As things like this are prone to degenerate, I posted this in nutzpah.

I agree with many things, but other things, most of which pertain to the markets, choice, and occasionally matters surrounding the :OGB:. The forum is slanted toward National Socialism, and Alex Linder, if memory serves and please correct me if I'm wrong, intended for there to be free speech.

I decided to take a look at the 1920 National Socialist Party's 25-point program and see exactly whether my ideology is compatible.

I am diametrically opposed to points 11-14, 17, and 23.

Indirectly, I am opposed to 7 and 9, though the latter only on account of how it is open to interpretation.

As it has been alleged that I am in fact an anti, and that I do not wish to cause trouble with my continued presence, I proposed two remedies taken directly out of the early Athenian democratic tradition. Ostracism would confine me to the 'opposing views' forum, execution would authorize my IP to be banned indefinitely. Both remedies would be carried out by an administrator upon my request. For the former to take place, the votes for both added together must form a majority, for the latter, the votes for execution must themselves form the majority, so I can satisfy some if not all.

My apologies if this appears to be drastic, but this is in light of a slew of recent negative reputation and that this measure is necessary so as to prevent any trouble. Hindsight is 20-20, and the votes will determine the necessity of this action.

I have made the poll anonymous, so even if you like me personally, you are encouraged to act in the best interest of the board.

Where is the poll?

Where is the poll?

Had trouble with the poll, Firefox was acting funny. It is there now.

I said you should be executed, and that's just for actually giving a fuck if a few people don't agree with you 100%.

Everybody gets accused of being an anti here. Hell, you're probably doing something wrong if nobody's called you a Jew yet.

How many "he should be executed" before you sod off?

I'll make a comic for you if it makes you feel better Alex. :p

I said you should be executed, and that's just for actually giving a fuck if a few people don't agree with you 100%.

Everybody gets accused of being an anti here. Hell, you're probably doing something wrong if nobody's called you a Jew yet.

He likes sooz, that is enough for me to "execute" him.

He likes sooz, that is enough for me to "execute" him.

WOAH! :eek::eek:

I don't think even her mother likes her.

How many "he should be executed" before you sod off?

>50% of the total, but you'll get a consolation prize (my 'exile' in opposing views) if the votes for exile and execution add to >50%.

@PS:
Yes, if the private messages are of any indication, I see little reason *not* to like her.

WOAH! :eek::eek:

I don't think even her mother likes her.

:rofl

Welcome back, Susan...there is much work to be done

EDIT: to ye who gave me negative rep on account of this post...kiss my ass.

http://www.vnnforum.com/showpost.php?p=699850&postcount=77

@PS:
Yes, if the private messages are of any indication, I see little reason *not* to like her.

Wait Alex, if I private message her she'll suddenly stop talking about my privates?!?!

Wait Alex, if I private message her she'll suddenly stop talking about my privates?!?!

I did not hear about this; she never mentioned mine...:confused:

I did not hear about this; she never mentioned mine...:confused:

If you're part :OGB:that might explain why.

On the serious side of thing I am sure you've seen this thread
http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=62957&page=2
Her last post makes it pretty clear that she's only here for self-glorification and she could care less about the movement. I was thinking about with-holding voting on your poll Alex but now I wonder if I should , you're supporting a disruptor. Associates say a lot about a person.

On the serious side of thing I am sure you've seen this thread
http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=62957&page=2
Her last post makes it pretty clear that she's only here for self-glorification and she could care less about the movement. I was thinking about with-holding voting on your poll Alex but now I wonder if I should , you're supporting a disruptor. Associates say a lot about a person.

I did not see where she really sought glory, could you point that out?
She made a valid point regarding the lack of converting energy from debate to actual implementation...

As things like this are prone to degenerate, I posted this in nutzpah.

I agree with many things, but other things, most of which pertain to the markets, choice, and occasionally matters surrounding the :OGB:. The forum is slanted toward National Socialism, and Alex Linder, if memory serves and please correct me if I'm wrong, intended for there to be free speech.

I decided to take a look at the 1920 National Socialist Party's 25-point program and see exactly whether my ideology is compatible.

I am diametrically opposed to points 11-14, 17, and 23.

Indirectly, I am opposed to 7 and 9, though the latter only on account of how it is open to interpretation.

As it has been alleged that I am in fact an anti, and that I do not wish to cause trouble with my continued presence, I proposed two remedies taken directly out of the early Athenian democratic tradition. Ostracism would confine me to the 'opposing views' forum, execution would authorize my IP to be banned indefinitely. Both remedies would be carried out by an administrator upon my request. For the former to take place, the votes for both added together must form a majority, for the latter, the votes for execution must themselves form the majority, so I can satisfy some if not all.

My apologies if this appears to be drastic, but this is in light of a slew of recent negative reputation and that this measure is necessary so as to prevent any trouble. Hindsight is 20-20, and the votes will determine the necessity of this action.

I have made the poll anonymous, so even if you like me personally, you are encouraged to act in the best interest of the board.

Well, Losonov, as another mentioned; if you have not yet been called a jew, then you are not doing too badly.

Why all this concern about negative reputation; I am looking at those green things beneath your name, and must wonder if you are not being a little too sensitive.

I chose not to vote in your poll; but to give the recognition you would have. Also, you need to re-read the 25 points. State your argument with the ones you have listed, I would discuss them here; on your thread, with yourself and others may enjoy doing so as well.

Its obvious your not deeply commited to anything, so maybe it would be a good idea for you to stand back a while, do some private research in order to consider what your own stance is on things, and then come back again to see if you can click with anybody.

Just remember - VNN is a message board for racists, its not an organisation (as yet) so its not the NSWP (as yet :D). And so there is going be several competing groups pushing their agenda in the hope of influencing people - (which I think is ok at this stage).

As for National Socialism, there is a debate going on as to whether NS (including the 25 points, but except the kernal) needs bringing upto date, so you may want to bear that in mind for the future.

As for negative reps, I think you need to take that on the chin. Nothing comes into this world without some form of struggle. If your not taking any flak, its because your not fighting for anything. So don't moan about someone having a go at you or your point of view.

I did not see where she really sought glory, could you point that out?
She made a valid point regarding the lack of converting energy from debate to actual implementation...

I tell you what psychologicalshock, since you're so goddamned smart, why don't you contact Knoxville and apply for the permit which will allow those who are interested to gather and pay tribute to Channon and Christopher. If the mods or admin had any balls when it comes to flames in activist threads, your post would already be gone. But, it's still here. Go ahead, you little two inch premature ejaculatory dick, get the permit needed for those interested to do something in January in Knoxville. Then, get the posters done, get speakers organized,and motivate people to show up, among other things. I bow to your obvious insight, wisdom, and competence. I've got better things to do with my time than waste it here among you ingrates.

http://www.vnnforum.com/showpost.php?p=684693&postcount=34

And, she eats with that mouth. :eek:

The 25 Points of Hitler's Nazi Party

1. We demand the union of all Germans in a Great Germany on the basis of the principle of self-determination of all peoples.

2. We demand that the German people have rights equal to those of other nations; and that the Peace Treaties of Versailles and St. Germain shall be abrogated.

3. We demand land and territory (colonies) for the maintenance of our people and the settlement of our surplus population.

4. Only those who are our fellow countrymen can become citizens. Only those who have German blood, regardless of creed, can be our countrymen. Hence no Jew can be a countryman.

5. Those who are not citizens must live in Germany as foreigners and must be subject to the law of aliens.

6. The right to choose the government and determine the laws of the State shall belong only to citizens. We therefore demand that no public office, of whatever nature, whether in the central government, the province, or the municipality, shall be held by anyone who is not a citizen.

We wage war against the corrupt parliamentary administration whereby men are appointed to posts by favor of the party without regard to character and fitness.

7. We demand that the State shall above all undertake to ensure that every citizen shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood. If it should not be possible to feed the whole population, then aliens (non-citizens) must be expelled from the Reich.

8. Any further immigration of non-Germans must be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans who have entered Germany since August 2, 1914, shall be compelled to leave the Reich immediately.

9. All citizens must possess equal rights and duties.
10. The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. No individual shall do any work that offends against the interest of the community to the benefit of all.

Therefore we demand:

11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.

12. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in blood and treasure, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as treason to the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

13. We demand the nationalization of all trusts.

14. We demand profit-sharing in large industries.

15. We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions.

16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle-class, the immediate communalization of large stores which will be rented cheaply to small tradespeople, and the strongest consideration must be given to ensure that small traders shall deliver the supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.

17. We demand an agrarian reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to expropriate the owners without compensation of any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.

18. We demand that ruthless war be waged against those who work to the injury of the common welfare. Traitors, usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished with death, regardless of creed or race.

19. We demand that Roman law, which serves a materialist ordering of the world, be replaced by German common law.

20. In order to make it possible for every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education, and thus the opportunity to reach into positions of leadership, the State must assume the responsibility of organizing thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people. The curricula of all educational establishments shall be adapted to practical life. The conception of the State Idea (science of citizenship) must be taught in the schools from the very beginning. We demand that specially talented children of poor parents, whatever their station or occupation, be educated at the expense of the State.

21. The State has the duty to help raise the standard of national health by providing maternity welfare centers, by prohibiting juvenile labor, by increasing physical fitness through the introduction of compulsory games and gymnastics, and by the greatest possible encouragement of associations concerned with the physical education of the young.

22. We demand the abolition of the regular army and the creation of a national (folk) army.

23. We demand that there be a legal campaign against those who propagate deliberate political lies and disseminate them through the press. In order to make possible the creation of a German press, we demand:

(a) All editors and their assistants on newspapers published in the German language shall be German citizens.

(b) Non-German newspapers shall only be published with the express permission of the State. They must not be published in the German language.

(c) All financial interests in or in any way affecting German newspapers shall be forbidden to non-Germans by law, and we demand that the punishment for transgressing this law be the immediate suppression of the newspaper and the expulsion of the non-Germans from the Reich.

Newspapers transgressing against the common welfare shall be suppressed. We demand legal action against those tendencies in art and literature that have a disruptive influence upon the life of our folk, and that any organizations that offend against the foregoing demands shall be dissolved.
24. We demand freedom for all religious faiths in the state, insofar as they do not endanger its existence or offend the moral and ethical sense of the Germanic race.

The party as such represents the point of view of a positive Christianity without binding itself to any one particular confession. It fights against the Jewish materialist spirit within and without, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our folk can only come about from within on the pinciple:

COMMON GOOD BEFORE INDIVIDUAL GOOD

25. In order to carry out this program we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the State, the unconditional authority by the political central parliament of the whole State and all its organizations.

The formation of professional committees and of committees representing the several estates of the realm, to ensure that the laws promulgated by the central authority shall be carried out by the federal states.

The leaders of the party undertake to promote the execution of the foregoing points at all costs, if necessary at the sacrifice of their own lives.
All of these points were in response to the jewish manipulation of the weak democracy to enrich themselves. Many of them were in specific reaction to jews and foreign jew carpetbagers.

I did not see where she really sought glory, could you point that out?
She made a valid point regarding the lack of converting energy from debate to actual implementation...

"Yeah....I'll be watching to see just who picks up the ball and runs with it. Don't fall all over yourselves fellas. If you need me, you know where to find me. Just apologize for acting like dickheads and I'll accept it and we'll move on together. Without an apology, I'm not doing anything....even for Channon and Christopher. I am more than willing to do much of the work to get something going, but not if every time I post, I have to hear from the same losers who despise me for reasons unknown."

There is little cure for blindness I suppose.

Why don't any of the resident freaks and psychos ever step up and offer to off themselves?? What? Feeling a tad depressed today? Relax, take a deep breath, have a nice bottle of wine, mellow out a little ... you'll feel better and forget all this silliness... http://bestsmileys.com/drinking/20.gif

On second thoughts, if you hav'nt got a clue, then I think - either you follow orders, or you piss off.

On second thoughts, if you hav'nt got a clue, then I think - either you follow orders, or you piss off.

I am seeking orders from those on the board who may get pissed off, as I consider their claim to the right to post without irritation greater than mine to post, as their ideology was intended to be discussed here.

@PS:
I'm still not buying it; an apology is an acknowledgment of wrong-doing on the part of the other party, not a glorification of one's own actions. In all fairness, I do sense she is being overly-dramatic about it.

@PS:
I'm still not buying it; an apology is an acknowledgment of wrong-doing on the part of the other party, not a glorification of one's own actions. In all fairness, I do sense she is being overly-dramatic about it.

Alex, your inability to see into motives and handle your political matters is your problem. The burden of association is on you as Susan has gained a reputation to be nefarious, even threatening to call the FBI on an individual. If you associate with her it's your responsibility to clear your associate of guilt not for me to prove to you how she is guilty. So far you have not and I have no reason to think otherwise of you. If you don't care what I think of you then you're free to ignore that burden.

By the way I am not selling you anything.

Just to make things clear- I am not prosecuting her as its clear by the number of times she was banned that it has been judged that she is a misfit already.

I am not my brother's keeper, not in the marketplace nor in politics. I detest the latter, but to be neutral in the eyes of all is impossible. But know this: I will speak my mind and act in good faith with those who do so unto me, damn the consequences.

I am seeking orders from those on the board who may get pissed off, as I consider their claim to the right to post without irritation greater than mine to post, as their ideology was intended to be discussed here..

Herr Shockley has kindly posted the 25 points of NS; and, embolded for you and others, those points to which you take exception in some fashion.

http://www.vnnforum.com/showpost.php?p=700272&postcount=18

I find it most curious that you have problem with the embolded points, which I would like to understand.

Why natter on about a person whom is clearly not a friend and has gone so far as to, rather irrationally, threaten to call the authorities on those whom would oppose her plans for a gathering. What an idiotic notion - one that would effectively dampen anyone's desire to attend any gathering she might wish to direct.

You have other fish to fry on this thread of yours, including defending Susan. Since, you brought up other topics, specifically.

Herr Shockley has kindly posted the 25 points of NS; and, embolded for you and others, those points to which you take exception in some fashion.

Why natter on about a person whom is clearly not a friend and has gone so far as to, rather irrationally, threaten to call the authorities on those whom would oppose her plans for a gathering. What an idiotic notion - one that would effectively dampen anyone's desire to attend any gathering she might wish to direct.

You have other fish to fry on this thread of yours, including defending Susan. Since, you brought up other topics, specifically.

I did not bring these up, I was merely responding to that matter as it kept getting pushed to the forefront so zealously. To keep things simple, I would like to take the points one by one. Shockley also mentioned there was a reactionary element that must be taken with a grain of salt, I would like for this salt to be defined so that I may interpret in context:

7. We demand that the State shall above all undertake to ensure that every citizen shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood. If it should not be possible to feed the whole population, then aliens (non-citizens) must be expelled from the Reich.

I am indirectly opposed to this on account that state intervention has the effect of supplanting the free markets in providing for the citizenry positions that meet market demands. In addition, the provision that in times of famine could easily be remedied by importing grain from abroad, and no distinction is made between skilled and unskilled workers. Quote me on this one, the last thing one wants to do in a time of famine is to get rid of anyone who has a large multiplier upon food production or delivery, foreign or not.

I've enjoyed your posts here on VNNF Alexei, i dont understand why you want to leave??

I've enjoyed your posts here on VNNF Alexei, i dont understand why you want to leave??

It was in response to a recent slew of negative reputation, and is more of a precaution so that my presence does not cause trouble, as I am sort of an ideological outlier. Foresight is never 20-20, hindsight is, so given the choice, the latter is always preferable...I don't want to leave, but more so I don't want to cause trouble to those for whom the forum was intended.

I did not bring these up, I was merely responding to that matter as it kept getting pushed to the forefront so zealously. To keep things simple, I would like to take the points one by one. Shockley also mentioned there was a reactionary element that must be taken with a grain of salt, I would like for this salt to be defined so that I may interpret in context:

7. We demand that the State shall above all undertake to ensure that every citizen shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood. If it should not be possible to feed the whole population, then aliens (non-citizens) must be expelled from the Reich.

I am indirectly opposed to this on account that state intervention has the effect of supplanting the free markets in providing for the citizenry positions that meet market demands. In addition, the provision that in times of famine could easily be remedied by importing grain from abroad, and no distinction is made between skilled and unskilled workers. Quote me on this one, the last thing one wants to do in a time of famine is to get rid of anyone who has a large multiplier upon food production or delivery.

This point is rather clear is it not. It states that the native and indigenous Citizen of the State and his need will be considered before that of any alien non-citizen - whom will, upon threat of famine or the like be ordered to leave the State or Nation. This is basic survival instinct.

And, while it does not directly address the difference between skilled German Workers and the un-skilled, all Germans were expected to attempt to make a living and not expect the State to become a Welfare state. Germans worked, they had enough food, they had jobs; which did not exist prior to NS and the elected Fuhrer, or the Reich itself - especially in post WW1 Germany.

However, toward the end of WW2, as the attacks against Germany were literally carpet bombings and the like, Germans had less to eat.

Actual starvation did not settle in until the Allies took over. Then Germans were allowed to starve. Not due to failure of Nationalist Socialist policies; but due to failure to allow some form of it to continue to serve the German People directly in the immediate aftermath of the war. Those whom were capable of ensuring the safety of Germany's Folk were either killed outright, or arrested and held for trial - or, unfortunatly, had to flee Germany with some remnant of their family intact in order to ensure survival of his Family members and otherwise.

Take exception to that fact Alexei - How is it that you are "indirectly" opposed to this?

Supplantation of 'free market trade' ie, the control of trade by jews and foreign elements within Germany is not addressed in this particular point.

I am not my brother's keeper, not in the marketplace nor in politics. I detest the latter, but to be neutral in the eyes of all is impossible. But know this: I will speak my mind and act in good faith with those who do so unto me, damn the consequences.

To be aligned with someone in good times and to disassociate in bad is something Jews enjoy doing. You are free to be an individual however you are to take responsibility for your associations, if you do not want the strings attached then don't endorse those people. It's your fault and your responsibility, once you made the statement you accepted that burden like it or not. Next time think before you say something. Individualism only leads to anarchy and this is a forum for a group interest, if you want individual interests then you should go to a Libertarian forum and stay there.
I did not bring these up, I was merely responding to that matter as it kept getting pushed to the forefront so zealously.
Once you make a statement it is your's to keep, answer for you associations.


I am indirectly opposed to this on account that state intervention has the effect of supplanting the free markets in providing for the citizenry positions that meet market demands.
Free market is meaningless in modernity, a machine supervised by men would easily put it to shame.
In addition, the provision that in times of famine could easily be remedied by importing grain from abroad, and no distinction is made between skilled and unskilled workers. Quote me on this one, the last thing one wants to do in a time of famine is to get rid of anyone who has a large multiplier upon food production or delivery, foreign or not.
False, less mouths means less to feed but the money supply does not change. Not only but you constantly ignore the fact that a country's own people are in all cases more educated than foreigners and skilled labor in many cases can make many times more output than mass unskilled. Look at China and then look at more industrial nations - a machine can do more work in the field than dozens of Chinese with scythes.

Your outlook on economics is both contradictory and not far reaching. First of all you're insensitive to the native population using abstract principals as the reason to leave people suffering from uneducated foreign filth. Second of all your chosen system is ineffective- as said before a machine of intense calculation could easily smooth problems much quicker than a free market could ever hope to . Effectively you're choosing the worst of two worlds - both insensitive to its people and insensitive to a country's maximum efficiency. Not only but you like it or not support a form of anarchy which can easily be and is exploited into Anarcho-Tyranny which only benefits the Jewish inhabitants of a specific country.

The only thing you support is maximal profit under abstract and vague conception.

I am indirectly opposed to this on account that state intervention has the effect of supplanting the free markets in providing for the citizenry positions that meet market demands. In addition, the provision that in times of famine could easily be remedied by importing grain from abroad, and no distinction is made between skilled and unskilled workers. Quote me on this one, the last thing one wants to do in a time of famine is to get rid of anyone who has a large multiplier upon food production or delivery, foreign or not.

Dont worry about your bread and butter in a National Socialist state. Your position in that state will be determined by your Nature, so long as you fulfill your duties according to your Nature - you wont need to worry about your needs.

With regards to famine, I believe Adolph Hitler stated -


State boundaries are made by man and changed by man.

But we National Socialists must go further. The right to possess soil can become a duty if without extension of its soil a great nation seems doomed to destruction. And most especially when not some little negro nation or other is involved, but the Germanic mother of life, which has given the present-day world its cultural picture. Germany will either be a world power or there will be no Germany. And for world power she needs that magnitude which will give her the position she needs in the present period, and life to her citizens.

http://www.crusader.net/texts/mk/mkv2ch14.html
In other words, if we need more food - as the true masters of this planet - we will take land off the weaker people, to grow the food we need.

[url]And, she eats with that mouth. :eek:

In a way, WNS, it's a problem with the English language, using the word "eat" indiscriminately for humans/subhumans/animals/subanimals.
"Wee'z all eequal."

The German language is an apartheid-language :

Real humans "essen" (eat).
People with no manners as well as all other lower creatures "fressen".

There can be no "human rights". (Only "god" would be able to determine the word "human rights". We don't accept the :[] as our god in this forum).

There can be, however, "animal rights", created by the next superior species: humans.

Gooks associating with Susans point out their "rights" every chance they get.
It is up to the next superior species, to decide, which "rights" to give to them
and which "rights" to withhold. :)

In a way, WNS, it's a problem with the English language, using the word "eat" indiscriminately for humans/subhumans/animals/subanimals.
"Wee'z all eequal."

The German language is an apartheid-language :

Real humans "essen" (eat).
People with no manners as well as all other lower creatures
There can be no "human rights". (Only "god" would be able to determine the word "human rights". We don't accept the :[] as our god in this forum).

There can be, however, "animal rights", created by the next superior species: humans.

Gooks associating with Susans point out their "rights" every chance they get.
It is up to the next superior species, to decide, which "rights" to give to them
and which "rights" to withhold. :)

Good point, Russian also discriminates the verbs for Animal consumption and human consumption. It's very insulting if you use the animal version for a person.

Good point, Russian also discriminates the verbs for Animal consumption and human consumption. It's very insulting if you use the animal version for a person.

I forgot to mention another word: FOOD

In civilized languages, there must be the apartheid:

German: Futter (food) 　　　　＝for animals only!
（Japanese: えさ）

German: Speise (food) = for humans only!
(Japanese: 食べ物)

I don't know if they make a difference in Chinese:confused:


Sometime back in history the :[]s found their way into China by marrying into
the upper caste.
I hold it therefore for established, that there is a hypertrophical "intelligent" :[]-mind hiding behind most of the most seducing Chinese slanted eyes :cool:

I've enjoyed your posts here on VNNF Alexei, i dont understand why you want to leave??

Are you going to continue ignoring the facts about the war (1618-1648) in Europe?
...or the Sweden-drink, playing the innocent by (viciously) pointing out an alleged incoherence of my posts to others?

How do they say in Tel Aviv? "Enjoy"! :D

Where is the poll?
__________________
.


Thats what she said.

This point is rather clear is it not. It states that the native and indigenous Citizen of the State and his need will be considered before that of any alien non-citizen - whom will, upon threat of famine or the like be ordered to leave the State or Nation. This is basic survival instinct.

And, while it does not directly address the difference between skilled German Workers and the un-skilled, all Germans were expected to attempt to make a living and not expect the State to become a Welfare state. Germans worked, they had enough food, they had jobs; which did not exist prior to NS and the elected Fuhrer, or the Reich itself - especially in post WW1 Germany.

However, toward the end of WW2, as the attacks against Germany were literally carpet bombings and the like, Germans had less to eat.

Actual starvation did not settle in until the Allies took over. Then Germans were allowed to starve. Not due to failure of Nationalist Socialist policies; but due to failure to allow some form of it to continue to serve the German People directly in the immediate aftermath of the war. Those whom were capable of ensuring the safety of Germany's Folk were either killed outright, or arrested and held for trial - or, unfortunatly, had to flee Germany with some remnant of their family intact in order to ensure survival of his Family members and otherwise.

Take exception to that fact Alexei - How is it that you are "indirectly" opposed to this?

Supplantation of 'free market trade' ie, the control of trade by jews and foreign elements within Germany is not addressed in this particular point.

To say that the needs of the citizen would be considered before that of the non-citizen is quite reasonable, it is by no means objectionable. My contention lies in how the point is implemented:

7. We demand that the State shall above all undertake to ensure that every citizen shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood. If it should not be possible to feed the whole population, then aliens (non-citizens) must be expelled from the Reich.

Interference in the labor market never helped anyone in the long-term; the Great Depression was made worse than it was on account that prices were not allowed to fall and the markets were not allowed to 'take their medicine'. Even though, in practice, the state may have a hand in ensuring law and order, protecting the borders i.e. acting as a 'night-watchman', and this helps the populace live decently...if it starts to act as an employer of last resort as it did under the 'New Deal' by that insidious Fabian Roosevelt (take my gold, I dare ya Frank), it will create dependency upon the state, as the free market will be unable to absorb the labor absorbed by the state at higher wages, otherwise the state would be 'pushing on a string' i.e. offering positions at a lower wage than the free market is offering.
In the event of a famine, though, this is the worst of all times to interfere with a labor market, as the platform does not states that they should be 'encouraged' to leave, nor does it state that they 'may' be deported, it states they *must* be deported. Agriculture is not as simple as it was in the medieval era, food must be harvested, transported, processed and each link in the chain has a multiplier effect upon the net result of food delivery to cities and rural areas. In lieu, it would be more prudent to use language that places the discretion upon the state to expel foreigners i.e. gives the state the power to expel them, but does not mandate they all be expelled.

Free market is meaningless in modernity, a machine supervised by men would easily put it to shame.

We already have these machines through automated trade, though it is done so at the discretion of men. The free market lies not just in the exchanges, but within the grain-fields, factories, and stores; it is an organism with many appendages and organs.

False, less mouths means less to feed but the money supply does not change. Not only but you constantly ignore the fact that a country's own people are in all cases more educated than foreigners and skilled labor in many cases can make many times more output than mass unskilled. Look at China and then look at more industrial nations - a machine can do more work in the field than dozens of Chinese with scythes.

One would presume the foreigners would be in there doing *something*, otherwise they would not be present within the country. It is one thing to have some low-IQ spic doing field labor with a low multiplier effect upon production, but someone from abroad working at a fertilizer plant, a refinery, a processor or anything of that nature with a high multipler effect would be retained. Positions do have learning curves, and a famine is no time for a newbie to be walking up such a curve. The free market has a remedy for famine: it is called 'importation'. Thus, the price of grain goes up a small bit and less is diverted to ethanol production, feedstock, or other less profitable things.

Your outlook on economics is both contradictory and not far reaching. First of all you're insensitive to the native population using abstract principals as the reason to leave people suffering from uneducated foreign filth. Second of all your chosen system is ineffective- as said before a machine of intense calculation could easily smooth problems much quicker than a free market could ever hope to . Effectively you're choosing the worst of two worlds - both insensitive to its people and insensitive to a country's maximum efficiency. Not only but you like it or not support a form of anarchy which can easily be and is exploited into Anarcho-Tyranny which only benefits the Jewish inhabitants of a specific country.

Uneducated foreign filth would get out-bid by more productive and higher-IQ domestic citizens in a free market, though unfortunately they are given an unfair advantage through welfare and affirmative action.
The economy is a dynamic organism and is predicated upon the passions and valuation of individuals. It may be more efficient to place it in a machine, but the machine can only do so; it may assign prices, but based upon what? Everything has and will always be worth what the buyer is willing to pay for it, no machine can supplant that.

You would advocate a return to the squalor of a bastard-child of feudalism and socialism. "Maximum efficiency" rarely stays that way due to the dynamic nature of production, invention, and so forth: it is all a non-linear equation that cannot be solved, but is instead navigated by market participants as it has been done for centuries. Who dictates 'maximum efficiency' and who enforces the will of your machine? Invariably, absolute power leads to absolute rule, and with absolute rule comes tyranny, I shall have no part in this and shall lodge many bullets in your machine should it be constructed.

I do not advocate anarchy, I advocate minimarchy underpinned by the consent to a minimarchist social contract as a consequence of the enlightened self-interest of the citizenry, as well as their ability to say 'no' to that which encroaches upon liberties not explicitly surrendered.

The only thing you support is maximal profit under abstract and vague conception.
The only thing that is not vague is tyranny, as it overwhelms the self and robs one of the fruits of one's labor by arbitrary fiat. Freedom is so vague because it is the absence of something absolute, just as free markets are vague on account that they are the absence of arbitrary interference by the state.

[quote=Alexei Losonov;700754]To say that the needs of the citizen would be considered before that of the non-citizen is quite reasonable, it is by no means objectionable. My contention lies in how the point is implemented:



Interference in the labor market never helped anyone in the long-term; the Great Depression was made worse than it was on account that prices were not allowed to fall and the markets were not allowed to 'take their medicine'. Even though, in practice, the state may have a hand in ensuring law and order, protecting the borders i.e. acting as a 'night-watchman', and this helps the populace live decently...if it starts to act as an employer of last resort as it did under the 'New Deal' by that insidious Fabian Roosevelt (take my gold, I dare ya Frank), it will create dependency upon the state, as the free market will be unable to absorb the labor absorbed by the state at higher wages, otherwise the state would be 'pushing on a string' i.e. offering positions at a lower wage than the free market is offering.

In the event of a famine, though, this is the worst of all times to interfere with a labor market, as the platform does not states that they should be 'encouraged' to leave, nor does it state that they 'may' be deported, it states they *must* be deported. Agriculture is not as simple as it was in the medieval era, food must be harvested, transported, processed and each link in the chain has a multiplier effect upon the net result of food delivery to cities and rural areas. In lieu, it would be more prudent to use language that places the discretion upon the state to expel foreigners i.e. gives the state the power to expel them, but does not mandate they all be expelled.



Markets do not always 'take their medicine' and sometimes require a 'kick start' - which is why in economics we talk about government spending since in free market theory everything should be left to the market.

This relies on a purely economic view of the world and is not something that a National Socialist believes in.

As you may or may not know - In National Socialism and in Racialism, the general key is not economics, but Race; so no matter how much you wish to prattle on re 'free market theory' it is of no significance to National Socialism.

We only take our advice from qualified economists who have been endowed with authority by the Leader.

We look at economics from the stand point of the nation (i.e. Race); not the stand-point of a vacuum as you have done by separating the racial context of point 7 and contending to differ [which you have no the authority to do if you want to claim National Socialist credentials or 'modernise' it] on various points purely economically.

National Socialism is not an economic theory; it is a philosophy of life which looks at everything from the stand point of Race and then later takes into secondary questions about what say the best economic theory is.

If you are unable to comprehend this, then you cannot claim to understand or make pretence to criticise or otherwise comment on the 25 Points.

Though you do represent a very good argument as to why attempt to modernise National Socialism should not be left up to neo-phytes whom cannot understand the fundamentals of Racialism. Which is the entire point of National Socialism.

It is this difference of views that has led to my contention: I came to view racialism as a consequence of the free markets, namely that the superiority of a race is exhibited by its ability to thrive in the market-place. This is why the Jew hates the free markets and must employ trickery, and uses its power to distribute profit from productive sectors of the economy (mostly Whites) and shifts it to sectors which would otherwise be unable to thrive (i.e. spics, niggers), and why they use monopolies (like that accursed kike who got a government monopoly for the production of body armor, may he die painfully) to implement their goals: they lack the ingenuity and creativity to compete in a free market.

Thus, my ideology merely defines the superiority of the White race in the context of the market-place.

It is not so much an issue of comprehension, but more of implementation.

In addition, government stimulus is employed by Keynesian economics, which I find insidious on account that Keynes was a Fabian, and the Fabian Society advocated the implementation of socialism through gradualist means. I take heed to Hayek and Von Mises: government has no place in the market save for enforcing statues surrounding fraud, theft, and other tasks which to it would be delegated in the course of acting as 'night watchman'.

That said, I must agree that my own ideology likely precludes me from being able to objectively comment upon the 25 Points.

Should I remain?

Yes, now shut up and stop being a primadonna. The forum isn't slanted towards National Socialism, its mostly just cranky old White guys who want niggers to stop pissing in their flowerbeds.

It is this difference of views that has led to my contention: I came to view racialism as a consequence of the free markets, namely that the superiority of a race is exhibited by its ability to thrive in the market-place.

That said, I must agree that my own ideology likely precludes me from being able to objectively comment upon the 25 Points.

Yes it does rather preclude you Alexei. For you have not come to Racialism at all. You have yet to understand the matter.

By your reply and it's extrapolations, taken in it's entirety; you are a Marxist, not a Racialist. For, your view of Racialism is exactly what Marxists hold to - Ie, Race is a creation of the markets.

As to Keynes, he was not wrong about everything; but Free Market Economics, was championed by a jew [Freedman] - so one can find that equally insidious.

Yes it does rather preclude you Alexei. For you have not come to Racialism at all. You have yet to understand the matter.

By your reply and it's extrapolations, taken in it's entirety; you are a Marxist, not a Racialist. For, your view of Racialism is exactly what Marxists hold to - Ie, Race is a creation of the markets.

As to Keynes, he was not wrong about everything; but Free Market Economics, was championed by a jew [Freedman] - so one can find that equally insidious.

I may have been mis-interpreted, as I consulted Wikipedia to get a sense of what racialism implied, and based upon the original definition of a 'superiority of one particular race'. This is a creation of the markets as the superiority of any given race, or lack thereof, is exhibited by the markets.

As for Marxism, I am not familiar with it, though I have read it was predicated upon the labor theory of value, and that is bunk on its face. In addition, Marxism, if I understand correctly, is the jew-created enemy of free markets.

As for free market economics, I have never taken heed to Friedman, though based upon what I read about him, we would likely agree upon the same things, the quantity theory of money included i.e. prices rise when more money chases the same goods being produced at a given time.

Alexei,you have my yes vote to stay.

I may have been mis-interpreted, as I consulted Wikipedia to get a sense of what racialism implied, and based upon the original definition of a 'superiority of one particular race'. This is a creation of the markets as the superiority of any given race, or lack thereof, is exhibited by the markets.

Race is nothing to do with - markets.

It is this difference of views that has led to my contention: I came to view racialism as a consequence of the free markets, namely that the superiority of a race is exhibited by its ability to thrive in the market-place. This is why the Jew hates the free markets and must employ trickery, and uses its power to distribute profit from productive sectors of the economy (mostly Whites) and shifts it to sectors which would otherwise be unable to thrive (i.e. spics, niggers), and why they use monopolies (like that accursed kike who got a government monopoly for the production of body armor, may he die painfully) to implement their goals: they lack the ingenuity and creativity to compete in a free market.

Jews love the 'free market'!

That's why every country has been persuaded (by bribery, threats, extortion or other spurious means) to sign the WTO Gatt agreement and to open up their borders to so called 'free market' competition.

Jews hate any other Racial group retaining control over its own resources - marketised or otherwise.

The reason why jews love the 'free market', is because jews dont create, build or grow anything, and a 'free market' allows them to live of the backs of everyone else who does work.

Maybe the reason why you have an economic point of view and can't grasp Race is because your NOT Germanic.


Thus, my ideology merely defines the superiority of the White race in the context of the market-place.

It is not so much an issue of comprehension, but more of implementation.

In addition, government stimulus is employed by Keynesian economics, which I find insidious on account that Keynes was a Fabian, and the Fabian Society advocated the implementation of socialism through gradualist means. I take heed to Hayek and Von Mises: government has no place in the market save for enforcing statues surrounding fraud, theft, and other tasks which to it would be delegated in the course of acting as 'night watchman'.
Economics is a child of xInsanity.

Economics is looking at the world - materialistically.

National Socialism considers economics as a consequence of Organic unity, not a driver.


That said, I must agree that my own ideology likely precludes me from being able to objectively comment upon the 25 Points.
Fair enough!

This means your NOT one of us.

I may have been mis-interpreted, as I consulted Wikipedia to get a sense of what racialism implied, and based upon the original definition of a 'superiority of one particular race'. This is a creation of the markets as the superiority of any given race, or lack thereof, is exhibited by the markets.
Is this supposed to be taken seriously?

As for Marxism, I am not familiar with it, though I have read it was predicated upon the labor theory of value, and that is bunk on its face. In addition, Marxism, if I understand correctly, is the jew-created enemy of free markets.
Communism and Capitalism are two sides of the same coin- both have the same symptoms. They both kill nationalism, target innocent people, let loose the criminals, and are burdened by a huge army of Jews who do absolutely nothing. Both are placed on an "if" ideology, both are theoretical, both only have books behind them. National Socialism was instantaneously beneficial both in Germany years ago and in Russia today, both are extremely resilient to large amounts of punishment, both respect their native people and maximize efficiency without selling their labor to another country, without importing cheap labor, without making people feel like aliens on their own land.
Remember- America was taken without a sound, Germany had to be physically hammered to bits for decades.

As for free market economics, I have never taken heed to Friedman, though based upon what I read about him, we would likely agree upon the same things, the quantity theory of money included i.e. prices rise when more money chases the same goods being produced at a given time.
I don't mingle in theoretics which don't actually have a real life component.















The reason why jews love the 'free market', is because jews dont create, build or grow anything, and a 'free market' allows them to live of the backs of everyone else who does work.

It allows your money work for you, or rather the gentiles.

Economics is a child of xInsanity.

Economics is looking at the world - materialistically.
Correct me if I am wrong but I only read a few authors on this matter, I remember Nietzsche going on for paragraphs about this.He said rather that Christianity exalts a-materialism and the abstract.
What do you think?

I
Communism and Capitalism are two sides of the same coin-

I agree with this.


It allows your money work for you, or rather the gentiles.
I'd like to agree with you, but the fact is the money we use is not our money. The money we use is printed by the jews, and using it works for the jews.

Having said that, my own personal opinion is that banking money or using money for any other purpose (besides living on a daily basis) is a devious way of living.

When people earn money, I think they should spend it and only save a bit for a rainy day - I dont like hoarders or people making money out of money.

I would like to destroy the stock markets!


Correct me if I am wrong but I only read a few authors on this matter, I remember Nietzsche going on for paragraphs about this.He said rather that Christianity exalts a-materialism and the abstract.
What do you think?
I'll move this to another thread:

http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?p=701101#post701101

I make it a point never to hold onto kike money; gold and silver only. I may keep cash for tuition and for monthly operational expenses i.e. bills, food, rent, but that is it. As for hoarding, I save over 50% of what I make, but I sense we are in for just a rainy day but something rivaling the Indian monsoon season.

Using money to make money is perfectly acceptable so long as deception is not involved. Without the ability to make money off money, there would be zero investment, and thus entrepreneurs would not have capital with which to start businesses.

Capitalism is a beautiful thing, but it has been hijacked by the jews, who employ deception. It has served civilizations well for millenia, it is only when the markets are interfered with (i.e. Federal Reserve money monopoly, ethanol mandates) that it ceases to serve its practitioners.

Answer me this: if I were to loan to Joe Sixpack one ounce of silver, with the stipulation that he shall return to me 1,05 ounces in 6 months, is it a bad thing? No deception, no jews involved. If Joe buys with the silver things needed to repair his widget factory, and he winds up making 1,10 ounces in the same period, what is the big deal? Or if he speculates on the wheat futures market and makes 1,10 ounces instead?

When people earn money, I think they should spend it and only save a bit for a rainy day - I dont like hoarders or people making money out of money.

I would like to destroy the stock markets!

I too would wish to see the stock markets disappear. The stock market seems to be more a destroyer of our Nations than a pillar upon which they can rely.

Whyever our People got involved with this scheme is beyond me. I admit to having only a rudimentary understanding of economics; however, it barely demands that one be a scientist to understand the effect and power the stock markets wield over the lives of the Folk of any one of our Nations. Whether or not they choose to be active participants in that stock market or not.

Everyone suffers when the market is down; only a few really are made wealthy or happy when it is doing well. It is not a creation made to benefit our People.

I too would wish to see the stock markets disappear. The stock market seems to be more a destroyer of our Nations than a pillar upon which they can rely.

Whyever our People got involved with this scheme is beyond me. I admit to having only a rudimentary understanding of economics; however, it barely demands that one be a scientist to understand the effect and power the stock markets wield over the lives of the Folk of any one of our Nations. Whether or not they choose to be active participants in that stock market or not.

Everyone suffers when the market is down; only a few really are made wealthy or happy when it is doing well. It is not a creation made to benefit our People.
Well said!

I like your other comments as well:


As you may or may not know - In National Socialism and in Racialism, the general key is not economics, but Race; so no matter how much you wish to prattle on re 'free market theory' it is of no significance to National Socialism.

http://vnnforum.com/showpost.php?p=700812&postcount=38


Spot on!

As for the stock markets, the only stock markets people see is the 'public market'. The real market is behind the scenes and available only to the jewish gangsters and their little helpers.

Buying and selling is not in our blood!

Only fools speculate with stocks; I would not touch them with a 10-meter pole. I've read about how easily they are manipulated. Still, it is an necessity, as companies issue shares of themselves to raise capital, and their share price is seen as collateral on account of the implied valuation of their business.

The most famous of these manipulations was when the jew pigsty (not fit to be called a house) of Rothchild sent out fake news to about Napoleon's defeat and brought up shares for pence on the pound.

When the economy is good, one would not need to access one's money, but in bad times, the stocks would be worth less right when one would need to liquidate. Gold and silver have held their own in good times and bad, and have until very recently served not only Europe, but the entire world quite well. It is when the standard to hard money is broken that the decline of nations is heralded.

When the economy is good, one would not need to access one's money, but in bad times, the stocks would be worth less right when one would need to liquidate. Gold and silver have held their own in good times and bad, and have until very recently served not only Europe, but the entire world quite well. It is when the standard to hard money is broken that the decline of nations is heralded.

So well that recently, due to the depressed stock market and lack of faith in dollars, whether Euro or USD; israel demanded that America give some of her aid to them in gold brick.

It was a 5 second news story that managed to sneak it's way onto MSNBC news; this story was removed. It was even on the i-net with link for about a day, too bad I didn't snag it. For it just happened.

Yes; if kikeland is after gold, it is a sure bet that gold is going to be quite useful. Silver too; it has gotten cheap relative to gold and as an industrial metal, if other economies i.e. China, India do well, demand will out-pace supply.

[QUOTE]Capitalism is a beautiful thing, but it has been hijacked by the jews...

What was this thread all about?
Remain?

My answer is : NO

[quote=Alexei Losonov;701102]

What was this thread all about?
Remain?

My answer is : NO

Threads tend to digress and take on a life of their own; as the initial topic had the potential to be inflammatory, I put it in Nutzpah. If that is your opinion, by all means vote accordingly...I made it anonymous for a reason. Oh well...

I intended for this not to really be a debate, but more of a gauge so that I may avoid any trouble for the board and especially for the moderators; please read the initial post.

Only fools speculate with stocks.

Our People are not fools. Our Nations' governments are not supposed to behave as fools either. It is time for the stock market to be returned to those that thought it up: International jewry and their henchmen, to quote Adolf Hitler.

What a revolution that would be. Refuse any stock market sales, speculations; the like. In fact, make such speculation illegal. It's already an illegal market anyways; so bring the fact into the open.

Let the juden fool around with it on their own. Wonder if depriving the stock market of it's value would encourage them and those whom serve and prefer to follow them to leave our Lands.

[quote=701148]

Threads tend to digress and take on a life of their own ...I may avoid any trouble for the board and especially for the moderators; please read the initial post.

...if you allow it...
don't you perceive yourself to be growing old by engaging in rambling digressions?

Our People are not fools. Our Nations' governments are not supposed to behave as fools either. It is time for the stock market to be returned to those that thought it up: International jewry and their henchmen, to quote Adolf Hitler.

What a revolution that would be. Refuse any stock market sales, speculations; the like. In fact, make such speculation illegal. It's already an illegal market anyways; so bring the fact into the open.

Let the juden fool around with it on their own. Wonder if depriving the stock market of it's value would encourage them and those whom serve and prefer to follow them to leave our Lands.

You take what I said a bit too literally; it is foolish to speculate upon something manipulated, and that doesn't even provide returns that keep pace with inflation. Thus, only a fool would speculate on stocks, at least without a large quantity of reforms of securities law.

The exchange of securities goes back to Venetian days as well as the courratiers de change in France, as they traded in debts. So long as one must pay a merchant in legal tender, there is a need to exchange debts for legal tender, be it legal tender or jew reserve notes, though if I must take the latter, it would soon converted into the former post-hate. Just as I could not trade a promise to pay from the government in Amsterdam worth 2 florins for that quantity of wheat in Paris, I cannot convert a promise to pay €50 from the German government into electronics in a boutique in Tokyo.

To make such things illegal would merely drive the speculation itself to the black market or more friendly jurisdictions i.e. Cayman Islands, Antigua and Barbuda &c. Better to keep things in the open and let fools and their money be parted (yes, that is what the market is for: it is a Darwinist function) than to drive things completely underground and watch as economies stagnate and decline on account that companies cannot raise capital.

Everything is worth what the buyer will pay for it, a share of a company included, let them speculate so long as all is done in the open and that it is not done in a deceptive manner; the Venetians prohibited the spreading of rumors intended to drive down the price of a security; under their laws, the Rothchild fortune would have likely been confiscated as punitive damages!

---

...if you allow it...
don't you perceive yourself to be growing old by engaging in rambling digressions?

I merely defend my position, I have no problem with it. If you have a problem with it, why do you engage in meta-digressions i.e. digression regarding digression? :P

I too would wish to see the stock markets disappear. The stock market seems to be more a destroyer of our Nations than a pillar upon which they can rely.

Whyever our People got involved with this scheme is beyond me. I admit to having only a rudimentary understanding of economics; however, it barely demands that one be a scientist to understand the effect and power the stock markets wield over the lives of the Folk of any one of our Nations. Whether or not they choose to be active participants in that stock market or not.

Everyone suffers when the market is down; only a few really are made wealthy or happy when it is doing well. It is not a creation made to benefit our People.
The stock market is really just a product of the federal reserve. I believe stock markets originated with shipping.

As things like this are prone to degenerate, I posted this in nutzpah.

I agree with many things, but other things, most of which pertain to the markets, choice, and occasionally matters surrounding the :OGB:. The forum is slanted toward National Socialism, and Alex Linder, if memory serves and please correct me if I'm wrong, intended for there to be free speech.

I decided to take a look at the 1920 National Socialist Party's 25-point program and see exactly whether my ideology is compatible.

I am diametrically opposed to points 11-14, 17, and 23.

Indirectly, I am opposed to 7 and 9, though the latter only on account of how it is open to interpretation.

As it has been alleged that I am in fact an anti, and that I do not wish to cause trouble with my continued presence, I proposed two remedies taken directly out of the early Athenian democratic tradition. Ostracism would confine me to the 'opposing views' forum, execution would authorize my IP to be banned indefinitely. Both remedies would be carried out by an administrator upon my request. For the former to take place, the votes for both added together must form a majority, for the latter, the votes for execution must themselves form the majority, so I can satisfy some if not all.

My apologies if this appears to be drastic, but this is in light of a slew of recent negative reputation and that this measure is necessary so as to prevent any trouble. Hindsight is 20-20, and the votes will determine the necessity of this action.

I have made the poll anonymous, so even if you like me personally, you are encouraged to act in the best interest of the board.

Alexei,
I have one question. Why do you even give a shit what most of the net-Nazi turds on this forum think?

I may have been mis-interpreted, as I consulted Wikipedia to get a sense of what racialism implied, and based upon the original definition of a 'superiority of one particular race'. This is a creation of the markets as the superiority of any given race, or lack thereof, is exhibited by the markets.

As for Marxism, I am not familiar with it, though I have read it was predicated upon the labor theory of value, and that is bunk on its face. In addition, Marxism, if I understand correctly, is the jew-created enemy of free markets.

As for free market economics, I have never taken heed to Friedman, though based upon what I read about him, we would likely agree upon the same things, the quantity theory of money included i.e. prices rise when more money chases the same goods being produced at a given time.

don't fuck yourself over as i did.
you have gained a few friends, which isn't easy to do.
i threw my chips on a lame horse, known as "lloyd" and now, i have few friends, due to my own dog and pony show.
if you are white
and proud
you must continue.
you must've done something right to have over 1200 rep points.

I have no opinion.....so where is the "i don't give a fuck" option on the poll?????? I think you left that off .......................:rolleyes:

I dont think it's located in the 'post reply' button :rofl

The stock market is really just a product of the federal reserve. I believe stock markets originated with shipping.

Then, and I understand my lack of understanding in the field - so I speak simply, why not take over the Federal Reserve and re-distribute the monies. A stock market is a false thing. A good business run by honest People has no need of investors. That takes the business away from the original owners, as well as away from the State and Nation; putting it into the hands of too few.

Federal Reserves are created to serve the Nation, not business. Would this be correct? For, I do not see the American People's; particularly it's White Citizens, continued benefit from the manipulation of the Federal Reserve, which has some jew at the head of. If this is what it takes to get rid of the Stock Market Scheme, why has it not been implemented?

What would happen if the White Nation and her People took back the Federal Reserve? I am curious to know, would the world really fall apart? And, if a financial world, based upon such a scheme were to be destroyed, would it not in the longer run benefit our People and their Nations; especially America.