Tag Archives: society

Liberal Ouroboros

https://westernrifleshooters.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/surgery_diagram.jpg?w=622&h=467

“All my friends are brown and red.”-Soundgarden, “Spoonman”

We are relentlessly told that white men are the problem, the “cancer of human history” to quote the Jewess Susan Sontag, but are they really? Are they the ones committing 52.5% of the homicides despite being just 13% of the population? Are they the ones spreading infectious diseases and bleeding the welfare state dry? Are they the ones running people over on bike paths and detonating nail bombs outside of pop concerts?

According to the FBI Uniform Crime statistics, with whites at a “control” of one anti-gay hate crime, the relative per-capita offending numbers for Hispanics are 5.08, and for blacks, 10.04. What this means is that Hispanics are five times more likely, and blacks ten times more likely, than whites to commit anti-gay hate crimes; given that Arab Moslems are classified as white, I can guarantee the numbers are probably much lower for whites than even that, meaning Hispanics and blacks commit those crimes at an even greater disproportion (and this is before considering Hispanics are often also classed as white). Regarding anti-transgender hate crimes, Hispanics are over fourteen times more likely than whites to commit such acts, and blacks are over forty-nine times more likely than whites to commit anti-transgender hate crimes. Remember, 70% of blacks voted for Proposition 8, and a majority of Hispanics did. In the aftermath of its passing, it was absolutely hilarious to watch outlets like The Atlantic and The Huffington Post twist themselves into knots trying to explain away why their pets didn’t vote the way they were expected to.

And of course the ungrateful blacks have of late been lashing out at the Jews who so generously set up and ran the NAACP for them as a cudgel against whites (recall Marcus Garvey stormed out of their offices because the leadership was “all Jews”); Ben “The Holy Grail” (because he’s a black Jew) Faulding wrote for Forward:

A recent controversy involving anti-Semitic firebrand Louis Farrakhan and leaders of the Women’s March has revealed a perplexing division. Last week, Women’s March organizer Tamika Mallory came under fire for attending an event led by Nation of Islam’s Louis Farrakhan and later posing for a photo with him. In true fashion, Farrakhan made several anti-Semitic statements during the speech, which Mallory did not repudiate. When she came under fire for her associations, she wrote a rather problematic tweet, which didn’t help her case: “If your leader does not have the same enemies as Jesus, they may not be THE leader! Study the Bible and you will find the similarities. Ostracizing, ridicule, and rejection is a painful part of the process…but faith is the substance of things!”[1]

Oddly enough, another of the Women’s March’s principle organizers is sharia proponent Linda Sarsour, who as a Moslem presumably is also an “enemy of Jesus”? Would not Farrakhan, also a Moslem, fall under the same category? What about March-approved Minnesota Congressional candidate Ilhan Omar, another noted “anti-Semite”? The Women’s March’s “unity principles” are: ending violence (75% of all global armed conflicts involve Islam), reproductive rights, LGBTQIA Rights,[2] Worker’s Rights (like wage-depressing open borders, or a $15 minimum wage which drives automation and the loss of even shitty service jobs), Civil Rights (such as the unconstitutional Affirmative Action and free college), Disability Rights, Immigrant Rights (read: no borders), and Environmental Justice (ignoring environmental degradation as a consequence of open borders and the importation of people who do not value conservation). They’ve also stated that, “Anti-Semitism, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, racism and white supremacy are and always will be indefensible.” All I have to say regarding the first three items in that list: Islam. “Transphobia,” see above. Racism is now a meaningless term, and “white supremacy” exists seemingly everywhere because America is a white-majority country that was founded by whites for whites, or FUBU (For Us, By Us).

After Starbucks announced it would shut down for a day in May to indoctrinate its employees about “racism” or something following the Rosa Parks Two “incident,” Linda Sarsour took issue with one of the organizations conducting the anti-bias training:

Starbucks almost had me on their anti-bias training for all employees UNTIL I heard the ADL was enlisted as one of the organizations to build their anti-bias curriculum. An anti-Arab, anti-Palestinian organization that peddles Islamophobia and attacks America’s prominent Muslim organizations and activists and supports/sponsors US law enforcement agents to travel and get trained by Israeli military.

Trouble in paradise for the J-Left? Thanks for demographically transforming the United States beyond all recognition, Jews, but we’ll take it from here!

It seems cucked white women are also obsolete in the new coalition; Melissa Harris-Perry, writing for Elle magazine notes that, “The Women’s March has created a kind of intersectional algorithm for determining which communities to target in 2018,” and this “algorithm” doesn’t seem to include Iscariotic white women, as another chief organizer Carmen Perez says:

Even in the Women’s March, much the work falls on the shoulders of the women of color. This is a movement where we’re trying to get people to understand that we must follow women of color, where trans folks and indigenous folks and other marginal people must be at the center. It can be hard for the people used to being in charge to step back. Today I went to a meeting about the importance of having black women lead, in Las Vegas. In that meeting several white women said, ‘Don’t forget about us white women.’ Or, ‘It’s about if you are black on the inside.’ I just couldn’t believe that in 2018, as we are preparing for the one-year anniversary, we still had white women trying to make things about themselves. It’s exhausting.[3]

It is exhausting; these supposedly high-IQ whites and even higher-IQ Jews just can’t seem to get it through their thick skulls that they’re not wanted! That no amount of supplicating and debasement is going to ingratiate them to an organization that is fundamentally opposed (not to sound too hyperbolic, but this is true) to Western civilization. The thing about this “algorithm,” though, is that it is unsustainable, and in their quest to embolden, say, “indigenous folk,” who are something like 2% of the population, they are alienating white women, roughly 31 or 32% of the population. Likewise, all the Jew-bashing is going to dry up a huge well of resources. Though the Jews are somewhere in the 1-2% range of the population, they are half of the country’s billionaires (WHITE PRIVILEGE MUCH!?). The Southern Poverty Law Center, which I have covered here, now has an endowment that has ballooned to almost $500 million dollars, which is almost seven times that of the NRA. Here’s a little snippet from the SPLC, which just goes to show how dishonest they are in equating the milquetoast buttoned-down basic bitch CPAC with the Alt-Right:

For years the Conservative Political Action Conference has had an extremist problem –– budding white nationalists, young and excited leaders of the racist “alt-right” and angry voices in the anti-LGBT movement all cozying up with conservative political leaders and hoping to have their voices heard.[4]

False on every possible count, but when your worldview does not wholly conform to the ever-shifting sands of the Lobotomites on the Left, then you are an Alt-Right hater, deserving of having your life destroyed. I’d expect nothing less from the ideological kin of the Bolsheviks who shipped 200,000 people to the gulags for making unapproved jokes about the Soviet regime. The thing is, when even The Hill is publishing op-eds that the Left has abandoned logic in its hysteria over “white supremacy,” you know you’ve completely jumped the shark. “Scholars” such as Reshmi Dutt-Ballerstadt have gone so far as to charge that the “logic of meritocracy” is…wait for it…RACIST! Vox has produced a video defending MS-13 as harmless bike-riding teenagers (seriously). The Left in 2018 has morphed into an atomized wasteland of incoherent and conflicting ideologies, niche identities, and mental illness galore.

In this “space,” you have Original Sin plowing head-long into social constructivism. You have the J(Jew)-Left and the P(Palestinian)-Left at loggerheads. You have inclusiveness that excludes and enemies as allies and the most obscene paradoxes. You have TERFs and gender-queers and “allies” and the trans-abled…The Year Zero Pol Pot Left is now in a state of infinite regress. Sure, hating whites (and many whites hating themselves) might be the glue that (barely) binds these contradictory, disparate strands for now, but for how long? And what kind of fallout are we looking at when the inevitable occurs?

Source: The Anatomically Correct Bannana

[1] https://forward.com/opinion/396068/we-need-to-talk-about-black-anti-semitism/

[2] See my take on that here: https://www.defendevropa.org/2018/uncategorized/a-gay-old-time-open-borders-means-the-end-of-lgbtq-rights/

[3] https://www.elle.com/culture/career-politics/a15755101/power-to-the-polls-one-year-after-the-womens-march/

[4] https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2018/02/26/racists-roam-halls-cpac-and-conservative-conference-ends-controversy-over-racist-comments

Advertisements

Say Hello to Your Future

https://whiskeytangotexas.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/ff6a0-rihannaattheeiffeltowerinparis7-6-2013_29.jpg?w=622&h=936

“Roy Rogers? He doesn’t mean anything. There’s a revolution going on, and it don’t include no Roy Rogers.”-Rosalina Sondoval-Marin

“For God’s sake, don’t disarm. Do not disarm.”-Dr. Gregory Stanton

The Left sings the praises of the “browning of America,” and the Western world as a whole, and looks forward to that glorious day when whites are finally minorities in their own nations with a religious fervor. Why whites becoming a minority in their own homelands is a good thing, and why it is necessary for the precepts of social justice to be fully realized, is never articulated; it’s simply a matter of faith that when the magical day cometh—the Social Justice Judgement Day as it were—the seas will part, an empire will collapse, and peace and tranquility will reign. The expiation of our sins may only be accomplished by a mass blood-letting, the likes of which has been openly, wistfully commented on by no less a personage than televangelist Oprah Winfrey:

As long as people can be judged by the color of their skin, the problem’s not solved… There’s a whole generation, I said this for apartheid South Africa, I said this for my own, you know, community in the South, there are still generations of people, older people, who were born and bred and marinated in it, in that prejudice and racism, and they just have to die.[1]

In this new, brighter (darker?) future, though, whose money is going to be taken at gunpoint and forcibly re-distributed once they’ve run out of easy-pickings whites? Asians? If the Rodney King riots in the ’90s taught us anything, they better avoid the Korean grocers. Will the Coalition of the Fringes leave their self-generated urban blight and head into the bush to fight the stump-toothed rednecks for scraps? Will their Jewish overlords be spared, or will the darker-pigmented continue to dutifully carry out the SPLC, AJC, and ADL’s anti-white pogroms? Will the New Zion be paradisal or will it quickly degenerate into South-Central Los Angeles on a national scale? Will the dashiki-clad Congressional Black Caucus pass motions like this: “No white man of whatever nation he may be, shall put his foot on this territory with the title of master or proprietor, neither shall he in future acquire any property therein,” or this: “The preceding article cannot in the smallest degree affect white woman who have been naturalized…nor does it extend to children already born, or that may be born of the said women” [sic]? Oh, you thought this was just scare-mongering dystopian fiction? No, no, Fair Traveler, those are Articles 12 and 13 from the 1805 Haitian constitution! Will there be a generous welfare state in New Zion to care for the 92% of white women who have a child or children with a black man out of wedlock, 82% of whom wind up on government assistance? Finally, and perhaps most importantly, what bathrooms will the trans community will be permitted to use? As we know, based on contemporary concerns, that’s infinitely more important than demographic sea change and meta-civilizational imperilment.

“Whiteness” must be diminished—or better still, eradicated. Faith in the new religion of Progressivism remains as strong as ever, and this is its central tenet. Despite all evidence to the contrary, the belief that Western civilization, and its men in particular are, to quote the African-American Studies and sociology professor Saida Grundy, “a problem population,” remains pervasive and deeply entrenched. Considering white men built the modern world notwithstanding, they are also underrepresented in most major crime statistics, as well as, in spite of the media narrative, mass shootings, I’m having a hard time figuring out what exactly this affirmative action hire is referring to with respect to “a problem population.” Additionally, the bastions of white supremacy that are American colleges and universities are statistically safer than the national average (and yes, that includes sexual assault, again contrary to the prevailing narrative). So an inventive, tolerant, non-criminally-disposed population has somehow been framed as the scourge of humanity. Right. Well, something is going to have to supplant “whiteness,” or at least step into its vacuum, something approximating the aforementioned New Zion.

In Afghanistan, women who are raped can be charged with the crime of adultery, which is punishable by death; victims of rape have been known to be publicly lashed in Saudi Arabia and imprisoned in Somalia; husbands may murder their wives with impunity if they are suspected of committing adultery in Egypt and Syria. Margot Wallström dubbed eastern Congo the “most dangerous place on earth to be a woman,” which Chilean-via-Sweden activist Zaida Catalan posthumously proved last year. By some accounts 1,000 rapes are committed daily. Marital rape is legal in the following countries: The Democratic Republic of the Congo, Brunei, Libya, Malawi, Bangladesh, Botswana, Haiti, Ethiopia, China, Iran, Lebanon, Laos, Ivory Coast, Kuwait, Zambia, Yemen, Uganda, Syria, Sudan, South Sudan, Tajikistan, Ghana, Indonesia, Jordan, Senegal, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Lesotho, Nigeria, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Egypt, Oman, Myanmar, Morocco, Afghanistan, Algeria, Mongolia, Bahrain, Mali, India (where one-third of men have admitted to forcing their wives into intercourse), Tanzania, or Malaysia; though this isn’t relevant in some of the above nations, spousal rape is concurrent with sharia law, whereby a wife may not refuse her husband unless she is menstruating, in which case she is considered temporarily “impure.” Islamic doctrine also excuses domestic abuse.

In Lebanon, Bahrain, Jordan, Iraq, Tunisia, Tajikistan, Uruguay, Malaysia, Peru, and the Philippines, rapists may be exonerated if they marry their victims. According to official statistics, migrants in Germany, primarily represented by Iranians, Syrians, Afghanis, Pakistanis, Algerians, and Moroccans, committed an average of nine sex crimes—a day. At less than 5% of the population, approximately half of all rapes in Germany are committed by migrants. Over half of all women in Papua New Guinea have been raped, two-thirds have been battered, and up to half of all underage girls are potentially at-risk for sex trafficking. Additionally, girls as young as twelve may be forced into marriage. But go on, tell us again how white males are the problem, Professor Grundy.

Far from dispensing with an artificial construct of “whiteness,” the progressives will realize far too late that, as Lothrop Stoddard wrote one hundred years ago:

The great racial divisions of mankind are the most fundamental, the most permanent, the most ineradicable things in human experience. They are not mere diverse colorations of the skin. Matters like complexion, stature, and hair-formation are merely the outward, visible symbols of correlative mental and spiritual differences which reveal themselves in sharply contrasted temperaments and view-points, which translate themselves into the infinite phenomena of divergent group-life. Now it is one of these basic racial lines of cleavage which runs between “East” and “West.”… The terms “brown race” and “brown world” do connote genuine realities which science and politics alike recognize to be essentially true. There certainly is a fundamental comity between the brown peoples. This comity is subtle and intangible in character; yet it exists, and under certain circumstances it is capable of momentous manifestations.

It’s not going to stop unless we make it stop. Life is not therapeutic, it is tragic. No one gets out alive. These real truths of being—we all die, we all suffer, if we are lucky we may love—are what it means to be human. To struggle against existence is to fight to become something more. The transience of life is both its tragedy and its beauty. So what, we’re just going to purge existence of all discomfort? Hardly. Lobotomizing your culture and wallowing in affluence can only last a generation or two, and then the ghosts of children you never had will eventually see the homeland you failed to defend fall into the grasping hands of the barbarian, soon to fall into disrepair. The old world will be nothing but a memory.

And yet the feminists still decry the patriarchy while their sisters are dragged kicking and screaming into the No-Go Zones to be savagely raped and beaten, their families threatened, their nations in flames. Tolerating the intolerable while being intolerant in the Church of Tolerance, the egalitarian project is more important than family, than homeland, than life—than reality. As Heather MacDonald said, “Science is now a fireable offense because it contradicts feminist ideology,” but feminism itself has, to quote Bruce Thornton, “institutionalized a fundamental incoherence,” willing to sacrifice its own ideology at the altar of DIVERSITY. Feminism has succeeded in creating a bunch of grotesque facsimiles of what men used to be before they all decided they wanted to become women, and in this new paradigm of incongruence, the barbarian strides in, confident and uncowed, slaughtering the braying masses in their pens of “hate speech” and inclusion.

What is the drug? Everybody’s tired of laying down with you, but they do it anyway, the same perfumed wreckage of human beings driven by nothing more than impulse. This is a rather dim view of my fellow man to be sure, but Winston Smith had faith in the proles and look where that got him. In my darker moments, this is where my mind will stray. “Into the abattoir of multi-culturalism with you! This is what you wanted, so by God, now you must live it!” But for that poetic justice, all would need to be lost, and I will fight with every fiber of my being to prevent that from happening. Where to, then?

This is another fun one: Lately I’ve been seeing the populist parties of Europe referred to as “White Nationalist” parties, used obviously as an epithet. The absurdity is of course that a White Nationalist in Europe and a European Nationalist are the same thing. It would be like trying to smear a Nigerian in Nigeria as a Black Nationalist. The bubble-wrapped, ahistorical, and uni-cultural worldview of the egalitarians is fully on display here. Nevertheless, all distinction must be erased by the globalist Leviathan. Joseph Sobran observes (this is worth quoting at length, so forgive me):

We don’t have to choose between Nativism and Alienism. A healthy native is not an all-out Nativist, but rather has a code of hospitality and gallantry that takes into account the position of the alien; and the reasonable marginal member of society is not bound to be a fanatical Alienist, even though there are those who would like to inflame his resentments. Both perspectives have their stories to tell. Both can be accommodated by civility and the rule of law, without privileges for either, although it is a mark of the surprising power of Alienism that its favored minorities do, in spite of majority sentiment, enjoy privileges based on race…One of [Alienism’s] principal targets is “capitalism,” a blanket term for a free economy. Just because it is impracticable to attack all economic transactions at once, liberalism issues a general condemnation of “inequality” while homing in on vulnerable points. By calling the overall distribution of wealth unjust, it authorizes itself to call for state intervention anywhere, without bothering to specify the final distribution it would like to see. Private transactions embody “greed”; state programs of redistribution to liberal client-groups represent “compassion.” In good gnostic fashion, liberalism damns the entire material world; but it redeems selected parts through piecemeal collectivization.

Like any political machine, liberalism passes its booty out among favored dependents, in the guise of succoring victims. Its moral pretensions have been so successful, its claims of idealism so unchallenged, that nobody thinks to call the liberal machinery a system of greed and corruption…One of liberalism’s most successful strategies has been to establish a standing presumption of guilt against the native: his motives are always in question, his racism and bigotry “just beneath the surface.”… SOCIALISM is the pure expression of Alienism. It rejects in principle the entire current and traditional form of society and insists on total transformation. In order to accomplish this, it must replace consent with unlimited state power.[2]

Thus, the state becomes All, for it is Good and Compassionate and Righteous. It is also an un-thinking monstrosity set to annihilating the native and replacing him with a population that, although less docile, is much more inclined to view a totalitarian state not just as good, but for many cultures it is the only kind of state that they can conceive of. There is no tradition of representative democracy in Africa; there are no precedents for republicanism among aborigines or Steppes people or people from the Levant. No, this is a particularly European phenomenon, and even the high-IQ Chinese tend to prefer an “enlightened despot.” With a very few choice exceptions in representative government like modern Japan and South Korea, and these are also still very conformity- and honor-based cultures in many ways, self-governance is the province of Western Man, and he is far too independent and difficult to control. It’s why whites went to Africa and the Americas and Oceania, to escape the clutches of the Old World and forge new societies from the wilderness. Obviously many of these people were themselves slaves, indentured servants, or convicts, but the intrepid frontiersman spirit is what drove the creation of the nations we see today.

This is why, in an increasingly globalized world, the managerial classes of the First World want to replace their populations with the Third World. Everywhere will resemble some shitty mix of Brazil, Nigeria, and Afghanistan, the glories of past civilizations forgotten, our shining city upon a hill nothing but a burned-out and decrepit shantytown.

“They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and saved created things rather than the Creator.” (Romans 1.25)

Source: The Anatomically Correct Banana

The Greater Depression: Comparing the 1930s and Today

Comparing the 1930s and Today

You’ve heard the axiom “History repeats itself.” It does, but never in exactly the same way. To apply the lessons of the past, we must understand the differences of the present.

During the American Revolution, the British came prepared to fight a successful war—but against a European army. Their formations, which gave them devastating firepower, and their red coats, which emphasized their numbers, proved the exact opposite of the tactics needed to fight a guerrilla war.

Before World War I, generals still saw the cavalry as the flower of their armies. Of course, the horse soldiers proved worse than useless in the trenches.

Before World War II, in anticipation of a German attack, the French built the “impenetrable” Maginot Line. History repeated itself and the attack came, but not in the way they expected. Their preparations were useless because the Germans didn’t attempt to penetrate it; they simply went around it, and France was defeated.

The generals don’t prepare for the last war out of perversity or stupidity, but rather because past experience is all they have to go by. Most of them simply don’t know how to interpret that experience. They are correct in preparing for another war but wrong in relying upon what worked in the last one.

Investors, unfortunately, seem to make the same mistakes in marshaling their resources as do the generals. If the last 30 years have been prosperous, they base their actions on more prosperity. Talk of a depression isn’t real to them because things are, in fact, so different from the 1930s. To most people, a depression means ’30s-style conditions, and since they don’t see that, they can’t imagine a depression. That’s because they know what the last depression was like, but they don’t know what one is. It’s hard to visualize something you don’t understand.

Some of them who are a bit more clever might see an end to prosperity and the start of a depression but—al­though they’re going to be a lot better off than most—they’re probably looking for this depression to be like the last one.

Although nobody can predict with absolute certainty what this depression will be like, you can be fairly well-assured it won’t be an instant replay of the last one. But just because things will be different doesn’t mean you have to be taken by surprise.

To define the likely differences between this depres­sion and the last one, it’s helpful to compare the situa­tion today to that in the early 1930s. The results aren’t very reassuring.

CORPORATE BANKRUPTCY

1930s

Banks, insurance companies, and big corporations went under on a major scale. Institutions suffered the consequences of past mistakes, and there was no financial safety net to catch them as they fell. Mistakes were liquidated and only the prepared and efficient survived.

Today

The world’s financial institutions are in even worse shape than the last time, but now business ethics have changed and everyone expects the government to “step in.” Laws are already in place that not only allow but require government inter­vention in many instances. This time, mistakes will be compounded, and the strong, productive, and ef­ficient will be forced to subsidize the weak, unproductive, and inefficient. It’s ironic that businesses were bankrupted in the last depression because the prices of their products fell too low; this time, it’ll be because they went too high.

UNEMPLOYMENT

1930s

If a man lost his job, he had to find another one as quickly as possible simply to keep from going hungry. A lot of other men in the same position competed desperately for what work was available, and an employer could hire those same men for much lower wages and expect them to work harder than what was the case before the depression. As a result, the men could get jobs and the employer could stay in business.

Today

The average man first has months of unemployment insurance; after that, he can go on welfare if he can’t find “suitable work.” Instead of taking whatever work is available, especially if it means that a white collar worker has to get his hands dirty, many will go on welfare. This will decrease the production of new wealth and delay the recovery. The worker no longer has to worry about some entrepreneur exploiting (i.e., employing) him at what he considers an unfair wage because the minimum wage laws, among others, precludes that possibility today. As a result, men stay unemployed and employers will go out of business.

WELFARE

1930s

If hard times really put a man down and out, he had little recourse but to rely on his family, friends, or local social and church group. There was quite a bit of opprobrium attached to that, and it was only a last resort. The breadlines set up by various government bodies were largely cosmetic measures to soothe the more terror-prone among the voting populace. People made do because they had to, and that meant radically reducing their standards of living and taking any job available at any wage. There were very, very few people on welfare during the last depression.

Today

It’s hard to say how those who are still working are going to support those who aren’t in this depression. Even in the U.S., 50% of the country is already on some form of welfare. But food stamps, aid to fami­lies with dependent children, Social Security, and local programs are already collapsing in prosperous times. And when the tidal wave hits, they’ll be totally overwhelmed. There aren’t going to be any breadlines because people who would be standing in them are going to be shopping in local supermarkets just like people who earned their money. Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of it is that people in general have come to think that these programs can just magically make wealth appear, and they expect them to be there, while a whole class of people have grown up never learning to survive without them. It’s ironic, yet predictable, that the programs that were supposed to help those who “need” them will serve to devastate those very people.

REGULATIONS

1930s

Most economies have been fairly heavily regulated since the early 1900s, and those regulations caused distortions that added to the severity of the last depression. Rather than allow the economy to liquidate, in the case of the U.S., the Roosevelt regime added many, many more regulations—fixing prices, wages, and the manner of doing business in a static form. It was largely because of these regulations that the depression lingered on until the end of World War II, which “saved” the economy only through its massive reinflation of the currency. Had the government abolished most controls then in existence, instead of creating new ones, the depression would have been less severe and much shorter.

Today

The scores of new agencies set up since the last depression have created far more severe distortions in the ways people relate than those of 80 years ago; the potential adjustment needed is proportionately greater. Unless government restrictions and controls on wages, working conditions, energy consumption, safety, and such are removed, a dramatic economic turnaround during the Greater Depression will be impossible.

TAXES

1930s

The income tax was new to the U.S. in 1913, and by 1929, although it took a maximum 23.1% bite, that was only at the $1 million level. The average family’s income then was $2,335, and that put average families in the 1/10th of 1 percent bracket. And there was still no Social Security tax, no state income tax, no sales tax, and no estate tax. Furthermore, most people in the country didn’t even pay the income tax because they earned less than the legal minimum or they didn’t bother filing. The government, therefore, had immense untapped sources of revenue to draw upon to fund its schemes to “cure” the depression. Roosevelt was able to raise the average income tax from 1.35% to 16.56% during his tenure—an increase of 1,100%.

Today

Everyone now pays an income tax in addition to all the other taxes. In most Western countries, the total of direct and indirect taxes is over 50%. For that reason, it seems unlikely that direct taxes will go much higher. But inflation is constantly driving everyone into higher brackets and will have the same effect. A person has had to increase his or her income faster than inflation to compensate for taxes. Whatever taxes a man does pay will reduce his standard of living by just that much, and it’s reasonable to expect tax evasion and the underground economy to boom in response. That will cushion the severity of the depression somewhat while it serves to help change the philosophical orientation of society.

PRICES

1930s

Prices dropped radically because billions of dollars of inflationary currency were wiped out through the stock market crash, bond defaults, and bank failures. The government, however, somehow equated the high prices of the inflationary ’20s with prosperity and attempted to prevent a fall in prices by such things as slaughtering livestock, dumping milk in the gutter, and enacting price supports. Since the collapse wiped out money faster than it could be created, the government felt the destruction of real wealth was a more effective way to raise prices. In other words, if you can’t increase the supply of money, decrease the supply of goods.

Nonetheless, the 1930s depression was a deflationary collapse, a time when currency became worth more and prices dropped. This is probably the most confusing thing to most Americans since they assume—as a result of that experience—that “depression” means “deflation.” It’s also perhaps the biggest single difference between this depression and the last one.

Today

Prices could drop, as they did the last time, but the amount of power the government now has over the economy is far greater than what was the case 80 years ago. Instead of letting the economy cleanse itself by allowing the financial markets to collapse, governments will probably bail out insolvent banks, create mortgages wholesale to prop up real estate, and central banks will buy bonds to keep their prices from plummeting. All of these actions mean that the total money supply will grow enormously. Trillions will be created to avoid deflation. If you find men selling apples on street corners, it won’t be for 5 cents apiece, but $5 apiece. But there won’t be a lot of apple sellers because of welfare, nor will there be a lot of apples because of price controls.

Consumer prices will probably skyrocket as a result, and the country will have an inflationary depression. Unlike the 1930s, when people who held dollars were king, by the end of the Greater Depression, people with dollars will be wiped out.

THE SOCIETY

1930s

The world was largely rural or small-town. Communications were slow, but people tended to trust the media. The government exercised considerable moral suasion, and people tended to support it. The business of the country was business, as Calvin Coolidge said, and men who created wealth were esteemed. All told, if you were going to have a depression, it was a rather stable environment for it; despite that, however, there were still plenty of riots, marches, and general disorder.

Today

The country is now urban and suburban, and although communications are rapid, there’s little interpersonal contact. The media are suspect. The government is seen more as an adversary or an imperial ruler than an arbitrator accepted by a consensus of concerned citizens. Businessmen are viewed as unscrupulous predators who take advantage of anyone weak enough to be exploited.

A major financial smashup in today’s atmosphere could do a lot more than wipe out a few naives in the stock market and unemploy some workers, as occurred in the ’30s; some sectors of society are now time bombs. It’s hard to say, for instance, what third- and fourth-generation welfare recipients are going to do when the going gets really tough.

THE WAY PEOPLE WORK

1930s

Relatively slow transportation and communication localized economic conditions. The U.S. itself was somewhat insulated from the rest of the world, and parts of the U.S. were fairly self-contained. Workers were mostly involved in basic agriculture and industry, creating widgets and other tangible items. There wasn’t a great deal of specialization, and that made it easier for someone to move laterally from one occupation into the next, without extensive retraining, since people were more able to produce the basics of life on their own. Most women never joined the workforce, and the wife in a marriage acted as a “backup” system should the husband lose his job.

Today

The whole world is interdependent, and a war in the Middle East or a revolution in Africa can have a direct and immediate effect on a barber in Chicago or Krakow. Since the whole economy is centrally controlled from Washington, a mistake there can be a national disaster. People generally aren’t in a position to roll with the punches as more than half the people in the country belong to what is known as the “service economy.” That means, in most cases, they’re better equipped to shuffle papers than make widgets. Even “necessary” services are often terminated when times get hard. Specialization is part of what an advanced industrial economy is all about, but if the economic order changes radically, it can prove a liability.

THE FINANCIAL MARKETS

1930s

The last depression is identified with the collapse of the stock market, which lost over 90% of its value from 1929 to 1933. A secure bond was the best possible investment as interest rates dropped radically. Commodities plummeted, reducing millions of farmers to near subsistence levels. Since most real estate was owned outright and taxes were low, a drop in price didn’t make a lot of difference unless you had to sell. Land prices plummeted, but since people bought it to use, not unload to a greater fool, they didn’t usually have to sell.

Today

This time, stocks—and especially commodities—are likely to explode on the upside as people panic into them to get out of depreciating dollars in general and bonds in particular. Real estate will be—next to bonds—the most devastated single area of the economy because no one will lend money long term. And real estate is built on the mortgage market, which will vanish.

Everybody who invests in this depression thinking that it will turn out like the last one will be very unhappy with the results. Being aware of the differences between the last depression and this one makes it a lot easier to position yourself to minimize losses and maximize profits.

So much for the differences. The crucial, obvious, and most important similarity, however, is that most people’s standard of living will fall dramatically.

The Greater Depression has started. Most people don’t know it because they can neither confront the thought nor understand the differences between this one and the last.

As a climax approaches, many of the things that you’ve built your life around in the past are going to change and change radically. The ability to adjust to new conditions is the sign of a psychologically healthy person.

Look for the opportunity side of the crisis. The Chinese symbol for “crisis” is a combination of two other symbols—one for danger and one for opportunity.

The dangers that society will face in the years ahead are regrettable, but there’s no point in allowing anxiety, frustration, or apathy to overcome you. Face the future with courage, curiosity, and optimism rather than fear. You can be a winner, and if you plan carefully, you will be. The great period of change will give you a chance to regain control of your destiny. And that in itself is the single most important thing in life. This depression can give you that opportunity; it’s one of the many ways the Greater Depression can be a very good thing for both you as an individual and society as a whole.