The problem with a Socialist economy is that it
restricts personal freedoms tremendously. With the government
being endowed with so much power, kids that do not do well in
highschool are put into a caste system for life without the chance of
improving themselves.
Great Britain is heavily Socialist and at least 10% of their kids do not even go to highschool.
Freedom in its true form is not the right to do whatever one wishes, but the right to have a will that triumphs and makes one successful.
The biggest problem with Socialist institutions is
that a legitimate education is not excessible enough. That
slows progress.
Freedom in its true form is not the right to do whatever one wishes, but the right to have a will that triumphs and makes one successful.
Socialism also does little to stem the tide of transnational corporate and finance greed. With the neo-libs and neo-cons firmly behind NWO programs such as NAFTA, GATT, and now CAFTA, a protected national free market system will continue to suffer. Only a Nationalist governmentprepared to insure some form of protective competition in relation to tradeas well as theinstitution of'Americanization' with regard to some foriegn holdings can save us from the slide towards globilization.
\"We lead by example; We lead from the front.\"
You guys are talking about left wing socialisim.What about national-socialism?
It is true that international socialism and national socialism are polar opposites.Originally Posted by Nordwave
Yeah -- National Socialism is "goth", and international socialism is "hippie". [img]smileys/smiley2.gif[/img]
The NYT announces that welfare abuse (or welfare itself?) is a thing of the past. Like I've said before, liberals only have to say a thing out loud and it becomes fact -- they're magicians, you see.
Or is there any truth to it? Please weigh in, gang -- you especially, Don. I would tend to assume that the poor pitiful "single mothers" referred to are actually the "welfare brood mares" in Wilmot Robertson's phrase, and not so much to be pitied as your average NYT scribbler would have it.
<DIV>
<DIV ="byline">http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/21/wa...1welfare.html? _r=1&th=&oref=slogin&emc=th&pagewa nted=all </DIV>
<DIV ="byline"></DIV>
<DIV ="byline"></DIV>
<DIV ="byline">A Decade After Welfare Overhaul, a Shift in Policy and Perception </DIV>
<DIV ="byline"></DIV>
<DIV ="byline">
<DIV ="timestamp">WASHINGTON, Aug. 20 — Ten years after a Republican Congress collaborated with a Democratic president to overhaul the nation’s welfare system, the implications are still rippling through policy and politics.</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
The law, which reversed six decades of social welfare policy and ended the idea of free cash handouts for the poor, was widely seen as a victory for conservative ideas. When it was passed, some opponents offered dire predictions that the law would make things worse for the poor. But the number of people on welfare has plunged to 4.4 million, down 60 percent. Employment of single mothers is up. Child support collections have nearly doubled.
“We have been vindicated by the results,” said Representative E. Clay Shaw Jr., Republican of Florida and an architect of the 1996 law who was vilified at the time. “Welfare reform was one of the most successful policy changes in our nation’s history.”
But critics say it has cut adrift some single mothers who seem unable to hold steady jobs and are not receiving cash assistance — women who have neither work nor welfare.
To help poor single mothers help themselves, officials used a combination of conservative and liberal policy tools. These included work requirements and time limits on public assistance, tax credits for low-income working parents, child-care subsidies and health insurance for people leaving welfare.
“We hardly ever make radical change in this country, but welfare reform was a radical change,” said Prof. Richard P. Nathan, director of the Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government at the State University of New York. “It sent a very strong signal to welfare recipients: We can help you, if you help yourself”...........
</DIV>
It seems the kosher CONservative 'right-wing' always want to defend capitalism, even when it has proven time after time it is detrimental to the interests of the white working-class. Both capitalism and communism are arms on the same Izzy Frankenstein monster. One arm on the 'left' and the other on the 'right.' The only social and economic system that can benefit the white working class is National Socialism.
Socialism is a scourge.
Between national socialism and international socialism (communism and capitalism) there is a great difference. National socialism is people assisting there own kind which has to be done from time to time. International socialism either communism or capitalism is basically taking production from one group and transferring to another. In capitalism businesses get corporate welfare and often have their labor cost supplemented like is currently happening with their Mestizos and Latin American Indians who often live off welfare while working for businesses. In international socialism production is taken from one group, most likely Whites, and given to another group usually non-whites who are not as productive in other words one group loses and one gains. In national socialism, there is a sharing within a nation in order to help the whole nation since there is only one group involved, there is a benefit to society as a whole. Exactly how this is done can vary but in a nation the helping your own people is what a true nation does. A barn raising as they use to do is a form of national socialism where the local community got together and help one another, it was voluntary but if someone refused to help stigmatization would surely follow.
Generally, the world socialism is viewed as international socialism with a basic thief mentality. But national socialism is more of a helping your fellow countrymen in a true nation.
Two great quotes by Racial-Nationalists Don Borowsky & Michael.
As a Christian Racial Nationalist the only areawhere I would differ is I'm for de-centralization.
The only recognized central authority necessary is Divine Providence. The race is the only collective: a collective of individuals & clans that make up our neighborhoods,townships,counties ,territories.
Providence has been administering to the needs of the universe longer than mankind's existance & everything has ran according to His scientific plan without our input.
We should learn from that example & stop allowing monarchs,presidents,etc to assume positions tobe held by Providence only.
National Socialism is definantly superior to the judeo-capitalist/communistmodel.
According to the greatest historian of the 20-21rstcentury,Eustace Mullins, the term Nazi means national zionist,which would explain why the Germans never used the termto describe themselves. It would also explain the esoteric message put out in theNWO media. They know the only war crimescommittedinthe worldin recent history against the White Saxon Nation ,as well as their own people,have been by the real nazis(national zionists).
Edited by: aryanfreeman
NS Greetings, Michael and whitefreeman. As to your concern of 'de-centralization' National Socialism addresses this. Take the NS Labor Front for example. It replaced the Marxist led union leaders (Jews), and monopoly capitalist businessmen and replaced them with rank and file workers who by majority vote (real democracy), determined what was in their best interests. Because what was best for the worker was in the long run best for the nation. If the worker was exploited, the owner of the company (capitalist), could have his business nationalized. Can you imagine this happening in the US? Not if your life depended on it!
Socialism is a scourge . . . it is always based on a powerful central government forcing the "redistribution of wealth" -- wouldn't you say?
What's wrong with free enterprise and a central government that sticks to the only jobs it ever could have -- extremely limited facilitation of interstate commerce and national defense.
There is nothing wrong with 'a strong central government.' It just depends on who controls the 'strong central government.' The strongest central government in the world is located in cesspool DC. And it is a plutocratic capitalist government. Would you be opposed to a 'strong central government if it was under the control of the American Nationalist Union?
Yes! Or controlled by anyone else!
Your thesis hinges on a very big "if" -- "if" the right people are running the strong central government. If great big "ifs" are allowed, why don't we just say we could have the country of our dreams "if" we could get the government to obey the present Constitution? Surely that's no less likely to happen than convincing a Naziphobic ameriKa to choose Hitler's form of government.
But once again, I'm willing to go you one further and say we should shut down government, period, and start over from scratch, making sure the thing never again reaches evenONE PERCENT of its present size and scope.
I really don't understand anybody in this forum promoting powerful central government, but hey, it's a free country -- for a few minutes longer.
Given the choice between a 'strong central government' and a weak central government I will take the strong central government every time. It is unrealistic and utopian in the 21st century to be for weakness in government or anything else for that matter. History is being made every day and it shows what happens to weak governments. When you have a reactionary imperialist like George W. Bush, who believes in 'preemtive attacks' you leave yourself wide open to attack when he believes you to be a weak opponent. This is why Iran and North Korea thumb their nose at Bush, and rightly so. They want him to be afraid, very afraid. Anything to stop that unstable lunatic. The libertarian view of weak government is fit for the ashcan history.
Greetings Don Borowsky. I appreciate your point of view. I have to say for the sake of clarity that I don't advocate an absolute NS prototype ,but I believe that the Third Reich was ethically or morally superior to it's 20th & now 21rstcentury counterparts.
I am for no centralized governmentother thana geographic capitolfor the sakeof national coordination.
Please consider: if all legal/political jurisdictions are local township or county then it is easier for the constituency to maintain government accountability. By constituency I mean the patriarchs(adult males)of legal citizenship, of the racial nation acting as theelectors/appointers ofadministrative councilswithin their local jurisdiction. These jurisdictions collectively would be the national body politic.
I realize many people see this idea as a weak prototype, but I believe it would make any nation stronger. The nation would be stronger because self-reliant individuals make better neighbors ,more self-reliant neighbors build stronger more independent counties & thus the nation.
I believe if Germany had not been forced into war a more populist Reich would have emerged. The enemies of Germany knew,& this is speculation on my part, that a populous trained to exist within the framework of massive bureaocracy & statism could not without re-education understand the principles of self-reliance, self-sufficiency,personal responsibility, individual initiative & at the same time moral ethics pertaining to the protection & advancement of the racial nation: the family or clans collectively, thus one of the reasons for the war.
Today we here in the White nations,for the most part, are in the same exactstate of existence as Weimar Germany. The people can't see that the electorate that continues to support modern democracy are practicing communists. They carry out 9 of the 10 planks of the communist manifesto every day. Gun confiscation is all that separates the U.S. from total compliance with the manifesto.
There is a group of kosher conservatives who don't like the present political establishment,but want to remain one thin line away from where we are right now .
We as racial nationalists & christians must be progressive in thoughts & actions. By using the best knowledgewe have plus positiveactionfor the future we can build a nation that doesn't need adominant central governmentto achieve & maintainlife,liberty,& property. God Bless. Edited by: aryanfreeman
OK, you're against the system the founding fathers set up, because you consider this "weak", setting up a false dichotomy in the process. Duly noted, Mr. Borowsky.
Governments that keep within legal bounds set by free people are not "weak" per se, they're the only thing that's ever worked. Is fascism what you're are after? I really can't get over nationalists calling for big government (or shall we say "powerful central" government -- probably the same thing.
whitefreeman, you're making more sense by the minute. In fact our favored models seem to be converging. And I think I can simplify it all yet further: If we could just get people to see that government is not God, i.e. to consistently apply apriori a healthy skepticism to all public figures instead of automatic awe and respect, the world would be a different place and how.
People do regard government as god. They do! Yes -- I'm proposing that people take a "criminal until proven otherwise" view of all public figures, quite seriously assuming they're crooks and allowing them to prove otherwise, if they can.
This process is actually the essence of my socio-political work. And I promise you that we could just get people to reorient their thinking in this fashion, the form of government wouldn't even matter, because nobody in the public arena would chance a single misstep much less the mass misappropriation of the public coffers and trust we see today.
People mistake government for God -- that's the whole problem in a nutshell, and has been since the dawn of time. They refuse to think critically about it and apply the normal, everyday rules and benchmarks to it. The worse politicians get, the more the sheeple bow before them in humble adoration. This is our downfall and that of every society that's lost sight of original freedom.
Edited by: nelson
Well a few things occurred to me while reading this thread. The last 3 generations have been so inundated with false history by omission.
The founding fathers. Who were they ? Most people would say the 55 men who signed the constitution. Not me . I don't give them that honor.
I believe that honor belongs to the people who for years ran the colonies without a dominant central government & fought the empire of their day as well as the empire loyalists.
Those who signed on to the constitution in my opinion helped found todays order. The constitution has all the checks & balances to insure thatthe people can never reform it .
Can we use the legal system for reform? Evidently the few patriot attorneys don't think so.
There is an untapped independent electorate that could challenge them,but instinctually the orthodox Christians or probably even theDeistswill not vote for evil.
The third parties offer thepeople over & over again the same political program wrapped in different packages. Independent Party, Populist P.,Reform P.,Constitution P.,Nationalist P.
None of these parties acknowledge Providence as the only sovereign in the universe. A simple matter of humility. By not making acknowledgement they are offering the lesser of evils which = evil. If folks will just think of God as the Great Scientistof the universe who created all that is, by His omniscience. Everything in the universe works according to the scientific method.
The law-principles,prophecies,etc were man's attempt to leave posterity a written record of their successes & failures . Today we misunderstand sometimes, what was simple to the writers of Scripture due to translations,mistranslations, & transliterations.
There are still other options. Separation by nation-building within the empire until we become the dominant element. That is a long term scenario,but actually we should be doing that anyway.
The otheroption is the one least desirable,but may be inevitable.The un-said option.
Our options for survival. Pray for Divine Intervention on our behalf & prepare as if everything depends on us. I hopethis make's sense .
I heard a Pastorsay this: "The world's leading scientists got together & decided that they didn't need God to create man any longer.God challenged them to a man-making contest. They agreed. As they were gathering dirt for the process, God stopped them & said ' Wait! You get your own dirt ! ' "
God Bless to those who are His & may He grant victory & peace to our white race. Edited by: aryanfreeman
But we, the people can and do reform the system -- every day. One bright day about 12 years ago the requirement for car inspection was suddenly, silently, dropped in SC -- because ONE man, a transplant from Massachusetts no less, told the DMV they were free to "inspect" his car, but only from the outside -- and even took them to court over it.
That man won back for us a MAJOR foundation stone, has paid a hellish price for it, and languishes in total obscurity on the brink of a total health meltdown.
We in the Patriot Network -- why do I even mention it again, nobody seems to pay it the slightest attention -- have prevailed against both the federal and state tax vampires in court. They have basically had to admit that our tax liberation programs are legal and agreed to leave us alone.
The main problem is not that we can't or don't regain ground, but that a spirit of total defeat and negativity prevails no matter WHAT gets pulled off! THe people that do effective warfare get no thanks for it from anybody, least of all the nationalists or whatever you prefer to call them. That's a great way to lose a war in itself........
Edited by: nelson
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote