tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post8746562713408844180..comments2024-01-26T00:52:04.340-08:00Comments on SBPDL: Obama Sent Three Officials from his Administration to Michael Brown's Funeral: How many will he send to New York City for the Funerals of Two NYPD Officers?Stuff Black People Don't Likehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07923871032509110194noreply@blogger.comBlogger107125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-12120891101793468162014-12-25T20:20:36.857-08:002014-12-25T20:20:36.857-08:00how would letting the price of wheat fall and lett...<i>how would letting the price of wheat fall and letting the wheat production suffer (and, presumably, letting the wheat farmers go bankrupt) necessarily keep people from starving?</i><br /><br />People were starving already. The policy of restricting wheat production to increase the price (which too many people couldn't afford to pay) was observably wrong, as well as being an over-reach of Federal power. Many Okies were thrown off their land when banks foreclosed on loans they couldn't repay; instead of trying to prop up commodity prices, maybe loan repayments should have been suspended in order to make farming affordable. But that would have affected bank(st)ers... the owners of the FDR regime.<br /><br /><i>There is a school of thought that an important cause of the Great Depression was a too-restrictive monetary policy; that commodity prices fell because there wasn't enough money in circulation.</i><br /><br />And it was not the first time that a policy of easy money to make loans easier to fulfill (in debased money) was a political issue. It had even been a campaign issue before. Of course, if all you're doing is inflating asset bubbles it doesn't help.<br /><br /><i>It doesn't matter what the price of pork is if people don't have enough money to buy it.</i><br /><br />Filburn would have been able to feed more willing buyers if he hadn't been forced to buy wheat at a higher cost than he could grow it himself. He may even have been able to hire workers to grow wheat for him; it's better to be paid in room and board than to starve, so all would have been better off. FDR stopped him.<br /><br /><i>if people were starving, then the most direct approach would be to just give them food.</i><br /><br />Food obtained from whom, by what means? If by printing money, why not just give it to the starving and let them buy from willing sellers?<br /><br /><i>the Great Depression resulted from unregulated markets.</i><br /><br />Wrong. The Great Depression resulted from bad policy, including interest-only mortgages (which we saw repeated before the 2008 crash). All of those things could have been avoided, but policy was deliberately crafted to bring them about.<br /><br /><i>Regulate, and destroy individual freedom, or don't regulate, and allow things to devolve into chaos (i.e., freedom). </i><br /><br />Thank you for reprising the Hegelian dialectic. I'm wise to that.Mr. Rationalnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-83947242219153950292014-12-24T13:20:08.399-08:002014-12-24T13:20:08.399-08:00"Technological society didn't require sup..."Technological society didn't require supply restrictions on wheat when people were starving."<br /><br />I understand what you're saying, but how would letting the price of wheat fall and letting the wheat production suffer (and, presumably, letting the wheat farmers go bankrupt) necessarily keep people from starving? There is a school of thought that an important cause of the Great Depression was a too-restrictive monetary policy; that commodity prices fell because there wasn't enough money in circulation. It doesn't matter what the price of pork is if people don't have enough money to buy it. Besides, if people were starving, then the most direct approach would be to just give them food. This is frank socialism, yet there's no logical stopping point to government intervention once it starts.<br /><br />"The simple fact is that there are things the government shouldn't be trying to do, because it cannot do them well and will push out non-government actors who'd do a better job."<br /><br />On the other hand, the Great Depression resulted from unregulated markets. That's the crux of the problem. Regulate, and destroy individual freedom, or don't regulate, and allow things to devolve into chaos (i.e., freedom).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-76410825479482822032014-12-24T09:41:09.387-08:002014-12-24T09:41:09.387-08:00Race said ”I'm the about the last person one w...Race said <i>”I'm the about the last person one would expect to defend bogo add he always attacks Christianity and generalizes and doesn't recognize Christians like myself who doesn't fit his mold. Having said that, don't come on this blog and attack us under an anon moniker. Unless you give yourself a name in going to assume all these anons are the same person pretending to be more.”</i><br /><br />Interesting assumption, Race, if that is your real name. You would be the last person we could expect to defend bogo, yet the possibility that that there might be more than one Anon who might criticize bogo cannot be considered. I'm going to assume that you and bogo are one and the same.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-83679059946151074772014-12-23T23:21:46.451-08:002014-12-23T23:21:46.451-08:00I'm the about the last person one would expect...I'm the about the last person one would expect to defend bogo add he always attacks Christianity and generalizes and doesn't recognize Christians like myself who doesn't fit his mold. Having said that, don't come on this blog and attack us under an anon moniker. Unless you give yourself a name in going to assume all these anons are the same person pretending to be more.Racehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09810047744616701191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-2432075875092163372014-12-23T19:18:09.092-08:002014-12-23T19:18:09.092-08:00The point you're missing, and the whole proble...<i>The point you're missing, and the whole problem, is that technological society requires that there be such policies, and that these policies will always come as restrictions on individual freedom.</i><br /><br />Technological society didn't require supply restrictions on wheat when people were starving. Reading them into the Constitutional powers of FedGov was a stretch that should have been denied, and history shows what a disaster it was. The problem with "policies" is that the policy-makers can be stupid, pre-occupied or corrupt, and are certainly ignorant of facts that people in the market know. The simple fact is that there are things the government shouldn't be trying to do, because it cannot do them well and will push out non-government actors who'd do a better job.<br /><br /><i>The pursuit of "Green" energy may or may not be a misguided policy, and I'm not sure how you see the decision in Wickard as bearing on it.</i><br /><br />A great many Greens see it as a way to restrict the use of energy (which they see as either damaging or as a moral evil) by driving up the price. Without <i>Wickard v. Filburn</i>, they would be deprived of the biggest legal tools they have for doing so.Mr. Rationalnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-29705345466867157502014-12-23T18:28:55.056-08:002014-12-23T18:28:55.056-08:00"Not "apparently" inimical, it was ..."Not "apparently" inimical, it was actually murderous. "<br /><br />You don't read very carefully, do you? I wrote "admittedly", not apparently.<br /><br />"Then tell us that Wickard telling us where we can buy our food and for how much was the right decision for everyone."<br /><br />You've also missed the point. Just because, with the advantage of hindsight, you disagree with the policy, doesn't mean it was a bad decision at the time. There will always be policy disagreements, and hindsight will always be 20/20. The point you're missing, and the whole problem, is that technological society <b>requires</b> that there be such policies, and that these policies will always come as restrictions on individual freedom. Government's role as caretaker of the public good acts to undermine all individual freedoms, yet without it performing this role technological society becomes impossible. Here's a brief history of agricultural price supports:<br /><br />https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_policy_of_the_United_States#Beginning_of_price_supports<br /><br />Notice how they inexorably expand into other areas:<br /><br />https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_policy_of_the_United_States#Increased_comprehensiveness<br /><br />The pursuit of "Green" energy may or may not be a misguided policy, and I'm not sure how you see the decision in Wickard as bearing on it. But that there is such a policy at all is further proof of my point. A government concerned with managing all aspects of the economy for the public good necessarily becomes an enemy of individual freedom.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-19048054371109039522014-12-23T17:11:46.474-08:002014-12-23T17:11:46.474-08:00The reasoning in Wickard was actually quite sound,...<i>The reasoning in Wickard was actually quite sound, though admittedly inimical to individual freedom. Public policy was to support wheat prices, and the wheat that was grown, even if for on-farm consumption, did limit the amount that otherwise would have been purchased.</i><br /><br />Not "apparently" inimical, it was actually murderous. People were STARVING because food cost more than they could pay, and FDR's policy was to make this worse. Filburn was trying to do something about that by making pork cheap enough for people to buy by cutting out the middleman for grain. Wickard killed people by starvation.<br /><br />We're seeing similar things today, especially with "Green" energy that costs far too much for people to afford and simply isn't there when needed. Had the SCOTUS properly decided in favor of Filburn, none of this would be happening.<br /><br /><i>This creeping loss of freedom is a necessary thing in a technological society</i><br /><br />Tell you what, you live on wind and solar energy exclusively (including for driving and working) and tell us how well you do. Then tell us that Wickard telling us where we can buy our food and for how much was the right decision for everyone.Mr. Rationalnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-79534304116459357622014-12-23T14:56:41.541-08:002014-12-23T14:56:41.541-08:00Anonymous posted, My world consists of accountants...Anonymous posted, <i>My world consists of accountants, bankers and finance people. There are about zero Blacks in my business and associated businesses.</i><br /><br />If you want your workplace to be from from blacks, find a job/career that requires:<br /><br />1. Background check<br />2. Drug screening<br />3. Swim qualification<br /><br />My good friend retired from underwater welding with a six figure pension & lives on a 100 acre ranch in the Midwest. I go hunting out there annually.<br /><br />TC2Truth Corpsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-44040617917182956902014-12-23T14:00:55.567-08:002014-12-23T14:00:55.567-08:00"Above all else, the primary cause of the dec..."Above all else, the primary cause of the decline has been the failure to understand the racial nature of the struggle."<br /><br />Some would say that there are people, many of them white, who understand it only too well. In his fireside chat of June 5, 1944, Roosevelt stated that "the United Nations [Roosevelt's phrase for what we would now call the Allies] are determined that in the future no one city and <b>no one race</b> will be able to control the whole of the world."<br /><br />http://millercenter.org/president/fdroosevelt/speeches/speech-3334<br /><br />The West has had an official policy of racial suicide for quite some time. As you detail in your post above, there are lots of reasons for this, and it would be a mistake to see them as mutually exclusive.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-83814931156481809012014-12-23T13:13:23.235-08:002014-12-23T13:13:23.235-08:00"Wickard v. Filburn is excellent law indeed -..."Wickard v. Filburn is excellent law indeed - if you're a damned communist."<br /><br />All supporters of technological civilization are socialists to an extent. Such societies can only work if large numbers of people coordinate their activities very closely; in other words, they can exist only in a condition of unfreedom. Redistribution of wealth and property is part of this. You're not really stupid enough to believe that you live in a free country, are you? Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005) is another decision that is sound when considered from the point of view of "the greater good", but inimical to individual freedom. "They" can take your private property any time they want. "The greater good" will always be the justification.<br /><br />The United States is a de facto socialist country, the USSA. Though it's still paid lip service, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights ceased to have any real force a long time ago. This isn't the result of a conspiracy, just another side effect of technological development.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-19760316804482115582014-12-23T09:28:21.257-08:002014-12-23T09:28:21.257-08:00Hi all, I need help, quick, please. I saw a stat r...Hi all, I need help, quick, please. I saw a stat recently regarding cops killed by blacks, and mentioned it at a site elsewhere, and now I can't find the stat. Anyone have it, for any parameter of time? And with a "mainstream" link would be cool too. Thanks!Melanienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-35688170736293964522014-12-23T09:28:06.195-08:002014-12-23T09:28:06.195-08:00[continued]
Suicide of the West. I'll do my u...[continued]<br /><br /><b>Suicide of the West</b>. I'll do my usual plug for James Burnham's epic book on this topic. It's a Spenglerian thing. Western Civilization reached a point some time in the mid-20th century when it went through the decline phase. Too many white people were killed in the world wars, especially among the healthy younger demographic. Western elites could not deal with communism, the exploding third world or dysgenic demographics which are prone to crime. So they recast liberalism as an ideology to rationalize away the defeats. <br /><br />e.g., European countries no longer have the will to fight colonial wars in Africa? Surrender Algeria and Rhodesia and Angola and South Africa to terrorist insurgents and call the result "majority rule" and "democracy.” White countries no longer have the will to defend their own frontiers? Open up the borders and glorify the resulting invasions for bringing "diversity" and "vibrancy." Third worlders burn down cities from Malmo to Ferguson? This is <i>really</i> an advance for human rights as the protesters are standing up against injustice and for equality. And so it goes...<br /> <br /><br />Above all else, the primary cause of the decline has been the failure to understand the racial nature of the struggle. Therefore, effective policies can not be implemented. At best, conservatives can tinker with some of the symptoms. But the vast majority of the threats to the Western world – the waves of violent crime and rioting, the torture-murders in SA and now in America, the failure of inner city schools, the outsourcing of industry and undermining of the middle class, the decline of the American manned space program, the No Go zones staked out by third world invaders in Europa, the destruction of entire cities like Detroit – all come down to one thing: <i><b>race</b></i>. <br /><br />Something to think about in the continuing crisis...Californiannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-22747624131884540122014-12-23T09:26:16.927-08:002014-12-23T09:26:16.927-08:00D-FENS said...The interesting question is why so m...<i>D-FENS said...The interesting question is why so many White countries have implemented the open borders-diversity theme? It's no coincidence particularly since it always seems to span the acceptable spectrum of political parties in each nation.<br /></i><br /><br />This is a good question. There are any number of answers. All of them need to be considered, no matter how off-the-wall:<br /><br /><b>Conspiracy theory</b>. It's the result of hostile elites. The CFR/Bilderbergers/Trilateral Commission/Insiders/Inner Party/Federal Reserve/Et Alia. These groups have pushed for world government for decades. They have the money and the power, and it's all finally paid off. So they give orders to the governments, political parties, media and NGOs. Borders open, national identities are erased, multicultism becomes the mass ideology—and elite power is consolidated worldwide. <br /><br /><b>Globalization</b>. Capital is international, markets are international, resources are international, information is international—so why shouldn't humans be international? Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, there is no serious force opposing globalized capitalism. The corporations promote multicultism as a means to overcome national opposition to global control of industry, and to break down the white middle class which might just unionize and oppose them. <br /><br /><b>Crystal Methodism</b> (for a lack of a better term) or the Amy Biehl Factor. Your average white person wants to <i>love</i> humanity, and wants to be<i> loved </i> in return. I have an acquaintance who is an exemplar of this. He's of “good nordic descent,” politically middle-of-the-road, but his philosophy is, “If I am nice to the blacks, they will be nice to me in return.” He sees it as a point of moral superiority that he <i>loves</i> mankind. He's not one of those (perish the thought!) <i>racists</i>. It's a childlike belief in the goodness of a common humanity like unto a drug. And the addicts will keep on believing in it even as they are being cut to pieces by their black objects of affection—e.g., Amy Biehl. <br /><br /><b>Incompetency on the part of the right</b>. The rightwing has failed to organize agitprop on the scale of the leftwing. The left creates massive media machines, sets up political front groups, organizes students, infiltrates institutions, takes it to the streets. The right goes about with a “business as usual” attitude (can't do anything that would look bad on the country club application) while the left is fighting a war. I have been involved in conservative student organizing, and I've seen this up front—leftwing groups have massive resources behind them, often subsidized by major corporations. And when all is said and done, leftists are willing to break the law, confront the cops, and go to jail in pursuit of their goals. The right tries to play it by the rules and thus is outmaneuvered <br /><br />[continued]Californiannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-22880541528237378142014-12-23T09:23:23.855-08:002014-12-23T09:23:23.855-08:00Regarding Asians, Hispanics and possibly Middle Ea...Regarding Asians, Hispanics and possibly Middle Easterners now in the USA: there may be room for white nationalists to make a tactical alliance with them against blacks. Today, white nationalists are not strong enough to go it on their own. There is no mass white movement, no mainstream white advocacy organization or media. Anything that can divide the opposing coalition is good. And certainly Asians, etc. have a healthy racial instinct, and have been victimized enough by black criminality. <br /><br />There are two problems with such an alliance. One is short term: these groups will not align themselves with white nationalists until whites are willing to take the fight off of the Internet and into the realworld. If white people will not stand up for themselves, then why should other groups stand up for them? Right now, Asians, etc., can gain much more political capital by being "anti-racist."<br /><br />There is the long term: assuming a white homeland is created. What happens to Asians, Hispanics, etc? As a thought experiment, perhaps America could be broken up into several countries: one a white homeland, another a massive reservation for blacks, a third a multi-cultural "paradise" where all races can be "enriched" by "diversity." Certainly, such a paradise would be a good place to consign DWL.<br /><br />I do not have an easy answer here, and this matter requires serious discussion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-9990713416726264562014-12-23T08:55:05.788-08:002014-12-23T08:55:05.788-08:00"We will never have peace as long as they are..."We will never have peace as long as they are near."<br /><br />You said it brother, now what are we going to do about it?<br /><br />I think our German brethren are getting the ball rolling for us: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/11309449/Record-numbers-rally-against-Islamisation-in-Germany.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-40262595098436037142014-12-23T08:37:08.069-08:002014-12-23T08:37:08.069-08:00Beautifully put, Sheila!
These anti-Bogolyubski ...Beautifully put, Sheila!<br /> <br />These anti-Bogolyubski Anons are 2 edgy 4 me!<br /><br />Seriously, Bogolyubski is not the only one here who holds cynical views (particularly toward TWMNBN) yet he is the only one constantly harassed for it. In my eyes, that only lends him more credibility. <br /><br />I would guess these Anons/TMH are the same individual. Their comments lack subtlety at best and are diversionary at worse. I mean, it would be one thing if it were one anti-Bogolyubski comment every blog post or so, OR if the troll(s) picked a fight with another commenter who holds similar opinions to Bogolyubski, but no, it's one anti-Bogolyubskis comment after another. Obvious troll(s) are obvious!<br /><br />The anti-Bogolyubski commenters are calling for the censorship of Bogolyubski's comments. That only makes me MORE suspicious of the anti-Bogolyubskis. Criticizing a commenter's opinion is one thing, but demanding censorship? That reeks of desperation.<br />World_War_Mehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00270760520978915122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-41376101492664824472014-12-23T06:06:56.588-08:002014-12-23T06:06:56.588-08:00Hahahahahahahaha!!! You're exactly right! E...Hahahahahahahaha!!! You're exactly right! Everyone is entitled to their opinion as long as its just like theirs! Hahahahahahahaha!!!<br /><br />J.J.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-87459903731672141282014-12-23T05:51:48.110-08:002014-12-23T05:51:48.110-08:00I don't watch that crap anymore. Use that tim...I don't watch that crap anymore. Use that time to go to the range when its nice out. <br /><br />J.J.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-86100230269109481032014-12-23T05:49:22.075-08:002014-12-23T05:49:22.075-08:00Exactly right. Gun control, use both hands, negro...Exactly right. Gun control, use both hands, negro control, front sight on target.<br /><br />J.J.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-30015837826923382382014-12-23T04:13:26.381-08:002014-12-23T04:13:26.381-08:00Until today I had never considered the inbreeding ...Until today I had never considered the inbreeding issue as perhaps one of the main components of Black incompetency. It makes sense and answers the Big Question "Why CAN'T Blacks seem to run things when they become the majority in a city? Why does it unravel so fast?" The genetics of this contribute to low IQs, low impulse control, bad decision-making (poor morals), criminality - all of it. The end result is they are so easily manipulated and have been weaponized by those with a sinister agenda. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-37287554863354612832014-12-22T22:33:46.396-08:002014-12-22T22:33:46.396-08:00That's right!! I think they might be waiting o...That's right!! I think they might be waiting outside your door at this very minute. Quick! somebody call Paul Craig Roberts.juvenalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12596363937357377570noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-71693301580538430532014-12-22T20:34:45.301-08:002014-12-22T20:34:45.301-08:00Nice to see Melanie commenting again. I thought we...Nice to see Melanie commenting again. I thought we'd lost you. Also Sheila, you've been scarce lately.<br /><br />Anon 3:27 (with several others concurring) said:<br /><br /><i> The decision for whites to go it alone or as one race among several races suffering from negro fatigue depends on one's goal. If our goal is a white homeland to the exclusion of all non-whites, we will need a different strategy than if our goal is just to handle the problem with blacks.</i><br /><br />This is correct. I've explained before, and I think I'm not alone, that my goal is the continuation of the White race. Whatever else we may lose can be rebuilt. Only extinction is final.<br /><br />This goal can't be achieved without an exclusive territory of our own. We've all had this demonstrated over the last century or so. Defeatism, doubt about the possibility of achieving it, are self-defeating. Maybe the odds are against us, but as the man said, it's the only game in town. If we don't try, we've already lost.<br /><br />I take comfort from the two lessons I've learned from history:<br /><br />1. The unthinkable happens.<br /><br />2. It can turn on a dime.<br /><br />Never say never.<br /><br />PS Bogolyubski, pay no attention to the ankle-biters. AnalogMannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-78745007922172879902014-12-22T20:28:13.298-08:002014-12-22T20:28:13.298-08:00Amusing to see the various trolls at work - likely...Amusing to see the various trolls at work - likely on the government payroll or that of folks like Adelson or Zuckerberg. TMH, who seemed particularly infuriated at my shot at Ted Cruz, seems to have forgotten that he's married to Goldman-Sachs. That really tells us all we need to know about him. Cruz, the magic-hispanic, is a typical Repuke: always the plastic smile on his face as he thrusts the knife in YT's back.<br /><br />At this point, even Kim Jong Un is looking sane compared to the folks supported and defended by TMH and the various anon trolls. Wickard v. Filburn is excellent law indeed - if you're a damned communist. As for all the magic-hispanics who TMH and his ilk are here to tell us are our salvation from the negro, just keep in mind the reaction of all those nice "natural conservative, traditional-Catholic (in the Hi-Fellatin' Franny vein), fambly-values" folks in the wake of the railroading by BRA of the "white" Peruvian zambo (octaroon) George Zimmerman: Every single professional hispanic organization backed the narrative of St. Skittles. Your shit-sandwiches aren't selling so well, TMH.Bogolyubskinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-53512804440438713592014-12-22T19:32:44.377-08:002014-12-22T19:32:44.377-08:00Melanie and Sheila,
God bless you both sisters.Melanie and Sheila, <br />God bless you both sisters.Racehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09810047744616701191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3890530692790573387.post-69841175598451536522014-12-22T19:31:30.481-08:002014-12-22T19:31:30.481-08:00Then expel all parasites. No northwest front, retu...Then expel all parasites. No northwest front, return America to it's historical and massive majority.Racehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09810047744616701191noreply@blogger.com