In the Year of Our Leader 108

Irregular Issue 1997-8

Gambanreiği Statement

An Odinist- National Socialist perspective on Life, Faith, and Events

§ 49 At the market came the Man of Power, only a glimpse, to stare, then he fades from sight. Simple lives the vitki and none may know where. His sons upon the hawk's path flown, he tends far borders, rushes, fens. He quickly speaks out his staves, for who have not will envy. Who envy will wound with the tongue or harm with the spear. He finds those who will counsel, does the Man of Power: none find him, nor is he known to others but as a herder of swine. As the woolen men were about with men-of-arms he reached into his cart, 'Mats of rushes,! Well-woven mats of rushes!

§ 50 Others huddled at the storm. She went about in simple thread, hands raised to Erde or Tyr, stood still, tall, proud, palms opened. Others took to shade but in the heat of day she tread slowly. Others made busy in the night, but he gazed to the dark heart at the arch of trees. Others huddled warm, when barefoot in the snow she trekked. Freedom in cold, freedom in hard, freedom is in simple hardships found.

§ 51 The youth thought him mad. He gazed into shadows in the noon slumber of high summer. In the snow he sat or stood until it melted about. At the marsh he sat, rubbed the juice of roots about to keep the biters away, yet stayed and sat. Now and then one sees him. A boy asked of him- why gaze or sit? The hermit answe-red- 'Much do we do between birth and death and most of it no matter. In all that Grimnir does, He becomes aware. When He bade Mimir speak, He was aware. Much passes between birth and death. What means any of it, I am not aware?'

'But how,' asks the youth,'is to gaze to be aware?'

'In each place and force a spirit dwells before me, after me, and always. They show me the world before me and after me. They have shown me our world at the Time of Hidings, when the People of Stones and the People of Oaks, when the Folk of Staves and Ravens, are banished, and they show me we shall return again, in the night after the next Sigurd.' Now and again, Folk see him at marsh or skerry stone and none think him mad.

On the Man and Woman of Power, circa 500 Common Era, from Meditative Paradigms of Seiğr.


A change of precessional, cosmic seasons occurred in 1992-3, bringing an end to the Age of Pisces, which began around 7 B.C.E. For the past 2,000 years, the sun had been in Gemini, meaning that the solstitial sun appeared before us with the stars of that constellation behind it. By this year, it is fully shifted to its new position, in the constellation Taurus, such a large con-stellation that it will spend a thousand years more there than in Gemini. Astrologers are often behind astronomers in identifying accurately the celestial events. Thus it has been that they regard the solstice as still occurring in Cancer, as it did before shifting to Gemini. That is why cartographers followed the astrologers' lead and termed those subequatorial regions where the sun shines at solstice nearly overhead "Tropic of Cancer," when by rights, it should be termed, Tropic of Taurus. The change of ages of the seasons of cosmic time is quite real. We shall see it unfold as this old order based upon usury, greed, exploitation, and the attack on Natural Law crumbles, or tears itself apart, and after many birth pains, a new order begins. It is then that National Socialism will be rightly perceived as that blueprint for society that it is.

Another reason that NS economics is right is that a national socialist state creates a secure economy with real jobs, doing productive work with worker-owners and local direction. Aryans, the most evolved tiny sliver of the world's population who are most productive and inventive, are also the most sensitive to economic conditions. Foresight is one of their salient characteristics and is tied to the long skull and greater cranial capacity. Especially on such important matters as procreation, Aryans are more sensitive to whether there is a future living for their children to earn and consider this when deciding whether to have additional children. Just as with animal species, there are special habitat needs and preservation of viable habitat is critical to survival the higher up the evolutionary ladder one looks. Roaches and flies are abundant in almost all temperate and tropical environments: raptors must have viable habitat for their progeny or the eggs fail to hatch and egg-laying itself declines.

Thus a New York Times article in mid-Hunting noted that in Eastern Europe, "insecurity has led not only to a sharp decline in the birth rate but also to a drop in the marriage rate and a more than tenfold increase in sterilizations. According to demographers, such precipitous de-clines have never before been seen except in times of war, plague, or famine." To prevent a similar event in their respective nations, the governments of Belgium, Luxembourg, and Poland have for years been offering financial incentives to have babies. The government of the German province of Brandenburg offers $650 for every newborn. How has it affected White Americans' birthrate that it can cost $3,000-4,000 per routine prenatal care and delivery in the face of declining employee insurance benefits? Compare this to free Medicaid coverage for fatherless lower primate populations or illegal Hispanic aliens- obviously Uncle Saul believes in cash incentives for favored populations and disincentives for those less favored- classical examples of genocide and racism.

Meanwhile, in Western Europe our White cousins back in the mother countries, are not faring much better than we are in the New World Order. In "The Future of Europe" by Daniel Bell, from Dissent (Fall, 1994) and "Europe and the Underclass" from The Economist (7/30/94), we learn that manufacturing jobs in Western Europe are fast disappearing and few new jobs have been created to absorb the long-term unemployed. Over 40 percent of the 17 million jobless in the European Union have been out of work for more than 12 months and one-third of them have never worked at all. Almost all of those counted are native Whites.

Four sociologists took a sample of long-term unemployed in three Dutch cities and found that 55% of these had stopped looking for work. More than half of these involved themselves in "other activities to give meaning to their lives: hobbies, volunteer work, studying, or working in the informal economy." Since Holland has an elaborate social safety net, the social scientists concluded that it has produced "a group of enterprising and calculating unemployed people. . .the strategically operating welfare client." In the Dutch economy there are four full-time workers for every three nonworkers who receive benefits. In Europe in general, Bell writes, social welfare spending is now 25% of the GDP (gross domestic product). In the healthier Japanese economy, by contrast, it is 10%, and in the U.S. 15%.

Bell states that excessive social spending is not the only reason for long-term unemployment, where it may be more rewarding not to work than to move or change careers in order to find a new job. Another reason is that Europe, even Germany, is failing to make the transition to a "postindustrial economy", propping up an inefficient smokestack economy with steel and autos. Looking at newer areas of manufacturing such as microchips or computer software, he writes "there are no major players in Europe." The latter argument seems specious: somewhere trucks will roll off an assembly line. Why not in a safe, well-ventilated, well-lighted and automated plant in a White nation? If Ruhr ore can be smelted into steel and then fashioned into body parts for a Mercedes, why would it be more "efficient" to ship it to Indonesia or Thailand to be produced at slave wages? The only people for whom this is "efficient" are the idle rich or highly paid speculators of the absentee investor caste looking for better "returns" on the "bottom line" of their balance sheets while their neighbors subsist by bagging groceries or flipping hamburgers. For a writer in the socialist periodical Dissent, this is a major omission- just whose side are these "socialists" on?

"Inhibited" or "shy"? Remember what Orwell predicted? The private life itself would become suspect and "Own Life" would become a crime in itself, that is to say, a life build upon the cul-tivation of private experience. A mandatory group experience underlies the multiracial-interna-tionalist world, hence the importance of destroying the large family, which is each race, and the personal experiences, those which uniquely manifest the folk-soul of each.

We had long suspected that North Europeans had a special need for privacy and individu-ality. It certainly is a recurrent theme in our cultures and was a driving force in the expansions, the folk wanderings, emigrations to France, Ireland, Belorussia of historical times. Population densities which other folk would have accepted drove Nordic settlers further away in order to settle out of sight from the nearest neighbor. It now appears likely that this is an hereditary trait, which, surely enough in modern medical practice, will be treated as a defect, "shyness."

Need for private experience will be treated as "shyness" and holding on to moral standards is already being discussed as "inhibitions" by the therapeutic community. In a research study of "shy" children (what's the problem, doc, they don't get along in a smelly sweatshop or overcrowded school with no ethnic boundaries?), Dr. Jerome Kagan at Harvard University set out to study this 15% of children. He discovered that among White children, two-year olds with blue eyes were usually the "shy" children, whereas the "uninhibited" youngsters were dark-eyed. Kagan speculates that the brain chemistry may correlate to eye color.

He goes on to speculate in the May edition of American Health that children with narrower faces, which really narrows it down to the few Aryans, whites with no round-headed, round-faced traits of Hunnish or Mongol origin, are the most "inhibited." Kagan reports,

Shy children may inherit a certain brain chemistry, and their genes also correlate with their eye colors. Blue eyed kids are likelier than kids with dark eyes to have elevated levels of neurochemicals that affect activity in the limbic lobe, the brain's center of emotion; these chemicals can also block the production of melanin, the natural substance that determines pigmentation.

In the first few weeks after conception, the fetus forms a tiny necklace of cells called the neural crest. Animal studies have shown that some of these cells become the sympathetic nervous system, which is responsible for heart rate which in turn is higher in stressed shy kids. Some cells become melanocytes (involved in pigmentation), and others become facial bone- inhibited kids tend to have narrower faces.

We can only guess what kind of name "Kagan" may be. One thing seems consistent with other ZOG protocols- if they can identify Aryan traits, they will doubtless eventually find a way to breed these out of existence through genetic engineering. It is surprising that after 50 years of Hollywood's showing Nordic women's mating non-Aryan Whites and non-Whites and Aryan men with Jewesses (Redford and Streisand in The Way We Were Then, there could even be 15% of the White population who tend to be "shy" and "inhibited" and therefore unsuitable geneti-cally for the crowded housing projects and teeming sweatshops of the New World Order. Since Dr. Kagan has discovered these physiological links to behavior, he might research the evident link between coarse, kinky hair and absentee fatherhood or melanism and criminal behaviour. Either trait is a matter of much greater priority and higher cost to society than "shyness" or "inhibition"- who knows, if non-White fathers supported their own children, there might be a lot more federal grant money for really useful research.

And from another corner of the global sweatshop, we learn in the 11/95 issue of Time that physicians are prescribing Prozac, Paxil, and other serotonin re-uptake inhibitors to at least 150,000 children at present and the use of anti-depressants is growing. Medical insurers are balking at the rates of qualified psychiatrists and encouraging family physicians and pediatricians to take a larger role in psychiatric medications for children. School districts, usually in direct proportion to the number of guidance counselors or psychologists on staff, are meanwhile diagnosing as many as 2 million American school children as having "Attention Deficit Disorder," supposedly meaning that the child cannot stay in one place and be attentive to classroom activities for longer than a few minutes.

Natural healing advocates point out that rampant yeast infections, candidiasis, caused by media-encouraged promiscuity, can result in many of the same symptoms, including fatigue and irritability, as can heavy-metals toxicity from lax or corrupt non-enforcement of water effluent environmental regulations and leaching from toxic landfills. Statisticians and social scientists point to the correlation that most "ADD" kids are from single parent families. Still, the business of medicine use expensive prescription drugs to threat this mystery ailment, such as Ritalin and other anti-convulsives, used for epilepsy and anti-psychotics.

Now comes the latest twist, this from physician, Dr. Deena Adell, who has a syndicated talkshow. In Harvest, '96, Dr. Adell's hypothesis is that ADD children may just be a natural variance in personality types. The theory, and test results support it, is that these kids are more tuned to the ancient role of hunter-gatherer, and not the detail, attention-intensive later development of agriculture. Their inability to focus on a monotonous task forces them to wander the eyes, search the horizon, and find the prey. Apparently, they score high marks in hunting trips, higher than average. Now, the solution to this "problem" would be to medicate each ADD child and adult to be a good drone in Colific schools or workplaces.

A controlled media commentator talks back to the quasi-moralist Right about real "values." In a column 11/1/95, syndicated columnist Ellen Goodman questions the 'virtue marketeers', Bill Bennett and Bob Dole (for our foreign readers, Bennett is the former Sect'y of Education and Dole was Senate Majority Leader and later Republican presidential candidate).

Think about it. Virtue marketeer Bill Bennett has just turned his attention from the sordid sounds of rap music to the sleazy sights of daytime talk shows. He and Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut are going after the talk shows and the companies that produce what they call "rot." Their weapon is shame.

Now all I can say is: go get'em tiger. But after surfing through Bennett's 'oeuvre,' his collected books of virtue, it seems to me that something is missing. It's a take on the ethical relationships between employer and employee, between the ecomomy and the society. What's missing in the morality business is business.

Bennett's books run through the virtues of self-discipline, compassion, responsibility, friendship, work, courage, and perseverance (ed. precisely those qualities which were assumptions underlying all behavior in pre-melting pot societies), honesty, loyalty, and faith. But I could hardly find a tale of right and wrong in the workplace in the whole lot.

All the virtue lessons these days seem to be about individual behavior. The only time we put a moral grid over corporate behavior is when some company, TV network, or media mogul is mucking about in popular culture.

Remember what Bob Dole asked the folks at Time Warner last August? "Must you debase our nation and threaten our children for the sake of corporate profits?" Now there's a question worthy of any talk show host. Maybe if Dole's president thing doesn't work out, we'll audition him for the job.

But why limit the question to Time Warner? Why limit the talk about values to sex, violence, rap'n' roll?

In a conversation last week, Labor Secretary Robert Reich- the only man in the administration who still talks this way- said that, "If companies have a moral responsibility not to fill the movie theatre and airwaves with violence and moral degredation, do they not also have a responsibility to upgrade worker skills, an obligation to fully fund pension plans, to provide health care?"

Applying his own economic book of virtues, he's been trying to raise the minimum wage, get rid of sweatshops, and save the Earned Income Tax Credit. He's convinced that ther's a "great pool of untapped indignation" about companies that are reaping and not sharing the benefits of an improved economy.

Executives in the 1950's talked almost routinely about their responsibilities to consumers, workers, and communities. But today, Reich says,"The CEO's are remarkable quiet. We are acting as if the economy had nothing to do with values. We need a serious national discussion about corporate responsibility."

Ms. Goodman goes on to postulate a humorous scenario in which corporate lives and decisions would be put on display in the typical "talk show"/ freak show format.

All you need to do is book the CEO of a corporation that's posting megaprofits while replacing permanent workers with temps and trading perks for pink slips. There he is in the guest chair, when out from the green room- TA DA!- pops a 30-year former employee who was outplaced into a creative new lifestyle as a cabdriver.

You want conflict? Babe, you got it.

How about humor? OK, get the 25 top paid executives whose 1994 wages added up to $1.5 billion. Ask one to explain exactly why he's worth $10,000 a day or $400 an hour. Let another justify earning two hundred times what his lowest-paid workers are getting. Get ready for the hoots and howls.

Want to get down and dirty? Line up a couple of honchos who promised jobs in return for state tax breaks and then took off with a new gal. . . uh, state. Now that's the kind of infidelity that can get the blood boiling again.

Good coverage, Ms. Goodman, as far as you went. Now, tell your readers about the 10 million American jobs which have been deliberately reassigned to the Third World by the Capi-talist Christian elite which runs this nation in order to bring more profit to the bottom line. What you fail to realize, when you speak of corporations' posting megaprofits is that the reason for the apparent "boom" economy is simply that labor costs have declined significantly, as manufacturing activities have been exported to the Third World.

What you fail to see is that what goes on in the stock markets is not a bell-weather for economies as a whole. The very conditions which have led to record profits and the increases in the numbers of Americans who earn more than $100,000 per year, as reported in the latest edition of Reader's Digest is simply that people making $5 an hour have been fired while their employer has the same job done in Indonesia by a worker who earns only 40¢ an hour. This results in record profits and increases in stock prices, a condition, which, with resultant increases in volume of trading, is euphemistically termed, "a healthy market" by System pundits. We should never confuse this, the health of the parasitic sector of absentee ownership and institutionalized manipulation of the fruits of others' labor, with the health of the economy. A healthy economy is based upon a balance of population and resources, concentration of economic resources in the activities of growing food and fiber, carefully extracting mineral wealth, and adding value to these resources by refining and manufacturing. The whole notion of 'a service economy' is a fantasy which capitalists have used to swindle a nation out of its real jobs with minimal social unrest.

Spreading "Democracy" around the world can take curious turns. In case you were wondering how South Africans were swindled into giving up their nation to exploitation by multi-national corporations and the New World Order, we were provided an answer from an unusual source- part of the enemy news media- National Public Radio. In their 10/10/94 broadcast a Rev. Ham-mond of the Frontline Fellowship stated that U.S. Ambassador Sweeney told Africaners that if they did not elect Mandela, the U.S. would do to them what they did to Iraq. S. African media enhanced this televised message by showing footage of the bombing of Bahgdad. A footnote to how the U.S. sets the stage for "democracy" is that, after the coup in S. Africa, Sweeney was posted to Haiti in order to prepare for the U.S. invasion there. There's more than one way to win public opinion, and the spectre of mass civilian bombings is highly persuasive.

Race-mixing - a good idea for anyone but the sponsors of the idea. Yet, something has gone wrong according to a July 21st column by Jewish writer William Safire, "World Losing Jews via Marriage." He moans that "the percentage of Jews in the U.S. has declined from nearly 4 percent to 2.3 percent" in the U.S. since 1945. Safire reviews the Jewish press (that which they wholly own, as opposed to the controlled media, which they operate in conjunction with Capi-talist Christian interests, like Hearst and Rockefeller) and quotes a report in The Jewish Ledger that the cause of their decline is "Jews marrying outside the faith, a practice that has gone from one in 10 marriages 50 years ago to one in two today."

Safire considers such marriages "a cause for celebration." To rejoice at exogamy in one's own tribe is the ultimate self-hatred, such as one sees in White race-mixers. Even while Safire rejoices at "reverse ethnic assimilation" as U.S. culture becomes ever more Jewish and American English reflects ever more Yiddish usage, he is deaf to the truth of what a conscience within his own tribe is telling him: race-mixing is a bad idea and is destructive to any people who practice it. That Jews have begun to believe and practice what they have preached to all gentiles will spell their own disappearance. Their demographic precepts will prove just as destructive to their own identity, genetically and culturally.

Further proof that the mixing is not solely a Jewish idea can be gleaned from other methods which the Illuminati employ to promote it. The controlled publishing industry is proferring another selection from the neo-conservative Dinesh D'Souza, whose last work the best-seller, Illiberal Education, which explored every cause for declining standards of education except the most basic- the treating of pupils of entirely different cultures and greatly mismatched mental capability as if they were "equal." His work, The End of Racism proposes that the only end in sight to racial conflicts is the complete miscegenation of all.

This latest conservative spokesman for the purple people precept of the New World Order is neither black nor white, but Indian, and feels uniquely qualified to offer solutions on racial matters. He calls awareness of racial differences in the West "a rationalization for oppression" and traces it to the "Englightenment." He mistakes this for its very real economic driving force- capitalism, which betrayed the White working classes in that era by forcibly recruiting slave labor, then subsidizing the mass-breeding of less evolved peoples to bid down the cost of unskilled and semi-skilled labor. The same, very real oppression is now at work as the planned destruction of America proceeds through its deliberate "deindustrialization" (a term coined in a 1972 planning paper of the Rockefeller Foundation.) He repudiates the notion that standardized acheivement and intelligence tests somehow descriminate against blacks and exposes the "vested interests" of the civil rights industry. He feigns concern over rising "racism from below" against Whites, then advocates our extermination through interracial marriage.

Confirming a story in our last quarterly edition, Summer'95, the investigative journalism TV program, Hard Copy, on 10/18/95 featured an interview with munitions expert retired Air Force General Bentin Partin, who accessed a secret report on the Oklahoma City bombing. He denies the orthodox story of a single bomb. He says that the level of damage was not possible from a parked truck charge at the ground floor. People heard boom-boom, the reports of two explosions, not just one. In another interview, this one by Chuck Harder on the Peoples' Radio Network, he reveals that the pillars at the base of the Murrah Building were precisely cut by a high-speed explosive charge, clearly placed at several pillars in the basement inside the building- evidence of a far-ranging conspiracy. (researched by Wolfgang)

Further thinking on Nordic Economics is appropriate now, as many readers wrote in with comments on a long section with this topic in our fourth GS issue, Yule '94. Our thanks to the many of you who wrote in with questions or wanted to more fully understand how NS economics differs from policies of Capitalism and Communism. The following will be an effort at answering and providing more detail. Remember, an economic system is the basis of all else in a social order.

1. Capitalism and Communism share a common goal and assumption, that all wealth must be re-distributed. In both systems, the fruits of the producer's labor are taken;

a. by the professional parasite/ service provider- doctor, lawyer, accountant, etc. protected by powerful lobbies, i.e., 'professional associations' from real competition based upon results, not just certification or formal training (in a free market, Abe Lincoln earned his law degree from correspondence school and used it in a successful practice)

b. by regulators / official parasites- tax collectors, bureaucrats who enforce various government regulations, whether Conservative laws against abortion to force a White woman raped by an idiot-level non-white, to bear his child, such as Colorado has, in place or Liberal laws to choke a small business with odious and unnecessary "equality police" regulations, at which California exceeds even federal standards, police fines for matters which shouldn't be anyone else's business and offend or injure no one, like "speeding" on a lonely road

c. by managerial parasites within companies, those who earn sometimes dozens of times what the producers do, yet work fewer hours at far less demanding or structured pursuits

d. by absentee owners/ stockholders, who "own" a share of your productivity in perpetuity through a one-time outlay to buy stock (Capitalist redistribution)

e. by assignment an unnatural and artificial entity, a collective farm, "work unit," or production cadre (Communist redistribution- with the same twerps getting paid more to plan and count the bushels of the harvest than to grow it)

f. by entrepreneurs / owners, who solely own the fruits of your labor by owning the business, such that you, as the skilled producer, can never realize a share of the profits (fits both systems, whether the owner is a collective or corporation)

g. by excessive and unnecessary personal income taxation by progressively centralized national governments, from which the rich, the apparatchika and the investor caste (parasites) and the welfare-unskilled labor breeder caste are all either exempt outright or through loopholes, but is levied on the producers

h. by debt and instruments of debt, which serve as a capitalist tax on every provider of goods and services at every stage of extracting, refining, growing, distributing, manufacturing, or adding value to a product or service- an insidious and omnipresent "tax" on all of mankind. Debt represented the supreme control of the Capital elite of the Committee of 300, whose tentacles reached into both systems, communist and capitalist nations alike through member corporations of the World Bank. These large banks, mostly in London, Switzerland, and New York, would lend to regional or local banks, factoring, or finance companies, who then loaned to corporations, entrepreneurs, or collective enterprises. Through both the printing of fiat money, through "treasury bills", "municipal bonds", and outright loans to central governments, a large portion of the world's productivity has been siphoned off and increasingly centralized into the elite of the speculator/ investor caste.

2. NS economic policy recognizes no income without participation and labor.

3. While one may not own the fruits of another's labor through stock or other instruments of debt, one may pass on one's share of ownership of an enterprise through inheritance to heirs, as a right to be an owner-participator, subject, of course, to approval of the other co-owners. Thus, workers in a machine shop whose founder/ major stockholder died might reject the claims of an unskilled, undisciplined playboy (or playgirl) heir and offer fair market payment for his/her shares of the company. Under capitalism, the heir would be allowed to ruin the company, milk it dry for self-indulgence, regardless the potential of hurting hundreds of people. Under communism, no one or even group of persons could own the shop in the first place. Who would decide such cases as the above? In the Reich there were Economic Courts, who protected both the rights of workers and those of owner/ operators of businesses. Reich economic policy and law was such that anyone could pass on to his or her heirs the fruits of his own labor, whether a house, an object of art, or, as above, a working, producing, value-adding share of a business.

4. NS economics encourages invention and inspired work as the highest good, since creativity is the especial activity of the highly evolved, long-high skulled races of mankind. Whenever an employee invents or creates, he or she should be a co-owner of that patent and its subsequent royalties. Much creativity in the U.S. has been suppressed by Capitalist redistribution, wherein employees sign, as a condition of employment, a waiver of all rights to patent profits for inventions made on premises, with tools of, or from work product of the employer. Under Communism, likewise, the indi-vidual's genius benefits the group and he has no right to intellectual property. Safeguarding intel-lectual property rights should also be the work of the National Socialist state. There should be no favored trade agreements, nor relaxation of tarriffs or duties with any trading partner which refuses to enforce mutually agreed patent and copyright laws and allows its corporations and scientists to "pirate" inventions of more evolved peoples. This practice is widespread among the Pacific Rim nations, where Japanese and Chinese tool designers have meticulously copied the inventions of White Americans and West Europeans, especially in machine tools and process equipment. Invention benefits all mankind. The theft of invention and suppression of creativity by both internationalist systems impoverishes everyone.

5. Both Capitalism and Communism evince the ethic of extraction and exhaustion, industrial versions of the slash-and-burn mentality which ecologists so deplore in rain forests. These pheno-mena are often direct products of greed. Ranchers who threaten to shoot any red wolves reintro-duced into the wolves' original natural range explain that even a 3% loss of lambs or ewes could make the difference between success and failure. Is ranching, then, inherently unprofitable? Cotton farmers patiently explain that not to spray carcinogenous herbicides would cost them the ability to make a profit needed to stay in business. Is cotton production, then, an inherently un-profitable enterprise? In both cases, the push to "optimize production" or to "maximize profits" has the same cause and source- the precarious position of owners who are trying to repay debt stacked upon old debt, ad absurdum. This and excessive governmental support of large producers, agribusiness, or loans to smaller branches ('infrapreneurship') of mega-corporations by the "Small Business Administration", artificially imperils the small producer or even the medium sized business. Small businesses and farmers/ ranchers have the same problem as non-rich wage-earners- the smaller the scale the more tax must be paid.

NS economics is based upon productivity within the greater good of society- who decides? In America Inc. the decisions are made by the priviledged elite. In Japan, which trades wisely and protects its industries and workers from job loss and unfair competition, there is a central planning board, MITA, which forces business to consider its impact upon society in major decisions. To replace the 'ethic' of exhaustion and extraction of Capitalism, National Socialists offer the ethical framework of co-ownerhip and cooperation in accord with natural law. To an NS rancher, wolf predation on 3% of his ewes and lambs would be a 'tax' which the rangeland itself imposed, since he is a co-owner with his employees and the 'people' of fur, claw, fang, feather, and bark, who lived there first on that land. A cattle rancher would not have to graze so densely that all cottonwoods forming natural windbreaks and beaver dams on small Western rivers would be destroyed because his trucks would have been purchased by real earned capital from pooling resources of employees, or even an association with other ranchers. Thus he would not be paying effective 71% interest due to repeated refinancing of farm loans or restructuring of debt. He would also not need to bring in alien stoop labor, as agricultural careers would attract a White labor force to work as worker-owners, rather than essentially slaves.

Slogans and phrases are not humanitarianism: policies which respect the natural boundaries of human subspecies, the limits of growth, and the needs of the land and seas, are.

Environmental ethics follow naturally from National Socialism. The orchardist wwhose fruit was picked by his grandchildren and their schoolmates would be very reluctant to use persistent pesticides. Fully involved worker-owners in a mining operation would not risk drilling an unsafe exploratory shaft. Nor would they leave tailings to leach out and pollute the watershed in which they live, unlike absentee owners. NS economics would solve a lot of problems which modern societies face, not in a bandaid fashion, or by rulebook regulation as does an unwieldy bureaucracy like EPA or OSHA, but by getting to the root causes of greed, concentration of wealth, confiscation of wealth from producers, and absentee ownership. With its land ethic and eugenic policy of seeking the best, quality, not quantity in human population, and by merely leaving Nature, our beloved Godess, Frigga, to deal with those who lack self-restraint through flood, drought, and high infant mortality, NS policies in the industrialized nations would allow human population levels to return to what the Earth can greenly, comfortably support. This would deal a blow to a driving force behind the exhaustion ethic- overepopulation, as would closing all borders in the West or advanced nations to "economic refugees" from the Third World. This safety valve on their population encourages and subsidizes in yet another way the overpopulation which exhausts the Earth and causes rainforests to be burned.

What of the Third World? Again, attack Capitalist greed with a national racial policy and you would return to India its capital and educated class, most of whom reside in the U.S. or Great Britain. With the return of her engineers, physicians, physicists, economists, and business professionals, India, China, and Pakistan, just to mention a few, would elevate themselves in two generations into self-sufficient, self-contained prosperous societies. When the drive for personal enrichment of a non-White educated caste satisfies the thirst of the Western capital elite, for less expensive professionals, the result is a "brain drain", such as the loss of skilled nurses by Mexico to U.S. hosptials, made possible by the NAFTA treaty. Any notion that race-mixing Internationalists or liberals "care" for the darker peoples or the Third World is surely belied by the insidious effects of their misguided policies there. They never even question the fact that the corporate newspapers, magazines, and corporate-supported university departments which crank out the "love-everyone" propaganda about the world as one big happy family are the same folks who, through the U.N., destroyed native sorghum production in drought-prone Africa and induced India's scientific elite to their shores, retarding that nation's development. Slogans and phrases are not humanitarianism: policies which respect the natural boundaries of human subspecies, the limits of growth, and the needs of the land and seas, are.

Whereas Capitalism and Communism are both collectivist, literally collecting the wealth created by the labors of producers into the coffers of fewer and fewer organizations, whether central banks, ministries, or the global banks which lend to all, National Socialism is based upon the premise that the earner should keep the maximum amount of the fruits of labor. The premise is, further, that Nature is not ours to exhaust or deplete and planning, production, and distribution must account for minimal depletion of resources and renewal or recycling whenever possible.

Our Leader and his economic planners, such as Schact, Speer and Darré created a separate economic ethic, one of renewal, a system which, contrasted to the degeneracy of modern economies, was regenerative. This applied not only to natural resources. NS economics, applied today, would realize the need to apply the latest human factors engineering knowledge to protect and regenerate workers, a far cry from the ethic of exhaustion and depletion being applied today, when the average American worker (and please consider how part-time employees lower this average- full timers are essentially slaves now) puts in a 49 hour work week. The part timer is counted only once in such surveys, not acknowledging that most part time employees (a scheme management uses to avoid paying benefits) work more than one job. It is this application of the NS spiritual principle of regeneracy that would dictate also protecting industries which enshrine folk spirit, including indigenous crafts that community life and health be a part of every economic decision, that regeneration of the earth be considered in all activity.

Thus we would not see the meadows befouled with filthy housing projects to shelter and protect those whose indiscriminate breeding and lack of human family structure place excessive demands upon the earth. Nor would we extract and poison large tracts of land, made excessively productive so that a large caste of non-working investor-banker-manipulator parasites would be supported by the excessive extraction, which leaves too little margin for reclamation. Such natural economic order will become possible only in Folk-states where persons are of like enough genetic traits to live within natural laws. In the meantime, Nature will strike many times by 2011, reducing most of the planet's population to a state in which further extractive-exhaustive activity is impossible, in which most inhabitants lead a stone-age type of subsistence. Then and only then will small pockets of White survivors begin to implement these NS economic and social policies, as will a few other highly evolved peoples in scattered enclaves.