Are you a capitalist?

[Bronk]

Well, are you?

Fifteen years ago I would have said yes. Today, no. I believe in free enterprise but I would not sell my soul to the idea of capitalism.

Capitalism, like communism, is a materialist ethos that promotes a life rooted in material accumulation. It can drive all social relations into cash transactions. Also, capitalism is as revolutionary as Marxism.

 

['sup bro?]

nope, i'm a nationalist. if it's good for white people, it's good for me.

 

[DixieDestroyer]

I support the free market & agree with much of the Austrian school of economics. I'm an anti-globalist, so I'd not consider myself a capitalist (per se). I'm more of a quasi-populist, pseudo isolationist (White) nationalist who is for mass reduction of government size, funding & power.

 

[Bronk]

Right, DixieDestroyer, one of the chief reasons that I'm not a capitalist is globalism. But what is populism to you? To me, it is the Pat Buchanan variety.


'sup bro?, what is good for white people? Free markets, statism or some mix in between?

 

[Don Wassall]

The terms "capitalism" and "free enterprise" have been used interchangeably to the point that most people think they're the same thing rather than being dramatically different. Global capitalism is almost as big a detriment to free enterprise as are communism and socialism.

 

[frederic38]

in my opinion the main problem is that in what we call capitalism and communism, everything is economy related
capitalism is good, but there should be something else above

 

[Bronk]

The terms "capitalism" and "free enterprise" have been used interchangeably to the point that most people think they're the same thing rather than being dramatically different. Global capitalism is almost as big a detriment to free enterprise as are communism and socialism.

I completely agree, Don. I learned the other day that GOP strategists are telling their candidates to avoid praising "capitalism" and use the phrase "free enterprise" instead.

They are different ideas because most capitalists believe free enterprise is "ruinous competition" and anarchy that must be solved through a state-big business partnership to create a manigerial state.

Frederic38: Yes, there are higher values than those of the market; i.e. I wouldn't sell my wife and kids to the highest bidder.

 

[DixieDestroyer]

Right, DixieDestroyer, one of the chief reasons that I'm not a capitalist is globalism. But what is populism to you? To me, it is the Pat Buchanan variety.

My brand of populism is similar to yours. Government for, by & of the American people. I'd agree with Don's differentiation between (global) capitalism & free enterprise. Corporatism is right in line with globalism.

 

[Colonel_Reb]

I firmly believe that a significant number of young White Americans are struggling with this issue right now. No doubt, globalist capitalism is doing as much to destroy the largely White American middle class as creeping socialism is.

 

[Bronk]

I firmly believe that a significant number of young White Americans are struggling with this issue right now. No doubt, globalist capitalism is doing as much to destroy the largely White American middle class as creeping socialism is.

Right, I think many in the occupy movement are the very ones struggling with the issue. They hate the idea of profits (they prefer things be done out of "pure" motives) but love the goodies that capitalism provides (smart phones, game systems, etc.). Meanwhile, the tea partyers want to stem government spending but prefer to keep social security and Medicaid. Also you're right about the white middle class caught in the socialist/capitalist vise.

Look, the folks on these boards are more tuned in than the average person and tuned into a different frequency altogether. WHAT is capitalism? Is it money power? Is it globalism? is it mammon? What is it exactly?

 

[Michael]

Capitalism is when business and government merge. Communism is when government and business merge. Both Capitalism and Communism are anti-Free Enterprise. The end result of both Capitalism and Communism is that a small group of "elite" ends up controlling most of the country's wealth and uses the government regulations and tax system to make themselves wealthier. Both Capitalism and Communism "elite" and lackeys are often, especially in White country's heavily Jewish. Both Capitalism and Communism systems are designed to keep the "elite" in power and wealthy at the expense of the common people.

Free Enterprise, would have limits placed on it by populism and White nationalism like a businessman couldn't import nonwhite slaves/labors. Fair Enterprise is, probably, where the government does not use regulations and tax money to help one business against another business like happens in Capitalism. And in populism sometimes the government is used to help people in need and even a space program would by some extreme Free Enterprise people be viewed as "socialism."

"Free" Enterprise, populism and White nationalism will need to form a balance that is best for the people of their nation. The U.S. Constitution only imposed minimum restrictions on the states it was designed to restrict the Federal Government! The states were, basically, free to govern as their people saw fit.

The balance between "Free" Enterprise, populism and White nationalism would, probably, vary between different White nations. Freedom and fairness is the beginning, how it is used is an open ended question that only the future can tell.

 

[space hillbilly]

All I can say Is I'm Pro-white....

 

[Paleocon]

The problem with capitalism is that it is free enterprise turned into an ideology. Ideologies turn some earthly concern into The One Absolute Truth which dictates the ultimate order of society. For this reason ideologues are almost always hostile to religion because ideology is essentially a secular religion. Because ideologies are little more than religions established around one earthly concern they invariably neglect the whole of man and of society.

"The simple governments are fundamentally defective, to say no worse of them. If you were to contemplate society in but one point of view, all these simple modes of polity are infinitely captivating. In effect each would answer its single end much more perfectly than the more complex is able to attain all its complex purposes. But it is better that the whole should be imperfectly and anomalously answered than that, while some parts are provided for with great exactness, others might be totally neglected or perhaps materially injured by the over-care of a favorite member."
-- Edmund Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France


In his essay on the neoconservatives, conservative writer Russell Kirk criticized the notion of Democratic Capitalism noting how the neoconservatives desired to form it into an ideology.

[excerpt]
What is this ideology that Kristol and Novak would have us embrace? Why, the ideology of a term Mr. Novak has popularized, “Democratic Capitalism.”

By vigorous advocacy of Democratic Capitalism, by doctrinaire attachment to that ideology, Mr. Kristol and Mr. Novak are saying in effect, Marxism will be undone and the American people will be given a vision of social perfection. What a feeble reed they put into one's hand.

Not caring to break a butterfly on the wheel, I offer you merely a very succinct refutation of the strange notion that the ideology called Democratic Capitalism can set our collective American steps aright. First of all, the phrase is a contradiction in terms; for capitalism is not democratic, nor should it be, nor can it be. The test of the market is not a matter of counting noses and soliciting votes; and the mark of capitalism is not the fallacy that “one man is as good as another, or maybe a little better,” but large decisions by shrewd entrepreneurs and managers. Nor is there any egalitarianism in the distribution of the rewards of a market economy.

Second, “Capitalism” is a word popularized by Karl Marx; it implies that the selfish accumulation and enjoyment of capital is the sole purpose of our society, soon to be overthrown by the proletariat. “Capitalism” is represented as a complete system, moral, intellectual, political, and economic: an ideology that has been devised by the greedy capitalists to serve as a false front for this enslaving of the workers of the world. Such is the Marxist argument; and Messrs. Kristol and Novak appear to be fulfilling Marx's prophecies by cobbling up just such an ideology.

Now in truth our society is not a “capitalist system” at all, but a complex cultural and social arrangement that comprehends religion, morals, prescriptive political institutions, literary culture, a competitive economy, private property, and much more besides. It is not a system designed to secure and advance the interests of great possessors of capital goods unjustly acquired. Do Kristol and Novak, in the role of [Jacob Christoph] Burckhardt's “terrible simplifiers,” think they will gain the affections of the peoples of the world by actually declaring Americans (and their allies) to be the very capitalist exploiters the Marxists have been denouncing all these years? By promulgating an ideological manifesto that offers nothing better than a utopia of “democratic” creature comforts?
--Russell Kirk

http://faculty.rcc.edu/sellick/Kirk on Neocons.pdf

 

[white is right]

I firmly believe that a significant number of young White Americans are struggling with this issue right now. No doubt, globalist capitalism is doing as much to destroy the largely White American middle class as creeping socialism is.

You better believe it. I was a hardcore socialist in my late teens to early 20's. Then when we elected a socialist government in my province(state) I realized what a bunch of crack pots most of the candidates were. I will say this I still have retained my worker rights attitude and believe in consumer rights. I have seen so many middle class jobs destroyed by big business all for the benefits of "leaner and meaner". Also I recall the socialist buffoon Micheal Moore interviewing Phil Knight on why he closed down his US factories. Knight stated no Americans wanted to work for 12.50US an hour. Now many Americans would line up for that wage...:thumbdown:

 

[Bronk]

Capitalism is when business and government merge. Communism is when government and business merge.

I would need a fuller explanation of this statement.

Essentially, we established the current American managerial state during the Progressive Era when big businessmen merged with the federal state to tame the "chaos" of free enterprise.

The problem with capitalism is that it is free enterprise turned into an ideology.

Yes, this is correct.

 

[Michael]

I would need a fuller explanation of this statement.

Essentially, we established the current American managerial state during the Progressive Era when big businessmen merged with the federal state to tame the "chaos" of free enterprise.



Yes, this is correct.

We can start by looking at the Federal Reserve, government giving to private business the power to print money, then go to the military being use to advance private trade like with Commodore Perry and Japan http://www.corvalliscommunitypages.com/asia_pacific/japan/perryinjapanall.htm or with "War Is a Racket" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Is_a_Racket How about how government finances business like railroads with The Pacific Railroad Act of 1862 or how the government is used to closed down private business by looking at Preston Tucker http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preston_Tucker.

Communism is easy to see as they just takeover and run private businesses overtly and quickly done. Capitalism is a slower processor but the end results is business and government become one. In Capitalism government uses foreign policy and the military to force favorable trade for private businesses, in time certain businesses get subsidized by government like pointed out with the railroads but also war contracts and government contracts and bailouts like the banks and part of the automobile industry for governments to hand tax money over to private business. Looking at Tucker to see how private business can be put out of business by government and look at how the over the air industries are totally under the control of the FCC. Let's look at privatization in say garbage collection in a capitalists' system say that five companies want to collect a cities garbage from residents, the city chooses one company and force the people to pay that company money, but in a free enterprise system the five are allow to compete against one another and the people can choose who they want or don't want.

High level executives move back and forth between government and business as with the Central Banks being private Government banks. What a Capitalist system is a big government big business continuum where government's power to compel is used to force the people either directly by ordering people to pay certain private businesses money or indirectly with tax money to support selected private businesses rather they want to or not. The banking bailout and the automotive bailout are two examples of transferring tax money to private business.

In the end, a capitalist system is where big government leaders are selected by big business and big business leaders are selected by big business and the government eliminates all other businesses. The end result of a capitalist system takes longer to get to, then a communist one but the result is basically the same with the same type people in charge. In a communist system in a White country Jews have disproportional representation same as they are in a capitalist system.

Capitalism and communism are two methods of ending up with the same results--the Jews in control!

 

[Paleocon]

Capitalism and communism are two methods of ending up with the same results--the Jews in control!

Honestly, what ideology does not have that characteristic? As they are generally rootless, Jews are endlessly fascinated by Ideology because Ideology is an attachment to an idea rather than blood or soil or even religion.

 

[jaxvid]

Honestly, what ideology does not have that characteristic? As they are generally rootless, Jews are endlessly fascinated by Ideology because Ideology is an attachment to an idea rather than blood or soil or even religion.

I agree with your assessment. Now that the jews have managed to force white culture into being rootless and completely separated from blood, soil, and religion, do you think we can now start to compete and overthrow that control?

 

[Paleocon]

I agree with your assessment. Now that the jews have managed to force white culture into being rootless and completely separated from blood, soil, and religion, do you think we can now start to compete and overthrow that control?

At present things are difficult because there really are no conservative institutions left. The church has between emasculated and corrupted with heresies. The academy was overrun by Marxist radicals and other subversives resulting in conservative parents sending their children to be educated by the enemy. The family is weakened by divorce, debt, promiscuity, the lack of stay-at-home mothers, and the delayed maturity created by spending extended time in college rather than engaging in real work. As political questions are at root religious and moral questions, our current political sickness is nothing more than an extension of our cultural sickness. We lost because the subversive completed a "long march through the institutions" so I believe that will be what it takes to win.