Many who are concerned about our future feel that the political system is beyond repair and that thus any political activism is a waste of time.
Perhaps, but the primary purpose of what we call “retail political activism” is not necessarily to transform local or state governments – although that would be nice – but rather to condition our own people to assert their interests, both individual and group interests.
We need our White race to be conditioned to exhibit behaviors conducive to survival rather than to passivity and defeat.
That is what matters. We must turn as many of our people as possible into pushy activists, and it must be done through direct social contact so that there is social support. We must help them break through the unspoken barriers imposed by the secular religion of human equality, and confront its blatant inconsistencies.
For example, why are we subjected, on one hand, to a massive media and governmental campaign of hate against brown skinned Muslims half way around the world, but at the same time to a campaign of love and tolerance toward those very same people we are required to allow into our own country?
The multicultural creed that we are forced to follow in the Western World would have us believe that the threat from these people arises not from anything we are doing to them, but rather from the soil on which they stand – a proposition so nonsensical that everyone can see it.
So as a result of the hate campaign, we must spend a trillion dollars to kill these people on the other side of the planet, while here at home people of European heritage must undergo full body scans in order to respect the delicate sensibilities of Muslim immigrants who might take offense if they alone were profiled and subjected to scans based on the perfectly rational correlation between the desire for revenge and Muslim religion or national origin.
We could have bought an awful lot of oil from them for a trillion dollars. And we could have built a lot of high speed rail and nuclear power plants to reduce our dependence on their oil with that money while creating millions of new jobs in the U.S.
Unlike borrowing to finance productive infrastructure, fighting wars half way around the world hurts us by piling up unproductive debt for military expenditure. Allowing those Muslims to immigrate to America hurts us by displacing American workers, while increasing the welfare support costs for those Americans who are displaced.
The entire mix of policies is insane and very damaging to the future of our children and grandchildren.
Current government policy creates mortal threats to our safety – both financial and physical – that cannot benefit us.
In order to move our race realism into the mainstream, we are going to have to demonstrate to our people that we are fit to govern.
That means we must come up with policies that our people will clearly see benefit them, as those policy suggestions demonstrate to them our competence and our fitness for leadership. Championship of these policies is the only thing that will induce our fellow Whites to change their behavior and become outgoing social and political activists.
Take for example the Republican mantra of lower taxes. In its simplest form, this very popular and universalist position stirs up the hope in most Whites that by restricting government revenue, the burden of welfare and government imposed on Whites employed in the private sector will be limited more or less automatically.
But the devil is in the details of our tax laws. The ultimate question for tax policy is: Cut taxes for whom, exactly? And which groups will have their financial and political power enhanced and which weakened by the particulars of a tax cut or tax increase?
I would suggest to you that the insane and highly destructive policies described above would never have happened if the tax laws had been different.
There can be no question that economic resources control political outcomes in the United States. Thus, the key to reforming the politics of the system is not changing people’s ideologies, so much as moving wealth and savings into the hands of those people who want different outcomes than those we witness, and then providing them with the channels that will effectively deploy those financial resources into the political arena.
In other words, irrespective of income, a person who lives from paycheck to paycheck with no savings will be an impotent political actor, just as will every high income earner who is captured by the siren song of consumerism and spends every nickel that he or she earns.
Political change inevitably follows a change in comparative group economic resources.
And once a political revolution occurs, of course, you would expect the victors to use the tax laws to protect and enhance their financial and political advantages.
Historically, during the gold standard (when money held its value) and absent income and estate taxes, the processes of getting and keeping political power were quite different from those at work today. Vast fortunes could be amassed and passed down from generation to generation, provided that heirs with less financial acumen had the discipline to live on the interest and not to invade corpus. The occasional talented heir might then increase the fortune.
In his 1972 classic “Genetics and Education” Arthur Jensen points out that the offspring of very intelligent parents tend to deviate back toward their population mean. So assuming that one population has a mean IQ of 100 and another a mean IQ of 115, one would expect that the group who’s offspring deviate back toward 100 would have a more difficult time maintaining family fortunes created by a bright parent than children of wealthy parents who deviate back toward a population mean of 115.
The potential for downward mobility is a consistent theme in all of Jane Austin’s novels, and the sexual selection process as it existed in 1815, with its extreme mix of IQ and talent within families and the imprecise and laborious (from a romantic standpoint) means of measuring intelligence and self discipline form the plot lines of her novels. Perhaps the most brilliant treatment of this “downward mobility fear” is seen in the movie “Metropolitan” about the debutante scene in New York in the late 1960′s or early 1970′s written, produced and directed by Whit Stillman.
Below is a chart of the cross sectional samples or four racial groups from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 displaying the probability of downward mobility by racial group in graphic detail.
The above chart has immense explanatory value, for you can see that anger over downward mobility, and the demand for preferences that protect against that downward mobility, will be strongest among the African and Latin American Indian populations of the U.S. The powerful mating preference for light skin within those groups serves as a marker of enhanced probability of their offspring being able to hold on to the parents’ occupational and financial positions.
The income tax and estate taxes began in 1913, after the great fortunes of DuPont, Rockefeller, Ford, Carnegie, and so many others had been amassed.
Below are graphs of the top marginal income tax rates by year since 1913:
Next we have the estate tax rates by year since 1916:
As you can see, the huge non-wartime increases in income and estate taxes began under the Presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt. His Secretary of the Treasury, responsible for structuring the tax legislation, was Henry Morgenthau. Harold Glasser was director of the division of monetary research. Other Treasury officials included Irving Kaplan and Solomon Adler.
Of course, this same crew at Treasury was instrumental in the Gold confiscation/dollar devaluation scheme in 1933, and for preventing individuals from preserving wealth by owning gold.
FDR was notorious for obtaining copies of the tax returns of his wealthy Republican political rivals and gloating over the immense sums he was extracting from them. During those Roosevelt years the tax system was enforced by collectors of internal revenue who were given patronage appointments to those positions by FDR. Thus, the enforcement of the tax laws was highly political in those days, and this did not change until 1952, just before Eisenhower was elected.
Thus, from 1936 through 1976 — 40 years, we had the confiscation of fortunes built up prior to 1929, and the confiscation of incomes that could build comparable new fortunes.
However, not all employees and shareholders were similarly situated as respects tax enforcement. Employees of large corporations had their incomes reported to the tax authorities and to the Social Security Administration just as they do now. Dividends paid by those large corporations on stocks and interest on bonds were also reported.
However, those alien owners of retail clothing stores, restaurants, auto dealerships, liquor stores, pawn shops, and other retail outlets had significant opportunities for skimming the cash receipts and avoiding tax at both the corporate and individual level.
Roosevelt’s financial attack on the old Wasp money was rather unique historically. In the past, nobles rather than commoners always paid taxes to the king. But in exchange, the nobles wrote the laws and their councilors fashioned the King’s edicts in such a way as to secure their position and enable them to collect the ground rents from commoners that ultimately financed the King’s taxes.
This sudden separation of political power from money power under Roosevelt was unique, and in large measure a function of downward mobility within the old Wasp elite. Once the alien obtained a toe hold in the Ivy League and began teaching Marxist doctrines, it was probably quite easy for the Ivy League to admit the mediocre scions of wealthy families, make them acutely aware of their mediocrity, and thus instill in them guilt over their “unearned privileges.” This guilt would drain them of the will to assert their interests, as wealth had asserted those interests from time immemorial.
There was a brief window of three years during the Hoover administration during which top marginal rates remained low, and the old Wasp elite could easily have established charities that could have handed out relief to their ethnic kinsmen with political strings attached, and especially farmers in the sparsely inhabited Midwest and West, resulting in control of the U.S. Senate. But it was not to be.
The old Wasp elite was unable, perhaps because of their contempt for labor, to rally a super-majority voting block within their own ethnic group, just as most of today’s Whites fail to understand how important it is to rally a super-majority voting block within their own race.
In any event, a very cohesive tribe made them pay dearly for their de-tribalized class consciousness.
After thirty years, the shift in financial and political power had reached a climax as the cultural revolution hit with full force in the mid 1960′s and Lyndon Johnson, backed by tribal money, would enact non-White race preferences with the Civil Rights acts of 1964 and 1965, bust up White urban neighborhoods, and trigger white flight to suburbs with the Open Housing Act of 1965, and open the flood gates for a rising tide of color into our country as a result of the Immigration Act of 1965.
By the mid 1960′s, Jewish power was becoming readily apparent, and a decade later, the income and estate tax rates began to fall. In the meantime, the legislation embedded in decisions of our Supreme Court as well as the administration and Congress under Lyndon Johnson, had crippled the power of the majority to use neighborhoods or profit-making economic institutions to organize resistance to the cultural revolution.
In three more decades we reached the point where, according to most sources, Jews provide 80% of the money to the Democratic Party and 40% to 50% to the Republicans. Beginning with Bill Clinton, 80% of his cabinet officers and advisers were Jewish, slightly less for Bush, and up to 80% again for Obama.
According to most sources, more than 50% of the world’s billionaires are Jewish. The average White will watch a movie like “People I Know” and think it is a fantasy, but that is exactly the way our political system works. Jewish billionaires pick our U.S. Senators. They control our politics not only with soft dollar contributions to the parties, but with bundled contributions to candidates as well as independent expenditure campaigns on behalf of candidates. Even more potent is their threat of independent expenditure campaigns against incumbents who “misbehave”.
Below is a chart of the 90th through 97th percentile by IQ of four racial groups from the 1979 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY).
Think carefully about the above chart. These people are all in the same age group, so it is corrected for age. They are all in the same high IQ range, so it is corrected for IQ. Each group should have the same educational and economic opportunities, but it is obvious that they do not.
There is no explanation for this distribution of wealth other than racial discrimination of the wealthiest in favor of their fellow tribesmen. Even at the relatively early ages of 36 through 44 (generally before they inherit from parents), the huge disparity in wealth would give one group enormous political clout relative to the others. It is a disparity that would only increase with increasing age.
What you see in the chart above is a fundamental threat to democracy.
Unfortunately, the influence of billionaires is not limited to politics. They have enormous influence over the universities and policy think tanks as well. In practical effect, the current estate tax is voluntary, particularly for those who have a political agenda. Billionaires escape it by giving their money to a private foundation.
The Internal Revenue Service gives wide latitude to these organizations to advocate policy. Private foundations can also set up special think tanks and research centers affiliated with universities to pad the salaries of favored advocates of Tikun Olam (which, loosely translated, means remaking the goy into new socialist man.)
Setting up a private foundation is an excellent way to make sure that the kids don’t fritter away the fortune frolicking on the Riviera, shopping in Milan or gambling in Monaco. And while you cannot hire your own kids to run the private foundation, you can always hire your friend Bernie’s kids who you know are committed to the cause. And of course, Bernie’s foundation can hire your kids, if they are similarly committed. Connections at the Jewish Community Center and at the “Squid” really matter in the great game of power.
Ok, then! How do we democratize America through tax policy?
First, we need to bring back the 90% top marginal income tax rates – the same ones that applied to Old Wasp money in the 1930′s through the 1960′s. They should apply to all income in excess of $5,000,000 per annum, including any capital gains which cause total income to exceed that level. Of course, much lower rates would be applicable to income below that level. The key point here is that small businesses generate 70% of the new jobs in this country so the confiscatory rates should not apply to those small business owners and entrepreneurs. The objective here is to “flatten” the bell curve of political power such that far less is concentrated in the hands of just a few hundred people at the right tail of super wealth.
Next we should raise the estate tax maximum rate to 75% on amounts in excess of $100 million, and limit the charitable deduction for decedent’s estates to $1,000,000. Public foundations – those that receive broad public support – would not be harmed much by this million dollar cap. In effect, there would be no escape from the estate tax on estates in excess of $100 million.
Finally, in order to democratize wealth, all estates would be entitled to an exclusion for the first quarter million they gave to any natural person who is a U.S. Citizen with a job, without dual citizenship, and with a net worth below $500,000. Thus, a billion dollar estate could end up escaping the estate tax entirely by giving 4000 middle class individuals each a quarter million dollars.
You might want to ponder for a few minutes how most billionaires would react to this tax incentive and how they might go about selecting recipients.
All amounts would be indexed to CPI but without the hedonic adjustments and the other Boskin Commission adjustments that understate inflation.
We often hear Congressmen advocate tax credits for new jobs. But these tax credits for job creation are largely political theater because most corporations pay little or no tax. From a 2004 article in the Boston Globe we see that “The GAO report showed that 61 percent of US corporations paid no federal income taxes from 1996 through 2000, a period of rapid economic growth and rising corporate profits. * * * An estimated 94 percent of US corporations reported tax liabilities amounting to less than 5 percent of their total income in 2000.”
In order to create middle class jobs we need to create an alternative minimum tax for corporations with generous tax credits for each additional job paying over $15 per hour and a larger credit for each additional job paying above $60,000. Employers who increase profits by firing American workers or by outsourcing jobs to Asia get hit with the alternative minimum corporate tax.
The higher tax rates on the super wealthy and on corporations are needed to fund social security and Medicare and thus keep working families from having to support their parents in old age.
These tax changes will be wildly popular with middle class Whites and they are the kind of policy options we should be talking about rather than droning on about race differences.
We should also remind our fellow middle class Whites that the best middle class jobs would be created by government funding of infrastructure such as high speed rail up and down the East and West Coasts of the U.S. and by the construction of more nuclear power plants, both of which would reduce the need for imported energy.
Show them the infamous Robert Reich video where this spokesman for the Obama administration states that Congress must make sure that the new jobs do not go to White males. That is the real spirit that motivates the Democratic Party and is the reason why no productive infrastructure projects are built: White males might be needed to build them.
It is true that more Whites will be caught up in the highest tax rates than Jews. But the problem is that White billionaires – like Warren Buffet and Bill Gates – are pathetic and clueless, giving their money away to charities that pursue ridiculous liberal causes, typically frittering the money away trying to teach Africans birth control or some such scheme.
And even the right-wing super wealthy end up having their private foundations taken over by the aliens that dominate the ranks of profession non-profit managers. Just look at what has happened to the Ford Foundation, the MacArthur foundation and many others. Each has become a profound enemy of the ideals and the race of the original donor.
You may remember that Putin had to expel from Russia 3500 of these NGO’s funded largely with American money that were interfering in Russia’s national politics. These organizations ran the elections in Ukraine and sponsored and organized the revolution in Georgia which turned that country into an ally of Israel and enemy of Russia.
Ironically, there are laws that make the kind of interference that Russia experienced a felony, but as far as we can determine, nobody has ever been prosecuted under these laws except Don Black of Stormfront.
Middle class Americans would be much better off if billionaire tax money were used to reduce the deficit than having it frittered away on Tikun Olam and other world improving and revolution provoking schemes of the super rich.
De-funding the left begins with a rework of the tax laws to take away their funds.
Producing a White super-majority voting block begins with talking about policies that benefit the American middle class while crippling the enemies of the American middle class.
Discussing these themes with our fellow Whites and their local representatives – the benefits they would get from the policies we could adopt – will raise the aspirations of our people and lead them to expect more from their government.
That is the ultimate objective of retail political activism.