Characteristics of Fascism

The Tea Partiers, rightwing extremists, Third Positionists, Yockeyites, etc. say that Fascism is a Left movement. No it’s not. It’s a rightwing movement, far right. Let’s look at the evidence:

Fascism is an extreme rightwing system characterized by:

  1. Varying degrees of contempt for democracy
  2. Intimidation of political opponents
  3. Utter contempt and hatred for liberalism, socialism and Communism
  4. Hatred for homosexuals and minorities
  5. Utter contempt for social programs as palliatives for the weak
  6. The notion that the strong survive, and the weak die
  7. Often use of extreme religiosity, usually Christianity
  8. Exaltation of masculine values and contempt for feminine values
  9. Emphasis on traditional values and traditional morality with hatred for “immoral” behavior
  10. Hyperemphasis on the family unit
  11. Utter hatred and contempt for feminism – the notion that women belong at home
  12. Ever-present propaganda
  13. Total dishonesty in government and society – the Big Lie
  14. A total marriage of government and business to where we can’t tell where one ends and the other begins
  15. Extreme emphasis on law and order
  16. Use of street thugs to enforce order
  17. Massive corruption in government and business
  18. Utter hatred for workers’ organizations and workers’ rights
  19. Exaltation of class society as divine and denial of class conflict
  20. Extreme, often belligerent, nationalism tending towards jingoism and militarism
  21. Hatred of most other societies as inferior or weaker
  22. Insulation and xenophobia – refusal to read anything from outside the motherland
  23. Hatred and contempt for all international institutions
  24. Hatred for all sentimentality, kindness, sympathy and other “soft, weak, feminine emotions”

Sound very Left to you? Not really. Not in general anyway. Sure, there have been crossovers. North Korea has fascist elements. The Khmer Rogue did too. So did Romania’s Ceaucescu.

Nazis Were Socialists

Yeah right. What a bunch of crap that is. That’s why Big Business fell all over themselves to support the Nazis, because they were pro-worker socialists. Get real. The Nazis assured business that labor would be under the firm control of the state, and business was free to manage their enterprises as they saw fit. The first to go the concentration camps were Communists, then socialists, then trade unions. Jews were fourth! Those first three groups were sent because Nazis were pro-worker socialists! C’mon. From William Shirer’s, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich:

Goebbels was jubilant. “Now it will be easy,” he wrote in his diary on February 3, “to carry on the fight, for we can call on all the resources of the State. Radio and press are at our disposal. We shall stage a masterpiece of propaganda. And this time, naturally, there is no lack of money.”

The big businessmen, pleased with the new government that was going to put the organized workers in their place and leave management to run its business as it wished, were asked to cough up.

This they agreed to do at a meeting on February 20 at Goering’s Reichstag President’s Palace, at which Dr. Schacht acted as host and Goering and Hitler laid down the line to a couple of dozen of Germany’s leading magnates, including Krupp von Bohlen, who had become an enthusiastic Nazi overnight, Bosch and Schnitzler of I. G. Farben, and Voegler, head of the United Steel Works. The record of this secret meeting has been preserved.

Hitler began a long speech with a sop to the industrialists. “Private enterprise,” he said, “cannot be maintained in the age of democracy; it is conceivable only if the people have a sound idea of authority and personality . . . All the worldly goods we possess we owe to the struggle of the chosen . . . We must not forget that all the benefits of culture must be introduced more or less with an iron fist.”

He promised the businessmen that he would “eliminate” the Marxists and restore the Wehrmacht (the latter was of special interest to such industries as Krupp, United Steel and I. G. Farben, which stood to gain the most from rearmament). “Now we stand before the last election,” Hitler concluded, and he promised his listeners that “regardless of the outcome, there will be no retreat.”

If he did not win, he would stay in power “by other means . . . with other weapons.” Goering, talking more to the immediate point, stressed the necessity of “financial sacrifices” which “surely would be much easier for industry to bear if it realized that the election of March fifth will surely be the last one for the next ten years, probably even for the next hundred years.”

All this was made clear enough to the assembled industrialists and they responded with enthusiasm to the promise of the end of the infernal elections, of democracy and disarmament. Krupp, the munitions king, who, according to Thyssen, had urged Hindenburg on January 29 not to appoint Hitler, jumped up and expressed to the Chancellor the “gratitude” of the businessmen “for having given us such a clear picture.” Dr. Schacht then passed the hat. “I collected three million marks,” he recalled at Nuremberg.

As long as businesses produced what the state told them to, they were assured of good profits and a compliant workforce. Strikes and unions were outlawed.

Workers had to obey management. Management threatened disobedient workers with being sent to concentration camps. At first, the Nazis forced businesses to build gyms for their overworked workers to work out in when they were not slaving away. Later, the Nazis got rid of this when business complained that it was costing them too much money.

True, the Nazis built the Autobahn, and that was a public transportation improvement, but improved driving conditions for the masses was secondary. Mostly, those big highways were built to drive tanks and other military vehicles on. To the Nazis, war was everything. Everything was sublimated to the war machine.

When the war really got going, workers were horribly exploited, often forced to work 18 hours a day under miserable conditions all for the Fatherland. Many died of overwork during this period. This is why slave labor was imported from the conquered areas. That was the dominant theme of Nazism: slave labor. Some pro-worker socialists!

References

Shirer, William. 1960. The Nazification of Germany: 1933–34. The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. New York: Simon and Shuster.

Belarus: Dictatorship or Democracy? A Review of Stewart Parker’s: “The Last Soviet Republic”

Belarus: Dictatorship or Democracy? A Review of Stewart Parker’s Book: The Last Soviet Republic. Originally Published on Globalresearch.ca

by Gearóid Ó Colmáin

August 24, 2010

Since the pronouncement of former US Secretary of State Condolezza Rice in 2008 calling the democratically elected president of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko “Europe’s last dictator”, the image and reputation of this noble country has been fanatically tarnished by the mainstream media.

The irony here is that Belarus is indeed deeply familiar with the iniquities of dictatorship. They, more than any other country, suffered the worst of Nazi atrocities during World War 11.

Belarus has always been a multicultural country with Jews, Christians and Muslims living side by side for centuries. This deep tolerance for cultural and religious differences is still celebrated in Belarus today. Yet the European Union, Israel and the United States, never cease from spreading atrocious lies and disinformation concerning the Republic of Belarus.

Belarus has generally received scant coverage from alternative and left-wing media, which is rather surprising considering the fact that Fidel Castro has awarded Alexander Lukashenko with the order of Jose Marti, the highest honour bestowed upon friends of the Cuban people. In a recent visit to Belarus, the president of Venezuela Hugo Chavez praised Belarus as a model of socialist development, one which Venezuela should emulate.

Yet there is a paucity of books and articles about this country and its “controversial” leader. One notable exception to this hiatus comes from Stewart Parker who published a clear and revealing book on Belarus and the policies of Alexander Lukashenko in particular.

For readers seeking an insight into this fascinating country, Parker’s The Last Soviet Republic: Alexander Lukashenko’s Belarus (2007) is a brilliant exposé of the lies and distortions emanating from the European Union and the US concerning “human rights” violations in Belarus and the absence of “democracy.” What follows is an attempt to summarize and evaluate the findings of this valuable study.

Alexander Lukashenko came to power after a landslide victory in 1994. A former director in a collective farm during the USSR era, Lukashenko was one of the few Belarusian politicians to oppose the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1990. Although the Belarusian leader had always been an outspoken critic of the USSR’s corruption, he remained committed to Marxism-Leninism, and opposed the rampant privatization proposed by Boris Yeltsin and his followers.

In the final years of the Soviet regime, Lukashenko, then a deputy to the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, formed a group called “Communists for Democracy.” Lukashenko argued that the real problem in the USSR was the decline in democratic participation and the parasitism and corruption of the ruling bureaucracy. He also advocated more autonomy for the USSR’s constituent Republics.

Belarus had always been the most advanced Soviet Republics, with high achievements in education and science. In spite of economic stagnation and increasing corruption in other republics of the USSR, Belarus’s state planning had continued to yield impressive results, with economic growth continuing throughout the Brezhnev era. In 1993 Lukashenko was appointed head of an “anti-corruption committee.”

One of the numerous myths repeatedly circulated since the fall of the USSR is that a majority of the Soviet people wanted free market capitalism. This was certainly not the case in Soviet Republic of Belarus. It was Alexander Lukashenko’s defence of Soviet values, together with his outspoken criticisms of the Communist Party of the USSR and the apparatchiks of the soviet regime that earned him the respect and confidence of the Belarusian people. In 1994 Lukashenko was elected President of Belarus with over 80 percent of the votes.

Finding a place for Belarus in the post-Soviet chaos was a difficult task for the young president. One of the first issues concerned the national flag. The BPF, a nationalist party, wanted to restore the white, red and white flag of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, which had been the national flag under the puppet regime of the German empire in 1918. It was also used by the collaborators with the Nazi Wehrmacht during World War II. The people finally settled for maintaining the Soviet flag minus the hammer and sickle. Radio Free Europe later lamented the dropping of the Nazi collaboration flag as a “heavy blow to democratic forces.”

In the intervening years since the fall of the USSR and the rise of Lukashenko, over 15 billion dollars had been siphoned out of the country. Privatization and the lifting of price controls had caused inflation to soar, with prices rising 432 times. The Soviet economy was being replaced by mafia gangsters. Western “freedom” and “democracy” was taking its toll!

Through a series of referenda Lukashenko was able to set in motion a democratic social program which has made Belarus one of the most prosperous and least corrupt countries in Eastern Europe. Just like Venezuela, a clause in the constitution decided by a referendum permits the indefinite re-election of the president should the Belarusian people wish to do so.

Over 80 percent of industry in Belarus remains in public ownership. In 1996 the unemployment figure in the country amounted to 4 percent. Lukashenko’s administration has since reduced this figure to little over 1 percent, one of the lowest unemployment rates in the world. Industrial output rose by 9.7 percent in 2004. Wages have been increasing significantly every year since Lukashenko’s accession to power.

Economic growth in Socialist Belarus has been so impressive that even the World Bank and the IMF have had to acknowledge this incontrovertible fact. In June 2005, the World Bank published a report titled Belarus: Window of Opportunity, which admitted that the Belarusian economy was growing steadily, while the IMF admitted that Belarus had significant wage increases coupled with low government debt. Good news for Belarus, bad news for the World Bank and IMF, whom Lukashenko, speaking before the Russian Duma in 1999, had called “a pack of swindlers.”

In a world where the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer, Belarus offers real hope that economics does not have to function that way.

According to the system developed by the Italian statistician Corrado Gini, known as the Gini coefficient, Belarus ranks as the most equal country on earth. The Gini coefficient for Belarus in 2005 was 0.217, the lowest out of 113 countries. In Belarus, the lowest income is only five times lower than the highest income. This means that the notion of “corporate greed” one hears about in the United States and Europe is virtually nonexistent in the Republic of Belarus.

Belarus also comes out on top in education. Adult literacy in Belarus is the highest in the CIS nations at 99.

In contrast to Western “democracies” where social security is being systematically destroyed to sustain the financial oligarchies, male workers in Belarus retire at 60, while women retire at 55 with full pension entitlements.

Needless to say, the attitude of the EU and the United States nomenclatura, that is to say, the self-proclaimed “international community,” is that Belarus is not a “democracy.” Media disinformation has backed this hostility of European and US elites to Belarus by publishing an impressive quantity of lies. At the 60th session of the United Nations General Assembly in 2005, President Lukashenko put the US “human rights” obsession thus:

If there are no pretexts for intervention – imaginary ones are created. To this end a very convenient banner was chosen, democracy and human rights, and not in the original sense of the rule of people and personal dignity, but solely and exclusively in the interpretation of the US leadership.

In order to promote the US “interpretation” of human rights, President Clinton sent Michael Kozak to Belarus in 2000. Kozak distinguished himself during the 1970s in the Iran/contra scandal where he was instrumental in organising the sale of arms to the contra terrorists in Nicaragua in exchange for cocaine, which the CIA sold to poor Americans on the streets of Los Angeles, the same poor people who would subsequently be incarcerated for “possession of narcotics.”

While poor people were forced to make military uniforms in US prisons for their drug convictions, Kozak was one of Washington’s key handlers of Daniel Noriega, a CIA narcotrafficker and dictator of Panama. Clinton had deep confidence in Kozak’s democratic credentials, as he himself was governor of Arkansas, where the CIA operation was conducted from. The US-funded terrorist campaign in Nicaragua cost the lives of over 30,000 people, most of them civilians. Kozak had the perfect credentials for spreading “democracy” American style in socialist Belarus.

Upon his arrival in Minsk, US ambassador Micheal Kozak, Clinton’s former CIA gun-for-drugs terrorist handler, now US “pro-democracy” diplomat, was quick to make contact with his European counterparts. Representing the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe was Hans Georg Wieck. Wieck worked closely with Kozak to groom “opposition” candidates in Belarus suitable to Washington and Brussels.

When Lukashenko won another landslide victory in the presidential elections of 2001, the OSCE condemned the elections as unfair without producing a shred of evidence to corroborate their claims.

After the 9-11 attacks in New York, the US showed the real motives behind the “global war on terror” when Senator John McCain declared:

Alexander Lukashenko’s Belarus cannot long survive in a world where the United States and Russia enjoy a strategic partnership and the United States is serious about its commitment to end outlaw regimes whose conduct threatens us…September 11th opened our eyes to the status of Belarus as a national security threat.

McCain was referring to the sale of arms by Belarus to the CIA’s disobedient puppet dictator Saddam Hussein, a claim denied by President Lukashenko. Here we see the US accusing other countries of crimes which it itself committed for years when it sold arms to the Iraqi dictator. But the real crime committed by Lukashenko was his progressive social policies, which were setting a bad example for other countries strangled by the financial interests of the US global oligarchy; US “national security” meaning the security of the financial elite, and “global war on terror” meaning global war on freedom.

But the US was determined to launch its global terror campaign against any state that dared to resist casino capitalism. Belarus and Lukashenko himself would pay a heavy price for standing up to the IMF and the World Bank. In 2004 the United States proceeded to take action with the passing of the Belarus Democracy Act, calling for sanctions against Belarus and funding for “pro-democracy” groups.

Most opposition groups in Belarus today receive funding from the United States government, paid for by cash-strapped US tax payers. This funding almost culminated in the so-called “Denim Revolution” in 2006, a CIA-funded attempt to arouse popular opposition to the Lukashenko government in order to replace it with a pro-US regime. However, unlike their neighbours in other Eastern European countries, the Belarusians did not take the US bait, and Lukashenko stayed in power.

After the failure of the “Denim Revolution,” the EU imposed a travel ban on Lukashenko and 30 ministers, preventing them from traveling to any part of the EU. This shows the extent of the anxiety among the EU elite in the face of Belarus’s popular democracy.

Stewart Parker sites a number of poignant examples in his book which reveal the extent of systematic anti-democratic interference in Belarusian affairs by the United States and their vassal states in Europe. What is particularly “totalitarian” about socialist Belarus is not the Belarusian state, but rather the way in which that state is portrayed by the so-called democratic authorities of the EU and the US.

The absurdities promoted by the mainstream media come from all sides. Lukashenko has been accused of anti-Semitism, in spite of the fact that the thriving Jewish community in the country seem to be unaware of this fact. In fact, the chief Rabbi of Belarus has praised the Belarussian president for his support of the Jewish community, yet the EU, the US and Israel insist that Lukashenko is “anti-Semitic” and also opposes “free media.”

The Belarus government has been accused of internet censorship and media control. More lies! The Open Net Initiative carried out a study after the “disputed” elections of 2006 to see if the claims about Internet censorship were true. They “found no evidence of systematic and comprehensive interference with the Net. Any regime-directed tampering that may have taken place was fairly subtle, causing disruptions to access, but never turning off the alternative information tap.”

Another slander against the Belarusian president came from Russia’s “free media.” In 1995, Dr. Marcus Zeiner interviewed Lukashenko for the German newspaper Handelsblatt. The interview with Dr. Martin Zeiner was cleverly mistranslated to include positive references to Hitler. This was confirmed by the interviewer himself who subsequently said “a tape of the interview had been quoted out of context and with the sequence of comments altered.”

The BBC continues to propagate this lie about Lukashenko, which only serves to prove the desperation of the corporate media in the face of popular leaders whose policies threaten their empire of lies.

Stewart Parker’s book The Last Soviet Republic is an indispensable guide to a country and leader the bourgeois media does not want you to know about. It is, to my knowledge, the only comprehensive study of a country that only receives attention when vicious opportunities for anti-socialist propaganda present themselves.

We have much to learn from this brave little country that sacrificed so much to defeat the forces of fascism of Europe’s past and is now menaced by those same fascist forces which have resurfaced today in the name of “human rights,” “democracy” and “freedom.” In a world dominated by the ideology of the financial elite, those who stand for the common man and woman are beaten down ruthlessly. Alexander Lukashenko stands for democracy, human rights and freedom, which is why the corporate media call him a “dictator.”

Robert Taylor in the Comments Section

Mr. Taylor is ruffling quite a few feathers (Thank God! There is hope for us yet.) in the comments section, which indicates there is yet hope for mankind. When his comments elicit storms of praise, we need to start worrying. A lot.

Most can’t figure out where this extremely pro-capitalist person is coming from.

Robert Taylor is an extremely hardline Libertarian type. More of an anarcho-capitalist. He’s so radical he thinks most of his fellow Libertarians are socialists. Just so you know who you’re dealing with.

Libertarianism is rocket-fueled, turbocharged, Racer’s Edge capitalism on steroids to the nth power. If you’re dubious at all about capitalism as the ultra-wonderful system our parties and media say it is, trust, me Libertarianism is not for you!

Anything on the Right Worth Supporting? Well, Yeah

A commenter notes that the Far Right and Far Left advocate similar things, at least in the US. But that’s not the case at all.

Rob, what’s wrong with taking the good out of the left and the right and mixing it up? Perhaps the far left and far right are realizing that their real enemies are not each other, but the corrupt, plutocratic ruling class?

Far Right is Tea Parties, Libertardian Party and the Republitard Party as a whole. They most certainly do not support an attack on the plutocrats!

I support the Right on some things.

  • I’m for a hard crackdown on illegals.
  • I’m also for amending the 14th amendment to get rid of the anchor baby phenomenon.
  • I want to get rid of treacherous ethnic studies programs in high schools like the ones in Arizona.
  • I’m for a judicial decision amending the Civil Rights Act on “disparate impact.” This has gone too far, and it’s just nuts.
  • I want to end the Hindu 1-B program.
  • I advocate marriage licenses for parents, though it’s not happening.
  • I agree that there are intelligence difference between the races, at the moment anyway. Maybe not forever.
  • I want IQ tests for prospective immigrants from lands that are producing large numbers of problem immigrants to the US.
  • I think that PC anti-racism has gone seriously too far to the point of insanity, and that’s it’s now little more than anti-White racism.
  • I think there are hate crimes against Whites, job discrimination against Whites and hate propaganda racism against Whites, hence Whites are at some times and places anyway a persecuted race on account of their ethnicity.
  • I think the racial makeup of a city, more than income level, explains more in terms of its crime rate and desirability as a living space.
  • I believe the high Black crime rate may be in part genetically based, but is by no means inevitable at any rate, as culture modifies genes.
  • I believe that Gypsies are a criminal race.

I’ve been told that these are all a rightwing positions. So be it.

You know what the weird thing is though? Among White liberals here in California (and I spent my whole life with these people) if you get them behind closed doors when no one is listening, they will agree with me on a large number of these “rightwing” ideas. But it’s not something they will talk about in public. And they all voted for Obama anyway.

Split Emerging Between CA Liberals and Left on Illegals

Repost from the old site.

Here in California (Ground Zero of America’s Mass/Illegal Immigration Nightmare) there is getting to be a serious split between some California liberals and the PC California Leftists over the issues of illegal immigration, Sanctuary Cities and other symptoms of major mental illness.

Take San Fransisco. You can’t get much more insane than Sanctuary Cities, but SF did just that. Not only do they hide illegal alien criminals from the law, they used to hide illegal alien felons, so long as they were underage! Turns out almost all of them ran away from the silly group homes they were dumped in, as we might expect.

Turns out some of them afterward went out and murdered people, as we might expect. Turns out a lot of others were really adults who lied and said they were minors, as we might expect. With blood on the sidewalk, three Italian native San Fransiscans, a father and two sons, dead, the mayor and his Leftist colleagues are incredibly holding their ground.

If you go to the comments on the SF Chronicle page dealing with these issues, you will see that there is an emerging split between SF liberals and SF Leftists. Probably 9

Well, over and over on those pages, you see these SF liberals saying, “Hey! I’m a liberal San Franciscan, but this Sanctuary City crap has gone too far! Count me out! Up with liberals, down with PC Leftists!” And a lot of them are also saying, “And by the way, down with illegal aliens! Get the Hell out of my country!”

Keep in mind California is Ground Zero for Mass/Illegal Immigration madness. If that reality doesn’t turn any native Californian sensible on this issue, nothing will.

Being liberal was never supposed to be about being nuts or being stupid. From any logical point of view, a pro-illegal immigration (defending an invading army of lawbreakers), Sanctuary City (shielding the invader army from the law trying to arrest the criminals), viewpoint is both dumb and nuts.

Equality is Not a Prerequisite for Liberalism

Repost from the old site.

On a White nationalist blog that linked to me, I noted that it was possible to be a race realist and a socialist. This provoked the following objection:

…That makes no sense. A fundamental principle of liberalism is that of equality, of human beings being equal and interchangeable. It’s false of course, but take it away and all sorts of other leftist and liberal ideas crumble by implication.

I don’t see how one can be a race realist without that leading naturally to some sort of white supremacist / white nationalist / white exclusiveness position.

First of all, I would like to say some things about White Nationalism. I’ve finally concluded that White Nationalism is nothing but White racism and often White Supremacism.

It’s just White racism and White Supremacism repackaged with a fancy new name called White Nationalism to make it seem like it’s not those nasty things that we know of as White racism and White Supremacism, the latter being largely discredited. Well, if a philosophy is discredited, just invent a fancy new word for it and say it’s not the bad thing it really is.

It also explains why White Nationalists are so sensitive about the word racism and always put it in quotes like this: “racism”. Of course, they only do this when referring to White racism. Black racism, Hispanic racism, and all the other kinds are quite real; it’s only White racism that is phantasmagorical.

It’s also interesting how White Nationalists project. While they are denying their own racism, they are often fulminating about Black racism and Hispanic racism and whatnot. That’s clearly denial and projection.

There does seem to be a trend now with a lot of White Nationalists to come right out and admit that they are racists. This is to be encouraged. If you’re racist, what the Hell, just admit it. It’s not like you’re alone in the world – the world is full of racists. And it’s not like it’s the worst thing in the world to be anyway – as White Nationalists note, there are sure plenty of Hispanic and Black racists out there.

White Nationalists think they have excellent reasons to be racists – they’ve had bad experiences with Blacks and Hispanics and want nothing more to do with them. If that’s the case, then just admit it and make your case to an inquiring world.

There are a few White Nationalists who don’t seem to be racists, but I would say that 9

No, onto this fellow’s rejoinder. This is a typical White Nationalist position. To them, one is either a silly race-denying liberal or one is a White Nationalist racist.

It doesn’t work that way. I know a number of White liberals and even Leftists who feel that there are intrinsic differences between the races; they just don’t think the question is very important. They date, befriend and even marry non-Whites. You might be surprised how common this type of thinking is.

One thing that always bothered me about the race realist crowd is that they insist that there are intrinsic differences between the races, and then proceed to blame races and ethnic groups for various average shortcomings and higher rates of pathologies.

But if those shortcomings and pathology rates are indeed genetic (This is what almost all race realists insist) then it follows that those groups should not be blamed for their shortcomings or pathologies. After all, it’s genetic and nothing can be done, right?

So, first of all, they accuse a group of being the equivalent of handicapped, then they throw the crutches away, kick the wheelchair to the side, throw the person into the gutter, all the while cursing them for being a cripple. How cruel can you get? Why does a realization that humans are not intrinsically equal automatically seem to lead to the cruelest sort of Social Darwinism, at best?

And by the same token, if the superior races are only superior through the luck of the dices, what on Earth do they have to feel proud of anyway? Nothing, really. Have they done anything to earn their superior status? Hardly. They just lucked out in the genes crapshoot. Big deal.

If humans are not equal, then it would be up to the state to equalize things. If Blacks, on average are always going to fall behind due to lower IQ (I am beginning to fear that this may be the case), then that is no fault of their own anyway, and it’s cruel to force them to suffer the ravages of the market, which is what most White nationalists seem to perversely want to do.

If Blacks were on average the same as we are, and the failures of their group were just due to their being a bunch of willful, perverse and deliberately wicked and stupid pricks, I would just say the Hell with them. But I honestly think that they can’t help it.

Nor can Amerindians, Polynesians, Hispanics, Aborigines, or any other group that is going to tend to fall behind. It’s really not their fault. Therefore, they should not be punished with failure for things that they can’t help.

If Black income is always going to be a lot lower on average than, say, Whites, due to an IQ deficit that they have no control over, then it is the duty of the state through redistributive taxation to equalize things a bit and make it more fair for Blacks who fail through no fault of their own.

Humans are not necessarily equal at all. Even within a race, we are born with wildly differing IQ’s and whatnot. I think most liberals would agree with that.

Even from a White Supremacist point of view, libertarianism makes no sense. Libertarianism is not only perverse for conscious White nationalists, it’s downright cruel.

If you really love your own people so much, why throw them into a Roman-type pit where they consume each other alive while you cheer on the deadliest and most homicidal of the White cannibals? Only via some form of socialism can Whites really work together to help each other and have real solidarity.

I’m not interested in supremacism or chauvinism or nationalism or any of that. What are you looking for in your acquaintances? There are smart or good or kind, or any combination of many other great qualities, Blacks, Hispanics, Amerindians, Arabs, East Indians and all sorts of other non-Europeans. Just as smart, good and kind as your European White friends.

I love my people finally (after decades of self-hate) but Whites are not the end-all and be-all. I think Whites are a bit cold, for one. Hispanics and Blacks are much warmer and friendlier, and it’s much easier to befriend them. Of course, their lower-income neighborhoods also have some big downsides too. There’s good and bad with all groups, including Whites.

If people are not equal, that’s no argument against liberalism. It actually implies we need it even more.

It means we need affirmative action, progressive taxation, humane prisons and all sorts of things you would never think of.

Is The Political Spectrum Linear or Circular?

Repost from the old site.

If you want to take the time, can someone please tell me where this guy is coming from? A lot of it looks like good Left progressive stuff, but then there seems to be this kind of Far Right Ron Paul populism too. I don’t get it. What is it? Some kind of marriage between Far Right and Far Left? I’m seeing more and more of this crap nowadays on progressive and Left sites and I must say, I don’t really like it.

While we are at it, where the Hell is Jeff Rense coming from anyway? Same place as this guy? He can write about Bigfoot and UFO’s all he wants, and there are usually lots of good articles on the site, but his politics seriously creeps me out. For one thing, he’s leaking anti-Semitism out of his pores.

My Mom has been telling my whole life, “Well, you know. It’s like a circle. When you go so far to the Left and so far to the Right, you don’t have two polar opposite ends of a huge ruler. The ruler starts bending and becomes circular. It’s a circle. Far Right and Far Left meet, and you just have a nut, a fanatic.” I always figured that was just Left-trashing, but now I’m starting to wonder.

There were some people marching against the war in Oakhurst the other day and my brother went to talk to them. Some of them handed some really weird brochures full of all this conspiratorial shit. I went to the site and it was the same thing. Anti-CIA, anti-militarism, anti-Bush, anti-Iraq War, ok, that’s good.

Then it starts taking off into all this weird conspiracy theory about the Federal Reserve, the Rothschilds, the New World Order, Ron Paul, black helicopters, chemtrails, bla bla bla. Kind of like this guy.

Hard economic times really brings this stuff out bigtime.

Is this what the new radical US populism is going to look like? Some Far Right – Far Left mix? I don’t mind the Far Left part, but whenever anyone starts talking about “marrying Left and Right”, I get the creeps. I hate to say it, but that tends to end up in some weird kind of fascism of one species or other. One of the favorite fascist lines was about “getting rid of Left and Right”.

Yuck.

Color me perturbed.

Global Warming Doesn’t Exist

As you can see, there is no such thing as global warming. It's all a great big like dreamed up by Al Gore.

It’s simply incredible the number of dickhead Americans, almost all White by the way, who say that either there’s no such thing as global warming or it hasn’t been proven yet. In 2008, the figure of Americans who did not believe in global warming was

These days, since Obama’s election, a relentless rightwing campaign run by the Republitard Party, Fox News and the Teabaggers (Yes, Teabaggers to a man don’t believe in global warming) has raised the number who don’t believe from

For some assfucked reason, White nationalists have decided that global warming is a White issue. In other words, the pro-White view is that there’s no such thing as global warming. I don’t get it. Pro-White means acting like a retard then? Is that it? American Renaissance, Occidental Dissent, Stormfront, every dipshit WN site out there lines up with the 70 IQ crowd and says there’s no such thing as global warming. But isn’t their argument that White people are the smartest humans on Earth?

This just shows how shitty and evil capitalism is. What do people who don’t believe in global warming all have in common? They are reactionary capitalists and pro-capitalists, strong supporters of the capitalist mode of production. This is what capitalism does to your brain. It fries it to a crisp worse than any drug known to mankind.

Capitalists oppose the idea of global warming because they fear that efforts to deal with global warming by curbing global carbon emissions will result in serious losses to their the profits. Bourgeois White Americans refuse to believe in global warming because they believe that efforts to deal with it will cause a lowering of their standard of living. These idiots would rather blowup the whole fuckin’ planet than take a hit to their profits or their living standard. Capitalism more and more looks like mass suicide a la Jonestown or lemmings plunging off a cliff.

Wow! People would rather die and see others be killed than take a profit loss or a living standard hit? Damn. That sounds like drug addiction or alcoholism. The addict keeps on hitting the bottle, pipe or needle until he drops. He’d rather be dead than sober. He’d rather be high than alive. Same with a capitalist. He’d rather be dead than socialist. He’d rather be a capitalist than be alive.

I hang out on a site called 2Care. It’s a liberal site, full of middle class+ SWPL Whites. But it’s also full of insane rightwing Whites. The rightwing Whites are there because they often have some weird “Left” pet cause, like animal rights, religion, or even environmentalism.

The rightwingers have been getting more and more scarce lately for some weird reason (That’s because the US is swinging Right, eh Fox News?), but they are still out in droves on the global warming stuff. 2Care is a good view into the mind of middle class and upper middle class Whites. A Hell of lot of them, even White “liberals,” still don’t believe in global warming.

Unbelievable.

Rats running off the cliff.

On the Naderists

Nader says there is a not a dime’s worth of difference between the Republican and Democratic Parties, that they are both wholly owned corporate parties.

Well he’s right in a sense, but we liberals never I mean never vote Republican. I’d almost rather die than vote Republican, and I’ve been that way for most of my life. I’m a liberal! Hell, why would I vote Republican? Give it up.

There’s a reason for that. Dems are way more pro worker and pro working family than the Republicans. It’s not true at all that they both the same. That’s a bunch of crap, and it makes me mad to hear it.

Truth is, if the Dems were more pro worker = Left/liberal than they already are, they would simply lose, because the electorate is that reactionary. The Dems are just as conservative as they need to be to win. Still, I think they suck up to corporations too much, but apparently this is due to campaign contributions.

The Reps’ whole line is that the Dems are not pro-corporate enough, that they are anti-corporate. They have been beating Obama with that since he came in. The Teabaggers are simply a Brownshirt type army for the corporations, the rich and the upper middle class.

For being as anti-corporate as they have been under Obama, the Dems are going to lose 6-7 Senate seats and maybe 20 House seats. So it doesn’t pay to be pro-worker. The Electorate is wildly pro-corporate, pro-rich and pro-upper middle class, and they punish you if you try to help working families even just a bit.

Republicans and Democrats: Pepsi and Coke?

In the comments section, Bay Area Guy tosses out the typical American argument that Republicans and Democrats are just Pepsi and Coke. If the Pepsi tastes bad, go buy a Coke instead. If the Dems can’t fix the economy, then vote Republicans. Surely they will fix it! Morons.

Besides, Democrats are hardly better when it comes to elites. Although at least from an economic standpoint, they’re not as bad as Republicans.

That’s a pretty horrible argument. Most Democrats I know certainly don’t vote for them because they are voting for the party of elites. Are you kidding?

The Dems suck up to elite politics because if they don’t, they will lose.

Newsflash: A majority of Americans arguably support pro-elite politics. If you go against the elite and upper middle class (the ruling capitalist classes) you get creamed in the bourgeois media, and you lose elections, then Republicans come in, and they are even worse. I haven’t met a Dem yet who said that the Repugs and Dems are the same, both parties of the elites, so this time I’m voting Repug.

Unless you are in the top 2

It’s a plutocratic political party.

I have a lot of respect for folks who make over $80,000/yr and vote Republican out of their economic interests. Or really anyone who votes Republican out of economic interests for whatever logical reason. If you acknowledge that voting Right is bad for your bottom line, but vote Right anyway due to cultural stuff or some other crap, then I respect you.

When voting Republican or supporting them hurts you in the pocketbook, but you think it doesn’t, is where I lose all respect for you. So I have no respect at all for a good 70 million American adult-tards.

Of course it’s the scum Lamestream Media that promotes all of this ignorance by telling people that the two parties are just two different flavors of Baskin Robbins.

Clinton got creamed when he pursued anti-ruling class politics on health care reform. Same with Obama. The Lamestream media keeps Americans ignorant and moronic.

The Communists actually make sense when they advocate nationalizing all the media, since all the rightwing media ever does is lie and confuse people anyway.

Keep in mind that all conservative parties on Earth are liars, and all conservative politics on Earth all history has been based on a Grand Canyon filled in with lies. Conservative politics is plutocratic politics. It only benefits the ruling class of society and their hanger on’s, at most the top 2

Judeopedia Redux

Repost from the old site.

Via Philip Weiss, who gets the scoop from Electronic Intifada, and thence to Joachim Martillo for final comment, it seems the paranoid and delusional world that I revealed in Wikipedia, Ziopedia or Judeopedia fully two years ago is finally starting to be proven true. But of course. I saw it with my very eyes.

I saw the Jewish Nationalist cabal on there and got nailed, run up by admins and then banned by them. Then I wrote about it. I don’t see how anyone could spend much time on Wikipedia and not notice these wicked little toads running amok all over that precious online encyclopedia.

The Electronic Intifada piece reveals a concerted effort by CAMERA, a rightwing Zionist lobby in the US, to infiltrate Wikipedia surreptitiously, ingratiate themselves with editors, get all pro-Palestinian editors run up on fake charges and hopefully run out, and to eventually move on up into the ranks of administrators. So my paranoid delusions about Jewish conspiracies on Wikipedia were proven true after all.

I can tell you flat out that the Administrators are already chock full of either members of this Jewish Cabal or rightwing libertarians allied with them. Jimmy Wales himself is a rightwing libertarian who has strong pro-Zionist views that he does not hide. The administrators are chosen well to carry out a specific agenda.

No one has ever run up these cackling criminal Heckles and Jeckles in this Jewish Cabal on anything yet, and anyone who mentions a peep about it gets put on their creepy neo-Nazi list (I made it on) which I guess has hundreds of names on it, in typical Jewish paranoid fashion.

Not only that, but the Jewish Cabal runs around crowing and bragging about their very project all the time; they call themselves The Cabal, The Jewish Cabal, and other names, so they are totally blatant about what they are doing. But if anyone dares to notice this and points it out, onto the Neo-Nazi list you go, and soon you will be run up to Administrators on totally faked charges and then run out of Wikipedia.

I don’t think I have ever seen a Jewish-critical or pro-Palestinian editor who lasted long there. It’s been two years since I wrote that post, and I keep hoping things have changed, but I keep getting emails from pro-Palestinian folks who just got run out of Wikipedia.

On Phil’s post, the truly disgusting Richard Witty, “Peace Now Zionist – Jewish nationalist – defender of the Jews” who seems to inhabit all of Phil’s threads is squirming around as usual. One gets the impression he is writing on a pincushion. This crap is getting harder and harder for the Richard Witty’s of the world to deny.

The usual rejoinders are employed by Witty – this happens all over the web, this is the problem with open source editing, there are cabals all over the place in our world, including the Internet.

Sure, I saw plenty of cabals trying to form on Wikipedia, usually on nationalistic or political issues. And they were crushed, one by one, but conscientious editors. However, curiously, the sickening little Jewish cabal was allowed not only to survive but to run amok across all of Wikipedia! Riddle me that!

And recently, a particularly vile and scummy Hindutva – Hindu Nationalist – Indian Nationalist Cabal has formed and this cabal has also been allowed to run wild all over all of the India and Pakistan articles on Wikipedia. The result is that most of the articles on India and Pakistan have been totally destroyed by stinking fascist Hindutva worms.

The Hindutva Cabal, of course, has formed an alliance with the Jewish Cabal, Jewish fascist dogs with Indian fascist dogs, all in one kennel, crapping on the floor, humping each others’ legs and yip-yapping away, just like in real life.

One Jayg is mentioned in the article as not a member of the CAMERA cabal, but instead a sympathetic outsider. Actually, Jayg is one of the leading members of the Jewish Cabal on Wikipedia. He’s one of the worst Jewish POV-pushers of them all.

Zeq, the leader of the CAMERA cabal, is also a well-known member of the Jewish Cabal on Wikipedia. The reason Zeq speaks poor English, I believe, is because he is an Israeli.

I am familiar with both of these sociopathic runts.

I believe they are both admins too, but I may be wrong.

Repeat after yourself: cabals exist, cabals exist, cabals exist.

Anyway, over and out. Writing this is starting to make me really angry all over again.

P. S. I would like to point out that a huge percentage of White Nationalists support Zionism (Jewish nationalism). That right there ought to stop anyone in their tracks and make them wonder why. When you finally figure it out, if you have any decency, you will realize even more than ever that WN is bad news.

The Wikipedia Jews

Repost from the old site.

More stuff on the Wikipedia Jewish Cabal, from a recent commenter:

Looks like the same old gang is back at it. Here is the link, from a Wikipedia history page, showing actual edits being done to a page. This project is being managed by notorious Jewish POV-pushers Jayjg and SlimVirgin. Those two were notorious when I was editing two years ago and it appears that they are still at it.I had heard a year or two ago that some of the Cabal had adopted the cause of trying to block the famous Jews pages, though that seemed odd at the time.

Apparently, being classic cases of Jewish paranoid-masochistic character*, they are trying to stonewall these articles, especially the ones about wealthy Jews in the US, because they can be used by the evil anti-Semites to insinuate some of those “classic canards about Jewish wealth”, as the ADL loves to phrase it.

So, due to their paranoia about anti-Semites, folks are being prevented from learning some interesting information about Jews in the US who have done quite well for themselves in business. Hey, what’s so bad about that? This is a capitalist country after all, right? And the Jews sure do know how to make money, got to hand it to a sharp businessman.

It’s strange that this stupid project is still ongoing, as I think I heard about it maybe 1-2 years ago.

SlimVirgin is a young Jewish female. Jayjg is a young Jewish male. I believe that they may both be administrators. Both are passionate Jewish nationalists. As you can see from the history page, they have shut almost all of these obviously Jewish prominent businesspeople from the page unless and until actual urls can be tracked down that conclusively prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they are in fact Jewish.

Never mind everyone knows Larry Ellison, Sergey Brin and Steve Ballmer are Jews. We gots to prove it.

Strange the obsessions some of these Jewish nationalists get hot for. A casual reader of the Jewish press quickly becomes aware that the Jewish press loves the idea of Jewish business success and is not shy at all about singing the praises of these folks every chance it gets. As well they should in a capitalist society. Hell, gimme some of dat money.

In anticipation of the usual rejoinders:

My experience on Wikipedia showed me clearly that there is some sort of a Jewish Cabal running amok on there unobstructed, and they have seriously damaged most articles dealing with Judaica and Israel – Palestine. I got run out of Wikipedia on faked charges after I blew the whistle on em.

Yes, there are many other folks attempting to form cabals on Wikipedia. None have been allowed any power other than the Jewish Cabal and a Hindutva Cabal from India. What’s up with that, Jimbo Wales?

It was clear to me editing Wikipedia that Wiki is swarming with Jews all over the encyclopedia. Jews are our smartest humans, and their cumulative knowledge is encyclopedic and often polymathic. Most Jews do not have a permanent hardon for Judaica. I assume that most Jews on Wikipedia are just editing stuff on linguistics, computers, butterflies or this or that.

A small group of Jews are heavily involved in editing Judaica and Israel-related stuff. They may number no more than 20-30. It has not been shown that they meet together, but they don’t need to. They came there for a common purpose, and that is what they are each doing – Jewish POV-pushing. They don’t need to hold secret meetings to do that.

That’s probably the way most cabals, and surely Jewish cabals, work in the world. I doubt most hold secret meetings. A lot of media Jews are just Jewish POV-pushers, wittingly or not. They know the line and they push, one after the other. No need for consultation.

Cabals are not automatically conspiracy theory. It is via cabals that any wealth and power is accumulated in any complex human society. The rich and powerful conspire and conspire to make their money and then again to keep from losing it to continuous challengers.

The rest of us conspire too. I and millions of other guys conspire to get women into bed, sometimes successfully, sometimes not. Life’s not necessarily on the up and up all the time, you know.

It’s cool that these punks are finally getting outed. Let’s shine the light on them more and more and maybe the Wikipedia admins will appeal to their best impulses and rope these wild horses into the corral.

Got tips for me on the last crap of the Wikipedia Jews, especially with links like this? Keep em coming! Email is on the upper right, or use the comments.

*I do not mean to imply that all Jews have this salient character, however prominent Jewish psychologist Stanley Rothman feels it is prominent amongst Jews. A worthy project of any progressive Jew would be try to wiggle out of this psychopathological suit of armor, I would think.

Wikipedia Jews Again

Repost from the old site.

Looks like some of the Wikipedia Jews are operating out of Israeli government computers and the Israeli Embassy in Washington DC. Well, I guess Wikipedia has really hit the bigtime when the diplomats and spy-types start trying to write it.

This blog has obtained a secret copy of emblem of the Wikipedia Jews, used by them in internal communications via instant messenger and email to ward off spies and infiltration attempts. They make sly references to this motif throughout their communications with each other. This is the first publication of the cabal’s secret sign, and hopefully it will stimulate further research into the workings of this very secret and devious cabal.

Even read Thomas Pynchon’s book The Crying of Lot 49? It’s quite difficult to read, but if you’re smart, you can handle it.

I feel it deals with Information Theory. Supposedly Information Theory is this, but my take on that is, “He who controls information, controls the world”. Right?

Well, that’s what’s up with the Israeli government rewriting Wikipedia. Supposedly other governments are doing this too. Only problem: it’s against Wikipedia’s mission and policy of being an unbiased (LOL!) encyclopedia. So, really, it’s not ok. Wikipedia’s not ok either, but neither is government encyclopedia manipulation.

The comments are really interesting too. Lots of Zionist Jews chiming in with the usual crap, excuses and lines.

Everyone does it.

That’s one of their favorites, from murder to spying to this or that or anything.

The Palestinian propaganda network is just as bad, if not worse.

ROTF.

I used to hear this one all the time in the Middle East Usenet groups. Zionist Jews have this peculiar notion that there is this vast worldwide Palestinian or pro-Palestinian network that almost controls the world’s press. Sort of like the Protocols of the Elders of Palestine or something.

It’s complete crap.

The Palestinians have nothing, just some terrorists ramming dozers into pedestrian vehicles – the latest attack – 3 dead, 70 wounded – is another Hezbollah revenge attack for the Mossad killing Mughniyeh. I knew Hez would make Israel pay for that. And crappy rockets that don’t even shoot straight.

I’ve been on Wikipedia and edited articles on Israel and Palestine in a completely fair manner, usually using the Israeli government’s own statistics to rewrite articles. I was more or less alone in this endeavor. All who went before me were thrown off Wikipedia.

For this crime, I was put on a neo-Nazi list by the Wikipedia Jews and their buddies like this twit Chip Berlet, had 10

That Berlet twerp is in very tight with the top Wikipedia leadership, and seems to work very closely with Ape Foxman, I mean Abe Foxman, of the spies and thugs of the ADL.

Berlet seems to specialize in finding “rightwing” movements where none can be seen for miles, and in finding all manner of “anti-Semitism” that often never seems to exist either. The man’s got quite an imagination. Lately, he’s been working on the Jewish Lobby or Israeli Lobby thingie. There is no such thing, you know, sez Chip. And if you mention it, you’re an anti-Semite. Neener neener.

Chip also insists that the US is in the midst of some sort of White nationalist and anti-Semitic seizure exemplified by fascist White racist thugs running amok on the streets destroying everything gay and non-White. There’s a few of these guys around, but if I were a gay or non-White, I’d rather worry about lightning, heart disease or car accidents. US neo-Nazism is a comically minor movement with almost no support.

Since these Wikipedia toads banned me, I have received repeated letters from editors who tried to put a bit of fairness into articles on the Middle East conflict on Wikipedia. Everyone I talked to was in the process of being taken out by the Wikipedia Jews. Last time I checked, the Wikipedia Jews and their buds were in firm control over anything Jewish or Israeli-related on Wikipedia.

Yeah, Wikipedia’s a hotbed of pro-Palestinian propaganda. Snark.

Amazing the crap some folks believe. Almost like they live in some Matrix reality.

Article written by Charles Levinson, an Jewish American journalist based in Cairo and Baghdad since 2002 and in Jerusalem since 2006. Charles did a great job here. Shout out!

Wikipedia Jews Redux

Repost from the old site.

I’ve been informed that the Wikipedia Jews (click the Wikipedia Jews category at the end of the post for more) have been successful, incredibly, at eliminating an entire Wikipedia category called Jewish Businesspeople. The list had 550 names on until a while ago, and now it has zero. The Wikipedia Jews win again. The crusade to get rid of it was led by Jayjg, one of the Wikipedia Jews’ top henchmen.

Now the Wikipedia Jews are going after the list of Jewish Sportspeople. For what reason, I haven’t the faintest idea.

A little background. The Jewish Businessmen category was eliminated by the Wikipedia Jews in order to hide the truth about Jewish success in the US. Jews have been very successful in this country, and reportedly 5

All through the centuries in the ghettos of Europe, wanted Jewish criminals were always hidden by the Jews. Why? Probably in part due to fear that a Jew accused of a crime would set off a pogrom. The same mindset is afoot here with the Wikipedia. Knowledge of Jewish business success in the US, it is feared, may feed anti-Semitism in the US. Letting this information get out is like “trying to start a pogrom”.

When I was on Usenet, every time a Jew would relate something uncomplimentary about Jews, for instance, the blatant racism of Hasidim they knew, the others would actually scream that: “What are you trying to do? Start a pogrom?”

Jews can talk about this stuff behind closed doors, but please, not when the Gentiles are listening. This is why the Israeli press is much more critical about Jews and Israel than the US press is. The Hebrew language press is the most uninhibited of all, because they assume that no Gentiles are reading it.

My mother went to school on the South Side of Chicago in a mostly Jewish school, apparently one of the same ones that Barack Obama now sends his kids to. Whenever a Jewish criminal was captured, the Jewish kids, many of whom still spoke Yiddish at home, would always say, “Oh, this is a bad day for the Jews!” She never heard of any other ethnic group saying such a thing.

What she describes is what Kevin MacDonald calls Jewish hyperethnocentrism. Understanding Jewish ultratribalism and hyperethnocentrism is one of the keys to the riddle of Jewish Question.

The deletion of the Jewish Sportspeople category is much stranger. The stereotype of the Jew is that he is a wimpy intellectual, he’s not much of an athlete, and he would rather run than fight.

Israel’s bristling, in-your-face, land-working, salt of the Earth, fight-to-the-death Sabras were supposed to put an end to all of that. On Usenet, Jewish ultranationalists loved to wave the few Jewish athletes in everyone’s faces. “See? We’re not all neurotic, myopic bookworms!” they seemed to shout.

The recent Wikipedia article on Samir Kuntar is another example of the Wikipedia Jews and their allies running amok. Kuntar is a Lebanese guerrilla formerly with Abu Abbas’ notorious Palestine Liberation Front (PLF) who has been in an Israeli prison for the past 29 years. He participated in a raid on Nahariya, Israel in 1979 that went down as one of the more grotesque and criminal Palestinian terror attacks.

I won’t go into the lurid details of this attack, although, after extensive reading about the incident, I finally learned that the purpose of the attack was not to wantonly murder Jewish parents and their toddlers, but to capture some Israelis as hostages to trade for Palestinian prisoners.

When their getaway was thwarted, yes, Kuntar killed Danny and Einat Haran. The description of the killings is pretty horrible, but one wonders exactly how the Israelis were able to figure out down to the last detail every word uttered and motion undertaken by Kuntar and his victims, since the two Israeli hostages were killed, two of the terrorists were killed, and only Kuntar and another terrorist were captured.

Kuntar has always maintained that the killings did not go down as described, and that the Harans were killed by Israeli bullets in the shootout on the beach.

The Wikipedia article on Kuntar is a wreck. There are long, windy passages describing the Israeli account (They figured this out how?) of the killings, complete with emotional and heartrending prose.

A look at the Discussion page shows there was a huge fight over whether to call Kuntar a terrorist. Wikipedia is not supposed to use the word terrorist to describe anyone.

AnonMoos, a notorious US neoconservative, wildly pro-Israel, Gentile Democrat I know from Usenet, has apparently landed on Wikipedia, is now part of the Wikipedia Jews team (some of the worst of the Wikipedia Jews are Gentiles, so the name is somewhat misleading).

The wreckers of the article are mostly Jewish and/or Israelis.

Kuntar has become famous again since he was just part of a prisoner swap between Hezbollah and Israel.

Much is made of Hezbollah wanting child-killer Kuntar back, but the truth is that their focus on Kuntar is because he is Lebanese, not because he’s a child-killer. Hezbollah is a Lebanese nationalist organization, Kuntar is a Lebanese prisoner, so they want him back for nationalist reasons.

The problem on Wikipedia is not that there are a bunch of little Jewish shits running around on any article remotely Jewish-related, censoring and POV-pushing. There are little cabals all over Wikipedia, including many ethnic cabals. In most cases, sober administrators stop the cabals cold, and the articles end up pretty fair.

But the Wikipedia Jews have been running amok from Day One, due to deep connections with a little shit named Jimmy Wales, an ultra-rightwing libertarian who runs the place. Why do the Jews get away with murder on Wikipedia while all the other cabals are put in their place? In this way, the Wikipedia Jews are a microcosm of America, for all intents and purposes now a Jewish country.

For more on that theory, see Yuri Slezkine’s The Jewish Century and Alfred Lindemann’s Esau’s Tears, the 20th Century and the Rise of the Jews. Jews help man the commanding heights of America, just as they are in with the top dogs on Wikipedia, and the Gentiles are all de facto “Jewish”.

Nobody can say shit about them in America or on Wikipedia, and their critics in both the US and Wikipedia are destroyed mercilessly. The story here is the familiar one of the corruption of power, along with the testy paranoia of a tiny ethnic group.

Chip Berlet is also a top Wikipedian who is in very, very deep with the ADL, the Wikipedia Jews and the upper echelons of Wikipedia leadership. A commenter posted comments on here recently implying that Chip Berlet works for either the CIA or the FBI or both. The hero-worship of Berlet on Wikipedia makes no sense unless he is some kind of agent.

Wikipedia is run by a far-right crowd of super-libertarians. Communism and socialism are trashed in most places, and radical freemarket economics of the sort that is now devastating America are pushed relentlessly.

Most articles on Communism and socialism are grossly unfair. Hard-right fascist Jewish nationalists and hard-right fascist Hindu nationalists have formed an alliance and destroyed most articles relating to India, Israel or Jews.

Chip Berlet is supposed to be some kind of a Leftist. He’s reportedly even a hardline Communist. Ok, so why is he the hero of and hobnobbing with some of the most extreme anti-Communists and radical Right types around? Furthermore, Berlet helped the ADL spy on many Left and even Communist groups in the US on the grounds that they were anti-Semites (anti-Israel). What kind of a Communist spies on the Left?

An agent.

The Wikipedia Jews, 2010 Update

A commenter disputes my notion that Wikipedia is still seriously Jew-fucked by the Wikipedia Jewish Cabal.

Here is my original, and actually now famous, article on the subject: Wikipedia, Ziopedia or Judeopedia?. The wildly anti-Semitic site Ziopedia actually was inspired to take its name from that article.

Your experiences on Wikipedia sound like they sucked, but I think you are too hasty on exiting the battleground and dismissing Wikipedia as impossibly Jew-corrupted.The fact is, for heavily trafficked articles subject to heavily ideological warfare from all sides, over 9

As you know, fights in Wikipedia are long and slow battles of attrition fought mainly on talk pages and through committees. You have to play the game and compromise to get anything done (sort of like real-life politics).

Maybe things have gotten better since I wrote that in April 2006, 4 1/2 years ago. But I doubt it. It’s not true that most articles are huge edit-wars. Most of Wikipedia is fair. There are tons of cabals always trying to get formed, and there actually exist all sorts of cabals, usually nationalist ones, on Wikipedia. But most don’t get anywhere because the admins stop them dead in their tracks via fairness. But for some reason, the Libertardian, Jew and Hindutva Cabals have been able to run amok, probably because Jimbo and his admin pals sympathize with them.

Everyone who was in my boat also got thrown off Wikipedia and banned by the Wiki Jews. I looked into it. It’s a tight cabal, but the group is not large, only 25-30. Also the Wiki Jews deviously sneaked some of their own people into the top echelons of Wikipedia, like admins, etc. Those admins would always side with the Jews on the bans. Also, the Gentiles on Wiki are mostly insanely Judeophilic. Jimbo himself is wildly Zionist and gives speeches before big Jewish groups. He should just convert already. Also, there were a few Gentiles in the Wiki Jew Cabal. One is called Slim Virgin.

I checked back a couple years later and they were still in firm control. Also they had thrown off almost all of the strong pro-Pallie types.

The reverts those shits do was just flat out fuckin vandalism. I changed a lot of their fucked up lie data, using the IDF’s own surveys. This was on pages called Terrorism Against Israelis. Their figures were all lies. I contradicted them via the IDF’s own stuff. I spent hours and hours doing it, and it was all reverted instantly with no debate. I tried to comment, but my comments were immediately deleted or no one would respond to me. Soon after, I was put on a Wikipedia Neo-Nazi List, and soon I was indicted on fake charges and all of my edits were stopped.

I did factual edits on many other subjects before the Jew thing, and they all stayed. Then the evil Wiki Jew Scum went back to all my non-Jewish shit that I worked on for months and reverted all of it out of sheer vandalism. Next they launched fake charges against me to run me up against one of their Wiki Jew Kangaroo Courts. That’s when I posted my Fuck You commentary on my homepage and then life-banned me.

Some concerned Wiki editors said the life-ban was unfair and done for ideological reasons, but the Wiki Jews overruled them.

The Wiki Jew thing is an excellent example of a Jewish conspiracy in real life, how it operates.

I now do edits anonymously on grammar, and 10

I ain’t a masochist. I am not getting a new account and going back to Judeopedia or Ziopedia or whatever the fuck it’s called.

Note that the only Jew-corrupted stuff is Judaic, about Jews or Israel. They leave the entire rest of Wikipedia alone. And 9

There is also a Hindutva Indian nationalist Cabal on there that is just as evil as the Jews. My friends are Pakistani nationalists, and they said all the articles about India and Pakistan have been destroyed by Hindutvas. Plus all Pakistani nationalists are very quickly banned by the Hindutvas, usually Wiki Jew Cabal techniques. The Hindutvas, like the Jews, have wormed into the top Wiki echelons. The top tier of Wikipedia are non-Indian Gentiles who love Hindutvas and Jews. Most of them are “libertarians.” Jimbo Dickwad himself is a libertardian.

Wikipedia is fucked. Jew-fucked, Hindutva-fucked, Libertardian-fucked.

I’m done.

Why Anti-Semitism Is Almost Always Rightwing

That’s true that US conservatives associated with the Republican Party are profoundly philosemitic. However, this is a fairly new thing. There is also the anti-Semitic Pat Buchanan wing of the party too, you know?

And if you took 100 anti-Semites in the US, 95 of them would be conservatives, either Republicans or Libertarians.

Leftwing anti-Semites are not that common. Nowadays a lot of Zionist shits are trying to say that there is all this liberal or Left anti-Semitism (the “new anti-Semitism”), but it’s mostly garbage. These folks are simply anti-Israel to out and out anti-Zionists. Most Left and liberal Israel-critics or even anti-Zionists are not anti-Semites.

A few liberal to Left anti-Zionist types do get into anti-Semitism, but when they do, they seem to gradually drift towards the rightwing! In particular, they start being sympathetic to either fascism or Islamism or both. Especially they tend to be pro-Nazi.

It’s really strange the way that works.

This makes me think that there is something intrinsically rightwing about anti-Semitism and something organically anti-anti-Semitic about liberalism or Leftism.*

With some exceptions.

Why Do Wealthy Jews Pursue Liberal/Radical Politics?

A commenter asks why anti-Semitism is never pro-worker.

How about take stuff from rich Jews and keep it for ourselves, rather than giving it to corrupt Gentiles?

Interesting theory, but it never works that way. Not once in history, I believe. The elites always grabbed the Jews’ stuff and money after theykilled them or expelled them. That’s anti-Semitism in a nutshell.

Kill/throw out the Jews and steal their stuff.

He also can’t believe that Jewish politics doesn’t exactly follow their class interests:

And what is Jewish politics based on then if not class interests

People’s politics don’t necessarily follow their class interests. Engels was a rich man. Carlos the Terrorist’s father was a millionaire Communist. People are funny that way.

When Jews who came here they were poor. And they were poor in the Pale too. So they supported the class politics of the poor. The Jews in the US never let go of their earlier liberalism/radicalism.

Then in the last century, a lot of them got behind Communism for some reason, contrary to their class interests.

One theory is the reality of Jewish life in the Diaspora.

Jews living in the Diaspora grow up being told that they are better than the Gentiles around them. And in some ways, they are better, especially those who live Jewish. Living according to Judaism is associated with lower outcomes on a lot of social pathologies.

They also grow up being told that the Gentiles around them hate them. This leads to a confrontational and often rebellious attitude of many Diaspora Jews towards a society they view as hostile and fucked up. Hence you get your Jewish radicals and revolutionaries of various types, out to make society a better place. You also get all the Jewish cultural radicals, from crazy artists to porn merchants. These secular Jews are basically rebels, and they’re giving the finger to hostile Gentile society in a sense.

For the last 150 years, conservatives in the West have tended to be anti-Semites. Even prior, Napoleon himself was a liberal, and he’s the father of all modern emancipated Jews. Jews see liberals as protecting minority rights.

And all the people who seriously attacked the Jews in the West for the past 150 years, including assholes who tried to exterminate them, were hard rightwingers.

The Czar was a rightwinger. So were the fascists. So are the radical right Islamists persecuting the Jews in the Muslim World.

Also in the West, conservatives tend to push Christian politics. That’s bad for the Jews. Liberals are more secular in the West and the Muslim World, so Jews trust them better.

In the past 150 years, Orthodox Judaism broke up into Conservative and Reform Judaism. Reform Judaism in particular has junked a lot of the horrible rightwing crap in the Talmud and Torah in favor of a liberal view of mankind. In particular, the proscription for the Jews to be “the light unto nations” has led many Reform and secular Jews to be revolutionaries and liberals of various types.

They’re called upon by their religion to make the world a better place.

Jewish Politics and Jewish Class Interests

Do you know of any blue-collar Jews? I don’t think they even exist. Since that’s the case, can you at least grant me that most of them will tend to fall behind neoliberalism, if indeed everything is all about class?

But they don’t. Jews are the most liberal group in the US. They are probably the most anti-neoliberal ethnic group in the US. In Israel, they voted for socialism for many years. Jews are funny people. They’re rich, but they’ve been supporting Left movements for about a century now.

It was not always thus. Prior to 100 hundred years ago, Jews were always conservative and always supported rightwingers due to their economic interests. Jewish politics doesn’t exactly line up with their class interests.

The commenter is getting trapped in the Socialism of Fools. Economic anti-Semitism is so retarded. Take stuff from rich Jews and give it to our own rich. Then our own rich will be nicer to us and share more money with us than those dirty Jews. Yeah right! Think again, man.

Nazi Condoms

LOL.

Nazi rubbers, WTF man? I thought they wanted all good Germans to produce plenty of fine Aryan babies for the Fatherland. Remember, German women were not producing enough kids. That’s one reason that in Generalplan Ost, Slavic babies with Germanic features were kidnapped by German troops and sent west to be raised as Germans by German women.

Fascism is always pronatalist. That’s one reason why it sucks. As a super-environmentalist, I’m just not down with pronatalism. White nationalist websites always have these articles about some White woman who had 18 kids, followed by a train of wildly cheering comments. I see that shit and I want to vomit.

Is White Nationalism Pro-Working Class?

A commenter disagrees with me when I said White nationalism is not exactly pro-working class.

And since Stormfront is representative of white nationalism, I don’t see these neoliberal white nationalists you keep bringing up. All major WN leaders are opposed to free trade and financial usury.

If they are against financial usury, it’s news to me. I’m not even aware they are anti-free trade. They never seem to talk about it.

White nationalism is a hard rightwing movement in every sense of the word. They never talk about the C word – class. All they ever talk about is race. There’s a reason for that!

Hence it serves the purposes of the rich and upper middle class to divide the workers on the basis of race. WN is just a continuation of the Southern Strategy. WN’s have been voting for Republicans forever in this country. As a rule, they almost never vote Democrat. What kind of pro-worker voting is that?

Go to Occidental Dissent, Guy White , Silver’s site, Jewamongyou, American Renaissance, Majority Rights, VNN, they’re mostly libertarians, and they support rightwing economics. They all want small government, as small as possible, and they all hate socialism and especially Communism. Though there are a few pro-worker commenters on Occidental Dissent and Amren these days.

The whole WN community declared war on Obamacare.

The whole WN community got behind Libertardian Ron Paul last time around.

The Stormfront and Tom Metzger types are not exactly the norm.

Jared Taylor is a very rightwing Republican corporate type. Frankly, he’s typical.

Most WN’s seem to have money, often a lot of it. That’s what White racism is all about in the US.

The Whites work and make the money, often good money, and the nigger and beaner layabout criminal leeches want to steal all of our money.

That’s why they hate the Democrats so much and why they always vote Republican.

WN is not exactly worker-friendly. Quite the opposite!

Anyway, Stormfront is not pro-worker. They take no stand at all, but they did support Libertarian Ron Paul last time. But a lot of the commenters are working class Whites, and a lot of those are openly socialist.

A Primer on Mark to Market

Repost from the old site.

Some conservatives, of course, are blaming the current economic chaos on too much regulation instead of the obvious cause of it that any moron can figure out, lack of regulation. This is especially popular on White Nationalist websites, where the line is that all regulation of business is evil for White people.

I would like to point that although the conservatives are reeling from this latest economic meltdown and their philosophy is in tatters (rejected by the media elite who used to support them to the hilt more than anyone else), some conservatives are starting to fight back.

The market meltdown was not caused by the lack of regulation that everyone knows caused it; instead, it was caused by the conservative bogeyman of too much regulation. But this is not going over very well. Outside of the Fanatics’ Bullpen and the Republican Party, no one is buying. Even the US rightwing media is not so stupid as to buy into this one.

The “mark to market rule”* controversy is an interesting one.

But nevertheless, mark to market is being put forward as one of the stupider regulations that supposedly either helped bring this mess on or is making it worse. So says Paul Craig Roberts (unapologetic Reaganite incredibly featured on Counterpunch) here, here and here, and Fareed Zakaria, Newsweek columnist and apologist for neoliberal globalism and US imperialism disguised as reasonable and thoughtful analyst.

Mark to market was put in to keep these corporate rats from lying about their assets and their bottom lines. Amid the catastrophes caused by the rampant accounting fraud and crime accompanying Enron and the other messes, the mark to market rule was instituted. What it means is simple: corporations have to list assets and debts as they really are, not as they think they are in their fairy tale fantasies.

What corporations were doing was this: Suppose I have assets that are worth $10X. That looks pretty bad for my bottom line, so I “re-evaluate them” with the help of some friendly local accountant firm criminals, and now automagically they are actually worth $100X. Why?

Because my accountant criminal buddies and I decided that my assets are actually undervalued, and are worth much more than the market says they are worth. So I get to fool investors, inflate my bottom line and pretend that my insolvent company is actually rolling in it.

Seems like an obvious abuse, no? Seems like a reasonable regulation, no?

Turns out after all that mark to market is sheer government evil. Evil big government is forcing angelic corporations to tell the truth about their net worth instead of lying as they always do, even in their sleep, and thus harming the glorified US economy.

Nowadays, banksters and other financial criminals are holding all sorts of assets that are said to be worth, say, $100X. In truth, no one even knows what they are worth, and there is no way to figure it out. Their true value is so low that the banksters act like these assets are toxic waste.

Mark to market means they have to mark them at $30X or $2X or whatever the market says this crap is worth. But what they really want to do is lie and pretend that it’s worth $100X.

Why? Because if the corporations tell the truth about how much their assets are really worth, instead of how much they lie and inflate their worth at, investors will pound their two-bit penny stocks into the ground where they deserve to be pounded.

But that’s bad for the economy. We can’t afford to have the stocks of insolvent companies pounded into the dirt on the basis of honest accounting of assets and debits. Instead, it is necessary to lie, paint a turd to look like a Michelangelo, and keep the sucker/investors marching in the door and laying out the cash. To tell the truth will wreck the economy. To save the economy, we must legalize lying once again.

Does any of this make sense in any rational world? Of course not.

These are the rarefied debates that occupy our ruling elites in these trying times.

*I am not an economist, and I may not have correctly characterized the mark to market rule or the arguments for or against it. If you think I have this wrong, head to the comments or email and let me know.

What Do White Nationalists Want?

Repost from the old site.

We clearly established here a while back that White nationalism is for the most part simply White racism or White supremacism with a nice-sounding new name to keep from scaring people off. In a fancy, innocuous-sounding package, in other words.

I think maybe less than

On more moderate sites like American Renaissance, the view that NE Asians are equal to or superior to European Whites is commonly held, such that we must note that many White nationalists are in fact not White supremacists. This is an important distinction. The Left always calls these folks White Supremacists, and in many cases, that’s not fair.

I’m fascinated with White nationalism for some perverse reason, and to be honest, that’s why I write about it all the time.

Reading this blog is unfortunately just a glimpse into my perverse, unhealthy and chaotic mind. I wish I was more mature than that, but I’m not. Whatever is in my mind during given periods ends up on the blog. I admit I’m obsessed with race. Hence, the blog is race-obsessed. I’m not able to separate my private mental life from this blog yet, and I may never be.

Let’s look at the White nationalist program to see if this movement is racist or not.

Even on Amren, in the comments, you see a very large number of White nationalists saying that, ideally, we ought to throw all non-Whites out of the US. I don’t know how many feel that way. I never heard any of them say that they morally oppose such a project. I wonder how many WN’s don’t think this is a good idea. Clearly such a desire is racist.

On a lesser but yet important level, the vast majority of WN’s seem to take the opinion that only European Whites are real Americans. All others, no longer how long they have lived here, will never be Americans. I argue that this notion is racist in and of itself. Those opposed are invited to the comments to disagree.

A very large number of White nationalists, even on Amren, hanker for a race war, in particular a war between Whites and Blacks.

They also like to project about this a lot, claiming that Blacks want a race war with Whites. Sure, Nation of Islam Black Nationalists might, but it’s not a common view. I’ve been around thousands of Blacks (I taught in Black schools for years) and I’ve never heard one Black person say this.

White nationalists hanker for this because they think they can win this war. Most Blacks don’t think this is a good idea, I assume because it’s obvious that they would lose. If anything is racism, hankering for race war sure as Hell is.

One thing that is clear is that almost all WN’s seem to want White separatism in some form or another. I’m aware that some WN’s say that they are not White separatists. Their numbers are very small. Even those who say they are not White separatists still support “the right of communities to implement separatism at a local level.” Hmmm.

It seems to me that in general, White separatism would have to be driven by feelings of racism. I wouldn’t say all the time, but surely most of the time. As a political project, White separatism must be seen as racist to the core, regardless of the motivations of individuals.

The final WN view is that all anti-discrimination laws should be repealed. Some say we should only do this a piece at a time, but they all seem to support it. I would be very interested to meet a White nationalist who does not support getting rid of all anti-discrimination laws.

This project is so obviously racist on its face that I have even said that non-racist folks pushing this, such as libertarians and anarchists, are de facto racists in that they are pushing a racist agenda, no matter what pretty and loving thoughts may be dancing in their empathy-drenched minds.

This has aroused a firestorm of fury on libertarian and rightwing anarchist sites, but it’s always a pleasure to have the right kind of enemies.

Just to be fair, let’s point out what’s not racist about WN. Discussions of race realism are not necessarily racist, depending on how they are handled. Complaining about or criticizing other races is not necessarily racist either. Maybe they’re just telling it like it is? Opposition to anti-White hate propaganda, so prevalent in our society, is not necessarily racist.

Feeling pride in being White is not necessarily racist either.

My opinion is that all races and ethnic groups should take pride in themselves. It’s sad that more ethnic nationalists don’t feel this way. In fact, if you meet people from around the world, most people do take pride in their race or ethnicity! It’s healthy! Love yourself, love your tribe, love your nation, love your race.

Ideally, if WN’s respected the right of other groups to take pride in themselves, WN’s could look at proud Blacks and Hispanics and at least respect them for standing up for their people; instead, WN’s almost always see such folks as deadly enemies.

WN’s often say that their project is not racist. They also typically deny that they are racists themselves. But this is a lie in almost every single case. I don’t think I’ve ever met a White nationalist who was not a pretty hardcore racist. If you’re not a racist, why would you sign to a game like that in the first place?

Let’s look at the White nationalist project in summary:

Project/philosophy                Racist?

Strike anti-discrimination laws   YES
Remove non-Whites from US         YES
Only Whites can be real Americans YES
Advocate race war vs. non-Whites  YES
White separatism project at core* YES

*At project level, not individual level.

I would argue that from an anti-racist point of view, WN is invalidated right there.

We don’t need act silly and beat people up for talking about IQ or crime rates, feeling filial pride, or defending their people against idiots of other races. Given my argument above, why on Earth would any non-racist to anti-racist White person, however proud, sign on to WN? Forget it.

In an incredible book about Peru’s Shining Path, The Shining Path: A History of the Millenarian War in Peru, Peruvian journalist and uber-intellectual Gustavo Gorriti wisely noted that Sendero’s revolution was a “race against time.”

Gorriti speaking at some sort of citizens’ security committees conference in Peru on July 4, 2008.

Sendero saw Peruvian society as it was, not as it is. Sendero saw Peru as semi-colonial and semi-feudal, but it was moving away from both by the time they started their war. Their war was actually a war against time, progress and modernity itself.

Peruvian society is horrible, and armed Left revolution is more than justified, but Sendero’s analysis applied better to 1960 than 1980. In the ensuing 28 years, Peru only moved further from semi-colonialism and semi-feudalism.

US White nationalism is, like Sendero, in a race against time. In the past 45 years, support among US Whites for the five core projects/philosophies listed above has apparently declined each year in the US. The decline seems to be continuing. Yet White nationalists are racing harder than ever to implement their projects, the prospects for which seem to grow dimmer by the day. How many ways can you spell “doomed”?

References

Gorriti Ellenbogen, Gustavo. Translated, with an introduction, by Robin Kirk. 1999. The Shining Path: A History of the Millenarian War in Peru. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

How the Rightwing Revolution (1975-Ongoing) Was Won

A commenter asked how it came to be that US workers are so rightwing, and why they support rightwing anti-worker economics at home and imperialist foreign policy abroad:

How do you think it became this way?

Over a century of hard rightwing propaganda from the ruling classes, intensifying in the past decades. They have the control over the media, and I would say that that’s all you need. What more do you need than to control the media? Control the media, control the cultural discourse. That’s one reason why Judeopedia, I mean Wikipedia, is so scary, and why the Jews have flocked it it in swarms.

Actually, this country was going in a good direction until the mid 1970’s. We were heading towards a progressive society.

Then a group of the heads of the top corporations of the US got together and held some meetings. They said if we don’t stop this trend, the US “will end up as just another European social democracy” (exact words). They and many of their ultra-rich backers (but mostly corporations) vowed to pour money into think-tanks to change the discourse of America. Hence the birth of the Hoover Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute, the Cato Foundation and the rest of the Stink Tanks.

At the same time, the Left think tanks were starved for money, and they still are. The think tanks control political intellectual discourse in society. When a politician or journalist wants to write about something, AEI or other stink tanks have a paper served right up to you. They will probably even courier deliver it to your office with flowers.

Also, right around this time, a Jewish scumbag named Milton Friedman was really getting going at the Univershitty of Chicago. He gathered  acolytes around him, published books, monograms, journal articles, etc. went on TV, interviewed, and publicized the Chicago School of Economics.

Economics is a dismal enough science as it is, but this stuff was horrible. A lot of it was out and out lies. For instance, they invented a new theory about how Antitrust regulation doesn’t work and how monopoloy corporations are great for business, society, consumers and workers. They coined new theories on all sorts of economic matters that was long ago settled debate. On and on with a lot of areas of economics. Lies, lies, lies and more lies, and more lies piled on top of those lies. This is the base of modern neoliberalism.

At heart it has some truths. Sure, a dollar invested in the private capitalist sector is more productively invested than a dollar invested in a public socialist sector. But so what? So what should we do then? Shut down public roads, housing, medical care, research, schools, dams, parks, canals, trash collection, sewage treatment, water, power and phone delivery, airwaves, airports, highways, refuges, forests, grasslands, oceans, lakes, rivers, beaches, police, fire, courts, regulatory agencies, social programs?

According to these POS’s, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, etc. They don’t believe that much of anything should be public, and they want to shut down most everything public and privatize it. They essentially want to privatize all society and end the public sphere altogether. Friedman was evil, and so are his scum buddies, but right now, Chicago School is all you will learn if you take Economics classes at a university. If you get an Econ degree, you will be a Chicago School economist. All the texts, journals, grads and big names in the field, everyone and everything, are Chicago School.

So the Chicago School staged a Bolshevik like coup against the field of Economics in the US, a coup which is ongoing. At the same time, the entire media, including the “liberal media” the rightwingers whine about, became Chicago School acolytes and defensive linemen. Chicago School become the Bible you swear on when you take the oath to be a journalist in the US.

Chicago School Economics also captured both parties. First it grabbed the Republicans, who had been drifting Left with Nixon and Ford.  They went Chicago School in 1980 with Reagan.

Next it took he Democrats with the Democratic National Committee in the late 1980’s, which held that Democrats were losing elections because they were too liberal in every sense, including economics, and that the only way to beat Republicans was to become a pro-corporate political party, one that lived off the fat donations of corporate backers. They would never beat the Republicans at the corporate money game, but at least they could survive and get enough money to win some elections.

Clinton and Obama are both Chicago School types. Obama even has ties to the institution. The Chicago School Revolution is ongoing as we speak. Tea Parties are Chicago School rallies. All this deficit slashing bullshit is straight up Chicago School.

Hence was the modern reactionary coup of the past 35 years won.

It all boils down to Information Theory. He who controls Information, controls the world.

Capitalism Hits the Fan, A Marxian View

Repost from the old site.

Great video by Richard Wolff, professor of Economics at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst.

Wolff is a Marxist, and the lecture is from a Marxist POV. However, it is interesting in many ways.

One thing that is clear to most sensible folks with an understanding of economics is that Marx’s analysis of capitalism is one of the greatest ever done by anyone. For a long time, it was taught in all economics departments. With the advent of crazy Friedmanite neoliberalism in the past 30 years or so, Marx may not be being taught so much, but that’s a mistake.

It’s sometimes said that Marx is great for analyzing either what capitalism does well or poorly, but not the opposite. Not true. Marx is great for analyzing capitalism both when it is doing well and when it is doing poorly.

In my opinion, where Marx has problems is in proposing alternatives to capitalism, and history has born this out to some extent. Capitalism, with all of its chaos and problems and horrors and deaths, may just be the only way forward for the time being. Like death, disease and taxes, it may be a necessary evil.

Wolff describes how US workers saw 150 straight years of growth and improvement in their living standards, from 1820 to 1970. This is correct. He doesn’t lay out how this happened, but there are many explanations for this. He also says that this scenario was rare to unheard of in the rest of the capitalist world.

After 1970, things changed. Productivity kept going up, but wages went flat or even went down. A US worker in the late 1970’s made more per hour than a worker working today. As productivity rose and wages went flat, capitalists began raking in incredible profits.

This is what has happened to the US economy over the past 35 years, as neoliberalism took hold and 8

As workers got more and more screwed and the capitalists, the owners, those who lived off the labor of others, saw their incomes skyrocket, confused workers began advancing all sorts of explanations about why this was happening. Anti-Semites, as usual, blamed the Jews. White nationalists and White Supremacists blamed Blacks and Browns. Lots of middle class and working class Whites blamed Big Government.

The truth was that the culprits were the business owners who were reeling in superprofits while workers got the shaft.

As this process continued, capitalists found more ways to keep the cost of labor down. They began importing massive amounts of legal and especially illegal immigrants as labor to drive labor costs down even further. They began moving many enterprises offshore and later, began offshoring work via the Internet.

Confused workers scrambled to keep up their standard of living. Others in the family, often the wife, began taking a job, bringing in a second income. Then one or more persons in the household began to work second and third jobs. Americans worked more and more hours, setting new records for workers in the West.

The despicable US media extolled this fact, and praised US workers for working themselves nearly to death, taking pains to point out how tough and hard and slaving-away Americans are compared to pampered, wussy, “soft” Europeans kicking back under socialism.

It’s true – part of the US war against European social democracy has been to declare that Europeans are soft, wimpy, sissified and wussy. How did they get this way? Socialism turned hard self-reliant European men into soft, pampered girlymen. Americans were hard, tough and macho. They didn’t need no nanny state to help them out. They could do it on their own. The American worker as Marlboro Man.

Wolff points out that that extra workers did not necessarily fix matters, as when the wife started working, it turned out that she needed many things, for instance a vehicle to get to work in.

Working more than one job didn’t seem to work very well, nor did having others in the household go out and work, but it did the trick for a while.

After some time, Americans would have to turn to some new tricks to try to keep up their standard of living. They turned to loans. At first they ran up their credit cards. Americans were setting records for going into debt on credit cards and were among the Western world’s poorest when it came to saving money.

This isn’t really very good personal economics, but the vile media cheered it on nonetheless. Silly, wimpy Europeans and Japanese saved their money for a rainy day, presumably because they were too neurotic to enjoy life. Americans went for the gusto! They spent ever nickel they earned and then went in debt up to their waders! Cheers, cheers, cheers!

After the credit cards were maxed out, there was an explosion in US housing prices. Call it a housing bubble. This came at a propitious moment, for it enabled Americans to use as collateral the biggest asset they owned, their homes. Americans borrowed on their homes, refinancing them, taking out second mortgages and using the money like a credit card to continue to pursue the standard of living to which they had become used.

The capitalists continued to reel in the dough from the leveling of wages, now via outsourcing and use of immigrant labor, and now the capitalists found a new tool – debt.

They loaned money to their own workers! It was like the old days when you lived in a company town, bought at the company store and ate at the company diner, all deducted from your check. Not only will we pay you a crap wage, we will snag every dollar you spend on food, rent and shopping too.

These same capitalists were now swimming in ultraprofits with the money they were making off loaning money to workers and home mortgages (just another type of loan). They had so much money they did not know what to do with it. They threw it into the stock market, and the market for high-end goods of all sorts went through the roof.

Conspicuous consumption came back with a vengeance, and the scummy media once again sang and danced the praises of the most idiotic and obscene ways the rich chose to blow their unneeded and often unearned cash.

A whole new financial industry, a parasitic industry on the economic body of the nation, sprung up, an industry that created no products and no real wealth. It was nothing but a gigantic casino on Wall Street.

All sorts of funky instruments that no one understood were dreamed up – derivatives, CDO’s, mortgage securities and all sorts of other stuff that probably shouldn’t even be legal. Almost no one understood these things and no one seemed to understand what they were worth.

The inevitable bubble came and the party crashed, as it always does when capitalist bubbles go bust.

The root causes were the destruction of the regulations put in in the 1930’s, during the Depression, in order to prevent another Depression. As soon as these regulations were put in, the capitalists began plotting and working to get rid of them.

Over the next 80 years, the capitalists created a Gramscian cultural hegemony that attacked socialism, government and regulation and exalted free market capitalism. Socialism, government and regulation were described as possibly good ideas, but doomed to failure. The only way to avoid the inevitable failures of socialism, government and regulation was to completely deregulate the economy. Anything less was the road to ruin.

With their money, the capitalist interests bought up all the media and most of the politicians. They used this to get rid of the Depression-era regulations and create the manipulate US culture to where your average worker thought that was a great idea, if he understood it at all.

There are various proposals for how to deal with this economic mess. As discussed in a previous post, conservatives, reeling and increasingly discredited, have tried to blame the catastrophe on too much regulation, not too little. Even the slimy media that normally goes along with this crap is finding this too much to buy.

White racists are promoting the racist notion that liberals (via affirmative action and anti-discrimination laws), niggers* and beaners* are the ones that destroyed the US economy. The Republican Party has to some extent bought into this, as has the business press, their amen corner in the mass media, and their academic hacks, but the argument is too slimy and racist for most decent people, plus there isn’t an ounce of truth to it.

Steve Sailer, an excellent writer who is widely read, is the latest to promote this racist travesty, much to his shame. Sailer is looking more and more like a Republican Party hack than a really deep-thinking, independent and empirical author.

Furthermore, Sailer has been skating on the edges of racism for some time now without really going over. More often, he seemed to be giving the racists lots of nice talking points. Now he’s finally pushing an explicitly racist discourse, and it’s not even true. Too bad.

Rate of subprime mortgage defaults by race:

Whites       1
Blacks       1
Hispanics    1

End of discussion!

Liberals, Leftists and social democrats have proposed re-regulation, but the problem here is that we are probably going to re-do the 1930’s experience all over again. We will put in a bunch of great regulations and as soon as we put them in, the capitalists and their mass media machines will start plotting to get rid of them.

Then the capitalists and their media machines will launch a jihad, for as many decades as it takes, to reverse all these regulations and get back to total deregulation again. In time, workers will forget why they put the regulations in in the first place, and they will go along with it.

The capitalists will buy most of the politicians all over again, and the politicians will vote to deregulate again. The capitalists will work to recreate their Gramscian cultural hegemony, and the average worker will once again think deregulation is the smart thing to do. The economy will blow up again and we will be right back to 1929 and 2008.

Wolff suggests that there is a third alternative. He describes a paper done by a colleague that describes Silicon Valley workers who hated their jobs. They had to dress up, sit in a cubicle and take orders and crap all day from a bunch of assholes. Can they pay anyone enough to put up with that? With the destruction of the Silicon Valley workforce, these workers were laid off.

A number of them got together and formed IT worker-run cooperatives, a non-capitalist form of ownership along the lines of anarcho-syndicalism. The study found that these workers said that they had never been happier. They were manufacturing software, selling it to buyers and dividing up the profits among themselves. The workers themselves were the new owners.

Wolff said that as a condition of the bailouts to the financial industry, we should mandate that they staff their board of directors with workers, not management, as a first step towards workers democracy.

Wolff also said that he had been giving speeches like this for 25 years now and he has had more interest in the past five weeks than in the previous 25 years.

That’s ending on a hopeful note for now. Enjoy the video.

*Used sardonically

Liberal Race Realism Trashed on Craigslist

Some character on Craigslist is bashing this site as racist:

…What makes this video interesting is that the blogger who put up the video is a self-confessed liberal communist, but he and his blogger friends go on ahead and tear the living shit out of those black boys.

As I read more theme entries and commentaries, I noticed increased racist sentiment against other ethnic whites, against Mexicans, against Jews, against blacks…in short, nobody gets spared. But this is a racism carried out by liberals. And what makes it unique is that it is all done without any swearing or emotional outrage.

Simply cool and reasoned (to them) racism, perpetrated by frat boys, in a deadly accurate yet nonetheless seemingly dispassionate manner. One overriding theme is also new and surprising. The commie blogger states that he is worried about the reduction in numbers of Nordicist white people, and that in order to survive in the future, that it would be wise to widen the circle of “whites” to include the “near whites” in order to have a bigger ethnic family in which to feel safe.

Now you know what intellectuals who are honest about their racism do in their spare time.

Not so. I don’t care about a White future, and I don’t care how many Nordics there are.

The rest is true. POC’s have to get over all this.

Sure, liberal Whites are a little bit racist, but conservatives are really, really racist. Take your pick!

And the conservatives’ racism, legislative and judicial, does actual damage to POC’s. And liberals don’t really hate POC’s the way that real racists do, because we simply don’t do hate. Race hate is not a liberal thing. A lot of the funny cognitive gymnastics you see liberals doing about race is not mental illness or evil hypocrisy or any such thing. These liberals are simply trying to reconcile the facts about race and somehow figure out a way to not descend into race hate.

Also, we liberals support POC’s politically. We support most of their agenda legislatively and judicially. We support integration and interracial marriage. We oppose obvious and egregious anti-POC racism of the kind that is really injurious to POC’s. We support being friendly to decent POC’s and advocate treating them as individuals the same way you would treat a White person who acts similarly.

What Liberal Race Realists are guilty of really is this aversive racism crap. LRR isn’t anything new. I’ve spent my whole life around White liberals, and I know precisely how they think. Notice that White liberals typically live in all-White communities? Notice that they send their kids to all-White schools? Why do you think they do that, because they are Critical Race Theory nutcases? Heck no. Because they are not stupid, that’s why.

I know how White liberals talk when they are alone. They don’t talk like hardcore racists, but they are not stupid. The best way to describe it is to say that White liberals are cynical about POC’s.

Even my father, who was about as anti-racist and liberal as any White man of his generation, had moments like this. This was a man who taught for years in the middle of the ghetto, in Watts. Once we were reading the paper about young males in New York pools assaulting young girls, trying to rip their bathing suits off and practically raping them in the pools. The lifeguards had had to dive in and sort it all out, kids were getting banned, and it was a great big mess.

My father had a cynical expression on his face. “This stuff always starts with the Blacks,” he said. “It starts with the Blacks and then it filters down to everyone else.”

No one at the table batted an eye, and everyone nodded cynically. My Dad was a good liberal to the end, but that comment could have just as easily been said by Jared Taylor.

The Abagondsphere would freak out about this incident and write 10 blog posts about the “aversive racism” it exemplifies.

The White nationalists also have a nutty view of liberals. We’re all a bunch of nigger-loving traitors. They see us as PC CRT Cultural Marxist types. But we’re not. I’ve been around White liberals my whole life, and you hardly ever meet one like that. When you do, it’s usually a Jew. A Jew who lives as far away from POC’s as possible!

Russia and China’s Moves Towards Ultranationalism

A commenter, John UK, attempted to defend the fascist and ultranationalist nature of the Chinese and Russian states on the grounds that they are fighting US imperialism. Whether they are or not is not particularly relevant. Anyway, why are Chinese ultra-sweatshops better than US imperialism?

These days both China and Russia are essentially fascist states. Putin smells like a fascist! He even has some fascist “youth league” where they go to these Hitler Youth type “summer camps” where they learn to attack Putin’s enemies – journalists, human rights groups, basically liberal society. He encourages his fascist youth group to “make lots of babies.” That’s natalism. Fascists are natalists. Natalism is not progressive. It’s fascist.

The youth group is even called Nashi. You know? Nashi? What does that sound like? Sounds like Nazi huh? There’s no way that’s an accident.

Putin’s shock troops serve the billionaire elite. The billionaires run their own private armies, like Mafias or death squads. They do whatever they want. When citizens protest their latest plans, like confiscating 10,000 acres for their development scheme, Putin calls his KGB style shock troops out to attack the people, Latin American style. Putin has his critics, like journalists, murdered on a regular basis. He shuts down opposition TV, radio and papers. He has committed genocide in the Caucasus for years now.

I support the armed secessionists in the Caucasus to the hilt. They certainly have a right to self-determination.

I appreciate that Putin is a nationalist and he stands up for his people and takes on US and NATO imperialism, but he’s a fascist nevertheless.

China seems to have abandoned socialism in favor of a form of 19th Century Industrial Revolution capitalism that kills at least 600,000 Chinese a year through overwork alone. It’s basically a murderous and even genocidal state, like a typical 3rd World capitalist state such as India. Mao was always a nationalist, and he always had fascist leanings. He treated the Tibetans horribly. Other minorities were terribly abused during the Cultural Revolution.

The Chinese have now replaced socialism with a particularly virulent type of Chinese ultranationalism with some really scary, fascist-like undertones. It’s sickening and downright frightening the way the PRC keeps threatening Taiwan. Isn’t it clear that they will never allow a free Taiwan to exist?

The Han invasions, riots and pogroms in Xinjiang recently reminded me of Kristallnact. The Han invasions and repression of the Tibetans are disgusting and ought to embarass any so-called progressive regime. Shame on them.

Why Is Indian Nationalism So Dangerous?

fpy asks why I think that Indian nationalism is particularly dangerous.

What makes Indian nationalism uniquely malignant?

They are basically all ultranationalists. They’re fanatics. Seriously, horribly brainwashed fanatics. They’re about as brainwashed as your average North Korean.

I have never met an Indian who was not livid with rage over Kashmir. And their heads were filled with lies. 9

The truth as I studied it in the early 1990’s was that maybe 9

I have talked to many Indians on this subject, and they are almost all insane. Dangerously insane. These views are typical: All Kashmiris want to stay with India. Or, following Golda Meir, there are no such thing as Kashmiris. 10

Even now this War of the Stones, which is so obviously a grassroots popular rebellion, is being blamed 10

It’s hard to believe that educated people could believe this crap, but they do. Ignorance and rage on that level are frightening. Your average Indian reminds me of an Israeli, or a Turk. Basically a flaming, lying, brainwashed, ultranationalist, militant, militaristic kook.

And they are seriously filled with hatred and rage, especially towards the West. They are dangerous people. The place has nuclear weapons!

Full of rage at the failed nature of their society, yet at the same time filled with tremendous pride. Their whole thing is that India was the greatest state on Earth until evil Muslims and British took over and ruined it. They’re furious at the West. We came in there, told them their religion was shit, told them their culture was crap, told them their science was garbage, and they’re still pissed.

Failed nations that are full of pride yet and full of rage at their fall, especially at the scapegoats who ruined their glorious nation, who dream of the Lazarus rising from the fire to reclaim to glories of old, are very dangerous states. These are the essential ingredients of fascism. And Indian nationalists have that in spades.

They remind me of Germans in the interwar period. Very fascist-like people.

Was Obama’s Bailout of the Banks Fascism?

Robert Taylor, an extremely radical super-Libertarian or more properly an anarcho-capitalist, suggests that Obama’s bailout of the banks was fascist. As such, he echoes a Tea Party line:

Robert, what would you call Obama bailing out the largest financial institutions if not Classical Fascism?

Under classical fascism, the corporations must work for the state. Otherwise, the state just takes them right out. The corporations don’t wish to be taken out, so they just obey the state. They have to do what the state tells them to. If they do, they are assured good profits.

Obama’s bailout is the opposite, and anyway it started with Bush. In modern America, the corporations control the state, not the other way around. The corporations were bailed out because they control the government. That’s the opposite of fascism. It’s not fascism if the corporations control the state. That’s just typical capitalism.

The bailout was surely necessary, but there should have been more provisions in there to pay us back. Actually, I wanted the state to completely take over many of those banks, at least temporarily. Take them over, make them solvent again, and then give them back. Even more radically, I would like a US National Bank along the lines of China’s.

Without the bailout, the economy would be way more screwed than it already is. However, it was necessary to pair the bailout with a lot of terms and conditions that effectively re-regulated the banks back to where they were in the 1930’s. That meant reinstating Glass-Steagall, the whole nine yards. The banks would have gone along with it or they would have had no choice. Or offer the banks a choice, we either regulate you or we are going to take your asses over. This is what Roosevelt did in the 1930’s. This was not done at all, hence the criminal nature of the bailouts.

The rightwing, as you see in this comment, uses the “fascist” meme to scare people away from any kind of socialism or state involvement in the economy. Yes, fascists had state involvement in the economy, but they were not pro-worker or even pro-middle class. Anyway, many,  many socialist states have had a great deal of state involvement in the economy and yet they were not socialist. They were mostly pro-corporate and especially supported a hyper-nationalist imperialist project abroad and a conservative, ultranationalist and anti-minority project at home.

I don’t necessarily oppose fascist economics though. The type of corporatism practiced in East Asia is actually a good idea. State control over corporations is actually a great idea. Fascists are bad in many ways, but their economic project is not so terrible.

National Bolshevik Video

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39IjFe4CS4c&feature=email]

I honestly don’t know where to begin with this crap.

This is some of the most fucked up and confused politics I’ve seen in a while.

Is socialism great, or is Socialism Death, as the video argues in one case?

The endless fascist imagery, the violent, morbid, punk, death and frankly occult imagery is very disturbing. This worship of violence, death and the occult is what fascism is all about.

The Communist leaders they love for the most part were some of the worst and most murderous Communists of all.

Stalin murdered 3.1 million people. Pol Pot caused the death of 1.7 million, 1/4 of the population. Mao did quite a bit of killing himself. Ceausescu was one of the worst, most backwards and most fascist-like leaders in the East Bloc. He had a ton of blood on his hands, and he’s nothing to envy. Ceausescu promoted natalism and made abortion illegal. This is progressive and pro-women’s rights? Stalin made abortion much harder to get in the 1930’s. Saddam Hussein was nothing but a murderer. The North Korean Kims have a horrific human rights record.

The video’s images of Nazis were very disturbing. Nazis are shit. They were shit then, they’re shit now, they’ll be shit forever. The video makes an extensive case that Stalinist Communism and Nazi National Socialism were basically one and the same thing. It’s not the case. They also play up the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, a treaty that is very misunderstood. This Communism = Nazism, Nazism is socialism, Nazism is Leftism shit could have been written by an American hard rightwing anti-Communist.

Many of the Nazbol (the name itself is disturbing as it sounds like Nazis) marchers look like skinheads. The written introduction to the video defends not only nationalism (somewhat dubious) but also “racialism,” which is just a fancy word for racism. So Nazbols are apparently not only nationalists but also racists. Apparently Nazbols are also anti-Semites. Wonderful! Such a progressive movement, moving forwards and leaving barbarism behind! But that’s not so. Instead this movement embraces barbarism and looks backwards, not forwards. The opposite of progress, or progressivism.

Fuck this Nazbol shit. It’s interesting, but it seriously creeps me out. Even thinking about it makes my head spin.

error

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)