Steam-Powered wrote: ↑
Thu Mar 10, 2022 12:16 am
Riley wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 21, 2022 7:24 pm
This is all I was saying, that there are real situations where such policies can become necessary, not that it's ideal or that it should be the norm for government to override individual rights. So now you contradict yourself, because before you said you don't care at all
about the circumstances, as your consent is more important than any other consideration. That is pure individualism, and as the Alliance is collectivist, this is what I took issue with. Now you seem to be saying something different.
For the past several weeks I've been listening to an episode of the ADV shows (from newest to older episodes) on my way to and from work and at least one of Dr. Pierce's talks (from the bitchute archive) at night. The topic of selfishness has been the focus of many such broadcasts and the message hit home. I've realized that "collectivism" was at the heart of my distaste for any form of socialism. You were correct, I was trying to have my cake and eat it too. Having read Ayn Rand's novels and non-fiction in the 80s, I've had a negative emotional reaction to "collectivism", seeing any such obligation as a violation of my individuality. What a bunch of nonsense, seeing where that brought us today. I've really been duped since my late 20s, kind of depressing, but at least I figured it out while I can still contribue something meaningful to our race.
Charles Murray's "Facing Reality" was a wake-up call for me. He puts all the facts about racial intelligence (IQ distributions) and crime rates on the table in just 125 pages (plus online documentation for those wanting more data and references). That book, Buchanan's "The Unecessary War", and a few others I've read over the past few months (I'm currently reading "Hitler's Revolution") have convinced me that I've been deluded for decades. Over the past week I've worked through the cognitive dissonance and came to the conclusion that the only appropriate economic system is whatever is best for the White race. As we are inherintly racial beings, the NSDAP makes the most sense. This is a major shift in my values and it feels liberating.
I really appreciate everybody's participation on this thread, it's been very helpful.
I'm glad some of what I said was helpful.
Since you are interested in economics, something that I found interesting as I was first learning about National Socialism was a book I found called Manifesto for the Abolition of Interest-Slavery
by Gottfried Feder.
https://www.nationalists.org/pdf/hitler ... -feder.pdf
Volumes of books have been written on the 3rd Reich and the Second World War that deal primarily with
Adolf Hitler, his generals, the War, or other “exciting” tangents from the European Theater in that period
of time. However I doubt that the families of the millions of men and boys who died in that tragedy known
as WWII would refer to any of it as “exciting,” and this publisher would be in agreement with them. What
is often left out of these books are the core principles and foundations of National-Socialism (Nazism) that
got Hitler elected and brought Germany out of the depression before any other affected nation had.
Adolf Hitler’s economic system – heavily influenced by the genius of Gottfried Feder – was unlike anything
the world had ever seen, and it worked better than anyone predicted at the time. National-Socialist
economics were of pivotal importance to Hitler’s government, but those policies are sadly very poorly
understood today for a variety of reasons, including the aforementioned lack of “excitement” surrounding
economic policies of 70+ years ago on the other side of the world. As the reader will soon come to
understand, “breaking the bondage of interest-slavery” was strongly emphasized, though most Americans
have never considered the idea of life without interest on a house or car payment. Gottfried Feder
discusses this in his Manifesto, and almost all of what he says in it applies today as it did in 1919. Some
authors and Nazi sympathizers have even suggested that if Germany’s brilliant economic ideas had spread
to other nations, this would soon lead to the end of endless profits and power for the banksters, and hence
the need for the Allied powers to bring Germany to her knees.
I can understand why a lot of people don't find this stuff very fascinating or practically useful to our current situation, but I see no reason why that means those of us who are naturally interested shouldn't learn about and discuss economics, particularly NS economics, because the economic policies of NS Germany are largely why it became such a great threat to the globalist empire. Often it is said the the Jewish control of the media is the key to their power, and it certainly is key, but the real key is their control of massive capital which allows them to create and maintain such media monopolies in the first place, and they acquire this capital primarily via interest-slavery on a global scale.
Another good book is The Creature from Jekyll Island
. It doesn't name the Jews, but it does a great job of explaining how this awful system of economic slavery really works. It is largely focused on the Federal Reserve banking cartel, which essentially grants the Jews the power to steal everyone's money at will while hiding this theft behind all sorts of smoke and mirrors.
This is a bit of a tangent, but I really hate the term "wealth transfer". If a guy picks your pocket, are you going to tell others later that night about how you "experienced a large wealth transfer" today? I mean, come on. It's technically true, but it completely leaves out the fact that a guy intentionally took your money without your permission, and I'd say that's an important part of the story. One might even call it pillaging or plundering on this scale, but "wealth transfer"? This is why I think people should give a little more importance to the understanding economics, so they can see through bullshit like this. The Jews benefit from this "discussing economics is pointless" attitude in a big way. I'm not advocating getting into the weeds about hypothetical policies so much as I'm advocating that we understand basic economic theory and how the current systems work.