🚀 go-pugleaf

When you speak of  Jewishness as an explanation
of conduct, you undermine the  anti-Trotskyite,
anti-globalist, and anti-finance-capitalism cause

Humanity cannot possibly win against the oligarchs,
unless a decisive number of good men agree to cooperate
in the task. Hitler was an enemy of power in the hands of
the common man.  His strategy was to divide and conquer.
The German Jews before World War I  were well along in
assimilation.  They represented a very powerful contingent
of the common man (I refer, not to Rothschilds, but to
middle-class Jews, Jewish professionals, Jewish scientists,
Jewish merchants, Jewish burearcrats etc.  When the
infamous agitator took up his scapegoating of Jews (as
if every Jew was the Rothschild's private advisor, agent and
confidant, he broke the power of the middle classes
in two. In the same way, American politicians have gained
control by pitting one group against another, so they will be
to busy throwing brickbats that they will not notice the
well-dressed gentlemen from the banks with their hands
in our pockets.

Bear all that in mind as you read what the bankers did to
the German middle classes after World War One.
----------

The German inflation as you never understood it before.

>From Klaus P. Fischer's Nazi Germany (New York:  Continuum, 1995):

   �Germany�s economic position [in 1922] was deteriorating daily as a
result of runaway inflation.  ... [From 1914 to 1918, the] German government
did not try to finance the war by taxation but rather by floating internal
bonds.  In addition the government also [engaged in deregulation] that
removed restrictions on the circulation of notes not covered by gold
reserves; it further authorized the establishment of Loan Banks with the
right to extend credit on collateral that had not previously been approved
for Reichsbank loans under existing regulations [i.e., credit on high-risk
�junk bonds.� --DE]  These Loan Banks extended credits to a variety of
borrowers -- federal states, municipalities, and newly founded war
corporations.  Funds were simply provided by printing money.

   �...the government resorted more and more to the printing presses,
driving up the amount of currency in circulation and devaluing the mark.
 {Was this sufficient economic inducement to cause powerful men to drag
their feet in ending the carnage of stalemated trench warfare that was
swallowing the liberally cultivated manhood that would have made such a
difference in the course of the Twentieth Century had they lived?  --DE)
The war hid the problem of inflation, but the pressures of defeat coupled
with the economic burdens imposed on Germany by the Versailles Treaty,
brought the problem to the surface in dramatic terms. ...

   �...

   �On January 11, 1923, a French-Belgian force invaded the Ruhr [the heart
of German industry --DE], seized its industries and mines, and stirred up
separatist feelings aimed at further weakening the Reich.  ...  all economic
activity came to a standstill  in the Ruhr.  The German economy now became
unglued because the government...resorted to  printing more and more paper
money  [using the excuse that they were attempting to subsidize  Ruhr
workers engaged in passive-resistance strikes --DE].
...The German government simply could not meet all of its obligations; it
was already chaffing under the weight of its obligations to the Allies, to
its war veterans, to the unemployed, to the aged.  [How strange the Fischer
does not mention Germany�s obligation to those holding its bonds.  It seems
to me that the takeover of the Ruhr and the inflation-induced destruction of
the purchasing power of all German middle-class savings and the necessarily
consequential transfer of wealth ownership to real asset owners  -- was a
liquidation of �Germany� for failure to meet its obligations -- the French
and Belgian forces were merely the �police� coming to seize assets.  I am
reminded of how Louis VI was unable to meet his obligations to merchant
bankers (for Mary Antoinette� diamond necklace etc.) declared his
repudiation of the debt  shortly before the agitation of the Estates General
(on a tennis court) set in motion the French Revolution -- itself merely
another �liquidation� of a nation that could not meet its obligations.  But
that is another story.  --DE)

(But understand this:  Hyper-inflation is never never caused by normal
market operation  -- it must must must  be the result of the monetary
authorities flooding the circular flow with more and more money, more and
more claims to shares of the economic pie.  --DE)

   �Germans were caught in a vortex from which there seemed no escape.  The
world was upside-down:  a simple penny postage stamp cost 5 million marks,
an egg 80 million, a pound of meat 3.2 billion, a pound of butter six
billion, a pound of potatoes 50 million, a glass of beer 150 million.
Prices changed from day to day, prompting people to rush to the stores armed
with satchels of worthless money to buy simple necessities.

   �To many Germans this period seemed like an economic apocalypse.  Konrad
Heiden has referred to it as Othe end of money,�  the end of roseate visions
of material affluence, and the end of all secular faiths in progress.  We
might add that it also seemed like the end of faith in government, its good
word, and its assurance that the savings of ordinary citizens would be
protected.  For nine years, Germans had sacrificed their lives and their
savings to the government.  In return, the government had squandered a third
of the national wealth in futile war [and I am sure this is a figure based
on the most static and conservative estimate--overlooking what those men in
the trenches might have done if they were instead working in laboratories,
designers benches, and each of the organizations that influence economic and
social betterment. --DE]  as a result of which war loans, savings, and
investments were now worthless.  [In short, the hyperinflation insured that
the middle-classes would be out of the line (out of the cue) for liquidation
proceeds.  --DE)   It was not at all uncommon for German savers to receive
polite letters from bank managers informing them that �the bank deeply
regrets that it can no longer administer your deposits of sixty-eight
thousand marks, since the costs are all out of proportion to the capital.
We are therefore taking the liberty of returning your capital.  Since we
have no bank-notes of small enough denominations at our disposal, we have
rounded out the sum to one million marks.  Enclosure:  one 1,000,000 mark
bill.�  To add insult to injury, the envelope was adorned by a canceled five
million mark postage stamp.

   �While the majority of middle-class Germans were ruined by the collapse
of 1923, never fully regaining their trust in the government, a few clever
financial manipulators grew fabulously wealthy by securing massive bank
credits, promptly investing in Ophysical values� (real estate, businesses),
and repaying the debts with devalued money.  [Fischer gives the example of
one man who bought up at random large numbers of businesses, including
banks, hotels, newspapers, paper mills, and so on.

   �...while a few got rich, the country as a whole steadily deteriorated.
Unemployment increased, farmers hoarded their produce, manufacturing
dropped, and millions of thrifty savers lost all their savings.�  [Yet
notice that in terms of nominal GDP the German economy grew millions fold;
that the economic indicator that the globalists prefer does not really show
economic suffering or economic distribution in a country.  Germany
in the early 1920�s is thus reducto ad absurdum demonstration of the
absurdity of globalist pronouncements of �the booming O90�s,� of �Clinton
prosperity,� etc.   And remember who bought up all the newspapers after the
inflationary 1970�s and the �junk bond leveraging of the 1980�s --Mortimer
Zuckerman, for example, was a master of junk-financed real estate deals who
later bought populist U.S. News and World Report and converted it into a
pale imitator of Time and Newsweek -- and aspect of the �S & L Crisis� not
emphasized in todays Money and Banking text books.  --DE)

I HAVE NOT POSTED THIS TO FEED ANTI-JEWISH REACTION.   I BEG EVERY READER TO
CAREFULLY CONSIDER WHY IT IS UNJUST AND COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE TO BLAME �THE
JEWS� FOR THE THINGS  DEVIANT INVESTMENT BANKING HOUSES DO.  (I hope that
readers are intelligent enough and fair-minded enough to follow the critical
discriminations I cut below, because if you are not I risk doing great harm
to the very relations I am seeking to bring to peaceful order.)

>From James Pool�s  Who Financed Hitler; The Secret Funding of Hitler�s Rise
to Power, 1919-1933 (New York:  Pocket Books, 1997).

  �In 1915 Henry Ford chartered a ship at his own expense and sailed to
Europe with a group of supporters in an effort to end World War I by
negotiating a compromise peace.  On board the ship, Ford told the well-know
pacifist Madame Rozika Schwimmer:  OI know who started this war -- the
German Jewish bankers.�  Ford later said to [a] correspondent of The New
York Times:

   �It was the Jews themselves who convinced me
     of the direct relationship between the inter-
     national Jew and war. In fact they went out of
     their way to convince me.  On the peace ship
     were two very prominent Jews.  We had not
      been at sea 200 miles before they began
      telling me of the power of the Jewish race,
      how they controlled the world through their
      control of gold, and that the Jew and no one
      but the Jew could end the war.  I was
      reluctant to believe it, but they went into
      detail to convince me of the means by which
      the Jews controlled the war, how they had
      the money, how they had cornered all the
      basic materials needed to fight the war and
      all that, and they talked so long and so well
      that they convinced me.

   �...

   �...Ford�s first editor of the Dearborn Independent, Edwin Pipp, said
that Ford Owas bringing up the Jews frequently, almost continually in
conversation, blaming them for almost everything. ...  At first he talked
only about Othe big fellows� and said he had nothing against Jews in
ordinary walks of life.  Later he stated: O  OThey are all pretty much
alike� . . . .�  ...

   �A year after Ford had purchased the Independent, he was questioned about
his experiences on the peace ship by one of his company�s executives.

   � OWhat did you get out of that trip, Mr. Ford?  What did you learn?� the
man asked.

   � OI know who makes wars,� Ford responded.  OThe international Jewish
bankers arrange them so they can make money out of it.  I know its true
because a Jew on the peace ship told me.�

   �Ford said that this Jew had told him that it was impossible to get peace
his way.  However good his intentions, no argosy such as the peace ship
could accomplish anything unless he saw the right people, and the Oright
people� were certain Jews in France and England.

   � OThat man know what he was talking about --[and]   gave me the whole
story,� Ford said.�  (Pp. 66-68)

   �...Thomas Edison   [inventor of the light bulb, phonograph, ticker tape,
etc. --DE]   may have been at least partially responsible for Ford�s
anti-Semitism.  Edison was one of the few men Ford looked up to.  The
relationship was one of pupil and mentor.  In October of 1914   [World War I
began in August of 1914 --DE]   Edison told a reporter that the rise of
German commercial power was the cause of the war...  The Jews, he said, were
largely responsible for German business success and Othe militarists which
govern the country [Germany] do their bidding.� ...�  (P. 70n)

So let�s think about statements like these.

Compare this statement (which for convenience stands in for any of those of
Ford or Edison, above):

�The Jews controlled the leaders of the German military caste,�   with this
one:

�Six or seven men, each a financier, each Jewish, together controlled
leaders of the German military caste.�

But note that if the second statement is true, then, by set logic, the first
statement would also be true in the strict sense that if a property (control
of the military caste) is exclusively found in a subset (the seven or eight
Jews who are a subset of all Jews), then it also must be true that the
property is also exclusive to the superset (all Jews) of which the
former is a subset.   Just as it is true that if one man landed on the moon
in 1969, then mammals reached the moon in 1969, so we are right in saying
that carbon-based bi-peds were pulling the strings of German militarists.

 ( Note: Those of you who have been following this thread know that the
German military groomed and planted the military spy, infiltrator and
anti-populist secret weapon, non commissioned-officer, Adolph Hitler in 1919
 - a position he continued to hold after gaining the leadership of the Nazi
party.  The implication is that 6 or 7 financiers, not �the Jews� have a lot
to answer for.)

So the second  formulation (�six or seven individuals did such and such�)
is better than the first (�the Jews did such and such�) , not because it is
any more true, but because it is more just, more fair, more specific.

But for many it is less satisfying.  Why?

Let me clue you in.  Because when people learn about outrageous crimes
against the general welfare in the name of self-aggrandizement of a tiny
subset of humanity they become extremely angry.  In this case, the raw deal
that middle-class Germans god in World War I and its inflationary aftermath,
provoked great outrage, but who among the victims knew the names of the 6 or
7 financier ultimate perpetrators?  So totally ignorant of the specific
�identity subset� of those and only those financiers that were culpable --
not knowing their identity, their organizations, their channels, their
accomplices  people could react only one way:  They resort to the blind
activism, the activist impulse that always stupidly eschews the wisdom of
the saying �look before you leap� and they travel up the nesting of  sets
within sets until a satisfying target that is within reach of their wrath is
found.

My own preference is to leave both groups (sets) and individuals (the
smallest subsets, of only one element) out of politics (leaving the bad
individuals to apolitical law-enforcement).  In political discourse, we who
seek a better society should only deal in terms of actions, policies, world
views, ideologies, reforms, laws, economics, motives, incentives, opinions
and attitudes about this and that,  but not about personalities and not
about group identities.  In other words we should approach politics
behavioristically, under the Skinnerian assumption that the autonomous inner
being or racial identity contributes nothing to a better understanding of
man and politics.  This is an especially sensible position, I think,
insofar as there has never been shown anything in the behavioral repertoires
found in the Jewish �gene pool� that does not also occur in the non-Jewish
�gene pool� -- and in fact, these gene pools, which ostensibly underlie
racial identity, have never been satisfactorily isolated or defined (and
many doubt that they ever can be.)

  The issue is not racial genetics (the �eternal Jew� so-called in German
translations of Ford�s anti-Jewish output of the 1920's) but rather
behavioral practices, sociological practices, economic laws and government
policies.

A network of individuals and organizations representing narrow interests is
running the world from their position of ill-gotten money power.  It will
take the entire balance of the human race  -- the intelligence and fairness
scattered through all the rest of us, to wrest power away from them.  And
the tool for that is education and reform, not sending the innocent to gas
chambers, not blowing up the innocent with car bombs, not shelling the
innocent, not hacking the innocent to pieces with knives etc. etc. etc.  --
because that kind of madness never stops.

Northern Ireland, Rawanda, Bosnia, Palestine, Kurdestan, etc. etc. etc.
The hateful and sadistic Nazi and the grasping and conniving merchant banker
 -- we all share those characteristics in our basic human flesh.

Expose the evil, but let the innocent go free.

(This is not well written, so I hope those of you who really
can write and who agree with me, will make this important
lesson easier for everyone to understand.)

A Note to those of you who are Jewish:  Having this kind of thing
written regarding subsets of the set you belong to by someone
who does not belong to your set  -- I imagine, might make you
very wary (it would me).  I merely ask you to consider that this
might be the begining of a benevolent  mutation within what you
have known as "the right", within populism --a refining away
of racist thinking and a turn towards universal justice that is
not incompatable with our own liberal and progressive ideals
(if you are a liberal or a progressive).  Anyhow, that is how
I how I hope this post will function.

Dick Eastman
223 S. 64th Ave.
Yakima, Washington
Every man is responsible to every other man.