relevant because the total population grew, not JUST old people. Yes, I’m counting non-whites here too, because they should be paying taxes if they are not. And how exactly would you like to “get rid of the old people”, Reginald? Euthanize them? If so, you should love Obamacare as promoted by Nancy Pelosi in its original form.
“Because of Social Security, old people nowadays can afford to live out their retirements being no use to anyone, sucking out the hard earned wealth of the young like a pack of vampire bats.” You evidently did not read or comprehend any part of my previous posts as to the number of SS recipients living in poverty. My own sister lives at home with me and my wife as well as my mother. My sister gets less than $400. a month on SS! Gee Whiz; what a kingly ransom she has to live off of huh? And yes, she worked her entire life.
“Yeah right, WWII is to blame even though no such problem resulted from similar levels of male deployment in World War One!” Women in the work place was uncommon in WW1 because it was socially unacceptable at that time for women to be so occupied, also the dollar had far more value (we were still on the gold standard back then) . Today’s dollar is worth just a few cents compared to the dollar in 1920, and so it bought more. I suggest a good history text for you, you will then find the corroboration that women entered the workforce en masse after WW2, don’t take my word for it. You are evidently hell bent on blaming SS for today’s economic woes;
” inflation that was used to pay for the monstrosity that is Social Security”, but you are not willing to acknowledge that the Federal Reserve has been systematically robbing the dollar of its value ever since the day of its inception (I suggest reading Eustace Mullins book on the subject), or even Ezra Pound’s writings regarding the Fed. And as I have stated before, SS has been robbed of its funding (replaced with IOU’s) to fund war’s for nearly the past century, and not one of those “conflicts” threatened the US in any direct way. War in Europe, war in Korea, war in Vietnam (all those maimed soldiers have to be cared for on your dime too; I guess you would like those poor guys to just die off as well?), now war in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Pakistan, what’s next? Iran I suppose. Do you think all this did not require your tax dollars? And of course that tax is hidden from you by taking it from the SS Trust fund and slipping it into the General Fund. Is this so hard to grasp?
“In the aftermath of World War II, Female Workforce Participation Rates were NOTHING compared to what they are now.” Of course not, I said it STARTED at that time, and beside, the population of the US at that time was about 200 million, there are MORE women today available to the workforce.
“Also, the vast majority of the limited number of females at work were UNMARRIED and hadn’t yet found a husband.” And just how do you know that? I doubt stats were kept which reflect that idea, and many of these women who were working in factories during WW2 were married to soldiers.
“We had a Feminist Movement in the early 20th Century, and it was strong enough to force massive changes in the political structure of American Society. And we had a capitalist Republic back then too.
And yet we didn’t have children being raised by daycare centers.”
-We had a comparatively tiny feminist movement early in the 20th century, and they weren’t even taken seriously for the most part, at that time. Big changes take time, and it wasn’t until the 1970’s (I was around back then, were you?) that they began to have a big influence on our society-the result, feminism and it emphasis on women having careers, not children (you do read the news occassionally, right?). Today’s media is full of articles and commentary on “women’s decision to put off marriage and child bearing to further their careers”- how did you miss this Reginald?
“Children nowadays are sometimes unconcerned about their progenitors because there’s no taboo against failing to care for your elderly parents.”
Actually, all to often children today, especially the males are simply self-centered, “man-boys’ who live at home with Mom and Dad until they are 28 years old or so, playing video games and just never having grown into adulthood. This might explain why someone would have the attitude that: “At least if your parent is living with you…you can get some benefit from their savings as they chip in to help the family get by, you can get some benefit from them providing childcare.”
I get the feeling from the sentiment that you display on this topic that you would have been comfortable in the Old Eskimo culture; it was a practice with them, before the intervention of Western Civilization, to leave an elderly parent, who was deemed “useless” and unable to “contribute” alone with enough food and water to last a day or two while the rest of the community simply left and moved on, leaving the elderly one behind to die. Of course, that was a primitive environment. What is your excuse?
Really, if this kind of sentiment is what WN is all about, it is enough to cause any thinking person to run screaming into the arms of multicultural New World Order.
Oh; I just wanted to add that (although it is laudable to have children) no one is FORCED into having children , even in the case of rape. That is a choice that you make, and the consequences are long term financial ones. And as Warren Berlinger once said, no woman should even look at a man unless he has a bank account with at least $5000.00 in it. Of course he said that in 1950, so you should move the decimal point at least one place to the right for it to apply today. LOL.
“And how exactly would you like to ‘get rid of the old people’, Reginald?”
If I actually wanted to get rid of the old people, and I never suggested such a desire, I’d do it the same way the really old people were got rid off 100 years ago: Let nature take it’s course.
The reason we have so many people over 80 nowadays is because our society is so atheistic that we burn holes in our wallets to keep people alive who have no real future in this life anyway.
” Of course not, I said it STARTED at that time, and beside, the population of the US at that time was about 200 million, there are MORE women today available to the workforce.”
Honestly, do you not understand what the word “rate” means?
“And just how do you know that? I doubt stats were kept which reflect that idea, and many of these women who were working in factories during WW2 were married to soldiers.”
I said in the AFTERMATH of World War II, not during the actual war itself.
Most of the female employment then was temporary, and a massive number of those girls never saw the inside of an office or factory again.
“-We had a comparatively tiny feminist movement early in the 20th century, and they weren’t even taken seriously for the most part, at that time.”
Then how’d they get females the vote when tons of men were against it?
How’d they have such a strong influence on the size of Government that even now, John Lott could find the correlation between letting the Women in State vote and the Government getting bigger.
“Big changes take time, and it wasn’t until the 1970’s (I was around back then, were you?) that they began to have a big influence on our society-the result, feminism and it emphasis on women having careers, not children (you do read the news occassionally, right?). ”
But why did they have a big influence on society? That’s the question you aren’t asking!
Only in a particular societal context could the idea of Women flooding the workforce have triumphed.
One necessary precondition was birth control, which made femaels more stable sources of labor than they were before.
But another profoundly necessary precondition was Social Security, and later Medicare, placing an incredible financial burden on Young Men.
This put PRESSURE on Young Women to enter the Workforce, no matter what the damned liars in the media said about how it was all a “Feminism Inspired Choice”.
“get the feeling from the sentiment that you display on this topic that you would have been comfortable in the Old Eskimo culture; it was a practice with them, before the intervention of Western Civilization, to leave an elderly parent, who was deemed “useless” and unable to “contribute” alone with enough food and water to last a day or two while the rest of the community simply left and moved on, leaving the elderly one behind to die. Of course, that was a primitive environment.”
I never said old people have nothing to contribute. Stop lying about what I said.
I only said that if an old person doesn’t want to live with young people, giving them the benefit of their wisdom and whatnot, then the old person is of no value to society.
For this reason there’s no good reason to force people to subsidize the lives of selfish people who care more about their so called independance than the welfare of society.
“Really, if this kind of sentiment is what WN is all about, it is enough to cause any thinking person to run screaming into the arms of multicultural New World Order.”
Heaven forfend, someone actually wants FAMILIES to take care of the old, as opposed to the State!
Go ahead and run to the New World Order, Stalinist, you’ll fit right in…
“Oh; I just wanted to add that (although it is laudable to have children) no one is FORCED into having children , even in the case of rape. That is a choice that you make, and the consequences are long term financial ones.”
The disgusting thing to me about Social Security is that the White People who make the financial sacrifice of having children have the fruit of their parental labor taken by the Government, and given to selfish Whores and Playboys who only took and used while never creating life.
“And as Warren Berlinger once said, no woman should even look at a man unless he has a bank account with at least $5000.00 in it. Of course he said that in 1950, so you should move the decimal point at least one place to the right for it to apply today. LOL.”
If you’re going to discourage people from having children, it just shows that people like you a genocidal threat to the continued existence of the race.
If a choice has to be made: Should the White Children die in the womb, or should the White Elderly die before death panels; a far better fate it will be if the White Elderly are made to die before death panels.
And you know, a lot more Young White Men would have $50,000 in the bank account if it wasn’t for 15% of every penny they earn being taken by FICA.
Oh sigh, this started off with me defending SS IN ITS ORIGINAL INTENDED FORM! (caps for emphasis, not for shouting!). I made the statement (see my previous posts) that a little Socialism is not a bad thing. I made the statement that having children is a personal choice (not as in “choice” to have or abort a baby- I thought I was clear on that-I meant that if a woman is raped, she does not have to bear the child to term). How is that discouraging people from having children? And you have the gall to call me a “genocidal threat to the continued existence of the race”?And a “Stalinist” to boot? I did not resort to name calling, so why are you doing so, and why are you distorting my words?
Then you make reference to “White People who make the financial sacrifice of having children have the fruit of their parental labor taken by the Government, and given to selfish Whores and Playboys who only took and used while never creating life.” ?? So to you, SS recipients are “Whores and Playboys”? What kind of nonsense is this? Did I not tell you about the people that I KNOW, that I SEE, who have worked all their lives expecting something in return (as promised by the government, btw), only to find themselves living on a paltry sum (did you read the part about my sister’s $400. per month SS “entitlement”?). Do I want the White people as a race to die out? NO! of course not, so stop putting words in my mouth.
An earlier quote from your “missive”: “The reason we have so many people over 80 nowadays is because our society is so atheistic that we burn holes in our wallets to keep people alive who have no real future in this life anyway.” You talk about 80 year olds with no future, and later about retirees who are “whores and playboys”. The general tone of your entry is one of hatred and vindictivness for the elderly.
You go on to state: “Then how’d they get females the vote when tons of men were against it”.
– through a series of court challenges, led by Susan B. Anthony, and we all know that the courts will rule contrary to populist wishes, now don’t we? (need I remind you that George Bush the 2nd was reinstated through the Supreme Courts decision?).
“I never said old people have nothing to contribute. Stop lying about what I said.” Reread the pertinent paragraph, I said ” I get the feeling from the sentiment that you display on this topic…” And I got that from statements like this one of yours: ” old people nowadays can afford to live out their retirements being no use to anyone, sucking out the hard earned wealth of the young like a pack of vampire bats.” There comes a time when you will be too old to work. So what I understand from your text is that when that time comes, they should make themselves useful by moving in with you and taking care of your kids (a time in their lives when they need and deserve a peaceful existence) as well as contributing to the family’s income. About here is where I guess you are going to resort to name-calling and tell me once again that I am a liar.
“But why did they have a big influence on society? That’s the question you aren’t asking!”
– there is no need to ask, the answer is self-evident: feminism is the brainchild of Zionism. But hey, being a “Stalinist” I wouldn’t know anything about that, now would I?
“One necessary precondition was birth control, which made femaels more stable sources of labor than they were before.”
– And therefore their desire to have a career instead of having children had nothing to do with it?
As I said previously, you want to lay all of White America’s ills at the doorstep of Social Security (I notice that you did not address the points I made about the Fed’s role in devaluing the dollar, the countless and endless and very costly wars, no , none of that-it is all because of Social Security!) Ah, if only you didn’t have to pay the FICA tax, then you would have that $50,000. right? Well, I wish that I had all the money in property taxes that I have had to pay over the years to fund schools which serve only as propaganda machines for the government! You can call me a Stalinist, Communist, Bolshevist or whatever other BS name you can come up with, just like calling me a racist, I do not care! I always thought that what separates the White race from the rest of world (and makes us superior) is our ability to “empathize”; at least for each other (regardless of age), but I guess I was wrong about that. I can see from this that whites will never be able to form any sort of “unity”. It is just a dream.
“career women chose not to have children because they felt it would hinder them in the pursuit of the almighty dollar.”
See, most working White mothers aren’t “career women.” She’s the PBX operator, the LPN, the waitress. She’s not doing it all because she’s aiming for the house in the Hamptons. No. She goes to work every day, dumps babe in daycare, and clocks in in order to get the money to pay the rent. And she bemoans that daycare costs half what she makes — but she MUST have the half that’s left because her husband’s check just doesn’t go far enough to meet basic needs. THOSE women, the wives of blue-collar men, vast in number, not having 3 kids is why the White birthrate is less than replacement. The high-powered career woman not having kids hurts the smart-fraction numbers, but they are only 2% – 5% of women.
During WWII, Rosie the Riveter was given praise and status for helping with the War Effort. At night she grew a victory garden. But two minutes after WWII was over, she instantly got married, quit that miserable job and popped out 3 kids — the genesis of the Baby Boomers.
SSSS — I don’t disagree with what you said. But you’re missing something. So LONG as those trillions STAY sequestered on the superwealthy’s balance sheet and don’t get spent buying real stuff, like food and shoes, prices for shoes and food stay low. The moneyprinting looks harmless. But if you give those printed trillions to the oldsters — who WILL spend it on food and shoes — the prices WILL go up.
““safe neighborhoods” are disappearing because the undesirables follow whites wherever they go”
Yes, of course, that IS part of the problem. The Equal Housing part of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (part of the “other social programs” I keep citing) contributed to driving up housing costs for the beleaguered working man.
But the thesis that the White birthrate fell off the cliff BECAUSE of the Pill isn’t accurate. Direct and inflation-taxes to pay SS and other social programs (including Civil Rights) were the cause. Without the Pill, White couples would have had to abstain from sex or use other methods (like barrier methods or Natural Family Planning –which is NOT “rhythm method” and is 98% effective when used by couples who fully understand it) in order to prevent the birth of children they couldn’t figure out how to provide for. Which White people, being foresighted and self-disciplined, do.
The Pill is simply another method. It was an enabler to the drop in birth rates, but not the cause.
I don’t want oldsters offed. I want them to sell their houses and move in with their kids and DO THEIR DUTY as grandparents. (Give wisdom, help look after the young’uns, use their savings to help the young couple buy in bulk to feed ’em all, including Grandpa and Grandma.)
A cursory examination of Americans and their lifestyles should blow away the canard that they crave traditional lifestyles and traditional roles but can’t fulfill that dream for economic reasons. They’re in race conditions with one another for status indicators. They’re leveraging themselves into larger and larger homes and larger and larger vehicles to accommodate their larger and larger asses.
It’s not their families are getting larger. It’s their appetites. Both figuratively and literally.
Used manufactured homes are remarkably cheap, but eschewed for status reasons. Children are very affordable if you reject a lot of the common notions of what a parent is obligated to provide. No young adult who is aware enough to be reading these characters I’m typing can seriously assume SS will still be there for them. It’s a hostile and unstable regime. Starve it. Ignore it. Work around it. Whatever you do, don’t rely on it.
Barb;
Thank you for your very civil input, it is appreciated. I understand that young white couples are in a terrible bind, and I really DO sympathize with them. I was just trying to point out that SS as originally conceived, as an alternate source of income for those reach old age and have nothing else (or very little else) was and still would be, a good idea. Granted, those who are well funded otherwise (pensions, stocks, bonds, capital in the banks) really shouldn’t qualify for it-and those people ARE out there and collecting SS as well, I realize. As for helping their families, if the elderly do have the health and are willing, why not? But they shouldn’t feel pressured into it. I see old folks who are the picture of health even at age 70, but genetics being what it is, some are not so blessed. Thanks again.
“made the statement (see my previous posts) that a little Socialism is not a bad thing. I made the statement that having children is a personal choice (not as in “choice” to have or abort a baby- I thought I was clear on that-I meant that if a woman is raped, she does not have to bear the child to term).”
I’m confused.
As far as I know, in the absence of getting an abortion a Woman DOES have to bear the child to term.
“There comes a time when you will be too old to work. So what I understand from your text is that when that time comes, they should make themselves useful by moving in with you and taking care of your kids (a time in their lives when they need and deserve a peaceful existence) as well as contributing to the family’s income.”
Yeah, that’s what I’m saying. I’m glad you get it now.
“So to you, SS recipients are ‘Whores and Playboys’? What kind of nonsense is this?”
I meant that even if someone was a Whore or Playboy when they were young, contributing nothing to the only real source of Social Security Payments: Young People, they still get Social Security.
This isn’t fair to people who weren’t Whores and Playboys when young, and who did produce the young people who have to pick up the tab for the program.
“Did I not tell you about the people that I KNOW, that I SEE, who have worked all their lives expecting something in return (as promised by the government, btw)”
The Government hasn’t defaulted on Social Security payments yet. I don’t see what right they have to complain given that every year the benefits have increased faster than inflation.
Also it must be noted that Half Sigma posted something a few months ago showing that people over 65 make much more per year than people under 30.
“Do I want the White people as a race to die out? NO! of course not, so stop putting words in my mouth.”
That’s good. It just is that Young People are getting so screwed over these days that if White Women started following your advice of only reproducing with a Man who has $50,000 in the bank account, we would go extinct.
Only a very small minority of young White Men have that much money.
“there is no need to ask, the answer is self-evident: feminism is the brainchild of Zionism.”
Just because there was intent to harm White People in the careers of people like Gloria Steinam and Betty Freidan doesn’t explain why the culture evolved to a point where a significant number of people listened to them.
While I understand you like the idea of old people having a safety net, the problem is this gives people too much freedom to be individualists.
Individualism, as opposed to collectivism, is vulnerable to ideologies that retard birthrates.
“Well, I wish that I had all the money in property taxes that I have had to pay over the years to fund schools which serve only as propaganda machines for the government!”
That’s a good point.
There are two ways in which FICA is worse though, at least from the standpoint of impact on fertility:
1. It is incredibly regressive, taking the most money out of the paychecks of the young fertile Whites who need it the most.
2. It’s a double whammy: Both making it harder for Young White Couples to feel like they have the financial security to have the Woman stay at home (or at least work part-time), while also allowing the creation of significant White Subcultures that fail to encourage childbirth.
In the old days a White Subculture that failed to encourage childbirth would run into a lot of embarrassing problems with the older members of the culture going hungry and whatnot, and the basic human aversion to starvation would stop these subcultures from getting too popular to be dangerous.
Though I do admit that the School System serves as a propaganda organ of the Government, whereas the Social Security System does not.
I would prefer if both were be abolished and replaced by Families handling the issues they currently address.
“I always thought that what separates the White race from the rest of world (and makes us superior) is our ability to ’empathize’; at least for each other (regardless of age), but I guess I was wrong about that.”
Too much emphathy can be dangerous, and is a big part of what got us into this trouble.
“No young adult who is aware enough to be reading these characters I’m typing can seriously assume SS will still be there for them.”
Social Security still has a negative impact on the birthrate, because:
1. Most White People aren’t reading this website.
2. Even if people got it into the thick skulls that Social Security is doomed, it would take a while for the culture to recover some of the traits it had before Social Security.
“Used manufactured homes are remarkably cheap, but eschewed for status reasons”
Hm. Maybe not for status reasons. Manufactured homes tend to decay and become decrepit quickly, so a poor long-term investment. Also, manufactured home parks are usually in areas of town that also tend to be crime-ridden. White women will NOT willingly conceive children and live with them in crime-ridden areas. She’ll forgo her desire for kids before she’ll deliberately bring them into a dangerous situation.
A manufactured home on some rural acreage can work–if the young couple can find a way to buy the acreage, and if the well and electricity line, as well as commuting costs, aren’t prohibitive.
Aside from pointing out the burden SS puts on young couples, we WNs need to point out to the young couples how to live on less — like a used manufactured home on some rural acreage. We also need charities to provide seed money for young White couples just starting out, so they CAN buy that acreage and put that used manufactured home on it, with the eventual goal of building a stick-built house.
The issue of those (few) elderly in honestly dire straights are better dealt with by charities. Charities know their recipients and can refuse aid / shame anyone trying to work the system. But gov’t doesn’t argue — they just hand out money to all takers. Bad plan. Also, when gov’t gets hold of money, they often turn it away from its intended purpose of helping the frail towards evil ends of their own (Exh. 1: Lyndon Johnson’s taking SS and spending it on Vietnam war.) Even in a jew-free White ethnostate, there WILL be a few bad apples and they WILL seek power. Best not to tempt them.
“if the elderly do have the health and are willing, why not. But they shouldn’t feel pressured into it.”
See, I say they SHOULD be pressured into it, because the young people are being pressured (by way of gov’t deducting FICA from their checks) into giving oldsters their money so the oldsters can enjoy homes, cars and fun. Phooey. We need babies.
“I’m confused”: yes you are, and in more ways than one. Let me spell it out for you: women who are raped do not have to go through 9 months of an unwanted pregnancy, they have the “morning after pill” and abortion (in this case-or would you rather she have to bring a racially mixed child into the world against her will if she was raped by a “person of color”, or anyone else for that matter?).
“Yeah, that’s what I’m saying. I’m glad you get it now.” That statement was meant that I understood what YOU want, that may not be what the elder wants for him or herself, and if not, they should not be forced to take care of your kids and move in with you.
“It just is that Young People are getting so screwed over these days that if White Women started following your advice of only reproducing with a Man who has $50,000 in the bank account, we would go extinct.” Taking things too literally again , I see. I was saying that a man should be prepared for marriage (financially as well as with moral commitment). What good does it do to be poor and have children? So by your reasoning, white people should just reproduce, beyond their means of supporting those kids?
“Just because there was intent to harm White People in the careers of people like Gloria Steinam and Betty Freidan doesn’t explain why the culture evolved to a point where a significant number of people listened to them.”
-This feminism was drilled into women via social pressure and the media at the time. Remember, Americans spend a lot of time in front of the television, and what social engineering they don’t get there they get in school.
“In the old days a White Subculture that failed to encourage childbirth would run into a lot of embarrassing problems with the older members of the culture going hungry and whatnot, and the basic human aversion to starvation would stop these subcultures from getting too popular to be dangerous.”
– Again, as I pointed out previously (and this is getting tedious), it was precisely because there were so many impoverished older people that SS was established.
“Too much emphathy can be dangerous, and is a big part of what got us into this trouble.”
– What would you know about empathy? You evidently have none, except for yourself.
“Let me spell it out for you: women who are raped do not have to go through 9 months of an unwanted pregnancy, they have the ‘morning after pill’ and abortion.”
But you said you weren’t talking about abortion. You’re being completely contradictory.
” Taking things too literally again , I see. I was saying that a man should be prepared for marriage (financially as well as with moral commitment).”
What if they don’t have the money because they’ve had their income depleted by parasitic old people?
“What good does it do to be poor and have children?”
It doesn’t matter worth shit whether you’re poor or not when you have children.
Randomized adoption studies show that the Socio-Economic Status of Parents has NO EFFECT WHATSOEVER on the life outcomes of children.
Only the GENES inherited from the Parents has a real and lasting effect on the children.
Therefore poor White People do a profound amount of good by having children, most importantly because they preserving our Race, but also because their children will be far higher IQ and morally upright than the average American.
Thus the average American will be higher IQ and more morally upright because the poor White Person had a child.
Also, somebody has to make the babies who will pay for your beloved Social Security Payments! Don’t you get that, you incredibly foolish believer in a free lunch.
The productive Race in this Country has a birthrate below replacement rate. Just think what that means for your precious Social Security System, just think how much faster it would collapse if it wasn’t for Whites with less than 50K in bank having children.
“Again, as I pointed out previously (and this is getting tedious), it was precisely because there were so many impoverished older people that SS was established.”
Well, according to you we also have a lot of impoverished old people now even with Social Security, so what good is it doing?
Do you have a shred of evidence that the Family did a worse job of keeping Seniors fed than the Government does now?
Maybe before SS was instituted, not all old people could afford to live in luxury, couldn’t afford unnecessary items like personal television sets, or personal housing units, or the shameless luxury of living it up in sunny Florida.
Boo hoo.
“What would you know about empathy? You evidently have none, except for yourself.”
Im not a Prostitute either, but that doesn’t stop me from knowing it gives you STDs.
My original comment: ““Oh; I just wanted to add that (although it is laudable to have children) no one is FORCED into having children , even in the case of rape. That is a choice that you make, and the consequences are long term financial ones.” Now obviously, I did not mean that a woman has a choice not to be raped! I clearly said that she does not have to bear the child of such an event- she has pharmaceutical and surigical choices to remedy that. Does that make it plain enought to you? I was not contracdicting myself. In all other cases, having children is a choice.
“What if they don’t have the money because they’ve had their income depleted by parasitic old people?”
– according to this site: http://www.slate.com/id/2183592/ The military budget for 2009 was $713 billion dollars. That is just for last year, and it goes up every year. Then you can add in “military aide for Israel” is 114 billion, see here:http://www.washington-report.org/home/245-2008-november/3845-congress-watch-a-conservative-estimate-of-total-direct-us-aid-to-israel-almost-114-billion.html
Then there is the cost of maintaining the 700+ military bases that our “empire” has throughout the world (no, I don’t have a figure for that, but I am sure it is not a paltry sum when calculated for all the years since, let’s say, WW2)
Then you have the cost of the “undocumented aliens” who cross the border, have a baby on this side, and then are entitled to “benefits” (your tax dollars are paying for that, you know, and since those babies are not white, I’m sure that should be important to you?).
Then there is the cost of the Wall St. banker bailouts -trillions?
All this doesn’t enrage you, but some SS payments going to elderly whites does? THAT is where the bulk of your tax money is going, not to the elderly.
“Also, somebody has to make the babies who will pay for your beloved Social Security Payments! Don’t you get that, you incredibly foolish believer in a free lunch.
-Look champ, I am not on Social Security, all I have said is that I think it is a good thing, and I stand by it. I may not even be able to collect it because it won’t be there when I am old enough to receive payments, but I don’t begrudge that help to older white people, whereas those payments to elderly whites is all you can see.
“It doesn’t matter worth shit whether you’re poor or not when you have children”. It would to me, because I would want to be able to afford to cloth, feed and house those children in a decent fashion. I would want them to have the social advantages necessary to better themselves (good schooling).
“Well, according to you we also have a lot of impoverished old people now even with Social Security, so what good is it doing?” I said we have some, and those people need the help, but you are given to exaggeration and taking my statements out of context.
“just think how much faster it would collapse if it wasn’t for Whites with less than 50K in bank having children.” – I explained the meaning of this statement in my last post.
“Maybe before SS was instituted, not all old people could afford to live in luxury, couldn’t afford unnecessary items like personal television sets, ..”
– I guess not, since TV’s didn’t exist then.
“The productive Race in this Country has a birthrate below replacement rate”. – Yes, but there were more of us prior to Ted Kennedy and company taking the restrictions off of immigration back in 1965. Though the “replacement rate” is low for whites world-wide, just because it is dropping here does not mean we will become extinct. There are whites in other parts of the world too, you know, and Russia and the countries of Eastern Europe are very racially conscious and nationalistic, if that is any consolation to you.
Two quotes of yours in particular , this: “What if they don’t have the money because they’ve had their income depleted by parasitic old people?” And This:
” the shameless luxury of living it up in sunny Florida.”
tell me that you cannot be reasoned with and that you simply have a rabid jealousy and hatred of those who have something you may never benefit from, as well as an irrational hatred for the elderly whites (those whose race you claim to be so concerned with saving). You simply cannot stand paying the FICA tax,(even though, as I have pointed out , other government spending far exceeds the costs of the SS program) and this is really all about YOU. As a matter of fact, I would venture to say that you are obcessed with the topic.
If even 2/3 of all those military bases of ours throughout the world were shut down and the war mongering were curtailed, and the porous borders closed, your taxes would be much lower. I wonder what on earth could be behind your rabid hatred of the elderly? It doesn’t matter, I really don’t care and I won’t be looking back at this site again. So….rant on, my friend.
Oh and : “Im not a Prostitute either, but that doesn’t stop me from knowing it gives you STDs.” My, isn’t that profound? No, equating empathy with a veneral disease is just sick.
Social Security is the biggest red herring ever. SS is not going broke until the Fed does. Privatizing Social Security – the absolute idiocy that Republicans and FOX-tards bring up every year – is nothing more than a forced investment in Wall Street (kind of like 401ks for that matter). Brokers are chomping at the bit to get a piece of what they call “big dumb public money.”
Sorry if my tone is harsh – but conservatives are promoting outright lunacy that will (has) resulted in the fleecing of the middle class.
The “fiscal conservatives” need to shit or get off the pot – either End the Fed and demand 100% reserve requirements, or accept the reality of fiat currency and what that entails. Monetarism is BUNK, it does not work, it has never worked, and it will never work.
Printing money in the current deflationary environment and giving it to old people in SS checks is not going to cause price inflation for consumer products like shoes – the world has unlimited shoe making capacity – and China is NOT going to let the yuan float, so it’s a non-issue.
Social Security is a NON-ISSUE. Our current economic challenge is the Triffin Paradox.
I cannot believe there are supposedly pro-white people complaining that elderly white people get to retire in a nice Florida condo. I thought you were supposed to be on *our* side?
Reginald, Social Security is regressive because of the cap. Remove the cap, problem solved.
Fiscal conservatives seem to think we have a gold standard and non-fractional reserve banking. They need to figure out what century this is. Please don’t confuse dollars with wealth.
If you want to save wealth, don’t save numbers in the bank computer – buy gold, or real estate. Currency is losing it’s status as a store of wealth, and will simply be for short term transactions.
Why not just end all taxes – fund the government with Constitutional tariffs and seigniorage.
“I cannot believe there are supposedly pro-white people complaining that elderly white people get to retire in a nice Florida condo.”
When elderly White people do that it isolates them from the young, and especially from their own children and grandchildren.
This is extremely unhealthy, both for the young and the old.
“Reginald, Social Security is regressive because of the cap. Remove the cap, problem solved.”
Well, as long as when you removed the cap you then used the extra revenue to cut the overall rate.
Just removing the cap while using the money as a source of further funding for the Governmental Behemoth would be worse than useless, unfortunately.
“If you want to save wealth, don’t save numbers in the bank computer”
Agreed.
“buy gold, or real estate.”
Even better to buy gold, with the way things are going, unless you’re going to get heavy duty use out of the property.
“Currency is losing it’s status as a store of wealth, and will simply be for short term transactions.”
It won’t be easy on people when this happens, though.
When Nixon went off the Gold Standard, that gave the Feds too long of a leash to fund social programs with inflation.
Social Security + Medicare + Medicade + What Nixon Did + Inflated Military Budget = The Death of the Dollar.
Social Security and Medicare are what will really kill our economy, though, because of us rapidly approaching a situation where there are too many old, and not enough young White People to pay them their pound of flesh.
The young Blacks and Hispanics won’t do us any good, because in net they take out more in services than they put in with taxes!
“Why not just end all taxes – fund the government with Constitutional tariffs and seigniorage.”
There’s no good reason not to.
The problem is that there are so many bad reasons not to, and so many people who are committed to these bad reasons.