Hello, and welcome back to another edition of American Dissident Voices, the Internet radio program of North America's foremost racialist organization, the National Alliance. I'm your host and the Chairman of the Alliance, Erich Gliebe.
For me and for many of you in this audience, the name Karl Marx is associated with a whole bucketful of evils. For one thing, Marx was a Jew, but that in itself does not necessarily make him evil -- although some of you might want to argue with me on that point. But it was what Marx DID that spawned all of the evil, although I will grant that there is often a strong correlation between who one IS and what one DOES. After all, that is a basic tenet of racialist thought: that the biology of an individual affects his or her behavior, and that the biology of a collection of individuals affects the general culture and stability of the society. So when we note that Marx was a Jew and cite all of the negative effects his thought had on the White race, some people claim that we are stating two different facts, while others claim we are stating a single fact in two different ways. It all depends on your point of view.
In any case, the Jew Marx's communist ideology wreaked havoc on the White race for the better part of a century, and its influence still pervades current multicultural ideologies. Communism led to the fall of the Romanovs and the Russian Empire and to the essential enslavement of hundreds of millions of Russians and Ukrainians. It exacerbated the disastrous conditions in Germany after the Great War, with communist gangs ruling the streets and taking over local governments throughout Germany. Such activity greatly aided the rise of racial-nationalist parties such as Adolf Hitler's National Socialist German Workers Party. I will also go so far as to say that the aggressive stance of the communist colossus of Soviet Russia NECESSITATED the life-and-death struggle on the Eastern Front during the Second World War. Had not Marx's communism seized power in Russia, it is hard to imagine anything remotely resembling the Second World War ever taking place.
Of course, once anti-communist Germany had been clubbed into submission by overwhelming material resources and overwhelming manpower, the virus of Marx spread to take over a whole host of Eastern European governments, and even into Germany itself. Marx had stated long before that his economic policies would bring prosperity to all of the people and, by the end of the Second World War, hundreds of millions of people were forcefully participating in a great experiment to see if Marx was right or not.
Well, it turned out that Marx, like lots of other Jews, was just an egomaniacal charlatan who made things up as he went along. Communism did NOT bring prosperity to the people. It did NOT bring stability to the countries. It did NOT bring freedom and justice. Quite to the contrary, on all counts. Communism in Russia and Eastern Europe has failed, and no one seems to be any the worse for wear, except for the tens of millions of our White kinsmen who went through the meat-grinder of Soviet oppression and Soviet labor camps.
But there was at least one thing that Karl Marx was right about, and that was on the essential inequity and instability of unrestrained capitalism. Capitalism's inequity has been thoroughly documented throughout history. You have all heard the stories of the horrible working conditions in the factories of England at the start of the Industrial Revolution, with children being used to rake in profits for greedy capitalists. The American author Upton Sinclair, who published his novel The Jungle in 1906, did his best to expose the horrors of the working conditions in Chicago's meat-packing industry and the dreadful plight of the working people. Besides its inequity, capitalism's instability is also well-documented, with capitalist economies riding a perpetual roller coaster.
Even today -- and even in the United States -- the weaknesses of capitalism remain. The wealthy grow wealthier, while the working people worry about their wages keeping up with the cost of living and about their jobs still being there next week. Too often, it is more profitable for those running the company to spend billions of dollars setting up their firm's production lines in Asia or Mexico, where the cost of labor is much lower and the cost of safeguarding the environment is nonexistent, since environmental legislation either does not exist or, if it does, a relatively cheap bribe in the right hands will take care of everything.
It is for all of these reasons that the economic system that Adolf Hitler and the National Socialists implemented in Germany during the 1930s was a semi-capitalist, semi-socialist system that was meant to ride the line between the extremes of laissez-faire capitalism and creativity-stifling communism.
But it wasn't just to balance capitalism and communism that Hitler and the National Socialists chose the particular system that jumpstarted the German economy and pulled that nation out of the Great Depression long before any of the other industrial nations of the West. There was a very important component that the National Socialists deliberately omitted from the German economy of the 1930s. That component was Jewish money-lending and Jewish high finance.
Hitler crushed the power of the Jewish financiers in Germany. He seized their assets that had been gathered at the expense of the working people. He destroyed their ability to move money around at will. The longtime Jewish practice of usury -- the lending of money on credit -- was greatly curtailed. The Jews -- who are well-known for their insatiable love of money -- probably hated Hitler more for all of this than for anything else he did, and they vowed to destroy him. Of course, by maneuvering President Franklin Roosevelt, they were able to bring the United States into the war and get their way.
The economy of the United States today, of course, is far from the laissez-faire capitalism described by British economist Adam Smith in his classic work, The Wealth of Nations. Over the years, countless pieces of legislation meant to restrain full-blown capitalism have been enacted and, to a greater or lesser extent, enforced. Industrial monopolies and child labor practices have been outlawed. Minimum wage laws now apply and businesses are supposed to abide by laws that protect their employees and the environment. Taxation of every conceivable kind has curtailed in many ways the freedom, not only of businesses, but also of the average consumer. But one idea has NOT gone by the wayside. In fact, that idea has grown disproportionately in the last few years. That is the Jewish idea of an economy based on credit.
The ills of a credit-based economy go back a long way. The practice of buying on credit was blamed for the original Stock Market crash, back in October of 1929. Basically, it boils down to the fact that buying on credit allowed people to SAY they had more money than they actually did. This system worked fine as long as nobody demanded to actually SEE the money another owed him. But as soon as one person in the chain of creditors demanded the payment of a debt, the demands spread down the line. The banks were just as guilty as anyone else: they didn't have the money on hand to pay everyone, on the off chance that everyone demanded their account balances in cash. It led to massive panic on Wall Street, and lots of people lost their shirts. All of this ushered in more than a decade of worldwide economic depression and human suffering.
The federal government passed some new laws in the wake of the Crash of '29. I'm not going to list them here, but they were meant to prevent similar events in the future. Some of that legislation was directed at requiring lenders -- banks, for instance -- to have on-hand a certain percentage of their deposits in order to head off any "runs" on the bank.
One simple thing to do was to educate the American public about NOT panicking if the market starts to drop, because the surest way to lose everything is to sell your shares when their value is, say, only half of what you paid for them. It is better, we were told, to hang on to the shares you had, sniffle a bit as the value dropped and, over time, the chances were good that the value will go back up.
To hang onto your shares: That is still pretty good advice today, as long as you don't depend on income from those shares to pay the bills. But if you do -- like millions of retired Americans do -- as much as it hurts, you'll sell those shares at half their value in order to keep food on the table. Or suppose you are greatly in debt, as millions of middle-aged and younger Americans are; you need money now, and selling low is the only way to get it. Of course, most Americans who are deeply in debt don't have much to speak of in terms of investments, and they depend on their day jobs to keep the wolf on the other side of the door.
But, in case you hadn't noticed, the economy is in the toilet. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, more than half-a-million jobs were lost in November, and unemployment rose to 6.7%. A quote from the Bureau of Labor Statistics Web site (www.bls.gov) states bluntly: "Job losses were large and widespread across the major industry sectors in November." It is tougher and tougher to keep a day job and, thus, it is tougher and tougher to keep the creditors at bay.
And why is it that Americans are so much in debt? As with everything, there are several contributing factors, one of which is the inability of most people to suppress their immediate wants and to make decisions based on what's best for the future. (And people wonder why I am so opposed to mass democracy, in which every Tom, Dick, and Harry is assumed to be responsible enough to be able to make decisions for the good of the race!)
Anyway, another contributing factor is that we have allowed our society to be infected with the Jewish idea of rampant buying on credit. To put your groceries, gas, and a $10 fast food meal on your credit card is one thing. Lots of responsible people do that kind of thing and avoid problems by paying off their credit cards every month. Those people don't need to pay for gas with their credit cards; if they had to pay cash, they could. But they use their credit cards because -- for one thing, it doesn't make any difference to them -- and two, it earns them free miles on their airline program or it counts towards a trip they want to take to Disney World two years from now.
But when people buy things on credit simply because they don't have the cash now, that's when things get dicey. They spread a large payment out over a longer period of time, a choice that is particularly attractive with the famed advertising ploy of 0% financing, or "Six months same as cash!". The resulting smaller payments fit into the budget…as long as nothing puts the budget in a bind. One hiccup in the income stream -- as from a lost job or from having to accept a cut in pay -- and suddenly having bought the new sofa and the new computer and the new car and the new washing machine on credit becomes a massive problem.
Obviously, buying too much on credit is playing with fire. It feels nice and warm, and things might turn out just fine in the end. But if a wind comes up, the fire could get out of control and destroy not only the wood that it was meant to consume, but also much more. The current economic stagnation is due largely to the overextension of credit, most notably in the mortgage industry, but also from the simple debt racked up on ordinary credit cards by Americans who can't control their appetite for the junk of egoistic Jewish materialism. That's an attitude that Karl Marx would have been delighted to witness in the White masses, whom he was forever baiting with promises of immediate wealth and prosperity.
This economy based on credit is now teetering on the verge of collapse. Whether the current depression is its death rattle or whether the economy will quicken and will die sometime later following a future downturn, no one knows. But the System that runs on this economy cannot last because it is an economy based not on REAL wealth, but on PERCEIVED wealth. It is an economy that encourages spree spending and an ignorance of future consequences.
Our race doesn't need more lessons in choosing an easy, feel-good present at the expense of a stable and secure future. Once this monster of a system collapses, we need to be ready to put in place an economic system that will sustain our people so that we can work on the more important issues of White culture and the White genetic stock.
Be one of the growing number of Whites who are taking seriously their responsibilities for the future of their people. Contact the National Alliance to find out how you can help.
I'm Erich Gliebe, and thanks for being with me again today.
