all 17 comments

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

The British aristocracy largely became toothless and irrelevant by the end of the second world war. Industrialization meant that most aristocratic estates became loss projects and real financial power went to the newly minted industrialists and bankers.

The aristocrats held political and military power in the 19th century but the gradual democratization of Britain eroded that too. When everyone could vote and had equality before the law, their political power dissipated as well. Politics then became a matter of money and media. If you had money, you could campaign more, buy more publicity and maintain more full time politicians.

As Spengler noted, the parties were completely beholden to the moneyed men. Plus, the plutocrats owned the media and entertainment industries, so they decided the course of mass culture and made and unmade politicians.

The aristocracy was relevant in the 19th century, it stopped being so by the 1920s. It even stopped staffing the military as bulk of the officers came from the middle classes.

A lot of people on the right like Spencer and BAP love to fawn over the European aristocracy, but the sad truth is that their demise became inevitable with the advent of the musket and the steam engine. The musket ended the nobility's military monopoly and industrialization broke their grip on wealth.

I think that was the reason why Britain fell to the Jews ultimately. Its democratic nature allowed Jewish bankers to slowly buy into the political-governmental establishment and seize control of it. Churchil for example was completely indebted to the Rothschild family and was essentially their manservant.

That's why he kept making a comeback despite his numerous failures and disasters: the Gallipoli campaign, the black and tans, returning Britain to the gold standard and prolonging the depression etc.

On a larger point, in the modern age, a plutocratic elite is inevitable if your country is democratic and liberal. They'll simply buy up the parties and beguile the population with their media and entertainment propaganda.

The only way to avoid the rule of the merchant is to be an authoritarian socialist/state-controlled economy like China, Russia, or Iran. There, the rulers of the country are the military-intelligence guys(Russia's siloviks) and technocrats(CCP).

They may be corrupt and sometimes despotic, but unlike the merchant, their power is tied to the fate of the country.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist[S] 3 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 5 fun -  (2 children)

I just want the booklet bro

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

Sorry, the subject piqued my interest and I went on an autistic rant over it.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

lol it's cool I agree with what you said but I've been looking for this book for months and I can't find it.

[–]insaneclownempire 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

The only way to avoid the rule of the merchant is to be an authoritarian socialist/state-controlled economy like China, Russia, or Iran. There, the rulers of the country are the military-intelligence guys(Russia's siloviks) and technocrats(CCP).

The problem is primarily Jewish merchants specifically. Normally the merchant class compete against each other, which helps prevent monopolies, but the J's will cooperate with each other against non Jews, who either dont even realize their Jewish competitors are working together or aren't able to call them out for it because muh antisemitism.

Jews long ago figured out how to game the system in high trust white societies this way. They have become increasingly masks off about it though as their wealth and power has become so great that even when people can see what they are doing, no one can speak out about it for fear of coordinated retaliation by them and their buttgoys.

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/06/23/japan-immigration-policy-xenophobia-migration/

The merchant is loyal to his purse and not to the ground he stands upon.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

High Finance has no country, only interests.

  • Juan Peron

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Yup. Having capitalists means having a permanent class of traitors in your country, ready to auction her to the highest bidder.

There was a notorious example of this with Krupp. During WW1, they sold hand grenade schematics to the British. They were disappointed at not being paid at the moment with the war raging. After the war, the British awarded them with shares in the Vickers company.

They made millions off of selling a tech that maimed and killed thousands of German soldiers. It's hard to imagine someone more worthy of being broken on the wheel and left as carrion to the vultures.

Capitalists are like this in every country. They have no real loyalty to the land and people and inevitably corrupt society with their money power.

Ideally, billionaires should not exist. No one man should be allowed to own that much money. There are no amenities or luxuries on this earth, you can't have with a hundred million dollars. That's more than enough for one person.

We should look towards worker-owned corporations as the road forward, a lot like medieval guilds. No one man or family can ever be allowed to control vast sectors of the economy or command too much wealth. The minute that happens, your society is destined for the gutter.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

We should look towards worker-owned corporations as the road forward, a lot like medieval guilds. No one man or family can ever be allowed to control vast sectors of the economy or command too much wealth. The minute that happens, your society is destined for the gutter.

People are studying the third position

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

third position

Did Fascist Italy or Nazi Germany make any such innovations though? The Nazi economy was essentially a mix of large privately owned corporations and state-run enterprises. The banks were mostly controlled by the state as well.

It was essentially a top down system. What I'm talking about is something more organic. A truly democratic workplace where the workers have a say in the direction of the company. Ideally, they should all vote to elect the Director/CEO for a period of 5 or 7 years. Nazi Germany as far as I know had run of the mill top down corporate structures where either the factory was owned by a businessman or a government manager.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Italy did it in the Salo Republic. Neither Italy (except in the second republic but it was a smaller state) nor Germany reached an 'endpoint', they were constantly evolving and both used a gradualist revolutionary strategy. They probably both would have fully implemented Corporatism with a lot of distributed ownership at some point.

[–]insaneclownempire 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

That still doesn't change what I wrote. Numerous East Asian nations have been aggressively capitalist for nearly a century, and still haven't let in large numbers of non Asian immigrants because they don't have "fellow Asians" working together to do it. Only the West has this, and only the West has allowed massive immigration from ethnically different populations.

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It's a matter of time. Japan is starting to let them in and South Korea is moving in that direction as well. Singapore meanwhile is a globohomo city-state with a hundred different races residing in it.

[–]insaneclownempire 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

How many Afghan refugees is Japan and Korea pledging to take in, or have taken in? How many Middle Eastern and African refugees or immigrants did they take in? I'm pretty sure the answer is zero.

You are overcomplicating the situation, when it's fairly simple what and who is driving all this. Yes there are other factors that contribute, but they aren't the primary drivers, and if they were then those Asian countries would have been flooded with ethnically foreign immigrants a long time ago, as they have been capitalist for 3/4 of a century now.

[–]literalotherkinNorm MacDonald Nationalism 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Pine in Tales Of The British Aristocracy has an entire section on it -- not a flattering one either. Haven't read it but I've always heard it mentioned. That the one?

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not this in particular but in the section of this book he mentions the pamphlet, it's 'Our Jewish Aristocracy' by Arnold Leese. Thank you borther.

[–]IkeConn 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

And all this time I thought they were German.