Yes, I have. Best investment I ever made, and I made it with the correct ingredients too.
Reagan signed the amnesty as a part of a more compressive security package that was picked apart by subsequent congresses and presidents… amnesty occurred instantly and the border security, courtesy the democrats and their chamber of commerce collaborators, never happened. Of course the millions of illegals that fell under that amnesty were part of an earlier border issue dating back to the early 1900 and now it very much has to do with crony-capitalism which, without a serious change of membership conviction in congress will be the end of US demographics. You are right that the democrats are exploiting the use of these people but it isn’t ‘these people’ (other than serious differences in custom and government experience) that are the problem, it is very much the one world attitude of the left. Keep in mind that Bernie Sanders rise to popularity was almost as devoid of black support as Trump.
I know the amnesty was nuanced, but take Reagan’s (and Thatcher in the UK) attitude towards free trade and capital investment neoliberalism. Once you totally liberalize your capital markets to outside investors and asset strippers, you get pile driven into the ground; then the political influence of these overseas creditors (Saudi Princes, etc…) begin to chip away at your border security and immigration policy. They begin to own your politicians, your media, (this is besides the amazing control Jewish capitalists have in Wash.D.C., 99% of whom support neoliberal trade). This is where the real problem is, just as you intimate.
Here’s the net foreign assets of the USA (Death of Mercantilism and birth of neoliberal world order) versus the trade deficits for instance :
NOTE: This graph has a typo. Second reference to “largest foreign creditor” should say “largest foreign debtor”.
Trade Deficits and Net Foreign Assets: One drives the other. Reagan is the man here. Reagan and Greenspan are a turning point in this process. If the USA wasn’t already sick after the implementation of the Federal Reserve and the creeping welfare-warfare state, this was where it actually flat-lined. I’m going to be writing an article about this very soon because people are living in the afterglow of neoliberalism as if the ‘prosperity’ caused by this national credit card addiction was the result of good ‘conservative’ management on the part of Republicans. They’re just as bad as the democrats. It’s just a one-two punch, and you’re the bag (much of this applies to Australia which is just a third wheel in the Chimerica Trade. We have a $20bill surplus with China and a $20bill deficit with the USA … it’s a classic triangular trade, thus we are also trapped in the neoliberal hurricane).
Reagan pointed at Harley Davidson and said “Look I’ll save the great American Brand” by having a kabuki theater ‘trade war’ with the Japanese that only effected Sports Bike imports (Harley didn’t make sports bikes). Distraction! And he did with his right hand, why? So with his left hand he could pass NAFTA, which was a backdoor for everyone including the Chinese. Along with NAFTA came the immigration influences with South and Central American kleptocrats like Carlos Slim, who started embedding their civil action hooks into US interior affairs, foreign policy, etc…
There is a connection between economic liberals - in regards to trade policy, not domestic free trade - whether they claim to be ‘right wing’ or ‘left wing’, and immigration policy. Nowhere is this clearer than in the EU where people and their skills are simply seen as economic units no different to widgets. This is the same direction the US has been dragged. It’s because of GATT, WTO, NAFTA, etc…
This crony-capitalism you speak of was epitomized by Reagan. Don’t get me started on Carter and Nixon. Reagan put Greenspan in charge of the Fed and the man was an Ayn Rand worshiper. Since then all of the administrations whether left or right have been neoliberals (just as Tony Blair in the UK sells himself as a Fabian Socialist. HA!). They all serve crony-capitalists, and they are all offshoring the profits and shipping jobs overseas. This is a massive problem in Australia and Canada also.
Neoliberals don’t just love free cheap labor (gardeners, nannies, servants), they also know they need to dispossess middle-class working whites. It is all about that core demographic which represents the founding principles of our nations. This is what they need to destroy. This is why all the mainline Republicans are all giving lip service to DACA and being ‘fair’. They’re all kleptocrats. Even Trump will eventually offer an amnesty. He’s already started back peddling in regards to DACA, regardless of his personal wishes.
If the core white demographic falls, the nation falls and the rest will be history, your patrimony and remaining wealth will just be voted away by the majority who see themselves as non-white. This is a really sensitive issue. I completely understand that. I’m just not going to stop looking for the answers - for the why? cui bono? - and they’ve become more obvious to me after I delved deep into the data. At the end of the day, it all comes down to two things :
1) in-group preferences and associated biological and cultural differences.
2) game theory (analysis of inevitable zero-sum games).
…the rest is just lipstick on the pig, but if I give too much space for good intentions, I’ll just be paving a road to hell. I’ll put logic above emotions here, for the sake of true objectivity.
There is an undoubtedly big difference between sub-Saharan African races and Eurasians, primarily it’s literally to do with brain volume, it’s biological, and it seems to be a problem for other non-whites too. This means that biologically - when living among Eurasians - these in-groups will always gravitate towards the side of the political spectrum which pushes demagogues (the data clearly shows this).
They know they are not able to compete for the leading positions in society under a pure meritocracy, so they vote where their NEEDS are. They NEED to find another way to compete, so the only other way is to take over the government and get the government to force redistribution and white-guilt policy. Rich white/Jewish kleptocrats and demagogues like Bernie Sanders, the Clinton’s, and take your pick on the ‘right’, are ever so happy to oblige as long as it is within the Overton window at any particular time.
I wish it were different, I’m aware there are exceptions to the rule, but the rule is the rule.
I’m also a very empathetic person, but I will no longer avoid the data or the knowledge that brought me to these conclusions. It’s like seeing daylight for the first time after being trapped underground for a prolonged period. It hurts the eyes at first, but slowly I came to realize the truth is the truth. As Jesus Christ said, “You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free”.
Right to Reply: on the Flaws in Race Realism
Hum… I find your last two comment posts to be confusing and somewhat conflicted. While the word ‘democrat’ does not denote a neo-liberal in total, I would suggest that they are cut from the same progressive cloth.
Your comment about Reagan and Harley is on point. The trade policy of the US was broken before Reagan but he put an exclamation point behind it with the deficit. I do blame the progressive movement for much that happens in the world. A managed decline of the US (presently) and the transfer of wealth… and power to government has been on the cards sense Wilson and with the FED putting the gears in motion.
Through history the progressive movement has used anything, any tool, any population group it could to coalesce that power goal. Religion, Unions, the poor, capitalist and class have all been picked up, used to exhaustion and discarded. I think we are starting to see quite clearly in the US the sidelining of blacks for the more numerous Hispanic. I am fairly certain that blacks would have been quite happy with the proper application of the constitution after the 1952 brown decision but the collaboration between King and LBJ which seriously damaged property rights and provided the incentive to ‘keep them … voting for a 100 years’ was a function of a push policy rather than one pushed on it by blacks. At the time it might have been more clearly seen but there was much distraction in the US over Vietnam to see just who was manipulating who. The race pushers used this chaos to their advantage but I think they were driven by a consortium of white benefactors.
Just as you see race as the root cause of our demise, I see the intervention that created, first the third world population explosion and second, the mass movement of people that we see today… While you might not call them democrats… its as good a label as any.
In the grand scheme of what appears to be going on in this globalist world I do wonder about trump … while his successful election might have been quite accidental, the power of the globalist movement always has me weary. I see, previous to Trump, what would be called a managed decline… The state taking on more of a carer roll for the disenfranchised and assuming ever more central control while creating policy that continues to export US wealth and import cheap labor. I sometimes wonder because of trumps various … variances of policy, if he wasn’t installed as a hand break… to slow immigration, create a new national norm to settle the body public, only to continue the destruction of western society at a more suitable time…placing him well withing the Overton window you described… a long game.
I know it’s confusing. Take the so called “neocons” … they’re all neoliberals. Every single one of them. William F Buckley was a neoliberal also, because it’s an economic philosophy, not a liberal social doctrine. Take Cheney, he’s pro-gay ‘marriage’. The Democrats and the Republicans have adopted unchained free-trade dogmas … they’re all neoliberals they only dress the pig different on social issues as if there’s some substantive point of difference. The ‘one worlders’ get their way regardless, through economic policy, and any ‘conservatism’ touted by the mainstream right-wing, is kabuki theatre to cajole a particular mindset within the demos who are broadly ‘anti-leftist’ (Libertarians, small gov conservatives, nationalists, ancaps, etc…). So to Bernie Sanders - pro free-trade - a one world socialist government and destruction of the meaning of America is fine, and for the Clinton’s, the same sacrifice of national sovereignty on the altars of the UN and NATO would occur. So I disagree, in that the Democrats are all neoliberals who only give lip-service to social issues for votes, but would keenly seek to destroy national economic sovereignty.
This will undoubtedly occur at some point, yes. It doesn’t change the root of the problem though; the anti-white anti-hegemonic alliance. Once that domino falls - and it’s the first target - what happens after is an irrelevance, and in order to make this domino fall, don’t expect the Democrats to dump the black ballast overboard. They need the black votes to control the large Municipal governments - this is very important for them, because urban centers are where all the Universities and economic dynamos are.
I’ll totally disagree though, because I’ve studied the biological differences. The race and IQ argument is a silver bullet. The evidence is overwhelming that they will always, in a pure meritocratic society living with whites, be trapped in a much lower socioeconomic bracket, which will undoubtedly manifest in ressentiment.
As for the cause of the third world explosion, if majority white nations had strong governments and border policy which is only possible while the whites hold all the power, the enemy outside the gates becomes a much more manageable affair than the Trojan horse already inside the gates. I’d be more concerned about the gift horse. It’s also possible that the industrial revolution and mechanized agriculture simply caused the population explosion, which would have been unavoidable, it’s just progress … but some cultures can’t handle progress like other cultures can. Meanwhile, white populations have a lack of fertility problem (birth control pill), which is the same thing - even we can’t handle our ‘progress’.
While I am not completely convinced of your genetically set in stone silver bullet, I do agree that any group that feels disenfranchised by any other group will use whatever tools available to create what they perceive as a level or advantaged playing field. I voted for Trump to assert Americas independence over immigration (which means putting the neoliberal power structure in check) and to right the many lopsided state to state trade policies that have gutted middle America… I would say however that many who voted for Trump saw in him the same advantages as any out group. (how many times have I heard it said of rust belt occupants that if they were smart enough to be observant, they would have seen the global trajectory and retrained to be competitive years ago)
You give to little credit to the progressive mind I think… Just as you see the cart pulling the horse, you to must see poor starving Africans who force 1) western liberalism to shove missionaries, who built schools and taught people how out of the way just to helicopter drop massive amounts of high carb aid into a natural birth limiting environment and calling on capitalist to rise to the challenge of ever higher density crops to sustain the explosion. I don’t think this was unavoidable progress anymore than I believe that the chants against the US aren’t, for the most part, self inflicted.
This is not the same thing. A person supporting true meritocracy versus people who are anti-meritocracy, is no evil. It’s a democracy, so of course people vote for their own best interests, that’s the point. The question is, which one is pathological in the long run, and which is at least less stupid? Meritocracy and Economic Nationalism is clearly what is best for a nation. I really don’t see your point here.
When it comes to the rust-belt and retraining people. Why? You’re still importing manufactures, which would otherwise have been produced domestically. EVERY leader on the left and the right were telling these workers that free trade would simply lead to higher efficiency but not job losses. This was the official line.
Did Reagan say “hey douche bags, I’m gonna ship your jobs to China, go learn how to flip burgers or get a useless humanities degree” !? Why should it be up to average workers when they’re working 50 hours a week, to have the economics nous to understand macro-economic trends in world neoliberalism?
This argument only holds water if you’re already throwing up your arms in surrender claiming US economic sovereignty to be forfeit to a supra-national, and globalist, economic rewiring. That has nothing to do with the ability of these workers to do their jobs or not based on racial IQ realities, but rather the ability of the USA to continue selling Treasury Bonds to pay for imports via I.O.U’s (see the Reagan piledrive Net Foreign Asset Position I posted above). Your argument sounds very similar to the rust-belt trashing over at National Review (neoliberals).
I don’t blame the schools because it can be demonstrated that the more economically sophisticated a people get, the lower their birthrate gets. High birthrates are the consequence of poverty and subsistence lifestyles.
You’re 100% correct about the USAID (etc… from other white nations). Dropping cheap grain in a poor country also dropped the price so much domestically that existing farmers were forced off their land, then they were forced on welfare or into exploitative and highly dangerous (very low safety standards) resource extraction jobs, serving neoliberal off-shored operations. This grain dumping was also done, however, not for virtuous reasons, but to use the food as a weapon to make these nations pliable. It was also done to support the price of farm goods, because the USA has a massive surplus of productive agricultural capacity, thus the Feds saw it as detrimental to allow farmers to be driven off the land as the price of their product inevitably dropped from oversupply, and no natural export market.
What they decided, was, instead of seeking an export market, they would buy up farm surplus with Federal funds and dump it on the third world - calling it ‘USAID’ - keeping the US farmers in business. This macroeconomic intervetion at the Federal level is also the reason for the increase in high fructose corn syrup as a replacement for sucrose imports, to make use of the surplus corn crops. This in turn caused the obesity crisis in the USA (I’m going to write an article on this). Thankyou Federal Government !!
Michael Hudson the center-left economist does a great job of explaining this grain dumping via USAID in his work. Some smart center-left economists are worth reading, though like Hudson, they are shunned from the left-wing economics/academic scene because they’re not neoliberals. It’s neoliberal on both dominant sides of the political spectrum now when it comes to economic policy. Neither support robust Economic Nationalism and diverse internal economies kept healthy via protectionism where it makes sense to do so.
I would say that in the long run one equals the other. To my way of thinking consolidation of politician and economic power at the top requires social liberalization to keep the lid on the masses. Chaney got caught in the abortion trap… his daughter turns up the be a lesbian and what is he to do, disown her… and some high profile guy’s mistress turns up pregnant… expedience more that outright approval…
I would think these minorities and their rather diminished I.Q. to have pulled off an interesting coup if it was they who managed to create an entire market for the west to dump their food on peoples who were otherwise to emaciated to think about having kids… create the conditions and health enough required to start a procreation boom and convince the world to pay for it and later convince half of the western population that it is the right thing to do to blow up a bunch of stuff to give them a ‘reason’ to become a refugee…
Don’t want to derail the discussion but this is one of the best debates I’ve ever seen on a forum and I’ve been stuck in these places for the past 20 years watching discussions.
… please continue
It wasn’t the minorities who did this. It was the neoliberal technocrats on both sides of the political spectrum. If you really want to read some hard hitting economic analysis on how it was achieved, read the following two books by Michael Hudson :
- American Imperialism
- Global Fracture
… they’re pretty hard reading but not so hard that a person with no econ education can understand them. He’s one of the smartest economic analysts out there because he doesn’t let his ideology taint his analysis. He’s mathematically honest and he analyzes the big picture rather than simply getting stuck tilting economic windmills. His book American Imperialism sounds harsh and leftist, but the book really isn’t that harsh; he simply explains the internationalization of the USD and how it is hijacked by neoliberals, multinationals, and offshore entities.
Hudson is actually very fond of protectionism and wrote another great book :
3) America’s Protectionist Takeoff 1815-1914
… this is why he’s shunned from leftist economic circles. I’d literally throw most of my economics texts into the trashcan and just read these three. I wish I’d come across them earlier and not wasted so much time reading classical rubbish by people like Adam Smith, which obviously has value, but is far outdated from today’s fiat commercial banking practices and developed bond markets. Keynesian and Austrian economics for the most part is all garbage as they’re so tainted by ideology to almost destroy any objectivity they contain, and it’s just a waste of time.
Mercantilism has been edited out of economic discourse by the neoliberals, and they own the left and right but have pushed the culture wars to distract people from the economic convergence. At least commies and capitalists used to have substantive debates sometimes back in the day, now everyone just argues over how many genders there are and why straight white males need to flog themselves publicly, daily. Follow the money though, I always say. That always leads to the Wizard of Oz … or Tel Aviv, etc…
Absolutely I agree. I was only pointing out that the incentive driving the actual transformation at the political level is neoliberal elites rather than the social liberals who then swallow the ‘one world’ mantra lock-stock-barrel.
There’s a convergence, but I see the cause being the asset stripping potential of these economics policies for elite parasites, the effect being that the social liberals then simply integrate the borders/sovereignty destruction aspects of it into their own drive to collapse what is left of the healthy capitalist dynamo which is not neoliberal but rather still geared towards diverse domestic markets (especially manufactures).
This is a lot like my race realism argument. They are a perfect match :
- It is the NEEDS of the locked down under-class which is largely racial for biological reasons that drives Democratic Party policies to feed the ressentiment for personal political gain.
- It is the NEEDS of kleptocrats for offshoring profits and paying no tax, making others carry the burden, which has driven neoliberal economic adoption within the Republican Party, starting in earnest with Nixon.
Then both dynamics worked out that they are essentially twin methods of dissolving the nation state, one being death by elites (I’m talking Davos level who control all the lobbies), the other being death by the underclass mob, the victim being the mostly white middle-class and lower-upper-class, stuck in the sandwich.
After the convergence you see the leftwingers dumping overt talk of Communism and adopting softer ‘socialism’ which is pro-free-market principles, but just with a creeping welfare state takeover. Nowhere can this be seen better but in Spain, imho. The hardcore Marxian socialists dumped Marx and adopted a ‘socialism’ which just serves neoliberals. At this point after 40+ years of neoliberalism, they have captured both sides of the political spectrum across the Anglosphere and in the continental EU.
Then the natural occurs, the elites mostly dump the rightwing and adopt leftwing talking points to act like good global citizens in the culture war, throwing their support behind the aspirations of the mob which is begging for globalism (global socialism, one world order, etc…). This is why all the Davos crowd, I find, are all Democratic Party and/or European Socialist Party shills.
It’s a perfect plantation model :
- The mob who can’t compete pulls down the middle-class and the wealth of the latter is redistributed.
- The elite keep all their off-shored wealth and become the technocratic class (or the appointers of the same) who manage the plantation.
It may have been a Freudian slip but did you mean ‘Super Imperialism’ ? I could find no American Imperialism title that he had written. While I understand the relevant relationships between various economic/business concepts, economics as a genre makes my head spin. I noticed in looking at these two that you offered up was another by him titled ‘J IS FOR JUNK ECONOMICS’… do you know if this is more readily absorbed by someone with diminished capacity? I think I actually became ‘red pilled’… or perhaps ‘black pilled’ by the John Perkins - ‘Confessions Of An Economic Hitman’… I just got his updated version which adds most recent events to his observations. It was probably the first time that I really understood that the many players on both sides of the political isle were partners in crime for most everything that made headlines in the press and most worrying, them many things that didn’t.
Thanks for the recommendations by the way…
Haha. Yeah, a little Freudian. You’re correct, it is Super Imperialism. Like I said, it’s a hit piece on neoliberalism rather than the concept of American Nationalism.
That is indeed a great book. I didn’t know he had released an updated version, but I’ll definitely be checking that out. The connections between the South and Central American drug trade and the CIA black budget funding is such an important topic, especially when discussing the 1) prison industrial complex, 2) heightened welfare dependency in the USA generated as fallout of the drug and crime epidemic caused by the CIA and other alphabet agencies working with chosen drug cartels. Perkins has done much to elucidate this fact, besides being an enjoying and easy to read author.
I haven’t actually read this yet, but I’m sure it’s a good read. I might order a copy because it does sound like a more specific tome regarding criticism of dominant economics gibberish. I couldn’t comment on whether it’s easier to read than the others.
America’s Protectionist Takeoff 1815-1914, however, is a must read for every American because it ties the history of America’s takeoff to the economic policies which were so different than that born in the post-Federal Reserve era. He poignantly concluded the date range in the title at 1914, the year the Federal Reserve Act became active.
To me the intersection point between ‘circumstance’ and the wet dream of those proud boys of Jekyll Island was Richard Milhous Nixon… Pure fiat was the endgame and we have transfered assets away from the people every since… (transfered being a nice word for … stripped)
Absolutely, but Kissinger and the Rockefeller’s were the key architects of all of this, Nixon seems to have just been a political prisoner trapped in a cage in the making since the Fed.Res.Act. Very sad state of affairs. The Kissinger visit to China in 1971 was a turning point that paved the way for Reagan to later do what he did with NAFTA and the ‘liberalization’ [selling out] of US economic sovereignty.
“hurr dudrr white ethnostate is gonna save west!” lol
I heard that your paradise is alive and well in Venezuela…
Are you familiar with the term “straw man”?