Photo from breitbart.com After three decades of internecine war, Abdul-Aziz bin Saud, allied with the fundamentalist Wahhabist Islamic sect, consolidated the House of Saud’s dominance over Arabia i…
Source: Castrated, by Robert Gore
Photo from breitbart.com After three decades of internecine war, Abdul-Aziz bin Saud, allied with the fundamentalist Wahhabist Islamic sect, consolidated the House of Saud’s dominance over Arabia i…
Source: Castrated, by Robert Gore
You went out last night for “a couple of drinks,” but you knew you were going to get drunk. You paid attention to someone who was not attractive or interesting, but you wanted to have sex. You and …
Hungarian Prime Minister last week regarding the immigration crisis. Call to action has me all fired up. This is leadership, for those of you who forgot what it looks like. BTW it’s clearly not just the Americans, Swedes, and Germans alerted to this.
Poached from Western Rifle Shooters
Via GoV, and opens as follows:
Last Tuesday (March 15) was a Hungarian national holiday: the commemoration of Hungary’s independence from the Austrian Empire. Prime Minister Viktor Orbán gave a speech in the rain that day, electrifying his compatriots in the audience — and anyone else who is permitted to hear or read a translation of the speech that has not been filtered, redacted, or expurgated by the legacy media…
Smoke is turning into flames…
You have to understand economics, and economic policy at the level of the Fed. If you don’t understand Keynesian economics, your definitely not sitting at the table with the other big kids.
But… Muh feelz!
Islam Must Be Expelled From The West
Fjordman speaks the unspeakable.
(Editor’s Note: I first rolled this grenade into the room in December 2010 to gauge the reaction from readers. Now look at what has happened relating to Islam in the last two years. But does Islam pose a serious threat to any state that secedes and becomes a sovereign nation? Let us know your comments.)
On the 11th of December 2010, the first-ever suicide bombing in Scandinavia occurred when Taimour Abdulwahab, an Iraqi-born Muslim and Swedish citizen with a wife and children in Luton, Britain, was carrying explosives and mistakenly set off an explosion near a busy Christmas shopping street in Stockholm just before he could murder dozens of people.
Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, who is a passionate promoter of having Turkey as a full member of the European Union and Islam as an established part of…
View original post 2,180 more words
Western Rifle Shooters is one of my daily visits, and some of the content on Burning Arrows is from here… great site.
…If you want to “reform” this government from within, get extra ammo, extra fuel for the wood-chipper, and pack a lunch…
Welcome to Consequence Land.
Population: You and your family.
Plus 100+ million collectivists who believe that you have whatever you have because you are a racist, sexist, Eurocentric, homophobic hater who, by virtue of those crimes against Duh Peepul, are exempt from any sort of moral consideration owed even to other species, let alone fellow humans.
Reflecting on the past week, it is not difficult to conclude that it has been anything but dull. I have been fortunate enough to find topics worth addressing in the near future, and from the perspective of a man trying to write, this is a good thing. On that note there are several folks who have requested I represent specific topics, to which I intend to oblige. If you are reading this and are one of those people, I will cover these topics as time and inspiration allow. This of course alludes to the fact that some people have been actually reading the blog. Not necessarily the people I expected would, but that is beside the point. Few souls brave enough to comment so far, but I am confident that the feedback I am receiving through other channels will eventually transform into the dialogue on the site I am hoping for.
I have also cautiously entered the Twittersphere this week. This alone is hardly worth discussing in any detail, but let it suffice to say that despite my reservations about the vapidity of social media in general and Twitter in particular, I cannot deny the utility represented if one wishes to get a message out rapidly. Apparently you can teach an old dog new tricks, and I intend to incorporate and develop the techniques associated with that platform. For the record, in my first attempted “Tweet” I generated a pretty passionate response to the content, which provoked a passionate dialogue, and this I choose to view as promising…
The meme I broke the ice with was “Anti-Racist is code for Anti-White #TheTriggering.” This of course is a hard phrase for many , and in particular the social justice warrior (SJW), to absorb without being “triggered” into falling directly onto their swords against perceived racism. This was actually the point, #TheTriggering is a hashtag created by Lauren Southern to serve such a purpose in the name of free speech. Regarding its genesis, she states:
“In September last year, I came up with an idea. What if there was a day solely dedicated to annoying cultural authoritarians across the world? What if we all came together and collectively posted offensive content in defense of free speech? A day when media feminists and social justice warriors would be triggered 69 times a second – a day of ‘Triggering’, if you will.
I jokingly tweeted out my master plan, not expecting anything to come of it. However, a screenshot of the tweet was shared all over Facebook and other realms of social media.
The reaction was overwhelmingly positive. With threats to our freedom of expression coming thick and fast both online and in the real world, I knew we had to go through with it….We will not let our liberty perish at the hands of the professionally offended.”
“The Triggering: A powerful defense of free speech against the professionally offended” is her full summary of the inspiration and intent of the hashtag, and is available at International Business Times, if you are interested. #TheTriggering was a dominant force on Twitter for several days, and it was great to see people vent their frustration with political correctness in a fashion that caught media attention. Of course the media, in an effort to downplay the hashtags social significance and maintain the establishment narrative that the media invariably always represents, has largely chose to represent #TheTriggering as a movement for bigots and racists.
This is why the meme I chose to represent my personal frustration with SJW culture was “Anti-racist is code for anti-White.” This is a phrase that has established itself in certain social media circles, and you guessed it, has been branded racist by the media. Apparently only non-white people are allowed to suggest they experience racism in any fashion. To offer an argument to the contrary must be racist! I won’t bother articulating the ways racism against whites is tolerated in this country. My suspicion is you know exactly what I am referring to, and if you don’t I would imagine you are too invested in defending whatever protected victim status you represent to hear my argument. Let it suffice to say that when reflecting on my life experiences to date, anti-white racism is alive and well.
Despite my frustration with this particular issue, as I suggested it was a good week. I am constantly reminded of the importance of tribe and family in these matters. While it is easy to get sucked into the maelstrom of social media chaos, coverage of the 2016 elections, Chicago’s recent display of superb class, Fukushima, rising global military tensions, Bruce Jenner’s sexual identity crises, etc. ad infinitum, one must remember that the people geographically closest to you in life are the ones that will hopefully be there if this house of cards finally comes down. Tomorrow is never a guarantee, and without tribe we don’t amount to much. I am fortunate to have an awesome family and friends that are actually worth a shit under duress.
(See real time US national debt clock here: US Debt Clock. No really, you need to see this!)
I will be doing some work on the blog this weekend, so for those of you who have expressed interest in looking at it or potentially contributing, please look at Burning Arrows.
For now, here is an article by Robert Gore over at Straight Line Logic. The topic is essentially a basic summary that draws parallels between the soundness of government money and other social and economic factors. These days my conversations perpetually seem to return to the realm of banks, finance, and government money when discussing social plights with peers and associates.
I cannot stress enough the importance of understanding, even if rudimentarily, economics and finance when evaluating politics and social reform. Some people I regard as pretty intelligent (you know who you are) completely dismiss this subject when discussing politics, and I think to do so is to engage in a form of Orwellian doublethink. In one case “…we can talk about these things, but as soon as you get into auditing the federal reserve i’m done…” was offered as a proposal to escape discussing the “man behind the screen.” This was from the very person who typically prescribes following the money to find the culprit. So in the case of evaluating US fiscal policy, to be unwilling, if necessary to “follow the money” to the private bank that funds US Government is at least disingenuous.
At any rate, Gore’s article It takes a village to raise a debt slave is worth a read. It doesn’t delve to the depths that typically leave those new to these issues nauseous.
Full text below:
It Takes a Village to Raise a Debt Slave, by Robert Gore
Historically, you’ve been able to tell everything you need to know about a government by the quality of its money.
Deacon Bainbridge, The Golden Pinnacle, by Robert Gore
Debt represents moral issues that transcend its economic role. The heart of debt is a promise: to pay the agreed upon interest and repay the principle at an agreed upon date in the future. The name of one class of debt—bonds— carries an unmistakable moral connotation: one’s word is one’s bond. Creditors must assess character—the willingness to repay—before they evaluate borrowers’ incomes, assets, and future prospects—the ability to repay. That formulation looks quaintly anachronistic, which tells you all you need to know about contemporary morality. As debt has become the centerpiece of global economics, so too has it become emblematic of global ethics, or more properly, their absence.
In 1913, a perceptive few recognized the political and economic dimensions of the new income tax and central banking legislation; fewer still recognized the philosophical and moral implications. Under a real money standard (money defined as: a medium of exchange, a store of value, and a unit of account, with intrinsic value, and not a liability of an individual or entity, e.g., a gold standard), the creation of debt hinges on the supply of real money and its value relative to goods and services. So limited, most debt will be incurred for productive uses that have a prospective return greater than the cost of debt service.
When governments and central banks are not so limited, they can create fiat debt at will. In 1971, President Nixon completed the transition begun in 1913 away from the convertibility of dollars for gold. Since then, the dollar has been a fiat debt unit. The government and the Federal Reserve can produce an unlimited amount of fiat debt units, not just Federal Reserve Notes, but member banks’ reserve balances at the Fed, and Treasury bills, notes, and bonds.
Deacon Bainbridge, a fictional character, was right on the money, so to speak. The quality of a government’s money is an infallible moral bellwether. A moral government would not be involved in the monetary system at all. Production of fiat debt amounts to fraud and counterfeiting. Its only “backing,” implicit at that, is the government’s ability to steal from its productive citizens. General acceptance of such intrinsically valueless debt requires legal compulsion. Fiat debt depreciation and devaluation steals from creditors for the benefit of debtors, which invariably includes the government doing the depreciating and devaluing.
When debt becomes a government-administered shell game relying on fraud, theft, and compulsion, the ethics of debt break down throughout the society. Neither the coercive welfare state nor the imperial warfare state would be possible without fiat debt. If the government had to extract its funding from a real money economy, with a finite and limited supply of currency, every dollar taken from that economy for income redistribution or bombs would be a dollar that could not be spent for private investment, production, or consumption. The real cost of government spending, and the real burden it placed on the economy, would be direct and clear. Long before governments reached the roughly 40 percent of the GDP they currently spend (combined federal, state, and local governments) their parasitic load on the economy would kill the host. The unethical means of funding the welfare and warfare states indict their ends; intellectual and moral bankruptcy precede fiscal bankruptcy.
Any entity that continuously spends more than it takes in will inevitably go bankrupt. Governments do so with monotonous frequency; insolvency has probably eliminated more of them than wars and revolutions. Such a fate looms for a host of governments that have made promises to their citizens they cannot keep. The mounting spending and debt loads these promises entail have exerted an ever-increasing drag on the economically productive and have shrunken opportunities. Less-than-bright future prospects has led to shrinking birth rates, which negatively feed back into economic drag.
The above characterization obviously applies to most of Europe, Japan, and China, where debt has funded not welfare benefits in the Western sense, but massive and often unnecessary infrastructure spending, factories, and other commercial projects that keep the population employed and docile. The US has its welfare state, but it also tries to militarily maintain its version of “order” in the world, a confederated empire. A mini welfare state resides within the warfare state. An appreciable portion of the trillions the US has spent on the military-industrial-intelligence complex has been dictated by domestic political considerations, unnecessary to achieve policy objectives, even if one holds that Pax Americana is a legitimate objective. A military limited to an actual defensive mission would shrink the warfare state and its embedded welfare state dramatically.
Debt has become a lifestyle in most of the developed world, the foundation of the modern economy, devoid of moral considerations. Impressively credentialed economic “experts” hold that expanding debt is the essential propellant of economic growth. Obtaining one’s first credit card—and consequently a credit score—is now an important rite of passage, with the ultimate ascension into full creditworthy consumer-hood marked by one’s first mortgage.
Republicans, long holding themselves out as a bastion of morality, look set to nominate a man for president whose corporations filed for bankruptcy four times, and who claims that stiffing creditors is a legitimate business tactic. Democrats look set to nominate a woman who wrote a book that supposedly demonstrates her solicitude for future generations, but whose proposed spending will only add to the government’s mountain of debt and unfunded promises it cannot pay. It takes a village to raise a debt slave.
An aviary of canaries in the credit coal coal mine face a mass die off, models all of responsiveness to something-for-nothing political “demand” and exemplars of contemporary economic theory. Which one expires first? Europe’s Mediterranean spendthrifts? America’s walking dead municipalities, with their underfunded pensions and medical plans? Japan, where debt is over four times the GDP and adult diapers now outsell baby diapers? China, as its staggering debt refuses to heed the commands of the commanders of its command economy? Oil exporting nations, revenues slashed by 70 percent? South America, in a reprise of its historical role as the deadbeat continent? It doesn’t really matter, because with today’s inextricably intertwined financial system, where virtually every financial asset is someone else’s debt or equity, when the first ones go the rest follow in short order.
Ethics are in harmony with reality. Living within our means is a requirement of survival, not a quaint homily. Perpetually living beyond our means is as impossible as perpetual motion, meaning our multiply mortgaged future is indeed bleak. Impending default has been preceded by a wholesale default of morality and reason. When the financial collapse arrives, the protestations of “good intentions” will be as phony and useless as the scrip currencies and debt littering the globe.
I think this is a great analogy on the immigration issue. It ought to appeal to our lower sensibilities too, its a cartoon (so you don’t have to read anything!) and its got easy to hate Hitler in it… enjoy.
Tribalism has been on my mind a lot lately. Notions and struggles of tribal identity have dominated my subconscious for most of my life, and these currents have washed potent longings for identity to the surface of my conscious mind many times. I can’t help but wonder of you can relate. I intend this theme to be a central one on burning arrows, which hopefully some of you will actually read over time. If you never do, at least this effort should help crystallize my ideas.
This is relevant to History Isn’t Over, pulled from a Radix Journal piece dated February 6th of this year. Full text here, don’t be afraid to comment…
Did the 5th century Roman watching the Germanic tribes storm through his gates know his world was ending? As half of Europe perished, thrashing in the final agonies of the black death, did some perceptive observer know the end of an era was at hand? As the Berliner watched his countrymen tear down the wall, did he know that his actions would cause the fall of the Soviet Union? As the Parisian relaxing on a Friday night heard the shots ring out in the Bataclan, did he in the terror of the moment suspect that the events signified not just the end of his life, but the hollowness of his social order, and the system of thought from which that order sprang?
The 5th century Roman did not know that from the ashes of Rome would arise a new civilization, feudal Europe and that the fall was the result of a loss of vitality centuries in the making. He only knew that his future had become uncertain. The 14th century European did not know that end of the Feudal system was at hand, he only knew that order had been replaced with chaos, and tried to cope as best he could. The Berliner taking a hammer to the wall did not know the Soviet Union was doomed, he only sensed the weakness of the East German Soviet puppet state, and capitalized on it. Even if he did not fully understand it on an intellectual level, he sensed instinctively that the Communist ideology had lost legitimacy. These brief moments were distillations of broad historical trends which were the products of decades, or even centuries, foretelling the end of a way of life. In a single instant confidence in the established order of things was shattered; creating the seeds of a new order.
As we watch the chaos unfold in Europe, we know that something is changing. As the refugees pillage Europe, seeds of doubt are planted. As we watch Ferguson and Baltimore burn, we begin to doubt “E Pluribus Unum”. We feel a certain uneasiness. We have a sense of uncertainty, of foreboding, that we can’t quite put our finger on. We know that what was certain has become uncertain, the unquestionable has become open to question. We, like the 5th century Roman, the 13th century European, and 20th century Berliner know that something is ending.
What we are witnessing is not a momentary setback for the current order, we are witnessing a paradigm shift on par with the fall of Rome, the end of the Feudal era, the beginning of the Enlightenment, and the end of Communism. We are witnessing the death of system of thought which has been dominant in the Western world of the last three centuries. Liberalism is losing legitimacy. It is losing legitimacy because Liberal regimes can no longer defend their borders, win their wars, pay their debts, or protect their citizens.
At first glance, the assertion that Liberalism is losing legitimacy seems laughable. Liberal regimes are the most militarily and economically powerful entities on the face of the earth that have ever existed in human history. America, a nation founded upon liberal principles, has become the world’s sole super power as a result of winning the Cold War. The multi-polar world of the Cold War has quickly become a uni-polar one in which the United States is a hegemon: dominant militarily, economically, and culturally.
Political theorist Francis Fukuyama speculated that this development constituted the end of history. The end of history, according to Fukuyama, is the idea that “a remarkable consensus concerning the legitimacy of liberal democracy as a system of government had emerged throughout the world…as it conquered rival ideologies like hereditary monarchy, fascism, and most recently communism… liberal democracy may constitute the ‘end point of mankind’s ideological evolution’ and the “final form of human government”. The decade following the Cold War would seem to confirm Fukuyama’s assertion, America boomed economically due to the tech bubble and asserted its will through the use of military power in the First Gulf War and in the Balkans.
Liberalism’s ideological hegemony will be its undoing. Its strength, bolstered by American military and economic global supremacy, is the source of Liberalism’s collapse. The post-Cold War era is the first time Liberal regimes have operated without constraint. Internationally, Liberalism was restrained by having to deal with major illiberal powers which could hamper its actions. Domestically, the situation is similar, in the past Liberal ideology was restrained by countervailing forces such as nationalism, traditional religious beliefs, and racial consciousness. These restraints have lost legitimacy in the eyes of elites which control the institutions that create and disseminate culture. For the first time in history, Liberalism is free of restraint internationally and domestically; Liberal regimes have almost total freedom of action. This strength has allowed the contradictions inherent in the ideology to fully manifest themselves.
These contradictions stem from Enlightenment philosophy, from which Liberalism receives its intellectual and moral foundation, and its founding mythology. Enlightenment philosophy holds that man is by nature a rational being, and that through the use of reason man can discover both truths about himself and the natural world, this is the epistemological core of the Enlightenment, from which the scientific method is derived. It also holds that man in a state of nature is solitary, equal, and free; that the individual is by nature autonomous, and predates the community, which was founded by these autonomous individuals to secure their property. Community is regarded as artificial, as are all social hierarchies. For this reason, individual liberty and equality are the core ethical beliefs of the Enlightenment, the political expression of which is liberal democracy. As a result of its belief in the primacy and equality of the individual, and the artificiality of community, Liberalism is by necessity a universalist ideology.
The epistemological and ethical components of the Enlightenment conflict with one another. Casual observation, the record of history, and scientific study reveal that human equality is a myth, that man is by nature hierarchical, that man is a social being rather than a solitary one, and that community, and the defining feature of community, identity, are essential parts of what it means to be human. Any ideology which denies these truths is doomed to fail. Thus it is no accident that at the peak of their power Liberal regimes cannot win their wars, pay their debts, secure their borders, or protect their citizens.
The goal of U.S. foreign policy for the last thirteen years has been to attempt to bring about the end of history, to establish a global Liberal order. In service of this goal, America, and other Liberal regimes have attempted to use military force to convert the Muslim world into secular, liberal democracies. Such efforts were doomed to failure from the start because they are dependent on the assumption that the majority of Muslims have same self-conception and desires as a Postmodern European. Efforts to democratize Iraq could succeed only if the Shia, Sunni, and Kurdish tribesmen of Iraq conceived of themselves primarily as individuals who desired “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”. This is not the case, the identity of the average Iraqi is defined by tribal, religious, and family ties. The average Iraqi conceives of himself as a Shia, Sunni, or Kurd, not as an atomized, autonomous individual. His family, tribal and religious ties are the foundations of his identity, thus any attempt to impose a system of government which is organized around the autonomy and equality of the individual is doomed to failure.
Liberalism requires a high trust society in order to function, such as those found in Western Europe, and the United States. These high trust societies are the product of millennia of evolutionary development, and centuries of historical trends. The Middle East, by contrast, is comprised of low trust societies, thus any attempt to turn these nations into liberal democracies is akin to building a house without a foundation. Liberal regimes cannot accept this because to do so would be an admission that the core ethical ideas of the Enlightenment, individual autonomy and human equality are not universally applicable. To admit this is to deny that the idea that “all men are created equal” and that their foremost desire is “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”.
Liberal regimes cannot pay their debts because Liberal regimes do not have the population base necessary to sustain a modern welfare state. All Liberal regimes have below replacement birth rates, creating a situation in which there are not enough workers to produce the wealth required to provide for medical care for retirees and benefits for those unable to find work in an economy increasingly geared towards those on the right-hand side of the bell curve. As this trend is found in every Liberal regime, it is not an accident. This fall in population is the direct result of the sexual revolution, the deconstruction of the family, and the pursuit of economic growth at all costs, all of which are a natural outgrowth of Liberalism’s belief in the autonomy and equality of the individual.
The sexual revolution separated sex from fertility; it desacralized sex, made it just another recreational activity instead of the foundation of the family. The patriarchal family itself came under attack by feminism, which objected to male leadership in both the public and private sphere, and actively worked to delegitimize the family and the mores and institutions which supported it. This project was aided by businesses which wished to increase the supply of labor, thus reducing its value. All of these trends contributed to falling fertility rates, and are products of principles of equality and individual autonomy followed to their logical conclusion. Liberal regimes cannot defend their borders or protect their citizens from crime because Liberalism cannot delineate an “Us” or a “Them”. They are unable to do this because Liberalism contends that human society is merely an aggregation of autonomous and equal individuals each pursuing their own rational self interest. It thus must deny the existence of the Other. It is not possible to conceive of an Other because to do so would be to “discriminate”. Discrimination is the act the valuing of one thing over another, thus the act by its very nature violates the Liberal moral principle of equality. Because of this, a Liberal regime cannot consider questions of identity when shaping its immigration policy without contradicting its highest moral principles. It is no accident that Liberal regimes are importing millions of “refugees” who have open disdain for the values and culture of Europe and have nothing in common with the European populations which they are “enriching”. It also why Liberal regimes throughout the world have long allowed their inner cities to become third world slums.
The inability of Liberal regimes to fulfill the functions and responsibilities of a state are the direct result of the contradictions within the ideology which were previously suppressed by competition with illiberal powers at the international level, and by piety, nationalism, and racial consciousness domestically. These failures have eroded the legitimacy of the ideology both in the eyes of their own citizens and internationally. This, in itself, is not enough to ensure its demise. For that to occur there must be an alternative system of thought strong enough to challenge it. This system of thought must have a mythic foundation capable of appealing to all levels of consciousness, as well as a philosophic core which is compelling to the few capable of philosophic thought. The job of our movement is to create a system of thought capable of replacing the dying Liberal status quo. We must take advantage of the chaos caused by the current paradigm shift to create a new order which is life affirming.
F. Roger Devlin, Sexual Utopia in Power.
Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man.