Aryan Skynet

Once Aryan Skynet Goes Live It Doesn't Matter Who Pulled The Switch

Nick Tosches on the Social Capital of the Ethnic Neighborhood

tosches

Pop music historian and mafia chronicler Nick Tosches, in his anecdotal study Save the Last Dance for Satan, captures the value of the ethnic neighborhood in a passage that warrants quotation at length:

[…] as the Church comprises many churches, so the neighborhood – I can not capitalize the initial n no matter how strongly effect and meaning entice me to do so, for, here, to exalt the word would be to misrepresent the thing – comprises neighborhoods beyond number. This is not an idle analogy: the neighborhood is, or was, the embodiment of a spiritual ethos as supernal and puissant in reality as that of the Church in theory. As every neighborhood was a parish, and every parish was a neighborhood, so together they have died.

The true gauge of the freedom of any community is the measurement of the degree of equality by which the fruits of malfeasance are shared by the rulers and the ruled, the cop on the beat and the man or woman on the street. The essence of democracy, as of capitalism, is corruption. Only when the criminal in blue and the criminal in mufti, the peddler and the priest and the alderman and the drunkard – only when they are neighbors of common root and conspiracy is any neighborhood safe for the old lady on the stoop on a hot summer night; only then is there true charity, only then is there a justice that is real, and only then is there life in the air. As the social clubs close, so the churches empty. This is fact, not metaphor.

These may sound to some like words beyond good and evil, but not to one who was to the neighborhood born.1

Thoughts?

Rainer Chlodwig von K.

Notes

  1. Tosches, Nick. Save the Last Dance for Satan. New York, NY: Kicks Books, 2011, pp. 93-94.
Advertisements

About icareviews

Propaganda Minister of #AryanSkynet

34 comments on “Nick Tosches on the Social Capital of the Ethnic Neighborhood

  1. icareviews
    November 11, 2016

    Reblogged this on icareviews.

    Like

  2. kerberos616
    November 11, 2016

    Reblogged this on Kerberos616.

    Like

  3. The Grey Enigma
    November 11, 2016

    Reblogged this on The Grey Enigma.

    Like

  4. bob saffron
    November 12, 2016

    The Wild West is so named only because the State insists that its monopoly on violence is not only legitimate but the only guarantee of civil society.

    For “capitalism”, I assume that the writer refers to State capitalism.

    Like

    • icareviews
      November 12, 2016

      Capitalism is people trying to make a buck. It lends itself to corruption regardless of whether or not it falls into the cronyist category. For example, the candy store proprietor an old supervisor told me about, who, when she was a kid, would sell gullible children candy at a dime apiece or two for a quarter. Used car salesmen don’t need the government to make them corrupt.

      Like

      • bob saffron
        November 12, 2016

        Competition tends to weed out shysters. Goodwill has real value. You can’t protect people from themselves. The fool’s mother is always pregnant.

        Like

      • icareviews
        November 12, 2016

        “Competition tends to weed out shysters.”

        You mean the way McDonald’s weeded out its less scrupulous mom and pop competitors by providing customers with healthy alternatives like pink slime? It’s out of sheer goodwill that “food” manufacturers list the ingredients and nutrition facts for their products, I’m sure. They’d all be doing that even if the government weren’t mandating it, right? And it’s great how the freedom of expression in the media marketplace has weeded all the wickedness and lies out of the country’s TV diet. The movie industry hasn’t been effectively censored by any state agency for decades. That’s because it runs on unadulterated goodwill for the gentile customer. I guess that’s why we have such wholesome content across the board nowadays, right? Now we have torture porn at the multiplex and bukkake and shit-eating for kids and all to see on the internet, which is fantastic because it affirms our liberty not to be saved by judgmental primitives.

        Like

      • Hipster Racist
        November 12, 2016

        I try to make a distinction between finance capital and physical and human capital. Finance capital is a social construct. This is where the anti-Fed libertarians almost get it right, it’s just that their cure – the gold standard – is worse than the disease.

        But real true “free market capitalism” is in fact amoral, and making money is not the highest purpose in life. Capitalism is like democracy – it works at some scales and falls apart at other scales.

        Democracy works quite well in a town or a small state. Direct democracy at the level of the USA federal government cannot work, and especially not at a scale when human communication is dominated by the mass media.

        Capitalism works great when you are talking about two diners. If one diner starts selling shit food and ripping people off, they will go to the one across town.

        But how does a free market work in the case of a natural monopoly? Mineral rights are on the oldest problems in political science, how does a “free market” decide such a thing? What about “air rights” being traded in Manhattan for skyscraper construction?

        Face it, property itself is a “social construct.” There are no technical processes that can replace human judgement and reason. At some point you can’t leave decisions to some “objective” ideology, you’ll have to actually make a judgement call.

        Liked by 1 person

      • bob saffron
        November 12, 2016

        Trying to make a buck is what we’re all doing. I see nothing dirty in money per se. It is only a means to an end, honorable or otherwise.

        Like

      • icareviews
        November 12, 2016

        Which is precisely why capitalistic license in itself is insufficient as a value for guiding a healthy society. It’s amoral and represents only one of the several dimensions of human experience deserving of our attention. Freedom and efficiency shouldn’t be granted any greater weight than the moral, spiritual, and ethnic wellbeing of a community.

        Like

      • bob saffron
        November 13, 2016

        A fool and his money are soon parted – this wisdom is eternal. It applies equally well in all political environments, anarchic or totalitarian, across all cultures and peoples.

        As you say, shysters will always exist and it’s good that people recognize this. In the absence of Big Brother, reputation is all. Where the product/service requires expert evaluation, consumers will pay for what they perceive to be impartial advice, eg. Consumer Reports.

        McDonalds serves crap, but it takes two to tango. Customers vote with their pockets. You or I might screw up our noses at the fare, but MacDonalds customers wouldn’t become Whole Foods customers in any scenario.

        Time is limited so I can’t go into an elaborate discussion of media oligopoly. Suffice to say it was always in the government’s interest to ally with the media, right back to Gutenberg. The Statute of Anne is a good primer on the indissoluble marriage between Crown and Press.
        http://subsol.c3.hu/subsol_2/contributors0/nimustext.html

        Like

      • bob saffron
        November 13, 2016

        No one suggests that commercial values are all important, though they are important to the extent that resources are scarce.

        Like

      • bob saffron
        November 13, 2016

        http://www.jewishpress.com/judaism/halacha-hashkafa/prayers-for-the-government/2013/01/31/

        Advocacy for strong government is a hallmark of Jewish activism.

        Like

      • icareviews
        November 14, 2016

        As is advocacy for minimal government. Goldman, Rand, Hayek, Mises, Rothbard, Friedman – all Jews. State power itself isn’t Jewish unless Jews are the ones we allow to wield it. All the Jewish libertarians want to do is vest the power of the state in the financial elite, which in turn becomes a de facto state, the choice of the “market” notwithstanding. What you would ultimately end up with after a few decades of unfettered capitalist activity would in fact be a new feudalism and debt slavery. Jewish supremacy, in other words.

        Like

      • bob saffron
        November 14, 2016

        Of those cited, I’d only class two as libertarians – Mises and Rothbard, both of whom suffered professionally for their ideology. Hayek’s more a progressive (pro-State schooling, health), and not Jewish. Rand a lousy fiction writer with some weird ideology on intellectual property. Friedman a technocrat (creator of income withholding tax, champion of central banking). Goldberg? Doesn’t ring a bell.

        The most important State monopoly of all – money – and State sanction of fractional-reserve banking by commercial banks (interest levied on money created ex nihilo) is what lies at the heart of the very fruitful relationship between State and Finance:

        It’s uncontroversial to state that Jews are manic organizers and logical that centralization of power favours their groups strategy. It’s so much easier to have one courtier whisper in the potentate’s ear than try to cover ten thousand micro power-nodes.

        Historically the Jewish minority has consistently developed symbiotic relationships with the State, affording protection against the wrath of the State’s subjects (the yellow arm-band a regal protection symbol).

        Like

      • icareviews
        November 14, 2016

        It doesn’t matter what you call them or what the little eccentricities of their ideologies are. Jewish economic thinkers have a history of lobbying for the dissolution of state powers that interfere with their machinations and downplaying the importance of race and nation and citing these as barriers to increased efficiency. Call it anarchism, minarchism, libertarianism, what have you – in the hands of a hostile Jew it’s merely Judaism by other means.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jewish_economists

        Like

      • icareviews
        November 14, 2016

        Mises opposed race-based solidarity. His ideas are anathema to ours.

        https://mises.org/blog/mises-battle-between-liberalism-and-racism

        The Acton Institute cites limited government as an “axiom of Jewish economic theory”:

        http://www.acton.org/pub/religion-liberty/volume-17-number-1/jewish-theology-and-economic-theory

        Anyway, until they’ve undermined a country’s established moral and state authority. Then they want all of the power for themselves. It’s a means to an end.

        Like

    • bob saffron
      November 15, 2016

      Jews are over-represented in all professions, economics being no exception. But the important question is what the majority of Jewish economists prescribe, and that is clearly a strong State apparatus. Hell, I can find you a Jews-for-guns organization if you think that’ll prove Jews love the 2nd Amendment.

      I fail to see how Jews – a minority – could enforce their will in a situation of anarchy, that doesn’t make sense.

      Like

      • bob saffron
        November 15, 2016

        Agreed they want all power to themselves. That’s why they consistently argue for centralization and strong government who can deliver same.

        I ignore Mises on race, he’s clearly biased (fled Nazi capture, married a Jew and never spoke to Jewish in-group solidarity). I also think his polylogism argument is irrelevant. Birds of a feather (tend to) flock together.

        That aside, I like most of his economic arguments. He was unable to get an academic posting in his native Austria on account of socialist Jews who held key positions in the universities.

        Rothbard was much more reliable on race. From memory, he was one of the founding members of the League of the South. Married a Catholic and was a closet Holocaust-skeptic.

        Like

      • icareviews
        November 15, 2016

        “I ignore Mises on race”

        You have to in order to make the case that his ideas are conducive to European peoples’ national health and sovereignty. According to Eustace Mullins, Mises even participated in Coudenhove-Kalergi’s anti-borders and pro-miscegenation Pan-European movement.

        It’s futile to pretend that Austrian economics hasn’t been riddled with Jews from the beginning:

        https://books.google.com/books?id=GiEU_muNhKIC&pg=PA20&dq=friedrich+von+hayek+jewish&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjV3Jjtu6zQAhVCwiYKHdK6B7EQuwUIIDAA#v=onepage&q=friedrich%20von%20hayek%20jewish&f=false

        Like

      • icareviews
        November 15, 2016

        It’s called neoliberalism. Pure anarchy, like any pure iteration of any ideology, doesn’t exist.

        Like

      • bob saffron
        November 16, 2016

        Where have I pretended that Austrian economics isn’t riddled with Jews? Didn’t I already say that in all professions Jews are overrepresented? I also made the point that Austrian economics and libertarianism in general are not espoused by the majority of Jews, point which you seem unable to grasp.

        Mises was an economist; I ignore his thougths on race just like I’d ignore his tips on exercise. It’s outside his sphere of expertise (aside from his biases, to which I’ve alluded).

        Anarchy is just the absence of the State. Neoliberalism is what happens when all the important functions of society are controlled or regulated by the State (banking, professions, media, money, law and order, competition, welfare), leaving private enterprise the left-overs. This is the case of the 20th century. I call it crony-capitalism.

        Like

      • icareviews
        November 16, 2016

        Shades of shekelism.

        Like

      • Hipster Racist
        November 16, 2016

        Anarchy is just the absence of the State.

        But as soon as you have more than a handful of people, there are conflicts. Conflicts lead to violence, which leads to men organizing themselves, making rules, and enforcing those rules with force – i.e., a state. Then you need some sort of way to make ruling about the rules, there, now you have judges and a court.

        You can call it something else, but it’s still a “state.”

        Liked by 1 person

  5. Hipster Racist
    November 12, 2016

    If you think of societies like an organism, cell inequality is the basis. In an organism like an ameba, all cells are equal, and that is as complex as it can get. But when you have specialized cells, you can have something like a mammal.

    Those old civic society institutions, like churches and social clubs, were specialized. Leviathan state always wants to destroy any civic society institutions because they are a check on the state’s power.

    When the slaves were freed, and Liberia was set up as a new homeland for them. They recreated their society in the model of the society they were used to. The American blacks became the masters and the native Africans became the slaves.

    The story goes that the Parliament building was just across the town square from the Freemason hall. While the native Africans had representation in the Parliament, all the legislation was determined ahead of time at the Freemason building. The American blacks just walked across the street and outvoted the native Africans.

    I try to keep manosphere type sentiments elsewhere, but the basic specialization of roles is that of men and women. During the era of women’s suffrage, there were lost of women that complained it wouldn’t give women more social power, but would actually lessen their privileges to be forced into politics – politics being just another men’s institution, warfare by other means.

    Some women suggested that if women entered politics, it would lead to the erasure of the distinction between mens’ and women’s roles and in the future women would be actually drafted into the military. After all, participation in politics has traditionally been part of participation in the military.

    But those women were crazy, what did they know?

    Like

  6. Pingback: Nick Tosches on the Social Capital of the Ethnic Neighborhood | Hipster Racist

  7. bob saffron
    November 12, 2016

    E. Michael Jones’ The Slaughter of Cities surely deserves a mention in relation to the State’s role (as proxy for jews and WASPS in this case) in denaturing the comunity.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. guest
    November 13, 2016

    >There are no technical processes that can replace human judgement and reason.

    In our imaginary libertarian wonderland we will have ethereum, a new, alternative robot law!

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Hipster Racist
    November 14, 2016

    The most important State monopoly of all – money – and State sanction of fractional-reserve banking by commercial banks (interest levied on money created ex nihilo) is what lies at the heart of the very fruitful relationship between State and Finance:

    This is true, but it’s a bit more subtle that the ideologues on either side want to admit. Fractional reserve is a subsidy to creditors and a detriment to debtors. A “strong dollar” favors creditors, inflation favors debtors.

    In theory, “the rich” are the creditors and the poor are the debtors – but in modern finance, the elite’s bank accounts are stuffed with fantasy derivatives – they are the biggest debtors of all.

    This is why old fashioned conservatives are so financially illiterate. So many conservatives really believe that their federal income taxes go to pay for black people’s EBT. It’s nonsense. Your federal income taxes go directly to pay Wall Street for interest on the money they were given the monopoly to create.

    But Bitcoin isn’t going to save us either. How do you enforce contracts? The state, the men with guns. Free market money is theoretically great, but libertopianism always fails because the first thing people will do is create private states to enforce contracts – and a “private state” is just a tyranny. The modern corporations is a dictatorship. If property rights are absolute, that means you can just arbitrarily shoot people on your land. Who owns the land? Who enforces property deeds? The men with guns – i.e., the state.

    Metal, especially gold, is where we get our modern ideas of money – it’s fungible, it’s divisible, it’s portable. But as they say, you can’t eat gold. In fact, gold is such good money precisely because it’s worthless. It’s heavy, so you start trading gold certificate instead of the metal itself, which is locked up. As Buffett says, you dig gold out of the ground, the dig another hole and put the gold back in the ground. Is that really a good use of human labor and coordination? It’s on a par with the Broken Window Theory. How do you get full employment? Pay people to break windows then pay them to fix them? Pay people to dig holes?

    Money is a social institution. Commodity money, say, iron or steel ingots, has the advantage of not needed much in the way of social coordination. That’s why gold always worked. When the system broke down, you still had a tangible commodity. But gold is worthless if there’s a food shortage, “a piece of bread could buy a bag of gold.”

    In this history of Europe, Jews were able to dominate finance because the Catholics and the Kings used the Jews as a go-between, and sometimes used Jews against each other. Jews were put in a privileged position precisely because Europeans couldn’t coordinate so needed an outside, “independent” actor.

    The libertarians are right, in a sense, about the deficiencies of fractional reserve and inflation and the Fed. But their “solution” is worse than the cure.

    Bitcoin is great – but it has a built in limit. Then comes a deflationary crash. So we trade fractions of bitcoins. How is that any different? Not long ago they were talking about embedding molecules of gold into paper money – that would make it “hard money.”

    Put a pound of gold worth whatever next to a BMW. What is really worth more? So we have massive inflation and how 100 molecules of gold can buy a brand new self-driving BMW. Why are we messing with the gold at all – a relatively worthless element? All gold offers us is a way to coordinate trade without a central authority.

    In theory, bitcoin does that as well – except, you know, you need the massive infrastructure of the internet, and computers, and cell phones, and electricity, etc., etc, otherwise it all goes “poof.” It’s not like bitcoin can exist outside of the network.

    Gold can though.

    But who needs gold? Gold is just a convenient way to “keep score” without resorting to the real ur-money – lead, as in bullets. Mao was right.

    There is no technical solution. Wealth = natural resources plus human labor. Natural resources are created by God, and human labor is our own efforts.

    There is not “right way” or some sort of “natural law” that we can outsource the hard human judgements necessary to make society work.

    Treasury used to be in charge of the Secret Service, protecting the President – along with punishing counterfeiters. That shows you how important the US dollar was.

    But 9/11 changed that – now, the Secret Service is under the Department of Homeland Security. It turned out that lead (force) was more important after all.

    Free markets work for consumer goods – free markets don’t work for infrastructure. Free markets work for entertainment like movie tickets. We don’t support slavery so buying wives and children is not socially acceptable anymore.

    Markets exist to serve society, not the other way around. It’s not a coincidence that Jews have been the ones pushing libertarianism – and communism – for the last 100+ years. Jews love ideologies, because they are lawyers at heart, and ideologies, at the end of the day, are just a bunch of words. Either markings on paper/bits on a screen – or funny sounds people make with their tongues.

    Jews are the world’s best producers of hot air – which is why they love ideologies so much, capitalism, communism – NRx – whatever. Jews will talk your ear off if you let them.

    It just depends on how much you values the noises coming out of a Jew’s mouth.

    Liked by 1 person

    • bob saffron
      November 15, 2016

      Freedom to deal or not deal with someone doesn’t need intellectualizing.

      Like

  10. bob saffron
    November 15, 2016

    @ HR:
    Both historically and presently the Crown/government was the single largest debtor. Even in a non-paper money scenario, it’s almost certain Jews would continue to occupy their money-lending role, though not necessarily be the only ones to occupy that niche.

    As you say, money is whatever people accept as a medium of exchange. I’m not in favour of a gold standard per se, rather that people decide themselves what money they trust.

    Aside from inflation being a subtle theft of purchasing-power to the detriment of the last-receivers and the benefit of the first-receivers (banks and financial institutions), inflation via the banking system sets up the familiar boom-bust cycle.

    Sure, small tyrannies I can live with. At least there’s competition betweens tyrants that way. Don’t like the local overlord, move to the next county. Tyrants without subjects have to rethink their strategies.

    Like

Leave a Reply - Your Comment WILL be Moderated.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: