306 thoughts on “How America’s New Nobility Has Forgotten Its Obligation To The Country”

1. Bring back the monarchy

2. Great piece. One small error. The Japanese attacked Alaska and occupied the islands of Attu and Kiska (Alaska) for a while, and I believe the Germans shelled our coasts for a little bit (or was that also the Japs?).

   1. never heard about the germans shelling our coasts. i think there was a bombing on the west coast that is thought to have been carried out be the japanese. that might be what you’re thinking of.

      1. Ah, right, I was thinking of the saboteurs sent by the Germans, who basically engaged in Mega Fail upon landing on the shores.
         I couldn’t remember whether the west coast shelling was an actual historical event, or me remembering the movie 1941 as a historical fact, heh.

         1. There were some anti-aircraft guns and ammunition fired in the Los Angeles area in the early 40’s because of the thought Japan was going to attack the West coast. I watched some UFO documentary saying there were some lights in the sky or some stuff like that.
            Every year there is a gathering to commemorate the event.

         2. I think the Japanese also sent over some huge hot air balloons that terrified a lot of people but never did any real damage .. haha.

         3. Thank God we had Dan Akroyd and John Belushi protecting our shores then, is all I can say.

         4. There was a west coast shelling. A submarine surfaced and lobbed a few shells near an oil refinery but didn’t hit anything important. As I recall, the shells landed in an empty field.
            Other than that, there were no west coast attacks.
            The Japanese did find out about the upper atmosphere currents and used them to send over some high altitude balloons with incindiary explosives, which were on a timer to descend. Most missed everything. The only account I recall of those doing any damage was that someone found one that was caught in a tree. The person didn’t know what it was (according to what I read, when the USA knew these were being sent, they kept it out of the newspapers to avoid starting a panic) and when they went it move it, it exploded. The plan had been to set large area of forests on fire but the plan failed because many of the balloons drifted to far to do anything.

3. I’m in agreement with GOJ. In truth, we may always have a reason to hate the elite, but there is much to be said of the morally bankrupt and divisive nature of the current elite who exploit our nature’s beautifully, at a time when we are our most desperate. Succinct article, fun read, and plenty of good points.

   1. They are fucking criminals. If any war is declared, it should be declared against them. Their assets seized and estates confiscated for the common good.

      1. I agree.. but who is to decide what the common good is, and who should be axed.. That’s the problem, it’s all built into the system. It’s a feature, not a bug.

4. The sad fact is that the elite class will do everything in their power to hold back anyone from a lower class, to be able to climb the ladder into improving their situation. It is a sad state of affairs and reflects the breakdown in social mobility. Indeed, the elite may have had characteristics that were once considered to be noble and worthy of being followed. But that no longer exists anymore.
   For example, in cities major cities, the middle class has been cleansed, with more opportunities being preserved for the wealthy elite. From real estate being bought and sold at prices that are insane, to jobs only being designated for graduates from Harvard, Stanford etc to even the entertainment and publishing industry, preserving its business opportunites for only a small elite segment of our society. The reality is, meritocracy no longer has any real sustantial value alone, in our world when it comes to making progress. All the irrelevant nonsense such as school name, family background etc, will ultimately be the deciding factor in determining whether to progress someone forward with an opportunity. Yes there are exceptions to this, but that is merely it- an exception.
   Remember, everyone from the politicians, the industrialists, the oligarchs etc are all in it together. They have unfortunately created a system in which it is getting more and more difficult to get through each day, where the average joe needs to stay ahead two steps of the game, if he is to survive in this horror show that we call Western society. And don’t give me that “well at least you’re not living in Africa where there is no clean water” bullshit. The reality is the West is now starting to resemble a third world country, where so many of our industries have been offshored and outsourced, a debt bubble that is on the brink of exploding where college graduates are essentially trapped into indentered servitude and a labor market that has tanked and decimated. Yet the wealth and prosperity are indeed, enjoyed by the parasite class such as Wall Street and the politicians.
   George Carlin brilliantly explained this in one of his segments and how the American Dream is not real. Yet, the masses will choose to switch their brains off, continue to spend whatever finite time they have left, watching the Kardashians or other braindead television, while worshipping the lowest of the lowest in human history, all of which contributes towards the cultural decline. Indeed, the West is a freakshow, that resembles the end of an empire. But what we can do, is learn from what we are seeing, and to learn from history and about how corrupt human nature can truly be. While at the same time, do the our very best to fulfill a good life while leaving something positive behind for our loved ones to follow.

   1. While it is more difficult to achieve great wealth, it is not impossible. You don’t want to get into that mindset where you feel you are the victim and there is nothing you can do to improve yourself to make great strides. Even if you don’t reach elite status, you would be better off than if you did nothing but whine and complain about how you are oppressed.

      1. Exactly. Most people who make that observation tend to stay in victim mode rather than figuring out how to improve their station in life. The vast majority of leftists are like that. It isn’t a healthy mindset. One can be realistic about the state of things and adjust their goals accordingly. No need for defeatism.

         1. Defeatism was the word I was thinking of.

         2. When Soviet Russia fought at Stalingrad. Defeatists were executed on the spot.

      2. Achieving great wealth doesn’t make you part of the elite. Carlin had plenty of money, I’m sure, but even for him, “It’s a big club, and you ain’t in it!”

         1. Agreed, plenty of 1st gen millionaires in the USA alone and they aren’t part of the “elite”.
            Money alone isn’t enough to be part of that inner circle. You got to have the right connections and the right ambitions.

         2. “Achieving great wealth doesn’t make you part of the elite.”
            Exactly. Many people think that someone who earns a six figure income is part of the ‘elite’, but it is not.
            Only when one becomes a billionaire does one have entry into such a club.

      3. Indeed. I say do not become a victim but don’t shut out the truth, either. I’ve talked with many people who consider the truth to be “negative” and they don’t want to discuss it. I told them that if they keep their head in the sand too long, when they do pop out to take a look then don’t be surprised when it looks like Haiti (a third world).
         Many of these people aren’t so much hopeless but they don’t want to hear the truth, either (the fact, stats). They are adults (but really children) and they just want the “bad stuff” to go away – without doing anything about it.

   2. “The reality is the West is now starting to resemble a third world country”
      america used to be 90% white, it’s now 60% white(a steady down-trend), no wonder then, that it is looking more and more third world because IT IS MORE AND MORE THIRD WORLD
      Yes, and it’s actually going to get worse and worse. If it’s bad enough to notice , than that is just the tip of the giant iceberg starting to show, like a faint smell that actually leads to a great big pile of shit that has been piling up stealthily

      1. Race has nothing to do with it stop using red hearings and point to the real problem:socialism

         1. Really? Race doesn’t matter? I wouldn’t mind socialism if everyone was my cousin.
            Really.
            It really pisses me off that I pay for my race replacement.
            I wonder why that is if race doesn’t matter.

         2. So socialism doesn’t mean anything to you anymore? THAT’S THE PROBLEMyou buffoon

         3. Maybe if the white birthrate were not so low, there would obviously be more white children, which would lead to more white adults, of course. Just because the other races are not as badly affected by feminism, and are therefore still capable of procreation, is no reason for you to go on a racist tirade. White America is in decline because white Americans have negative population growth. I thought pointing stuff like this out was the whole point of Return of Kings.

         4. “Race has nothing to do with it stop using red hearings and point to the real problem:socialism”
            LOL.

         5. The higher the income and education level of an American or European, the less children they have. (Below replacement level now.) The lower of both, the higher the number of children. And of course reproduction rates are exponential over time, so which ever trend (up or down) accelerates. We are going into the steep part of the curve now, even without considering immigration.
            The traditional majority will be outnumbered literally by 2025 or so. By then the minorities will have political majorities. And it will get really nasty, because I doubt the establishment is just going to tuck tail and walk away from their power base.
            Just last month, for the first time in US history, 50.1% of the children born were minority.

         6. White women rebelled against Patriarchy. This is the result.

         7. White population growth has been effected by no fault divorce etc etc but that is a good point.

         8. Well, the problem is… some races are more r-Type (some overwhelmingly), and thus more prone to socialism.

      2. ice-“berg”
         antisemite!

      3. Yet when historically black neighborhoods become gentrified and more white, it’s considered ethnic genocide fueled by RACISM and community leaders discuss to keep black residents around. It’s also kosher for a black hood to become a Hispanic or Asian hood like in the numerous areas of LA. To reminisce about how a place used to be predominately white is considered RACISM.

      4. “america used to be 90% white, it’s now 60% white(a steady down-trend), no wonder then, that it is looking more and more third world because IT IS MORE AND MORE THIRD WORLD”
         Good observation. It’s no coincidence that white cultures have a higher percentage of people who use garbage bins and wipe their asses.

      5. Case closed.

         1. “I crawled through razor wire, landmines, and machine gun nests to escape the Representative Democracy I lived in… Said no one ever.

   3. Very well said. Its perfectly clear that the well to do see a sinking ship in this country and they’re feathering their nests by bleeding this country dry only to have optional homes in remote places of this country and other hard to reach countries away from the ensuing turmoil that is coming.
      Never has this polarity of the classes so evident when I lived in the San Fernando valley just the other side of the Hollywood hills where the super rich live. every house is owned by a celebrity , athlete, entertainment big wig, musician, and international players like rich Chinese and families of OPEC connections. These people are the liberal limosine elite that ram multiculturalism and energy conservation down our throats yet live very well by hiring illegals to handle everything but wipe their asses for them. These illegals live down in the valley in 3rd world sanctuary cities like Van Nuys where they will stay poor by working for these liberal cheapskate billionaires staying rich off the backs of the poor. They love to pat themselves on the back by touting multiculturalism and look the other way when it comes to illegal immigration as long as it means paying a fraction of what it would cost to have your carpentry, landscaping, pool, child care, cooking, cleaning done by a regular skilled AMERICAN worker or god forbid do it by themselves. But no the wife needs her $50,00 Range Rover to go to her exclusive zumba class, He needs his Ferrari to keep up with the Joneses ALONG with their obligatory Prius to show that they’re down with the common man and want to do their part to minimize their carbon footprint.

   4. Carlin didn’t hold shit back. Man is a saint in my book.

   5. “The reality is the West is now starting to resemble a third world country..”
      Come to Central Europe right now and you will witness what liberal hell looks like.
      Our politicians care more about refugees from Syria and Africa than about their own people.
      High apartment rents nobody can afford anymore:
      Who cares!
      Refugees complaining about sleeping in tents:
      We immediately find or even build rent free apartments for them. No joke.
      More and more jobless people:
      Fuck them! We rather provide every refugee a brand new bicycle and smartphone. Again, no joke.
      It´s really sickening and scary here.

      1. Any right wing protests yet?

         1. Still the large minority.
            The liberal force is just too strong in most Western Europeans.
            Monkey does what monkey sees on TV and facebook. So let´s be solidary all together and fuck the negative consequences for our own future.

   6. Elite back then had nobliesse oblige. Now the new elite that has gotten there via fraud and ill gotten gain is what we are ruled by.

      1. I am reading the Bush biography by Webster G. Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin. The first chapters illustrate very well how the present US ‘nobility’ established itself.

5. There’s definitely a new aristocracy in place. Not always new money though but they spend a great deal of time and thought and probably money to trying to come across as being ‘of the people’, representing trendy progressive causes, which somehow seem to make them more money rather than less. A lot of these billionaires are committing to giving much of their wealth away, yet for people who live and breath the accumulation of wealth and power they seem strangely unthreatened by it all. Must be something to do with how power works in todays world. A lot of the time their massive wealth is given away to their own or similar ‘foundations’ – which this article makes reference to. Those foundations effectively launder their hard earned cash into respectable (i.e. frequently subversive) political and charitable causes, human rights, internationalist and developmental causes which sound great on the surface but all work to make the rich richer somehow, even as they give away that wealth in the form of largesse.
   Clinton foundations, Soros, Rockefellers, Gates, all of them should be examined very carefully for how they work. There is a lot of money, power and influence to be had from supporting or appearing to support worthy causes. So lets spotlight philanthrophy and find out just how beneficent these people really are (I’d actually prefer if they turn out to be less beneficent than more….if George Soros turns out to have a good heart that bleeds for the oppressed it will be really annoying)

   1. Soros enjoyed pulling gold teeth out of, and rooting through the remains of the corpses of his own people when ordered to do so by the Nazis. He not only doesn’t have a heart, he has no soul and is nothing but a font of evil.

      1. it does appear that way. The bottom line is he plays God and has admitted as much. Its not right that money can buy, subvert and re-make countries, people, markets, and all while making a tonne of cash. When progressive causes are being financed by elites who seem to get richer in the process (while the rest of the world gets poorer) its not wrong to ask what the connexion is between money and the causes being financed

         1. When you have more money than you know what to do with you start fucking with people’s lives.

      2. Soros was a kapo?

         1. If that’s what you call that kind of thing, then apparently so, though I’m not certain that he was actually in a concentration camp (as in, I don’t know one way or the other).

      3. Dude is stone cold sociopath. 60 Minutes did a feature on him years ago, asked him how he could assist the Germans, he shrugged and said “If I didnt do it, someone else would..”
         And he was a teen at the time. He is a scary guy…

   2. Those elites are masters of misdirection. Soros, for example, tells people that gold is a worthless investment yet he stockpiles it periodically.
      We ought to be suspicious of the charities elites invest in for the same reasons.

      1. Have you heard the tale of the Rothschild misdirection at the Battle of Waterloo. The messenger getting the results of the battle back to England by stage-post quicker than the British Government’s own postal system. It may or may not be true, but the story goes that the Rothschild agent arrived early to update Mr Rothschild of the result. The latter started selling his stock in full sight of the other dealers in the City of London, resulting in all of them following suit on the assumption that the news he’d received was of a defeat by the Napoleonic armies. The reality of course was that the British had won but only Rothschild knew at that time. So when the price was low enough he started buying up the stock.
         Of course, it might not be true. Its just a story. The principle though is correct. It is all about misdirection. That’s one reason I’m suspicious of the panicking being induced at the moment: the market is about to crash across the globe. That could be true, or it could equally be the case that its not true, or that nobody really knows and some who have invested in one direction or the other want others to think that it is or isn’t true. I enjoy Gerald Celente’s broadcasts, and to a lesser extent Money Week, except then when they’ve made a rock solid case that the world is about to collapse you see an advertisement for Gold, the most obvious commodity to buy in the event of the possibility of a collapse. Whatever the state of the international markets – and I have no doubt the situation isn’t good, there’s always someone out to manipulate public opinion and make a killing.

         1. Here is what I read about Celente online recently on yahoo:
            “He’s
            just selling snake oil. It’s just show biz. He’s an “operator” from “da
            Bronx” and his game is trends forecasting as opposed to 3 card Monte.
            The guy skims a bunch of newspapers for his daily sound bites and calls
            actual news makers assholes and jerks. Like the kid in high school that
            isn’t afraid to cuss in front of the principle and thinks it makes him a
            man. Cause he’s from “da Bronx and we’s calls dem as we’s see dem”.
            He’s an opportunist who has found an audience of social misfits,
            doomsday, and conspiracy nuts who through the internet have found their
            false profit and are willing to pay for his form of nonsense. He’d be
            the first one to call them imbeciles off camera.The accuracy he touts as
            having in terms of his predictions are based on such risky forecasts as
            “The Trends Journal predicts that the next pope will be catholic. So
            no, he is not to be taken seriously but you should keep a firm grip on
            your wallet when you are around him.”
            ^^That is a bit harsh, but there is more than a grain of truth to it.
            Like Alex Jones, he probably believes most of the things he says, but he knows how to play it for entertainment value and money.

         2. I was not aware of that Rothschild story. It wouldn’t surprise me. Having said that, I have mixed feelings about all this NWO conspiracy stuff, but I definitely don’t trust those uber wealthy families.

         3. I quite like him, but there’s no doubt that he’s making money off of his dire predictions. Its not all false, there’s is a lot wrong with the world economy, and when he says we’re being lied to, he’s probably not lying himself, but his game seems to be a combination of fortune telling and cold-reading . He knows his target audience and is selling them a product based on their paranoia (some of which I think isn’t without foundation perhaps?) and their desire to know what the insiders know, to be ahead of the rest of the pack. He actually did pretty well with predicting the volatility on Monday, so who knows maybe its not all showbiz, but at least some of it is. The fortune telling bit seems to involve as you say making observations and predictions that are so general and unexceptional that they can’t really catch him out. I do wonder about the gold connection though. If enough people panic things like Gold (or whatever is being pushed c.f. Moneyweek) will go up – so its not just about predicting but about shaping as well

         4. It could be true or false. Rothschilds might not like everything that’s said about them, but I’m sure they’re happy enough to be at the centre of the NWO mythos, a notoriety which makes them conspiracy’s most powerful family in the world. There’s no penetrating to the core, because it at that level its all misinformation, and at best strategic truths. The NWO though is real enough, but its more prosaic affair – governments and elites negotiating and shaping a new international order that at the very least could have serious implications for the sovereign states and the democratic freedoms of sovereign peoples. There is a great deal of err. cooperation at the international level and banks and corporations want it so there is even more. They are already talking about phasing out physical cash – the FT for example is saying that this would prevent the ‘run on the bank’ as with the great depression etc. Of course that will mean no more anonymous purchases. Now why would the powers that be want that?

6. http://memecrunch.com/meme/4E051/the-goyim-know/image.png?w=400&c=1

   1. We know the Jews’ Kryptonite: They become helpless on the Sabbath.

      1. It’s Friday – ask one to light your cigarette lol!

   2. Oy vey!!! This is turning into a hate site.

7. http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/390/282/409.gif

   1. I was wondering when someone would point out who the new nobility is. The membership list of the elite is long and it’s tentacles even longer. The important thing to know is that they hate us.

8. So . . . why exclude the Kochs?

   1. They’re nowhere near as powerful as the Progressive elitists, and they’re libertarians (or at least, seem to want people to believe so). It’s funny to me to watch the Left go into hyperventalation about the Kochs, while conveniently ignoring and being tone deaf to the real power brokers like Soros, Buffet, Gates and all the other super billionaires in their corner.

      1. I’ve always been frustrated by the left’s blind eye to their own corrupt leaders. They’re so quick to crucify their enemies, but shrug it off when one of their own do the same thing.

         1. I know it has become cliche, but they really are the ideology of the mentally ill. I’ve given up even worrying about the how and why of them, they are functionally insane in one form or another, almost always coming back to extreme narcissism, so basically at this point they aren’t worth my analysis. And frankly I don’t give a shit, I truly honestly despise them and if all of their heads exploded tomorrow I’d pop open a bottle of bubbly and celebrate.
            My only question about the left these days lay in how to take their insane hands from the wheel and tiller and render them powerless. Why they are delusional is no longer my concern.

         2. Agreed. I’m just very analytical and like to know how people tick. I use it to keep some nosey people from interfering too much in my life.
            But with these liberals, it’s mind boggling. They contradict themselves in every other sentence, lie out their ass, and are hypocritical on every issue, yet it seems like they wield supreme power in the media.
            I don’t get how people drink the Kool-Aid without realizing there’s anti-freeze mixed in.

         3. The left has an inferiority complex, as noted by
            Ted Kaczynski. You take their hands off the wheel and tiller by awakening the non-libs to the fact that the libs are insane, unreasonable, and won’t stop until all is destroyed.

      2. Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s tragic that American democracy is for sale, but it’s disingenuous to treat it as a Left-only problem

      3. I am starting to see the Koch’s as part of the problem as well. Not as bad as Soros, but their libertarian policies have a lot in common with the policies of the left. There are just a little more pro business.

9. Our current elite are cowards and snakes. The sooner we can get back to having respectable men of honor in power, the sooner we can start rebuilding our society from the trash heap that it currently amounts to.

   1. Most of the new wealth didn’t build shit but manipulates markets, builds off the backs on others. They don’t offer anything to society. They don’t produce anything and don’t share the wealth of the people that actually do the work.
      Parasites.

10. Another glorified American nobleman is Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg. Worth an estimated $38.6 billion, the Internet entrepreneur was listed among Time magazine’s 100 wealthiest and most influential people in the world.
    Zuckerberg has put his wealth and influence to use by spending an estimated $25 million for pro-amnesty candidates and causes via his pro-open borders lobbying group FWD.us.

    https://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lybx5hWlbp1qamvyco1_250.gif

    1. What better contrast of the old vs new aristocracy than putting the Emporer Karl and Flip Flop Zuckerburg photo side by side. There is literally nothing good to emulate about him. He encourages attention whoring, jealousy, narcissism, and commercialization (through ubiquitous advertisements at all times).
       I have said I don’t think Facebook will even exist in 5 to 10 years. They have saturated the market–everyone has a FB account that is going to get one. People are now dropping them for other services. I had one back when it was an actual “College Face Book” site, as it was designed to be. When they opened it up to everyone it went to shit.
       And yet somehow financial analysts are predicting it is going to DOUBLE ITS PROFITS next year. How, pray tell? Is it going to double its number of ads? It can’t double its users, it supposedly has 1.5 billion “active” users already and billions more semi-active or inactive. (Does coca cola even have that many?) I cant wait to see everyone left holding the bag who thinks this is a “real business” worth investing in.

       1. I am still absolutely confused on how it actually makes money, outside of selling stocks saying “No, really, we’re going to make money…eventually!”. Click through advertising never seemed like a big money maker to me on social media, simply because people aren’t there to shop, they’re there to be narcissistic attention whores. Clicking on that advert from Macy’s takes away from their craved “Me Time!”. Maybe I’m wrong though, wouldn’t surprise me if there is some super clever way that somebody is making money outside of selling what I think is rather fraud backed stocks.

          1. It’s the retailers spending their advertising money to Facebook in hope of people buying at their stores. It’s no different than buying a commercial slot on TV.

          2. Sure, I get click through advertising, I just don’t see how it would be effective on a site dedicated to “Me me me me me!”. For example, if I go to a website of interest to hunters and outdoorsmen I can see quite clearly how a company like Cabelas would want to place ads on the site, and how it would in fact be relevant and profitable. But on Facebook? I don’t get it.

          3. Whenever you click “Like” from something a friend posted, it records what you like and adjusts the ads catered to your liking so when you log on, it could send an ad like Cabelas.

          4. I absolutely don’t understand it either. I studied finance and all the knowledge and financial analysis skills I have are no longer useful in the joke that is the US stock market today.
             I had to look it up–well, facebook *doubled* its profits last year, which is why people are predicting it will do so again. The numbers astound me: $1.5 billion 2013, $2.9 billion 2014. I could make some comparisons about how some ad that likely no one is clicking on is valued at higher than entire industries full of engineers, cranking out real products using iron, steel, and ingenuity, but no one cares anymore. Facebook to the moon!
             A few years ago I read about how some car company paid them $1 million to be the image people saw in one day when they logged out of facebook.. my response was.. Who even CLICKS the log out button of facebook!? People stay logged on so they get a constant stream of notifications of bullshit.

          5. ??
             So if a friend posts “Hey, had a great day at the pool today!” I’d be sent advertising based on his own tastes (for example, he likes to eat monkey food, so I get my ads adjusted to sometimes show monkey food)? If not that, then….?

          6. You’d get sent ads about the brands of chlorine cleaner they use in pools if you clicked ‘like’.

          7. The algorithm is a bit deep, but if your friend mentions anything with key words like pool for example, it will trigger ads for pool supplies, bathing suits, or anything related. Even if your friend mentions a restaurant, resort, product, etc.
             Edit: What is beneficial for the retailers is that they can target their market audience. Get the most bang for their buck, so to speak rather than blindly casting their ads out there and hoping they catch some people that are interested in their products.

          8. Have you ever clicked on one of these? I despise most all advertising, but the old model of talking me into buying something I don’t think I need might occasionally succeed. I’m sure I’ve bought some snack food item after I saw an ad for it back when I had a tv. But this algorithm of trying to sell you shit you already have / hobbies you are into is dumb. If I have a pool, I likely know where to buy pool supplies and bathing suits. I just don’t see the *service* ever being valuable in any way. If I want to research good or affordable pool supplies, facebook is the last place I would go.
             Advertisers are paying them a lot of money, to be sure, but I have serious doubts they are getting anything for their dollars.

          9. I have a sneaky suspicion Facebook is going to be the next Enron.

          10. Ok, I see, so how is that profitable? I don’t click through on ads unless I’m actually interested, for example the hunting site. I’m there gathering information about hunting, so an advert about the latest Remington rifle would in fact be of interest to me. I’m actively indicating interest. When I say “Like” to my dork friend narcissisticly telling me about his adventures at Pool Land, I really could give two shits about pools or chlorine, rather I’m just being stupid and felt that he would feel good if I encouraged him (or whatever else people use to justify a “Like”).

          11. I think the only people who would really benefit from advertising on Facebook are bloggers/vloggers trying to get their name out there. Elliot Hulse comes to mind.

          12. Yeah, I have spent literally thousands of dollars on Amazon over the years, and in return it has provided me with countless real, tangible products, and yet it is unable to turn a profit yet. And somehow facebook, which I’ve never given a penny to, whose ads I have never even clicked on, somehow churns out billions a year? Something’s VERY fishy.

          13. That’s exactly what I’m saying, right there. It doesn’t make any economic sense.

          14. I only have a FB account to promote my blog. If it goes down tomorrow I will celebrate our world’s newfound freedom.

          15. Facebook sells ads to retailers. That’s how Facebook earns money. Retailers pay Facebook.

          16. For what return? I’m not saying there isn’t one, I really don’t understand what they get out of it or how they get something out of it. When I watch people use FB I never see them click through on an ad. So while I guess I can see how FB can make money if retailers are giving it to them, well, what’s in it for retailers? Is my random real life sampling simply outliers who are among the few who don’t click through on FB? Maybe so I guess?

          17. I love your hilarious comment.
              Man, i’m out of my depth regarding how Facebook monetizes its model. It does look similar to what Google tech seems to have with the algorithm(s) that maps preferences & logs all that the next time you surf while still being logged into Facebook.

          18. The genius of the Facebook model is that it influences people in thinking of it as a necessity.
              If you we’re an oil baron at the turn of the last century, it would be like controlling all the railroads & gas pipelines cutting across borders.
              In Facebook’s case, it’s like having a swarm of intangible electronic tentacles reaching out & pumping cocaine that triggers people’s natural potential for narcissism.

          19. They can target you based on posts, keyword searches, liking a brand. Say you like Dodge Charger, you walk or drive past a dealership, and the app is open on your phone, they can send you a message to stop in at the dealership for a test drive.

          20. They also have other sneaky ways of pulling you into opening up your FB app. I received a notification on my phone the other day that someone poked me, but when I opened it up to see, there was no such notification. My only thought is FB saw I hadn’t been on in a while and was luring me in.

          21. App on my phone? heh, no such thing homey.
              Do they really target you when you’re walking down the street? For fucking real? And people are not severely creeped out over this?

          22. I am, thats why I turned off locations service/GPS.
              Apparently, the sheep love it.
              Everything is going mobile, I think they get 70-80% of earnings from mobile platform.

          23. You sure you didnt have the app open? Ive never witnessed that.

          24. Perhaps, but that still doesn’t explain the “poke” I had supposedly received from a friend when they really hadn’t. It said you have a new notification, so-and-so has poked you, but when I went to my notifications to review it, there was no such notification.

          25. Let’s say for example you’re a vegetarian. You’re driving down the freeway and you see a large billboard sign for Lonestar Steakhouse. You wouldn’t give 2 shits about the restaurant, but the restaurant chain still paid the billboard sign owner money to try to target the people who eat steaks that happens to drive down that same road. The restaurant just cast that net out there and see who takes the bait.
              Facebook has it so that it can target the people who MAY be more interested in the retailers’ products. Facebook is like the billboard.
              This marketing method is no different than advertising kids cereal and food products on Saturday morning cartoons when we were growing up. You certainly didn’t see Budweiser commercials when watching Bugs Bunny cartoons then.

          26. Maybe they are in fact doing data collection of users for reasons as yet unknown. They have communications between members, interest groups, messenger wants a cell phone number.
              Google is pushing account consolidation as a way to “protect” you and wants you cell phone number to tie them together.
              I wouldn’t doubt Ashley Madison existing simply to be a honeypot to collect data on people who may use the site. People have found the majority of female accounts came from an internal non-routable IP and set up bots to bait new users. Not only that, the fee to completely remove data didn’t scrub shit. Another reason was the supposed credit charge would report Ashley Madison as a Merchant.

          27. Advertisers on Facebook get value through branding (mainly) and getting users to spend money off-site through getting leads and collecting email addys. No one opens their wallet while on facebook.

          28. They monetize the facebook users down the line once they’re off the site. Brand awareness for retailers, free website memberships, tempting you to give out your email address, all in hopes of getting you to spend cash down the line. it’s a slow-drip model that works to some degree, but you can’t scientifically measure “branding” effectiveness.

          29. Facebook’s value is in the sheer quantity of personal data that it has access to. In many cases fb would know more about a person and their habits than the individual is even consciously aware of.
              All that “me time” from such a large % of the global population adds up to fb being able to trend and profile on a global scale. I’m surprised nobody has considered it’s potential to influence global politics.. FB already would have a very good idea of a persons political persuasions, motivations and fears. It would literally cost them nothing to deliver content that pushes their own political agenda.

          30. I would say that retailers pay Facebook in the hope that narcissists, who we know have low impulse control, click the add and in turn buy a product to fulfill their narcissism. Isn’t all advertising based on psychanalisys of a subject and presenting adds that emotionally move said subjects desire to buy some product, regardless of its necessity? Ie. The ubiquitous ‘buy this product to lose weight,’ ‘this product will make you happey,’ etc. This works because people are stupid and the advisers know this, in the same way we know this.

          31. To answer your question: Facebook isn’t an advertisement hub but an information hub. It will double it’s revenue simply by it’s unconfirmed links to Google. Have you ever tried to Google your name? Ever wonder why, specifically your Facebook images come up when you are Google’d? Information is big business and finding out your tastes, the changes they make annually, the partners you have and the changes they influence, gives advertisers permanent ties to how to sell something to you.
              Every Candy Crush game over, gives several advertisers a peek into your life and those you hold dear. And that is but one head to this Hydra.

          32. I thought Amazon started making a profit sometime last decade?

          33. Tangible industries actually have high costs and require thousands of employees. Facebook has something like 150 people working for them so they save money.
              They make money from adds (every penny counts), they have deal and campaigns with huge brands, and they sell info.Facebook has many trackers, as well as Google.

          34. Amazon pays next to no tax in the UK. They channel the profits to tax heavens.

          35. I looked it up and they had a loss last year. I have not heard of them turning a profit yet. I think they are investing all their earnings into new technologies like the kindle and the Amazon tablets and such, playing the long game. But they are one of the longest running startups that has neither folded nor become profitable yet.

          36. Of course I agree that FB has low overhead and high profit margins. I just seriously doubt the product they are selling (online clickbait ads) is worth even a fraction of what companies are paying for it. Has anyone here ever clicked on a facebook ad? Anyone? And if so did you actually buy anything?
              Also, you do understand that there has to be a tie to a tangible product or service at some point… I mean facebook doesn’t have to make a facebook selfie stick, but for their ads to have any value they have to be for actual real products that people are buying. They can’t just keep selling advertisements and telling businesses but look how many users we have! You have to keep sending us money!
              Amazon has a referral program too, ROK should sign up for it, any purchase your users make they donate something like 1% of the sales to you, the price the buyers pay is unchanged. And yet this program has not made Amazon profitable. But supposedly it earns FB billions? And the majority of FB users are from the third world, they are not giving FB advertisers any money I can guarantee you.
              Another fake company is twitter. How in the world is reading a tweet supposed to generate money? It’s insane.

          37. In the US, most Amazon purchases are free from sales tax. Combined with free shipping, you usually save quite a bit purchasing from Amazon (10% automatic discount in my case)

          38. Selling data to security agencies maybe?

          39. Exactly. You can be pretty sure that they have political/emotional/marketing profiles of most of their users already.

          40. Bingo (and corporations)

          41. Agencies with off-the-books black op budgets who can fork over a billion a year to guys like Zuckerberg, who meet regularly with the White House and alphabet agencies? Now you’re on to something.
              https://www.yahoo.com/tech/s/cia-backed-company-may-scanning-facebook-chats-003033417.html?nf=1
              http://www.globalresearch.ca/facebook-the-cia-conspiracy/12685
              http://www.infowars.com/facebook-google-are-cia-fronts/

          42. Cheers for the links

          43. They’re selling your data (whatever that might be) to third parties.

          44. Amazon re invests everything back into the business. It’s not that they were not able to make money.. I use amazon cloud services a lot.. Btw, they built a space ship there. Many times, what they do, they lower the price for their services by passing their profit onto the customer. I know because I benefit from that. That’s pretty unheard of… I absolutely love amazon.

          45. ..it’s more of a tentacle that owns the future now. not just a social site..

          46. Now *that* sounds like the real way they’re making money.

          47. Facebook has all the personal data it wants to sell to the highest bidder

          48. Same goes for me. Facebook is great for advertising my writing. For anything else it’s bullshit.

       2. Facebook, literally owns virtual reality through oculus.
          Not too far from now, virtual environments will be as realistic as real environments, and facebook has already 1 billion users, all of these users will go mad for virtual reality,
          Facebook, Is just the platform for a coming tidal wave of $$$$$$$$ You won’t be able to resist Virtual reality, it’s going to be 100 times better than real reality.
          But by 2025 when the shares have doubled… it will be too late
          .. they have already trippled since the ipo

       3. This trend isn’t gonna stop

    2. Those fuckers support shit like that because they want cheap labor.

       1. I actually think it’s bigger than that. I strongly suspect that the elite want a world without us in it.

          1. According to JFK, it was the “enslavement of every man, woman, and child” (words spoken right before his death). According to the Georgia Guidestones, it’s all but 500 million of us. They do need their slaves, ya know

          2. Honestly I want the same thing. A world without them in it.

          3. Mars, bitches!
             (President Dave Chappelle joke)

11. There are no countries anymore, just economic zones.

    1. The need for nationalism is greater than ever

       1. That is sanctioned only during the World Cup 🙂

          1. Or for Americans, if the US Government decides to invade some obscure 3rd World country….

       2. Seeing nations with centuries of history slowly perish is really something sad. For example, recently in Spain with an attack by another islamist terrorist (surprise?), the catalan authorities once again give for the typical “we will not let terrorism harm the diversity” speech and continue to accept more illegal immigrants and “refugees”.

    2. A freind of mine consulted for the Federal Reserve and has written a lot of studies on the economy and corporations. He calls the U.S. the “Starter Wife” for the rich and corporations. Similar to guys who’s wives supported them through med school or untill they got rich, and then dumped them for young gold-diggers. The modern crop of rich people used American resources and technology to get rich, and then bought off politicians to change the laws so they could move their wealth and manufacturing overseas. And yeah, anymore a country or nation is just a facade to give greater leverage to the rich.

       1. Once the US middle class is gone who are the Chinese going to sell their junk too? Sort of like who were the bath house owners in San Fran’thithco supposed to make their money off of once their customers all keeled over from the aids that was spread in the sick activities they encouraged?

    3. No need to even elaborate here. Adios, Western Civilization, and not a second too soon!

       1. You left out Poland; which has the nastiest looking guy I have ever seen as a defense minister. His sneer alone could destroy a tank brigade. People who have been invaded, conquered, and raped in living memory tend not to go for this stupid brotherhood and equality crap.

          1. Well Norway and Italy’s Ministers could be men too, apparently.

          2. True…. it is a shame really I always held Italians (and Italian women in particular) in high regard for their style… What happened to the bunga bunga girls of Burlusconi?? We need them back ASAP!!!

          3. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3097b0579f0f0f32b482562a7c5804fc8e52a4de1413ce742044b78e6ec6b2e8.jpg

          4. Ironically enough, his face looks like Vladimir Lenin’s.

       2. That really sums up what’s happened to masculinity in the West, and illustrated its fate.

          1. I repeat, not a second too soon!

12. Not to nitpit, it’s a good article, but I don’t think “education” has much to do with todays elites. Sure, most of them went to some Ivy League school, but it’s not the education that makes them elite–they were part of the elite society at age 18 before going to college–they are mainly going to Harvard or Yale *because* those are collections of elites, the same way they go to the country club to dine with other elites–it doesn’t do anything to make them elite. I have a masters degree and I’m no more elite than the day I received my high school diploma. And then there are plenty of elites like Bill Gates who never finished college. Plus they are not studying philosophy or history or music, they are getting MBAs and studying “finance” which wasn’t even a real degree 25 years ago.
    But the gist of the article is spot on–I am not an elitist at heart, I truly want the ideals of the French Revolution – Liberté, égalité, fraternité.
    But just as I also want a nice girl I can be a kind and sweet and loving beta to, I realize this is not the world we live in. Until a better system comes along (and AI may provide this) monarchy has proved to be the best system of governing. And monarchy is simply honoring the “old elites” this article talks about, which were groups of hereditary classes. Now in the past education *WAS* a big part of the nobility–they were expected to be well-learned (that’s learn-ED with an ed), musically talented, some sport, even if it was a somewhat silly one like riflery or polo, and yes, they absolutely had a duty and an obligation to lead their society and look after the well being of everyone else, including the poor. And indeed Monarchy led civilization through its best days and greatest innovations, through the industrial revolution, and ending some time during the last century, during which it’s clear to me that society, technology, and science have stagnated.
    I am a fan of the BBC series Downton Abbey, where one can see the last vestiges of the old aristocracy in its waning days (WW1 had much to do with destroying the old aristocracy). The main character is The Man, and he is expected to use his reason, his wealth, and his soft power to make important decisions and be a leader in his community.
    One can argue that your birth parents are a poor way to determine what kind of person you will be, and I understand this logic; however, history has shown us that heredity is the best way of all of selecting an elite or ruling class. Until AI takes over and begins ordering society based on logic, it seems to be the best way to live in a class society.

    1. World War 1 is indeed the crucial turning point in history when Traditional Liberalism (aka a mix of libertarianism and healthy nationalism) was brought to its knees. The authors point about the ranks of the real aristocracy being eliminated is spot on, in addition, it was also the time when millions of young men went out and died in long, grueling battles, leaving the home front governed by frail, soon to pass old men and sons who were raised fatherless (dad, wot, dying in the war and all). Those two things together were the arrow through the heart of what might have become a more perfect freedom in the West had it not happened.
       It’s no mistake that very, very shortly after the end of WW1 the Progressives took power with a vengeance, with there being nobody really left to oppose them aka the Old Aristocrats. Then came women’s voting, the planting of the seeds of the Multicult, the welfare state, feminism, etc. and everything else that we now know today as the poison destroying our nations.
       WW2 was just a cleaning up of the remainders and slicing up of the global pie among the new elite.

       1. WW1 was THE event that abruptly ended the old world and brought us WW2, Stalin/Hitler, Communism/Socialism/Nazism etc.

          1. Yes, precisely. It was the birth of the New Left. While socialism obviously pre-dated WW1, it was the culling of millions of Classical Liberals from society, and the Old Aristocracy, that allowed the weak, effeminate New Left power. There were so few natural ideological “anti-bodies” remaining that the disease got a good foothold.

          2. Also, a socialist from 100 years ago would be to the right of any of the current Republicans running for president.

          3. Quite so, at least on some issues.

       2. Read Robert Graves book “Goodbye to all That” chronicles the loss and alienation after WW1

       3. WWI wasn’t the “real” event(s). The passing of the Fed and the IRS in 1913 (which enabled financing of the war) was.

          1. I think we’re talking about two different things. The Progressives predate the war, for certain, and had gained a bit of ground, no doubt. The Fed, at the time, was sold as the “Third National Bank of America” and I doubt anybody actually understood what it was. WW1 was necessary to cull out the Old Order, both the Aristocracy as well as the legions of Classical Liberals, in order to pave the way for a smooth transition to their world view.
             Besides, the Fed Reserve and the IRS had jack squat to do with Europe’s taking up arms before the Americans entered the picture. That America came in so late, and lost so little compared to the other allies, I think, rather helps prove my point. Europe is and has been far left socialist since at least the end of WW1, forward, whereas the U.S. held out a lot longer, and still even today has large pockets of “On no you don’t, you fucking bastards” with their middle fingers in the air. Europe took the brunt and lost an entire generation of men and Aristocrats, America, not so much.

       4. The year of Jubilee is near that God will give the Nations that Revere his word, i’m interested to see what will happen. The Shemitah is something i’ve just learned about.

       5. They were already in power prior. Woodrow WIlson and Teddy Roosevelt were both progressives

    2. Also, God help us if we’re ruled strictly on logic. Logic is math, in essence, which is only concerned with the outcome, no matter what kind of variables are needed to be used. I’d prefer Reason AND Logic, personally, and I’m not entirely certain that we can come up with any coding algorithm to incorporate reason.
       Last thing I want is some perfectly logical system deciding, based on reviewing history, that hey, these human things are destructive (we are) so logically we are a threat to life itself.

       1. That *IS* the unavoidable conclusion, isn’t it? Yes logic alone would mean the end of mankind.

          1. So why are you looking forward to AI? The Cylons destroyed humanity based on pure logic lol

          2. But man they were smokin hot!!!

       2. Remember that movie “War Games”? “Shall we play a game?”
          The only winning move is not to play.

          1. The oldies never get old, heh.

       3. Excuse my ignorance… But what’s the difference between logic and reason?

          1. Logic is basically the human form of computer code.
             1 + 1 = 2 is both math and logical.
             Reason is more akin to good judgement and sense (see the moral component there?).
             So say we have a problem. A rotary fan has no cover on it, and kids are putting their fingers near the fan.
             Reason says solve this by covering the open fan with a cover and educating the kids not to be idiots.
             Logic says “If I cut off the fingers of the children, they will no longer be able to put their fingers into the fan”
             Both solve the problem.

          2. The Liberal version of logically solving the Kids vs the Fan predicament, is Planned Parent- hood.

          3. Logic is formulaic, and true regardless of what happens in the real world. The principles of logic hold even in eternity, i.e. as God the Father, who dwells in heaven.
             Reason is the use of logic, along with judgment and sense, to deliberate and act in a world of experience, i.e. as God the Son, who lives in the world in the image of God the Father.
             Logic is static. Reason is dynamic.

          4. Asking questions is not ignorance. Ignorance is the refusal to know that which one is capable of knowing.

          5. This was an accurate but unusually dark post. Lolknee, is that you?

13. Nice article. First off, George Soros is a humongous piece of shit and I hope he chokes to death on disease-ridden black cock. It’s pretty inspiring that the nobility of old took their fortune as a sign that they should give back and protect the peasants. I wouldn’t call it “nobility”, I think elites suits the extravagantly wealthy these days. There’s hardly anything noble about slurping down black cock for all to see and then getting famous off of it.

14. I would take the old Robber Barons in a second over these jumped-up tech/geek billionaire fucks. Rockefeller , Vanderbilt, Astor all seemed at least pro American and had some allegiance to the nation

    1. Also, they still have lasting legacies centuries later. The Rockefeller foundation funds countless art and film and other projects. You think the name Zuckerberg is gonna mean anything in 20 years?

       1. Rockefeller also fund a lot of feminist / progressive causes I think. Old man Rockefeller is NWO as they come or at least some of his statements have suggested as much

          1. I saw a documentary that said Rockefeller was the mastermind behind Prohibition.
             At the time, Ford had developed an engine that could run on ethanol. So in order to protect his oil business having this new invention called cars use gasoline refined from oil, he pushed the evils of drinking alcohol idea to the women who pussywhipped the men into passing the 18th Amendment. Banning the production of alcohol ensured that there would be no competition to his business of using oil/gasoline.

          2. wouldn’t surprise me. Old man Rockefeller was a strange one by all accounts. Not to mention he was close to a raging feminist through his wife I think

    2. They were risk taking self made men (for the most part) who produced tangible innovations & products. I’m not American but I’ve always admired that old school American pioneer spirit & work ethic. They see possibility when others see barriers.
       The technogeeks with their wizardry are one electromagnetic pulse wave away from having their ‘product’ & the flimsy architecture it sits on vaporized.

    3. Yes the old robber barons actually left something tangible in their wake. e.g transportation etc
       These new billionaires are either tech geeks or money movers. They don’t really produce jack shit that will benefit society in the long run.

15. Zuckenberg is a billionaire and he married that girl???Jeez!! Anyways, these people don’t have an obligation to the country. They’re rich enough not to serve and would move if ever they felt that their life or money might be burdened. They’re scum of the earth that feed on the lives of us little people without any obligations to us. this would be fine if there was a true free market and we all had the possibility to move up ,but these same people use their money and influence to keep that from happening and by doing that have defacto appointed themselves the use Nobility.

    1. Meanwhile, Prince Harry has more wealth than God, but put on a uniform and served in the same ranks as his subjects. I’m not much of a royalty fawner, but that dude reeks alpha in so many ways. Probably due to the genetic association with Churchill I suspect.

       1. Agreed about Prince Harry he’s a stud. But look closely at him ,he does not look like the offspring of that Jug Eared dad of his . Mom yes . Prince Charlie no. It is widely thought that Prince Charles is NOT Harry’s real dad but that Di had an affair with this dashing major in the Brit Army.

          1. No way, he has those same beady eyes as Prince Charles.

          2. I’ve wondered about his parentage myself. The older dilweed is clearly his father’s son, but Harry has very, very little to go on outside of perhaps the eyes as you mention. Perhaps Chuck was disinterested when Diane was spread eagle and couldn’t be arsed to pass along but a few random DNA segments?
             How that jug eared idiot could pass up on a beauty like her still surprises me. Camilla is and has always been awful to look at.

          3. Lot of people wondering the same thing. He chose a steed over Diana? WTF?

          4. Diana was a batshit crazy broad. A spoiled, narcissistic princess of a princess.
             Looks aren’t everything.

       2. Yeah, I don’t know much about the Royal family, but when they had more power and actually elevated people through knighting while also still being controlled through laws circa 18th and 19th century seemed like a legit system. Well…, if it wasn’t for rich people buying positions in the military and such.

       3. Fucked up how Harry is doing the noble thing, but gets less attention than his brother and his wife. We’ve truly got our priorities backward.

          1. What causes that I think is that she is one of the few remaining pretty girls in England. An oddity of sorts. Heh.
             Some of the girls I’ve seen Harry photographed with are quite stunning as well actually. And dude just kind of has this whole “Yeah, whatever” air about them whenever I see photos like that, which is cool.

       4. Harry (and even William) are great examples of still doing service for their country. I wonder what the British royal family’s real political views are, especially Harry. He just doesn’t strike me as being as politically correct as the Tories or Labour.

16. I cringed when I saw Kim Kardashian.

    1. everyone does, there is more to this.

17. “Amnesty helps large corporations by increasing the supply of low-income workers, thus driving wages down for those jobs.”
    ———————–
    Creating exploitation labor under rainbow banner.
    　
    Only thing is the american public IS wise to this.
    　
    That’s the real reason for Trumps popularity.
    　
    While it’s true that a lot of these new immigrants do represent a threat to life and limb, americans (elite and prole alike) quietly acknowledge what it’s really all about.

18. Too be fair, our elite does their best to appear virtuous to the masses. Feminism, socialism, gay acceptance and stuff like that are the new virtues to be pursued nowdays.

    1. I don’t think it operates in that way. feminism, homosexualism, socialism etc are all top down. So, its not that these elites do their part in supporting this, rather, this is where all this shit originates from. These elites are the creators of these things! Take feminism and homosexualism both are very un-natural, the later, is applicable to a very small segment of society and the core essence of who they are is centered on perverted sex (sodomy to shit eating). Deny it all you want its the simple truth and if you do deny it then all your doing is showing your brainwashing, and ultimately, your ignorance. “gay” acceptance, for instance, is a direct function of the disproportionate representation in media, namely entertainment, and the one sided portrayal that is heavily sanitized and embellished. Case and point, just this week a homosexual man gun down two innocent people in cold fucking blood. Elsewhere a homosexual couple that was showcased in the media had a surrogate child just so they could rape it and pimp if off to other homosexuals to rape. And even now the media is a buzz with utterly ridiculous statements many from homosexuals themselves that justify this other homosexuals actions ergo justifying murder. No. This is a not some grass roots or inevitable human development, this took years of centralized and coordinated planning and execution. Its exogenous and artificial. Re-read this article to see how it occurred. Celebrities, for instance, are extremely wealthy and within that industry we’ve always seen a concentration of homosexuals and bohemians. Point, the massive wealth, has been a relatively recent occurrence. With this wealth these people, as did the elites before them, patronized the issues that they wanted. Look at a typical celeb, they’re a hot mess. Their lives have become our culture. But please note, I have absolutely nothing in common with a celebrity. I can’t, for instance, further my career by engaging in self destructive activities. For celebs having to go to rehab and then relapsing is actually a positive development. You see, this is entirely out of step with us peons. But, that is where all this silliness of homosexuality and every other fringe issue comes from.

       1. I like your beliefs, but to me it is too deep to see. Is our cultural decline brought by these destroyers of humanity with the perversions, and immorality they seek to instill upon us? Or are they a reflection of society? I may never know, but regardless of what is. It is good that we here know that the times are evil. And that good is hated in the world.

19. Thing is, Trump’s one of them right?
    Could he be breaking from the pack?
    If so then why?
    Rumor has it that Trump didn’t enter to win (at first).
    But that now he’s serious.
    https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2015/08/24/is-trump-in-it-to-win-it/

    1. Remember that trump is a real estate developer from new york, surrounded by jews working in the jews own turf playing their game, maybe he is sincere anyway.

    2. He’s in it to win it.
       People can argue about his motives or his ideas all day, but his love of his country is obvious and goes back to his earliest publicity. People can call him a dick, a jerk, a narcissist, or whatever they want, the guy loves America and isn’t ashamed of it.
       Years ago, Reagan was badgered about his strategy on the Cold War. In the end, he came out with “We win; they lose”. Trump is the first politician in decades who buys into that philosophy for America whether it’s trade with China, border control with Mexico, or building up our military so we fight to win instead of fighting to prove we’re willing to die to be fair and nice.
       He’s also an actual alpha male. Not the bang a chick and not call her back type, he’s an actual alpha male. A charismatic leader who can accomplish big things and who isn’t afraid to fight when he thinks he’s right. While society has been falling all over itself to be PC and backing down from anyone they offended, Trump told the whole liberal US to fuck off when they started attacking him after his announcement, and he hasn’t stopped.
       He wants to bring America back, he has the will and the resources to fight back against the liberal lynch mobs, and he knows how to get things done.
       People will love Trump before this is all over.

20. Somebody posted this in comment section of youtube, on one of the x22 report videos:
    WHO CONTROLS THE U.S.A.
    List Summaries
    INTERNET
    Who Controls E-Bay?
    Summary:
    Of the nine(9) eBay executives, six(6) are Jews. This is a numerical
    representation of 67%. Of the eleven(11) eBay directors, two(2) are
    Jews. This is a numerical representation of 18%. Jews are approximately
    2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews are over-represented among
    the eBay executives by a factor of 33.5 times(3,350 percent) and
    over-represented among the eBay directors by a factor of 9 times(900
    percent).
    Who Controls Apple?
    Summary:
    Of the ten(10) Apple executives, three(3) are Jews. This is a numerical
    representation of 30%. Of the eight(8) Apple directors, five(5) are
    Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of 63%.
    Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews and
    spouses of Jews are over-represented among the Apple executives by a
    factor of 15 times(1,500 percent) and over-represented among the Apple
    directors by a factor of 31.5 times(3,150 percent).
    Who Controls Yahoo?
    Summary:
    Of the thirteen(13) Yahoo! executives, eight(8) are Jews or have Jewish
    spouses. This is a numerical representation of 62%. Of the eleven(11)
    Yahoo! directors, five(5) are Jews. This is a numerical representation
    of 45%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore
    Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented among the Yahoo!
    executives by a factor of 31 times(3,100 percent) and over-represented
    among the Yahoo! directors by a factor of 22.5 times(2,250 percent).
    Who Controls Google?
    Summary:
    Of the six(6) Google executives, four(4) are Jews or have Jewish
    spouses. This is a numerical representation of 67%. Of the ten(10)
    Google directors, four(4) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a
    numerical representation of 40%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented
    among the Google executives by a factor of 33.5 times(3,350 percent) and
    over-represented among the Google directors by a factor of 20
    times(2,000 percent).
    Who Controls Amazon?
    Summary:
    Of the eleven(11) Amazon.com executives, eight(8) are Jews. This is a
    numerical representation of 73%. Of the nine(9) Amazon.com directors,
    six(6) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical
    representation of 67%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented
    among the Amazon.com executives by a factor of 36.5 times(3,650 percent)
    and over-represented among the Amazon.com directors by a factor of 33.5
    times(3,350 percent).
    Who Controls Facebook?
    Summary:
    Of the three(3) Facebook executives, three(3) are Jews. This is a
    numerical representation of 100%. Of the seven(7) Facebook directors,
    four(4) are Jews or partial Jews. This is a numerical representation of
    57%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews
    are over-represented among the Facebook executives by a factor of 50
    times(5,000 percent) and over-represented among the Facebook directors
    by a factor of 28.5 times(2,850 percent).
    THE DEATH OF AMERICA was enacted in 1965 with the signing of the Open
    Immigration Law Of 1965.
    While serving Jewish interests, the Open Immigration Law Of 1965 was the
    beginning of America as death as a
    unified nation. Jews were behind the law, promoting, lobbying, and
    bribing” the law into existence with the fanaticism equalling the most
    dedicated Muslim terrorist.
    Jews have continually evinced hostility toward American Christian
    culture in their aggressive efforts to change it.
    The Open Immigration Law Of 1965 is a prime example of that hostility.
    A typical example of what characterizes the Jewish push for open
    immigration can be
    seen in the following 1948 quote by David Petegorsky, former Director of
    the AJCongress:
    Jewish survival can only take place within the framework of a
    progressive and expanding democratic society,
    which through its institutions and public policies gives expression to
    the concept of cultural pluralism.”
    Here Are The Names Of The Jewish people Behind The Open Immigraton Law
    of 1965:
    1. Senator Jacob Javits (NY)
    2. Congressman Emanuel Celler (NY)
    3. Leo Pfeffer (Former President of
    American Jewish Congress (AJC)
    4. Norman Podhoretz (Writer and Member of The Council of Foreign
    Relations)
    * Senator Jacob Javits played a prominent role in the Senate hearings on
    the 1965 bill. Javits authored an article entitled
    Let us open the gates’ that proposed immigration levels of 500,000 per
    year for 20 years with no restrictions on national origin.
    * Congressman Emanuel Celler, who fought for unrestricted immigration
    for over 40 years in the
    House of Representatives, introduced similar legislation resulting in
    the “Cellar-Hart Immigration Bill, the precursor to the fatal bill of
    1965.
    * Leo Pfeffer, wrote many treatises and books that propagandized for
    open immigration.
    * Norman Podhoretz, a former leftist, now a Jewish neo-con, also wrote
    many articles promoting open immigration.
    * Jewish organizations such as the American Jewish Congress, The Jewish
    Federation, the ACLU, and the Bnai Brith,
    (there is no end to their organizations), filed briefs in support of
    open immigration before the Senate Subcommittee in the early sixties
    leading up to the passing of the 1965 law.
    THE 1965 OPEN IMMIGRATION LAW IS PRESENTLY fulfilling the aims of the
    Jewish conspiracy as seen in its effects.
    The U.S. Census Bureau projects that by the year 2050, European-derived
    peoples will no longer be a majority of the population of America due to
    the massive influx of immigrants since the signing of the bill in 1965.
    Most of these immigrants come from Third World Nations whose customs,
    religions, and culture are far removed from
    anything remotely resembling Western Civ. Within the context of a
    Jewish-informed “multicultural America,” these immigrants are encouraged
    by the Jews to retain their own languages, customs, and religions.
    Who Controls Microsoft?
    Summary:
    Of the seventeen(17) Microsoft executives, six(6) are Jews. This is a
    numerical representation of 35%. Of the nine(9) Microsoft directors,
    five(5) are Jews. This is a numerical representation of 56%. Jews are
    approximately 2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews are
    over-represented among the Microsoft executives by a factor of 17.5
    times (1,750 percent) and over-represented among the Microsoft directors
    by a factor of 28 times(2,800 percent).
    Who Controls Wikimedia?
    Summary:
    Of the seventeen(17) Wikimedia senior staff and trustees, five(5) are
    Jews. This is a numerical representation of 29%. Jews are approximately
    2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews are over-represented among
    the Wikimedia senior staff and trustees by a factor of 14.5 times(1,450
    percent).
    MEDIA
    Who Controls Big Media?
    Summary:
    Of the twelve(12) senior executives of the “Big Six” media
    corporations, nine(9) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a
    numerical representation of 75%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented
    among the senior executives of the “Big Six” media corporations by a
    factor of 37.5 times(3,750 percent).
    Who Controls Hollywood?
    Summary:
    Of the sixty(60) senior executives of the major Hollywood studios,
    trade unions, and talent agencies, fifty(50) are Jews or have Jewish
    spouses. This is a numerical representation of 83%. Jews are
    approximately 2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of
    Jews are over-represented among the senior executives of the major
    Hollywood studios, trade unions, and talent agencies by a factor of 41.5
    times(4,150 percent).
    Who Controls Television?
    Summary:
    Of the sixty-four(64) senior executives of the major television
    broadcast networks, cable networks, and production companies,
    fifty-seven(57) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical
    representation of 89%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented
    among the senior executives of the major television broadcast networks,
    cable networks, and production companies by a factor of 44.5 times(4,450
    percent).
    Who Controls Music?
    Summary:
    Of the fifty(50) senior executives of the major music labels and trade
    organizations, thirty-nine(39) are Jews. This is a numerical
    representation of 78%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews are over-represented among the senior
    executives of the major music labels and trade organizations by a factor
    of 39 times(3,900 percent).
    Who Controls Radio?
    Summary:
    Of the forty-six(46) senior executives of the major radio broadcast
    networks and station owners, twenty-eight(28) are Jews. This is a
    numerical representation of 61%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews are over-represented among the senior
    executives of the major radio broadcast networks and station owners by a
    factor of 30.5 times(3,050 percent).
    Who Controls Advertising?
    Summary:
    Of the forty-six(46) senior executives of the major advertising
    corporations and trade associations, thirty-one(31) are Jews. This is a
    numerical representation of 67%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews are over-represented among the senior
    executives of the major advertising corporations and trade associations
    by a factor of 33.5 times(3,350 percent).
    Who Controls the News? (Part 1)
    Summary:
    Of the sixty-seven(67) senior executives of the major television and
    radio news networks, forty-seven(47) are Jews or have Jewish spouses.
    This is a numerical representation of 70%. Jews are approximately 2% of
    the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are
    over-represented among the senior executives of the major television and
    radio news networks by a factor of 35 times(3,500 percent).
    Who Controls the News? (Part 2)
    Summary:
    Of the sixty-five(65) senior executives of the major newspapers and
    news magazines, forty-two(42) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a
    numerical representation of 65%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented
    among the senior executives of the major newspapers and news magazines
    by a factor of 32.5 times(3,250 percent).
    BANKING
    Who Controls the Economy?
    Summary:
    Of the sixty(60) senior officials of the U.S. Government economic,
    financial, and monetary institutions, thirty-nine(39) are Jews or have
    Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of 65%. Jews are
    approximately 2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of
    Jews are over-represented among the senior officials of the U.S.
    Government economic, financial, and monetary institutions by a factor of
    32.5 times(3,250 percent).
    Who Controls Wall Street? (Part 1)
    Summary:
    Of the fifty-one(51) senior executives of the major Wall Street banks,
    trade exchanges, and regulatory agencies, thirty-seven(37) are Jews or
    have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of 72%. Jews are
    approximately 2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of
    Jews are over-represented among the senior executives of the major Wall
    Street banks, trade exchanges, and regulatory agencies by a factor of
    36 times(3,600 percent).
    Who Controls Wall Street? (Part 2)
    Summary:
    Of the forty(40) senior executives of the major Wall Street mutual
    funds, private equity funds, hedge funds, and brokerages, twenty-six(26)
    are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of
    65%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews
    and spouses of Jews are over-represented among the senior executives of
    the major Wall Street mutual funds, private equity funds, hedge funds,
    and brokerages by a factor of 32.5 times(3,250 percent).
    Who Controls Goldman Sachs?
    Summary:
    Of the nine(9) Goldman Sachs executives, seven(7) are Jews. This is a
    numerical representation of 78%. Of the twelve(12) Goldman Sachs
    directors, six(6) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical
    representation of 50%. Of the thirty-three(33) Goldman Sachs management
    committee members, twenty(20) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a
    numerical representation of 61%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented
    among the Goldman Sachs executives by a factor of 39 times(3,900
    percent), over-represented among the Goldman Sachs directors by a factor
    of 25 times(2,500 percent), and over-represented on the Goldman Sachs
    management committee by a factor of 30.5 times(3,050 percent).
    Who Controls JPMorgan Chase?
    Summary:
    Of the ten(10) JPMorgan Chase Operating Committee members, nine are
    Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of 90%.
    Of the eleven(11) JPMorgan Chase directors, six(6) are Jews or have
    Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of 45%. Jews are
    approximately 2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of
    Jews are over-represented among the JPMorgan Chase Operating Committee
    members by a factor of 45 times(4,500 percent) and over-represented
    among the JPMorgan Chase directors by a factor of 22.5 times(2,250
    percent).
    Who Controls American International Group?
    Summary:
    Of the sixteen(16) directors and trustees of American International
    Group, twelve(12) are Jews. This is a numerical representation of 75%.
    Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews are
    over-represented among the directors and trustees of American
    International Group by a factor of 37.5 times(3,750 percent).
    Who Controls the Treasury Department?
    Summary:
    Of the twenty-six(26) U.S. Treasury Department senior officials,
    eighteen(18) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical
    representation of 69%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented
    among the U.S. Treasury Department senior officials by a factor of 34.5
    times times(3,450 percent).
    Who Controls the Federal Reserve System?
    Summary:
    Of the seven(7) Federal Reserve Board governors, four(4) are Jews. This
    is a numerical representation of 57%. Of the twelve(12) Federal Reserve
    District Bank presidents, four(4) are Jews. This is a numerical
    representation of 33%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews are over-represented on the Federal Reserve
    Board of Governors by a factor of 28.5 times (2,850 percent), and
    over-represented among the Federal Reserve District Bank presidents by a
    factor of 16.5 times(1,650 percent).
    GOVERNMENT
    Who Controls the White House?
    Summary:
    Of the eleven(11) current and former senior advisors of President
    Barack Obama, nine(9) are Jews, partial Jews, or have Jewish spouses.
    This is a numerical representation of 82%. Jews are approximately 2% of
    the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are
    over-represented among the current and former senior advisors of
    President Barack Obama by a factor of 41 times(4,100 percent).
    Who Controls the Senate?
    Summary:
    Of the twenty(20) U.S. Senate Committee chairmen, eight(8) are Jews or
    partial Jews. This is a numerical representation of 40%. Jews are
    approximately 2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews are
    over-represented among the U.S. Senate Committee chairmen by a factor of
    20 times(2,000 percent).
    Who Controls the Congress?
    Summary:
    Of the forty-two(42) U.S. House Committee chairmen and ranking members,
    six(6) are Jews or partial Jews. This is a numerical representation of
    14%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews
    are over-represented among the U.S. House Committee chairmen and ranking
    members by a factor of 7 times(700 percent).
    Who Controls the Supreme Court?
    Summary:
    Of the nine(9) U.S. Supreme Court justices, four(4) are Jews or partial
    Jews. This is a numerical representation of 44%. Jews are approximately
    2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews are over-represented among
    the U.S. Supreme Court justices by a factor of 22 times(2,200 percent).
    Who Controls the State Department?
    Summary:
    Of the seventy-four(74) U.S. State Department senior officials,
    forty(40) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical
    representation of 54%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented
    among the U.S. State Department senior officials by a factor of 27
    times(2,700 percent).
    Who Controls the Justice Department?
    Summary:
    Of the forty-seven(47) U.S. Justice Department senior officials,
    twenty-two(22) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical
    representation of 47%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented
    among the U.S. Justice Department senior officials by a factor of 23.5
    times(2,350 percent).
    Who Controls the Defense Department?
    Summary:
    Of the one-hundred eleven(111) U.S. Defense Department senior
    officials, forty(40) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a
    numerical representation of 36%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented
    among the U.S. Defense Department senior officials by a factor of 18
    times(1,800 percent).
    Who Controls the Treasury Department?
    Summary:
    Of the twenty-six(26) U.S. Treasury Department senior officials,
    eighteen(18) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical
    representation of 69%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented
    among the U.S. Treasury Department senior officials by a factor of 34.5
    times times(3,450 percent).
    GLOBALISM
    Who Controls the Group of Thirty?
    Summary:
    Of the forty-three(43) Group of Thirty members, twenty-three(23) are
    Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of 53%.
    Jews are approximately .25% of the world population.* Therefore Jews and
    spouses of Jews are over-represented among the Group of Thirty members
    by a factor of 212 times(21,200 percent).
    Who Controls the Bilderberg Group?
    Summary:
    Of the thirty-five(35) Bilberberg Steering Committee members,
    sixteen(16) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical
    representation of 46%. Jews are approximately 1% of the population of
    the Western world.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are
    over-represented on the Bilberberg Steering Committee by a factor of 46
    times(4,600 percent).
    Who Controls the Trilateral Commission?
    Summary:
    Of the fifty-six(56) Trilateral Commission Executive Committee members,
    twenty-three(23) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical
    representation of 41%. Jews are approximately .25% of the world
    population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented on
    the Trilateral Commission Executive Committee by a factor of 164
    times(16,400 percent).
    Who Controls the Council on Foreign Relations? (Part 1)
    Summary:
    Of the forty-three(43) Council on Foreign Relations directors,
    twenty-eight(28) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical
    representation of 65%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented
    among the Council on Foreign Relations directors by a factor of 32.5
    times(3,250 percent).
    Who Controls the Council on Foreign Relations? (Part 2)
    Summary:
    Of the fifty-five(55) Council on Foreign Relations think tank members,
    thirty-one(31) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical
    representation of 56%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented in
    the Council on Foreign Relations think tank by a factor of 28
    times(2,800 percent).
    SOCIETY
    Who Controls the Ivy League?
    Summary:
    Of the twenty-four(24) senior administrators of the Ivy League colleges
    and universities, twenty(20) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a
    numerical representation of 83%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented
    among the senior administrators of the Ivy League colleges and
    universities by a factor of 41.5 times(4,150 percent).
    Who Controls the Think Tanks?
    Summary:
    Of the thirty(30) senior executives of the major think tanks,
    eighteen(18) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical
    representation of 60%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews and spouses of Jews are over-represented
    among the senior executives of the major think tanks by a factor of 30
    times(3,000 percent).
    Who Controls Professional Sports?
    Summary:
    Of the sixty(60) senior executives of the major sports leagues, talent
    agencies, and media outlets, forty-three(43) are Jews. This is a
    numerical representation of 72%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S.
    population.* Therefore Jews are over-represented among the senior
    executives of the major sports leagues, talent agencies, and media
    outlets by a factor of 36 times(3,600 percent).
    Who Controls the Anti-Defamation League?
    Summary:
    Of the fifty-three(53) executives and directors of the Anti-Defamation
    League, fifty-three(53) are Jews. This is a numerical representation of
    100%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews
    are over-represented among the senior executives and directors of the
    Anti-Defamation League by a factor of 50 times(5,000 percent).
    Who Controls the Southern Poverty Law Center?
    Summary:
    Of the twenty-two(22) Southern Poverty Law Center senior program staff
    members, fifteen(15) are Jews. This is a numerical representation of
    68%. Of the thirteen(13) Southern Poverty Law Center directors, eight(8)
    are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of
    62%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews
    and spouses of Jews are over-represented among the Southern Poverty Law
    Center senior program staff members by a factor of 34 times(3,400
    percent), and over-represented among the Southern Poverty Law Center
    directors by a factor of 31 times(3,100 percent).
    Who Controls the American Civil Liberties Union?
    Summary:
    Of the nine(9) executives of the American Civil Liberties Union,
    four(4) are Jews. This is a numerical representation of 44%. Jews are
    approximately 2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews are
    over-represented among the executives of the American Civil Liberties
    Union by a factor of 22 times(2,200 percent).
    Who Controls the Defense Policy Board?
    Summary:
    Of the twenty-two(22) Defense Policy Board members, fourteen(14) are
    Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of 64%.
    Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews and
    spouses of Jews are over-represented among the Defense Policy Board
    members by a factor of 32 times(3,200 percent).
    The Jews have mostly been parasites in every host nation kind enough to
    take them in.
    They always use their money to take over the banking industry of that
    nation,
    then start buying all the politicians with their ill gotten gains. Then
    they start
    pornography, and homosexuality. Then they take over the main stream
    media, education,
    and newspapers until degradation brings that nation to its knees.; and
    collapse sets in.
    Jewish Bankers and Speculation people destroy/enslave the world.
    The ownership of the 10 major Central banks are: 1. Rothschild Bank of
    London
    2. Warburg Bank of Hamburg 3. Rothschild Bank of Berlin
    4. Lehman Brothers of New York 5. Lazar Brothers of Paris
    6. Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York (Now Shearson American Express)
    7. Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy 8. Goldman, Sachs of New York
    9. Warburg Bank of Amsterdam
    10. Chase Manhattan Bank of New York.
    The Federal Reserve Bank of New York
    is centrally controlled by Nathan M. Rothschild & Sons of London.
    The names of these banks, except Chase Manhattan-Rockefellers,
    are all obviously Jewish names and the
    Rothschild name was originally Bauer.

    1. I’m sure it is just a coincidence.

       1. and I mean that sarcastically.

       2. COHENCIDENCE my friend

          1. Hehe good one mate 🙂

          2. I heard the other day that EVERY head of the Federal Reserve has been Jewish. All of them. That was the most troubling thing I had ever heard about the tribe.

          3. The current vice-chair of the Fed has dual-citizenship and is the former governor of the Bank of Israel.
             https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Fischer

          4. Haha that’s fucking gold!

    2. Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!

    3. Very insightful do you have a link for this information? How come the bean counters never notice these discrepancies? It’s always something stupid like affirmative action for fireman exams because one group of people couldn’t pass the written portion of an entry exam and tests aren’t that important anyway.

    4. You forgot the fact that jews are also 90% of the people who go into hysterics about bird-watching being “too White” .

    5. Lol

       1. Just imagine.
          

          1. Epic

          2. That’s epic

       2. I wouldn’t emphasise that guy too much.
          I don’t know much history, yet have read that he was involved in a socialist coup in Bavaria in the 1920s and also that he was sponsored by the British spooks. The SA is said to have had British machine guns and been a redux of homos, the reason why they were eliminated.
          Also his wars were said to have been lost by incompetence, overreach and treason rather the supposedly stellar performance of the UK/US spooks (crypto …).

          1. You are full of shit.

          2. You’ll never know the true story. The current one was written by the winners of the war.
             We are finding out now that they were probably just as fucked up as the supposed ‘monsters’ they were fighting.

          3. Uh, nopes. I go to the toilet every morning.

          4. He let the British escape at Dunkirk, he failed to put a stranglehold on the mediterranean when he could have, operation Barbarossa, he was a grandchild of the Rothschilds, he was mind-controlled by the British intelligence as you pointed out. Goebbels is an obvious Jew btw.

       3. Hitler was an idiot and anti-slavic. Screw him.

    6. I’d you connect the dots, this shows why we fight all of Israel’s wars for them. They own us.
       A friend of mine showed me something like this years ago but I didn’t want to believe it. Typical American conditioning. We fear the word Nazi like we fear the word racist.
       But this control is now shoved in our face.

    7. You can add that sack of shit George Soros (pictured above) to this list. A Hungarian Jew that voluntarily collaborated with the Nazis during WW2 to hand over Hungarian Jews (i.e. his own people) whilst he profited by dividing up stolen assets with his friends in the Waffen-SS. His fortunes were literally built on slaughter of innocent women and children. Not to mention this atheistic, Jew scumbag visited unimaginable quantities of death suffering and destruction upon the people of Ukraine, et al by funding the color revolutions; Then bragged about it.

       1. Fuckin Kike is the most evil monster on this planet. Look at that ugly Jew face. Your senses tell you all you need to know.

       2. Wow didn’t know what George Soros did in World War 2, goes to show you that’s how someone rises to the top. Sell you soul to the devil then tell lies afterwards on why “he was forced to do it on the fear of being shot”.

    8. Wagner said “Jews are the unseen force of decay”.

       1. Wagner’s essay on the Jews is a literary Holocaust™. Everybody should read that. Preferably the original german version.

    9. I finally made it a point to read your entire post. While is certainly *seems* that jewish interests are grossly represented and that they are detrimental influence on the world stage, we simply cannot blame all Jews. I’m sure there are a handful that aren’t involved.

       1. There are of course a few. Benjamin Friedman tried to expose the Jewish agenda 60 years ago. Henry Makow today is exposing the Zionist conspiracy. Stanley Kubrick exposed all the communist Jews in Hollywood and the Jewish propaganda machine nearly destroyed him and 4 decades later all those Jews he named as communists turned out to be communists. The thing about the little Jews who don’t seem to be involved in the big money Jew’s destructive schemes is that, as Dr. William Pierce pointed out years ago, the big Jews don’t operate in a vacuum. They have the support of all the Jews that make up the Jewish virus. I have only known one Jew who distanced himself from his Jewish origins.

       2. NAJALT > NAWALT

    10. Your list is probably a low estimate, as there exist many who pose as Eskimos.
        Look at those people again and sig a bit deeper into their bios.

    11. That copypasta has been posted online before, however it fails to back up virtually all of those numbers and statistics with actual names/backgrounds.
        To everyone here, it’s important that we don’t fall into the trap of blind faith in regards to political views like the leftists do. True facts and being able to back them up are of utmost importance.

    12. Interesting story on NPR a few weeks ago. A guy wrote a book about the 1958 census where they Jews protested and got exempted from it. They flat out said they worried because it would reveal that they were too concentrated in the media, banking, and legal industries. And it would solidify people’s concerns and prejudices that, well, the jews ran our media, banks, and legal services. Now, 70 years after WWII, the Holocaust, and all that shit, Germans are saying that the population went after the Jews because they controlled the banks, media, and politics, and were using the German State as their own fiefdom with the Goyim as serfs. History repeating itself.

    13. This list is excellent. I will write an essay in german on this one.
        I just love how here in germany:
        – they banned most of the videos on (((youtube))) showing Hitler (‘This video is not available in your country’)
        – they blame Friedrich Nietzsche, Richard Wagner, Martin Luther and many others for being antisemites (most german authors have written some antisemitic texts, that’s the reason why the jews see the german people as their biggest enemies hence they want to exterminate us by mass migration.
        – you can’t buy a copy of Hitlers Mein Kampf in germany. There is a annotated edition and the anti-Hitler annotations make up 70 % of the book. And it costs like 100 €. A normal copy of Mein Kampf is seen as demagoguery hence it’s not allowed to be owned.

        1. “We should have all the anti-Semites shot” -Nietzsche

21. Too bad there are no bona-fide superheroes. THEY’D be worth looking up to.

22. Our current nobility is as deluded and isolated as the french nobility right before they pulled out the guillotines. The only difference is that modern nobility go to that point in record time.

    1. That ended rather badly, actually.
       They stormed a nearly empty Bastille and liberated basically nobody. They looted everything in sight, not just the nobility. Their run on the food of the nobles kept them fed, for a few days, then off to starvation they went. They murdered, not just nobles but “suspicious people” out of pure mob rule savagery, then installed a reign of terror that was a model for future police states to pattern themselves after, which of course ultimately ushered in Napoleon, the arch-type of the modern dictator, something they wouldn’t shake off for decades, as he not only returned, but had several proteges follow him in his wake as well.
       Later, when they calmed back down, it was too late and the best of France was either dead on the trail to and from Russia, or too politically confused to be effective. What remains today is a far leftist state that can’t seem to win a war against even a kindergarten kickball team, which goes ape and shuts down the country when even modest or unreasonable demands are not met.
       On the bright side, we did get a nifty house numbering system from it. So there is that.

       1. Countries do need a revolution from time to time,be it armed or not. Tell that to anyone in the UK, especially England, were it takes a bit of time and bureaucratic manuvers to access the land registry. A good deal of people don’t actually “own” the land their house is on. Is that £1000 council tax check for utilities only? Tend not to think so. However, in France, US or Italy you just go to your mayor and, Viola, there it is.
          Juxtaposed to GB, other countries have had revolutions or drastic changes where land distribution actually happened, and that is just an example good things that come from revolutions. Also, revolutions bring anarchy so don’t expect insta-heaven.

          1. Nobody in the UK, not even Dukes and Earls, owns the land their houses are built on and that makes up their estates. All land is owned by the Crown, and “held” by someone. Hence “freehold” and “leasehold”. I own my house (bricks, mortar and the soil and what grows in my garden) but I “hold” the land my house and garden occupy “freely” that is, without payment to the Crown for using it and indefinitely. By contrast a leasehold expires at some time and nearly always has a liability for ground rent charges.
             Council tax, that regressive and swinish thing, is actually for “services”, salaries and council overhead. There’s no land rent in it.

23. I really don’t like how the elites have cranked out propaganda against white Southerners, especially with this nonsense about attacking an obsolete battle flag used by part of the Confederate army 150+ years ago.
    The hostility directed towards the admittedly troubled Duggar family in Arkansas has this anti-Southern prejudice as a subtext: Bad enough that this married religious white couple in the Ozarks has made so many white children, including some fairly attractive daughters. But then they had the temerity to show their lifestyle on a reality TV series in such a positive light that even nonreligious women like my mother have become their fans. I can see why the Duggars’ enemies have looked for any weakness to take them down.

    1. That flag is an affront to much more than just black people. It represents states trying to leave the union. Washington did not fight for that. That flag is terrorism.

       1. George Washington didn’t fight for people seceding and rebelling from their government? Care to elaborate?

          1. What’s to elaborate? It is clearly understood. Oh you mean that Washington did the same with England right? Yeah Except that it was for good reasons. Southerners did it to keep the black man in chains.

          2. Washington died decades prior to the Civil War.

          3. I’m pretty far to the left of your average ROK reader, and will tell you this is absolute hogwash. Slavery was one of a number of issues of contention between the north and south, but the idea that millions of southerners joined up and killed their bretheren, all because they wanted to keep black men down, is absurd. Go read some quotes by Lincoln of what he really thought of these slaves he emancipated. As racist as anything you’d hear from the Klan today.
             Most southerners at the time didn’t feel the war was about slavery, that is a simple fact. No other nation in the world fought a war to free slaves.
             Slavery is an ugly part of American history, but then it’s an ugly part of every society’s history on the planet.
             Look at everyone upset at the US government today. If a rebel movement started (and I’m not sure it would even be in a southern state today) you could blame it on a number of factors.. you could say Hispanic immigrants. You could say Obama care, you could say high taxes, you could say the deficit, you could even say black issues (ferguson, welfare, etc). The point is there is not one rallying issue, and while 1% of southerners who owned slaves wanted to keep them, it was one issue among a larger disagreement between the feds and the southerners.
             To act as if the Confederacy was fighting for slavery is silly and asinine. If the south had won, slavery would have ended there, maybe not for another decade or two, but slavery ended everywhere when Brazil abolished it in 1888, about 2 decades after the civil war.
             If you want to believe this war was about slavery, then that’s a pretty sick condemnation of an entire nation of people (the confederacy) and a distortion of history. But more importantly, what’s the point? I’ve found people with this agenda are typically pushing a pro-federal government message. If we had 2 competing Americas, it would be a good thing, and would put pressure on each government to stop making bad laws and bad decisions.
             Finally, what was so right and noble about Washington overthrowing his king that makes his rebellion glorious and the southern one hateful and evil? I seem to remember the Yanks were opposed to high taxes. How’d that one work out for them?

          4. A good analogy I can provide would be states that have legalized medical marijuana which violates the Federal drug laws classifying marijuana with no medicinal use. There were DEA raids of marijuana dispensaries in these states and people arrested and charged with a Federal crime. States (the people) have the right to declare the legality of marijuana. If this happened back in 1860, these states that legalized the use of marijuana would join together like the Confederates and fought the Union.
             Basically, the Confederates were saying,
             “Tell me somethin’. It’s still ‘We, the people’, right?”

          5. It is not a part of every society, we Mexicans have never enslaved people because we feel superior to them. You cloud the issue by saying that they killed their northern brethren to keep the black man down. It’s worse actually, it was to keep the black man in chains, to rob him of soul and dignity. I do not really care what Abe thought of them, if it even is true. What matters is that he broke the chains, while the south would have them on forever, it is clearly demonstrated by every racist that posts or expresses contrary to my OP.

          6. Mexico got rid of slavery in 1829, a few decades before America, and within the normal range of all other nations. Mexicans are a mix of Spaniards (who systematically enslaved more people that any other nation) and local indian groups like Aztecs, who also practiced slavery.
             http://www.smithsonianeducation.org/migrations/legacy/almleg.html
             http://www.mexconnect.com/articles/666-slavery-in-mexico
             http://www.mexonline.com/history-blacks.htm
             What is it about people in the Confederacy that they would have kept slaves “forever” when every other society in the world banished slavery (without a war)?
             
             “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.”
             by:
             Abraham Lincoln
             (1809-1865) 16th US President
             Source:
             Fourth Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Charleston, Illinois, September 18, 1858
             (The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume III, pp. 145-146.)

          7. Correct, and there would be people who claimed the war was only about drugs and the stupid, lazy southerners who just wanted to get high.

       2. States should have the ability to leave the Union, regardless of what happened in the Civil War. At least put the departure plan up for popular vote and honor the outcome, like the plebiscite in Scotland last year.

          1. Lol, you’re crazy. You go in and declare such statement to any king, or president.

          2. Actually the states can leave the union as stated in the articles of statehood. I don’t know why people don’t know that or dismiss it out of hand.

       3. I thought Washington was in the Revolutionary War where the 13 colonies fought to secede from British Rule in 1776.
          Fast forward to 1860 was the US Civil War where you have the Union vs the Confederates. Confederates did not want the Federal Government intruding into states’ rights (10th amendment) which included owning slaves as property while the Union viewed slaves as people protected under the Bill of Rights and owning slaves is unconstitutional.
          I can’t make the connection on why that flag represents terrorism.

          1. So you believe we should still have slavery then, right?

          2. Absolutely not. You are combining slavery with what the whole idea behind the Confederates. Slavery was legal along with smoking pot. Confederates did not want the Feds telling them they won’t be able to smoke pot anymore for example. They fought for State sovereignty.
             Say if slavery was abolished before the Civil War and the topic of debate was banning smoking cigars outdoors, they still would’ve fought to tell the Feds to fuck off. In this case, then people would say you’re pro-lung cancer because you support the Confederates.

          3. Ah, if you have not seen this yet, it is AWESOME. The Whitest Kids You Know (kinda like Kids in the Hall) did this in their last season: The Civil War On Drugs
             https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnJpDf8wDy4&list=PLE473E2A6570E129C

       4. Please stop misusing the word terror. Try a dictionary.

          1. Oh typical, focus on the fly and ignore the pile of dung you comfortably sit on.

          2. Terror =
             : a very strong feeling of fear
             : something that causes very strong feelings of fear : something that is terrifying
             Let’s dispense with the anonymous ad hominem attacks to strangers on the internet and try to discuss the subject at hand, shall we?

24. Yeah, lets be honest here. The upper class views the lower class the way we view a vapid whore. Good for getting what we want and nothing else. If it wasn’t for the shallowness, stupidity, and rampant consumerism of the lower class, people like kim kardashian would be working at mcdonalds right now. Theres only a market for shit like this because average people out there are stupid enough to buy into it.
    Shitty idols don’t get into favor with a good public and shitty leaders don’t get elected by a good public.

25. Old concepts such as chivalry and nobility and honour have now been corrupted to fit the new paradigm of communism and feminism and “muh equality”

26. Best article of August 2015 in my opinion

27. This was a great article. Too many of us have been raised on movies where the noble class is always the bad guy. We take the morals displayed by today’s nobles and put them on historical ones who as we have seen were very much different.

28. This is very timely as we in Canada are in an election cycle where NONE of the real issue will be addressed by a contemptuous and exploitive elite.
    Its been done in EVERY white nation and ONLY White nations. Its GENOCIDE.
    What he talks about in London is been done in Toronto, Vancouver and everywhere it can be accomplished.
    “I am opposed to the swamping of our land by foreign races that will inevitably lead to our physical extermination and extinction, as a people and as a race…And, the reality is there aren’t any white communities left. Call it what you will: White Flight, ethnic cleansing, genocide; in many areas whites are now irrelevant. There aren’t any whites left. So the reason I live in London is so I won’t forget this. And, I won’t forget what the political class has done to my people…”
    

29. The new white privilege

30. Uh, are you kidding? No mention of the most despicable pack of criminals to walk the earth in decades, i.e., the Bush clan and their cronies?

    1. You meant the Clintons and Obamas.

       1. I’d say you’re both right.

       2. Take off the blinders.

          1. You first, pig-ressive.

          2. Clever, in a barnyard edumacational sort of way.

    2. I did mention them: “wealthy, liberal political elite such as the Kennedys, Bushs, and Clintons”
       I see little difference between the so-called American liberals and the so-called conservatives.

       1. LOL. That’s the first time I’ve heard the Bushes referred to as liberals (and hopefully the last time).
          In any case, a passing reference is a pittance compared to the exposure/blame you dish upon the others. Considering all the crap the Bush scum has dug up, you should have dedicated the article to them if truth be told.

          1. A full article on the devastation wrought by W might be in order. But I think you are fooling yourself if you think there is much of a difference between Bush, Clinton, and Obama. They answer to the same corporate masters. Liberal versus conservative is kabuki theatre to keep the proles distracted.

31. The best article I’ve read on RoK this year. There is a great book called ‘why we can’t afford the rich’ that takes a deep dive into this subject.

32. They haven’t forgotten their obligation to America.
    On the contrary, they don’t give a damn about anything, except getting paid and gaining more power for themselves.

33. This reads like some of the bilge that leftist websites were publishing around the time of the Occupy movement.
    ‘Wah wah wah. Mark Zuckerberg drives a prius and Natalie Portman likes vegan food. Why aren’t they spending their money on things I like :(”
    Take some personal responsibility.
    The people mentioned in this article are outright successes in some of the most competitive industries on Earth- that they spend their money according to their beliefs and interests is their prerogative.
    ROK used to promote men taking the initiative in their lives. Now it indulges in golden age fallacies and tells men they are special little victims who need to take kratom to become real men…

34. America lacks virtue from top to bottom. It’s not just the so-called “aristocrats”. If anything, the Clintons, Zuckerberg, the Kardashians, professional athletes, and the Hollywood establishment merely reflect the values of the commoners. To criticize the aristocrats as though we, the masses, are somehow morally superior is folly. Honestly, this country doesn’t DESERVE a truly noble elite.

35. The problem with this article is calling this collection of Kikes and vermin an “aristocracy”? You think you can expect “noblese oblige” from this collection of animated infected pus?

36. Just about the best article on this site to date…and there are plenty of good ones.

37. There is an essential difference between the old aristocracy and the new aristocracies which the article fails to identify, ruining its entire premise.
    The old aristocracy was born into its exalted, wealthy, privileged position. Yeah, privilege way beyond anything any contemporary SJW is agitating against. From there followed the whole notion of noblesse oblige.
    The same does not apply for this new aristocracy. Their wealth and exalted position aren’t privileges they were given by birth, but (supposedly) rewards for their contributions. Kim Kardashian? Apparently the free market decided that her reality TV crap has economic value and thusly rewarded her.
    If you think the new aristocrats are unworthy of their positions, the issue is that society, or in the case of most of those people, free market capitalism, has rewarded the wrong people with riches, status and fame. Not that the new aristocrats haven’t reciprocated through noblesse oblige.

38. I think your use of the word ‘nobility’ is confusing as it is inaccurate. Pareto’s “elites” are a much better description. We have had elites eve in the US who were members of a landed upper class, but that was all swept away in the election of 1800 with the triumph of the Dmocratic-Republican party of Thomas Jefferson.
    What is true of contemporary elites is that they believe the interests of their class do not depend upon the prosperity of the United State, but in membership in a global elite. It is this change, since 1990, that has bred the many ills we see impoverishing America. Our current elites are members of one of several global elites – Finance, Technology, Entertainment. Bangalore and Silivon Valley have now more in common with each other than the country that surrounds them.
    We change this only with a ‘circulation of elites’. Which elites in the US are candidates for replace the set we have? We saw such a circulation starting in the New Deal, culminating in the reign of Kennedy the First. Bush the Second seemed to have formed a new elite class, but clearly he was overthrown. So, what are the alternative choices?

39. pretty accurate take on things. And this too shall pass…we are only one disaster away from real life. Enjoy it while you can.

40. This 2010 piece from the New English Review sums it up:
    http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/68292/sec_id/68292

41. The aristocracy, as the highest social class, is the one everyone looks up to and whose values they strive to absorb.
    And so we see the masses following the aristocracy in their materialism, pointless hedonism, lack of attachment to values (unless you count consumptionism as a value), and narcissism.

42. The nobility has only had an obligation to themselves and their master, which is Satan. Most of these ‘new nobility’ aren’t really new. Either their family had ties somewhere or they were ‘allowed in’ after swearing allegience to that upper crust.
    What made America decent for most of the populace wasn’t some kind of benevolent elite, but rather a middle and lower class who did their best to limit too much power from converging and who kept themselves sufficiently educated so as to also be autonomous and responsible for self.

43. Excellent article.Thanks for reposting it.

44. http://thecompleteobamatimeline.com/uploads/3/4/8/7/34872825/2471270_orig.jpg

    1. This is interesting. Detailed and quite convincing. It’s anonymous though, so its persuasiveness is limited coherence, self-consistency, apparent knowledge etc. I have read it all but the take-away appears to be that the Clinton Foundation is a monster of corruption and bribery and that George Soros is the eminence grise and puppet master. But then we already knew that so its preaching to the choir in that respect.

       FBI Insider Leaks All: Clinton Foundation Exposed! Involves Entire US Government! from conspiracy

       1. They want to get the word out, in which case preaching to the choir will happen. But all the “victims” (aka left pop) don’t have time for this. They are too busy in line for the new Jordan’s and trying to make sure unemployment doesn’t know they have a part time job on the side. lol

       2. Oh and, they owe Monica a big check, without that scandal, the Clintons wouldn’t be who they are fame wise.

45. …

46. That feeling when it’s 3 am, you’re all hopped up on redline and primatene tablets, and the latest article on ROK is a repost

47. This article is spot on. Gone are the days of honor or loyalty.
    Today we have nothing but a selfish generation (it gets even worse the higher you go). People used to have a sense of loyalty or duty to a country (especially if they’ve done well in said country – financially as well as socially, family). These elites feel they owe this country nothing. Many have become very wealthy giving this country away (side deals behind closed doors) so they only feel loyal to themselves.
    When was the last time a politician (President, member of Congress) had their kids go off to war? How many have died for the cause – the many wars that these politicians love to start (mostly in the name of “democracy”)?
    The rise of Trump is due to this disconnection by these elite (the established). He is tapping into an angry nation that has watched this country fall down due to the overwhelming greed that has a grip on our “elites”. Nations in the past have burned because of it (the lack of loyalty and honor).
    This nation will be no different.

48. I do not want to defend the Clintons, Soros, the face book twerp or that girl who blew ray j by any means. I find them all totally insidious.
    However, I do not see the difference between today’s insidious elite and that of the past. Of course if we take the worst of today and juxtapose them with the best of another time then we can see some really fanning evidence.
    However, with every power structure in every type of government, be it Roman Empire, Russan Tzars, Brit monarchy, commies, modern day banking, on and on and on, there have always been an insane amount of liberties taken.
    If you think that there has ever been a time, despite military service, that princes and business magnates have given a shit about the pleebs then you are really nutters.
    The truth is, it is easier today to break into the elite class than it has ever been in the history of mankind. Not easy by any measure, but much easier than it would have been under, say, a feudal system if you were born without the proper name.

    1. Good point indeed about the upward mobility these days compared to the past. I suspect that there is no way to avoid a bizarro elite class so long as we have nations and groups of people of sufficient size.
       Only a group small enough to be truly fairly meritocratic can avoid it, but as soon as the group is big enough that a leader is full time leader, you lose accountability and meritocracy in the sense of comparability to peers.

    2. If you think that there has ever been a time, despite military service, that princes and business magnates have given a shit about the pleebs then you are really nutters.
       Some nutters know their history.
       The leading members of the Anti-Slavery Society in England came from wealthy families – William Wilberforce, Thomas Clarkson, Zachary Macaulay.

       1. Ok. And some invent their history. And even if not it doesn’t change the fact that some are good and some are bad. So you just doubled down on my point. Play with someone in your own leauge dude. Leave me alone. No time for the mosquitos here

    3. Soros has said I think that he sees himself as a God (or something like that) which makes him kind of equivalent to the Roman Emperors of the past perhaps. The Romans though didn’t have to put up with Caligula trying to promote progressive, lefty values, even if he did fuck arses and stuff

       1. I don’t like the Soros shit either. But anytime there is an artistocratic elite there are some people who benefit, some people who get fucked, some good aristocrats and some bad ones. Being on the shit end of this one sucks. But to think that it wasn’t just as bad or worse under other situations is just wrong.
          That said, there is far more chance for upward mobility now under this regime than there would have been in others.
          My only point is that we should be careful to say we like this group of aristocratic, omnipotent jackasses but not this other group of aristocratic, omnipotent jackasses

          1. I don’t disagree with that. But the fat aristocrats of the past were less likely perhaps to try to change society fundamentally, even if they would happily exploit you and have you fight their wars…although that still happens. We have the opposite of an ancien regime now perhaps, but it can be oppressive in its own way and perhaps tends a little towards the totalitarian

          2. That is true. However, they also didn’t have to. People had a different feeling about the station they were born in. If and when there was a peasant rebellion of, historically, the thought of bringing democracy they didn’t subtle control society, they slaughtered their peasants wholesale.
             Soros is no different than Louis 16. All that’s changes is the tactics because the modern aristocrats saw what happened to the older ones and methods changed and became more sophisticated.
             Again, I’m not saying these guys are good. I’m just saying, to quote The Who, meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

          3. I can appreciate that. Not getting slaughtered wholesale…or at all…is certainly a boon. Subtle measures of control are typically how ‘management’ is done these days, I suppose, and it works in its own way, but there are surely considerable dangers still. I mean not just for the ruled but for the rulers. People need to believe in what they do. I don’t for a moment believe Mr Soros is purely a cynic. He can do what he does because he believes in what he does, or at least he can do the bad because he can say to himself that he also does good – you know all that progressive stuff: that part of the promotion of ‘(elite-sponsored) grass-roots democracy), colour revolutions etc where people don’t get killed but maybe have a better life. And the bad stuff, the pure lust for power and control – if that is what it is – gets repressed into (an effective) unconscious – be it in the brain or in the intelligence services. What I’m saying is I don’t think Soros (or whoever) is really quite the same as Louis 16 (let alone 14). Rather he’s both the King and the revolutionary: an alchemist, to use a term he uses in one of his own books. Nobody really cares what Louis 16 believed in. Soros though – what he believes in matters a great deal, and I’m not entirely convinced it’s all just about power. Not that necessarily makes it any better

          4. Mostly agree. I too do not subscribe to the evil mustache twisting “let’s destroy the world” attitude amongst the modern elite. I just don’t buy it.
             However, to say that kings and tsars and emperors beliefs didn’t matter is mistaken. They didn’t matter to the pleeb but they mattered to different nations. The thing is, the idea that someone could come from very little or even a middle of the road and, with brains, become the kind of person whose decisions influence the word would have never occurred to the Russian Tsars or the French Monarchs (your highness, the peasants are revolting! You said it! They stink on ice”
             I feel there is this movement lately to look at these empires and think how great they Are but to forget that they didn’t “ban your account” if you spoke against them then…they cancelled your next hat sizing appointment.
             Everyone imagines themselves as part of the noble ruling class.
             For my dime, given that I am a mix blood with no national connections and without family money or power I am glad I was born in a society, even with its evils and ills, where I could make something of myself.
             Warren Buffet once said that he was happy because if he was born at any other time or in any other place the skills that made him one of the wealthiest men in the world would be totally useless.
             If I was born when the Hapsburg family ruled id be fucked. I’m half German half Italian born with no money? If have worked mysef to death and died in the exact same situation I was born in most likely.
             Yes the “progressive” liberal influence is an insidious thing which is creeping it’s way into society and doing some very ugly things, but there are always ugly things. These are the ones we have. We can be upset about that or make the most of it.

          5. I’m certainly not saying that I think the opinions of Kings or emperors don’t matter, but mainly that they were more likely to be stable and knowable than those of a subtle fellow like Soros. Soros in other words is doing something different, just like Rockefeller (who’s alluded to in the other article). In the latter’s case we’re talking about globalism, or something along those lines – the setting up of a system, a potentially very ambitious one. Maybe Soros is part of that or maybe he isn’t but while that may be just a different (and kinder?) way of ruling the world for a different more complex world the apparent ideological differences can’t really be overstated compared to what has gone before. No-one would disparage what Marcus Aurelius thought, but then he wasn’t part of an apparently globalist, apparently collectivist ideology (maybe I’m wrong – maybe Rockefeller’s just teasing and I’m reading too much into Soros’ penchant for sticking his fingers into everybody’s pie).
             In some senses I do think it is a kinder system – in the sense that you indicate – although equally the commitment to ‘turning things over’ (the alchemical part perhaps) isn’t necessarily so kind, especially if you factor war into the equation.
             I certainly don’t idealize / idolize monarchies of the past, although I except that’s probably the exception round here. I’m a democrat for the most part (political system wise not in terms of the party). But what happens when you’re a democrat that no longer finds democracy very believable? And I would say that’s increasingly the norm rather than the exception (although fortunately for the elites, people are more likely to comfort eat than protest these days). To the extent that democracy is an illusion – even if it is a kindly one – it’s difficult to see it lasting if cynicism – and deception is so fundamental to the system.
             It seems like the whole thing is built around catastrophism.
             As for me, I would have been fucked under the Hapsburgs too, so I’m not saying its all bad; and I appreciate everybody can’t rule, perhaps, but there’s only so much sustenance to be had in a house of mirrors or whatever we’re in at the moment Eventually everybody will suffer nausea, and that seems to me like a pretty fundamental design flaw

          6. What to do when you realize the system is all a dog and pony show? That’s easy, maximize your happiness.
             Nausea unto death seems about right. But, in the meantime, good wines, cheeses and port products exist, women have smooth legs and the sun is shining.

          7. well, I’ll overlook the fact that that does sound a little bit like give-in / enjoy the decline, but wine, cheese, and crackers women and a soiled copy of Sartre’s Nausea does sound like heaven. Or maybe hell. One or the other

          8. Nothing is good nor bad but thinking makes it so. The world grows. The world declines. If you want to call it enjoying the decline I won’t deny it. I like to think im just enjoying life. What else is life for?

          9. “Nothing is good nor bad but thinking makes it so”
             we do the valuing for sure, and are responsible for our valuations. I don’t agree that we can call black white and white black and for it to be equally true though. I guess I hold out for the possibility of some kind of intransitive truth. To recognise the limits of perceptions and evaluative apparatus are just that: to recognise our limits

          10. ‘fat aristocrats of the past were less likely perhaps to try to change society’…because it worked well for them being at the top of the heap. Why change the system and do things to benefit the people when it might cost you some power or money and create enemies with other members of the elite. Not changing society when you are the part of the elite 1% at the top of the heap is not a noble virtue.
              Even with say Zukerberg wanting to implement social changes, its not a noble gesture if the underlying motive is to benefit his wealth/power or those of his rich friends. Left or right distinctions become less meaningful when it comes to the elite. Whatever works to help them get richer or extend their influence thats their No.1 cause

          11. That was kind of my point. ‘Changing’ society, being the revolutionary who leads society in any particular direction is now part of the progressive / elite style. Beyond any particular goal or endpoint, changing people is a way of leading and controlling them, not least because it involves influencing their belief system in a direction that may be positive to you – think for instance of a bank (boo) that happens to be working to help the environment or some other worthy cause.
              Today we’re all (supposed to be) working for a better society, it’s just that the elite are getting rich and staying on top off the back of it all

49. Putting the cream of the crop in the frontlines instead of the dregs in WWI had a really devastating impact on the western world and helped tipped the scales towards much greater egalitarianism.

    1. Both were represented in the great war (wwI). The higher class tended to have officer positions or were pilots, while the working class were the bulk of the soldiers and sailors, hence the term cannon fodder to describe the latter

       1. When I talk about dregs I talk about the weakest and most stupid members of society as well as criminals.

50. “While we can’t do anything at the present time to remove our new aristocrats, we at least can nourish our souls with what is best: high quality art and music, classical philosophy, and sound theology.”
    Reading the Stoics come to mind.
    

51. The old nobility was that way because wealth came from the land. Nationalism naturally sprung from that… To protect their wealth and status they had to protect their land and those that worked it. Now however wealth is measured in make believe fiat currency and controlled by a nomadic people. There is no loyalty to any land or any feelings to the interchangeable cogs that work it. It will remain so until land has value again.

    1. Well, and succinctly, said.

52. The point is not to lose hope-we are often drawn to idealize history because we have a need to believe there was at least once a period of ideal state of affairs. But it simply isn’t so, and thankfully it brings a good side of the medal with the bad one. These times have come, but they might as well go past. Think of the degenerate, interbred aristocracy drinking expensive wines while their hard-working peasants were starving. Think of the feeble-minded dynasties which ended up being playthings of their personal guards, family or court members-the Roman Emperors, Habsburg Emperors or British Kings may ring a bell. The elites of today spend their money in most idiotic ways because they themselves are idiots-crooked, lying politicians, stupid overpaid athletes, whore singers, whore celebrities etc.
    The only thing that can shake these idiots off is the people waking up, growing up mentally and reclaiming sanity for our society.

53. “AHHHH! SHE WAS SHOT IN THE HEAD!”

54. There is another huge difference between the aristocracy of old and the modern self appointed aristocracy. The aristocracy of old believed that they were responsible to God for the way they ruled. The modern ones are by and large atheists who believe they have a responsibility to no one but themselves and their cronies.

    1. Many aristocrats traditionally viewed religion cynically as a tool for keeping the rabble in line, without believing in it themselves. Today’s aristocrats just show their nonbelief more openly.

55. Charter jets/turboprops burn hundreds to thousands of pounds of JET-A fuel per hour.
    It always boggled my mind how these folks could charter a turboprop to move their ass for a few hours to go from LA to Sacramento for a wine tasting at a total fuel burn of say 2500 lbs, and then go preach about global warming.
    I had less of a problem flying NASCAR owners than the hypocritical types.

56. “Where men are forbidden to honor a king, they honor millionaires, athletes, or film-stars instead: even famous prostitutes or gangsters. For spiritual nature, like bodily nature, will be served; deny it food and it will gobble poison.”

    I think of C.S. Lewis mainly as a British Jack Chick with a few more IQ points and a more elite education. But occasionally he did write something showing real insight into man’s nature.

57. They are all over privileged degenerates not much different from the rich in third world nations.
    Clinton is a “vegan”, I recall he used pop into McDonalds for burgers.

58. Nobles used to feel bound to protect and serve the commoners. Now, the nobles try to destroy the commoners.

59. Plutocratic insurgency: where the scions of global capitalism appropriate for themselves extra-sovereign privileges and make war on the rest of humanity from their gated communities and techno-palaces. Quintus and I have been talking about this for some time. Here is how they operate: http://masculineepic.com/index.php/2017/08/13/tracing-the-plutocratic-insurgency/

60. Where have I seen George Soros before… https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4785536d458515209ec8981eca85374572506c98e49b2e59f13486b019b90bb3.jpg
    Oh yeah, Pixars Monsters Inc.

61. Where have I seen George Soros before…
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4785536d458515209ec8981eca85374572506c98e49b2e59f13486b019b90bb3.jpg
    Oh yeah, Pixar’s Monsters Inc.

62. Where does that C.S. Lewis qoute come from?

63. This was a great article, nobility should be noble. Try telling that to land barons in England who burn down their centuries old listed ancestral homes for the insurance.
    ‘we at least can nourish our souls with what is best: high quality art and music, classical philosophy, and sound theology.’
    You are what you consume, and most people consume vapid shit.

64. “This idea of ‘wealth for me, but socialism for the proles’ is a familiar trope among our new aristocrats.”
    Well, duh!

65. America’s new “nobility” is not American. They are parasites from around the world – and like all parasites they poison the host to continue feeding on its body.

66. The term for this is “Noblesse Oblige”. Something that I think our current crop of useless overlords would flee from as a vampire from garlic. To be replaced with virtue signaling. Another useless occupation.
    There is lots of good Americans in our that were wealthy and had plenty of Noblesse Oblige. Checkout LeRoy Grumman. During the war he made sure his factory workers were taken care of, including day care for the new Rosies on the factory floor. As far as I can tell he could talk to top businessmen, engineers, and the workers as an equal.
    Also, I’ve read several Taki essays on Euro nobility nobody knows of that displays plenty of Noblesse.
    I think it’s still out there, just not in the headlines. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/84a59b86c24abeb3f18785aee91dab3bba6e101a77344aa8c3f830b2858f0ed6.jpg

67. “This idea of “wealth for me, but socialism for the proles” is a familiar trope among our new aristocrats.”
    This has been the idea for the american ruling class for about 120 years or at this point. The wealthy always move towards socialism because it cements them at the top of the political and economic pyramid and for those that like play social engineer they get to do that too.

68. This was the purpose of the SS.
    Much like Britain the Germans had lost their old upper class and in the Weimar years found them replaced by all manner of degenerates and criminals.
    The SS existed in order to build a new aristocracy.
    Hence why they were hunted down and executed so viciously after the war. Can’t have such people running around improving peoples lives.

    1. A boring fantasy.

       1. For jew

69. ‘The behavior of the English nobility during the First World War is a good example of this.’
    We lost 49 Generals killed in WWI
    By WWII, that number dropped to around 12.

70. Once one has money, raising taxes really doesn’t matter. You can just move your money to safe havens from the tax man. Business owners can pass the cost on to their consumers and workers. All taxes are eventually paid for on the backs of workers.
    If you are an entertainer, landlord or business owner, more immigrants means more consumers of your product and cheap slave labor. So the elites are going to back leftist causes. Leftists are just their useful idiots.

71. I tried to form a fully fleshed out answer to this article but I couldn’t find the right words for it. Long story short, please use solely elite class for those familys. There are still aristocratic familys out there, that don’t want to be thrown in the same pot with these.

Comments are closed.