A recap of my beliefs ...

  Here for those new to the party:

The elite use their pawns, the left and right wings to create the body 'majority politics' ( a majority of plutocrats), which then imposes upon you. Not hard to understand at all Junior.

To recap my Basic Beliefs about Everything.

The basic fact of human societies, is that all human beings are born into a group of a mother and a father. These two persons had to mingle flesh, so that each and every person on this planet could be produced. And this holds true even if scientific so called artificial means are used to facilitate the creation of life, because the sperm or egg cannot be created artificially and thus a male and a female are still necessary for the procreation of life.

This basic fact, of human existence means that all radical individualism, is utterly false at a minimum and at a maximum a destructive belief, which wastes saved capital from the past, and ensures that there will be no productive future. This being said, it is also untrue that societies of humans, are hives of bees. We cannot operate like insects do; this is not possible.

Therefore it follows, then a middle ground must be found between these extremes, which allows for the individual to exist and the group to not be negated and which allows for the group to exist and for the individual to not be negated. This may sound like some sort of mystic dualism, but this is only true, if you accept the idea that individuals and groups are necessarily in conflict.

Once you accept the reality that they complement each other, the apparent mysticism dissolves. A very solid proof, for the necessity of groups, to the existence of the individual, can be demonstrated from nature, in which all humans live in tribes, villages or some other group of at least an extended family. There is no man woman or child home in the natural order of things, who exists without a past, family and a society into which they were born. Yet on the other hand there is no group that is not comprised of individuals and again we see that there is no conflict or contrary between the group and individual  -- they are complementary.

The most basic group is again the family group, then it expands to the extended family, then to tribes, then to nations. This is the natural organic progression. Families are a proto-statelet and clans are states in all but name.

From this basic reality of human social organization, it follows that all societies, must like all just families, find/make/ensure – the semantics are not important –a place for all their members. It simply true that everyone in a society must have some use, purpose, or function in the society or they shall become alienated, and not hope for the best interests of the society at large. Everyone must have a purpose, everyone must put in and everyone must get their right and just due. This is the basic moral doctrine of any correct political/social/economic system, anything else is not satisfactory and must be rejected.

In our modern terms, this means that each head of household, must have a homestead, work that will provide for the upkeep of said homestead, and that these two bedrock conditions must be legally protected from economic/legal forces, otherwise in time men with money, will ensure that some citizens are pauperized and cannot properly raise families to increase the citizen body. Thus to make it more general it follows from the above, that a just society restrains economics to the needs and interests of the members of the society. And that further, a just society views the components of society all the way down to the tribes, families, and particular people as members of a larger family or if you will as parts of an organic whole all having needs, and who all contribute to the common good. Yes it is true that the above means in part that each and everyone won't get to just do as they please, that is true. But nothing in it should be implied to mean that anyone would be stopped from earning an honest living. Honest shall be defined to mean not legally but MORALLY correct within the above precept about Everyone counting.

In the natural order of things, Work, physical and mental, are the means to meet the needs of both the individual and the group, which at a minimum are: food, clothing, shelter and lastly some sort of weaponry with which to protect these other things. Work is also an end to ensure that each has their material to contribute to the common good and his particular good which are tied together. It is important that psychologically each think himself to be an active part of the community's life as such to ensure their loyalty. Thus from this odd view it is both an end and a means to other ends.

Also it must be admitted that in the natural order of things, there are only so many hours to everyday, and that only so many of these hours can be put to work and allow for the conditions outlined above which necessitate a certain amount of leisure time for the citizens. Thus, without a right to work and earn one's way, a place to stay, cloth on one's back,food in one's belly, and a sufficient amount time of leftover to live well, the Rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness are meaningless and empty promises. They were after all proclaimed by very very wealthy men, after all, and in truth.

In fact it is only when these basic conditions of living are met that anything like freedom or any other abstract concept has any real meaning whatsoever, as there are done it all practical realities going to be few to any, starving, penniless, vagabond, bestial philosophers, scientists, mathematicians, or great world leaders; and this is an overreaching fact. The opposite is also true that any livelihood work, occupation which does not provide for these minimal conditions, is no just work at all and is not right or CORRECT in any way shape or form. I shall go so far as a state that any work which uses up a significant portion of the workday over any significant amount of the week should pay a living wage as that work/time can never be had back, and the person must yet eat be housed and be clothed. Workers Live and thus require Living Wages: No exceptions.

It is obvious that in any just, proper and stable, polity, for a citizen, to have any meaningful use, of what we conveniently call rights, he must have his needs in life met, and still have time necessary to enjoy his life and engaged in the pursuits required of free citizens in a free state ie he must have education and leisure as well as the opportunity to work by which work to earn a livelihood for his family, and by extension his nation's organic being.

Economics' was invented by human beings, for their ends, humans do not exist for economic ends. Thus any theory or belief that postulates that economics control men or that modes of production are dominant over human will is false. Since it is a penultimate truth that human activity IE human will, created economics and all value judgments as we know them now--there being no mode of production in nature sans human beings. The small matters of economics are merely matters of human will, money merely being an invention of our minds, it is absurd that it should be our master.

In a preceding paragraph effects were discussed briefly, economics has a great number of unintended consequences when it is simply allowed to be pursued blindly for pure personal profit and with no regard for anyone else. Part of these effects which should be taken into account are of course the effects that any large scale industrial action action has on the environment around us, as that environment is our home writ large. This is not to say that we should abandon industrial society, it is only to say that we should balance the needs of an industrial society with the realities of what nature can and cannot absorb in the line of pollutants destruction and the rest. This is also to say that natural resources, should not be used willy nilly, to the benefit of private companies and to the loss of the commons.

The simple fact is is that, no company, no person, no group of persons, have a right nor ideally should have any legal ability, to do the common people harm, for mere return on investment or market gain. The idea would be similar to saying that, in the days of the cave, one person should have the right horde the food and sell it all the others. Do you think your ancestors would have tolerated being treated like this? But this is the market, where some horde, and some go hungry, and you golden calf worshipers, call this moral and just. But I say a market was born in theft, a royal theft at that. And that its freedoms are never free, and quite the contrary are always attached to interest, debt, pauperization,, slavery resource depletion, and over extension, which will in the long-term ensure societal collapse. The market demands more resources from nature eventually than can be had, thus it is a false paradigm. A further truth is that if you look at the birth of both the Bolshevik economy, and the early English industrial economy, both feature the same sorts of population transfers, murders, thefts of the common persons wealth and its concentration into the hands of a few favorites.

Thus the common paradigm in which there is a free market and communism. A controlled market and a free market, are false contrasts. They have no real validity. 

The fact is that yes, you should be free to engage in commerce or economics, but, only, if, that commerce is honest and not destructive to to the homeland, the hearths, and/or the common citizenry who make up the base of the social system upon which you engage and commerce. That is in so much as you engage in commerce honestly and within the rules as establish for the common good you shall be let alone and protected by the might of state, with the blessings of all good men. It is as easy as following the rules, paying taxes, and doing call ups, really.

I see nothing there that does great injury to anyone's ability to engage in honest fair business. Those of you on the other hand that would wish to do underhanded business, who would wish to cheat the nation by doing business with foreigners at the expense of the nation you will be driven out like vipers, routed for the good of all as good old Andy Jackson put it.

From here it is only a matter of choosing a political system ... it will be a mixed system ... I advise the tried and true combination of a Head of State; a Council; and an Assembly of the People. From all time to all time, this repeats, you will not escape it.

The only thing that remains is to determine if YOU shall control the process, or if others based upon what ever qualification shall do the controlling. I will let the diagram below speak for my thoughts no the matter:

This is actually the most simply part as if you have a proper society and economic order, there is little for the political arm to take care of outside of national defense and keeping basic order among the parts. Proper society of course is one in which the MEN over a certain age determine for the rest what shall be and what shall not be, by means of first their Familial authority over their own homes which then is translated into political control. The only system that works is to tie voting with call up and paying tax, while simply only allowing men to do call up. Anything else is modernist subversion. Period. IN reality this is the most stable social form ever found and that is why the modernist PC bots hate it so, as it is a very very hard nut to crack. Even the limpid remnants are giving them a good go, the return of Masculinity has them terrified. Especially the confuse members, of the feminine half of the species, who have grown to like lording it over the beta Males that are conditioned to put up with them. This planned revolt against 'patriarchy' ie normalcy is outlined by Frederick Engel's in several of his works and to a lesser extent by Karl Marx. It is also a common theme among the 68'er commies and the Frankfurters who are commonly understood to be Political Correctness or Cultural Marxism.  Traditional society was destroyed harpy by harpy, harridan by harridan, Jewish Mother by Jewish mother. 

And this is where men who reject PC, must run straight into modernity's main supporters the 'liberated women' and 'free adult' 18-21 year old child who make up the bulk of voters between them.  These voting blocks are the reason sanity can never be had at the poll as females are not reasonable and children are dull, thus both are easily tricked by the media into doing what is expected ...

Fortunately, voting is an OPTION, at least any vote that includes anyone not born with a penis who is over a certain age of understand is FULLY an option.

The real fact is that a group of angry upset adult men, who have a large enough mass and distribution, have no need of these concepts that have allowed all this insanity called PC.  

I will let you in on a secret: Liberal modernity can lie to itself, but males are always the strong backs and sharp spears, that keep any system standing, in all times and places and that does not and cannot 'evolve' without the degenerate display that is modernity. Once the men trapped by this abnormal and unnatural system mentally defect and find/realize/confirm that their interests are no longer served by this PC egalitarianism and modernity, then it is absolutely assured that something very much like the patriarchal society I call for will reemerge from the rubble and rebuild among the ruins that is modern PC matriarchy. 

It is assured, since once the goodies, the services and the games ( video and otherwise ) can no longer distract the young men, and they realize that they have been robbed of their future by Mommy PC and the Matriarchs,homos, minorities, and other churls who hide behind 'the system' it is my feeling they will do what any White Man would do: Slap reality back into line!  

And as always: If you are not angry you are one of the thieves!