The Civic Platform - A Political Journal of Ideas and Analysis

3 Responses to “Capitalism = Economic War on the White Middle Class”

1. 1 Fred Scrooby
   January 5, 2008 at 7:05 am

   Capitalism = Economic War on the White Middle Class

   And race war too, completely apart from the economic war being waged. Capitalism = the mailed-fisted brutally forced reduction of an unwilling white middle class financially to the condition of abject pauperism and racially to a state of irreversible negritude. The negritude part is necessary in order to preclude rebellion: whites whom you long subject to imposed beggar status, keeping them groveling at your feet for the crumbs that accidentally fall from your table, will eventually rise up in revolt unless while you’ve got them ground down you take advantage of the situation to change them from whites into Negroes: the threat of rebellion by people who’ve been changed into Negroes is virtually naught: it’s infinitessimal. Once they’re all Negroes you can sleep soundly at night — which you can’t as long as they’re white so better hurry up and get to work on their genetics, get ‘em changed. The entire Bush and Rockefeller families, Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, Ross Perot, Ted Turner, the Kennedys, the British royal family (Queen Elizabeth, Prince Phillip, and Prince Charles), and the Pope and Vatican Curia are typical examples of the Euro element endorsing the above overall set-up and working hard to hone it to perfection, and of course all Jews everywhere represent the Jewish element (I think there are about six Jews worldwide who don’t endorse the above, making the proportion of Jews who don’t six divided by twenty million, or 0.00003%, leaving 99.99997% who endorse it with a passion — so actually that means the Jews who howl indignantly when it’s claimed “all” Jews support the above are right: only 99.99997% of them do …)

2. 2 Fred Scrooby
   January 5, 2008 at 7:16 am

   If you tend to forget the figure for the percentage of Jews who question the above set-up, there’s a simple trick for remembering it: it’s the same as the percentage of non-Jewish neocons — you know, the gentiles the Jewish neocons use as cover: Jeane Kirkpatrick, Bill Bennett, and that guy whose name I always get mixed up with Robert Novak, I can’t think of his first name — is it Michael? Something like that. So I guess the Jews who howl indignantly when it’s said the neocons are a Jewish movement are right — 0.00003% of them aren’t Jews.)

3. 3 Fred Scrooby
   January 5, 2008 at 5:14 pm

   In summary: the post-1965 immigrant influx has brought essentially no net aggregate benefit to native-born Americans. In fact, if the effects of government transfer payments are factored in, there is a small but significant net loss — Americans are paying to transform themselves. On the other hand, immigration causes a very substantial redistribution of income within the native-born community. For example, Borjas has estimated that about two percent of Gross Domestic Product is transferred from labor to the owners of capital because of the impact of immigrants on wage rates. (Similarly, immigration causes further redistribution within the native-born community because of its impact on transfer payments, which are ultimately funded by taxes.)
   -
   The stark fact is that current immigration policy lends itself to explanation in the crudest Marxist terms. Quite simply, it is a savage attack by the American rich on the American poor (and middle class), by American capitalists on the living standards of the American working class. [All emphasis added.]

   ( http://www.vdare.com/pb/071218_business.htm )