Part I : Jews and the Libertarian Movement – Capitalism

by Alex Gore

Libertarians in general are against the concept of government. I myself had been a big fan of the libertarian movement for many years. I’ve read a number of books by the Ludwig Von Mises Institute such as Man, Economy, and State by Murray Rothbard and Human Action by Ludwig Von Mises. I’ve also read Why Government Doesn’t Work by Harry Browne. However what I once supported has got me questioning major aspects of it. I now believe too much freedom is not really a good thing and there should be limits. Unlimited freedom ends up turning into despotism.

The one big issue that is almost never discussed among free-market capitalists and libertarians is that of RACE. And the fact that it is almost never discussed is probably the worst kept secret of libertarianism. Libertarians want to act like there is no such thing as race and like the mainstream they believe that race is just skin deep. The fact is, by discussing race realities, the whole foundation of libertarianism would crumble.

As I explained in my post, Jews and the Multicultural Movement, there are actually genetic and biological differences among the races in terms of IQ, aggressiveness, propensity towards committing acts of violence, the treatment of the outgroup, and ethnocentricism. Blacks, Arabs, and Jews, to name a few, are considered ethnocentric – meaning they are cohesive and have a “brotherly” attachment to members of their own kind. They practice a “natural” socialism. These people’s tribalism likely evolved through thousands of years of conflict with enemy groups in which strength in numbers was crucial to survival. I personally have visited a number of Arab countries, where in the markets all the shoe sellers would congregate in one area of the market and sell the same shoes for the same price. That’s the same for sellers of jewelry, clothing, produce, etc. Getting ahead of your competitors by, for example, undercutting is considered an offense. The attitude is that everyone (in their group) should be on the same level.

Caucasians on the other hand evolved in the sparsely populated cold north where dealing with the climate was of more importance than dealing with tribal conflict. They have highly individualistic tendencies. They value personal achievements over group based ones. That’s a major reason why the standard of living is much higher in the West than most anywhere else. European-based people are natural born competitors. They don’t mind putting their fellow whites out of business (unless it is their immediate neighbors of course). I would say they are natural born libertarians as well. Unfortunately their individualistic tendencies and relative compassion for outsiders mean they have little ethnic defense against strongly cohesive people. This is the paradox of libertarianism which stresses individualism. When it comes to conflict – group based strategies will almost always win out against individually based ones. That is evident in the US which over the past 100 years has gone from a relatively free society to ones ruled by despots that have little in common with the citizens they rule over. We essentially have a mafia that runs things. European-based people are able to be pushed around without fear of them fighting back. On the other hand, Middle Eastern societies, (both Arab and Jewish) with their strong ingroup-outgroup barriers, have done a far better job of containing unwanted elements than Western societies.

Now what do Jews have to do with libertarianism? And why are there so many prominent Jews in the libertarian movement (think Ludwig Von Mises, Milton Friedman, Murray Rothbard, Ayn Rand, and Stefan Molyneux)? Brenton Sanderson in The Occidental Quarterly (vol 11, no 3, Fall 2011) answered those questions in Free to Lose: Jews, Whites, and Libertarianism. Quoting Milton Friedman:

The feature of capitalism that has benefited the Jews has, of course, been competition. Wherever there is a monopoly, whether it be private or governmental, there is room for the application of arbitrary criteria in the selection of the beneficiaries of the monopoly—whether these criteria be color of skin, religion, national origin or what not. Where there is free competition, only performance counts. The market is color blind. No one who goes to the market to buy bread knows or cares whether the wheat was grown by a Jew, Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, or atheist; by Whites or blacks. Any miller who wishes to express his personal prejudices by buying only from preferred groups is at a competitive disadvantage, since he is keeping himself from buying from the cheapest source. He can express his prejudice, but he will have to do so at his own expense, accepting a lower monetary income than he could otherwise earn.

Sanderson further writes:

It may have occurred to the reader, however, that while Friedman, von Mises and Rand opposed the existence of monopolies that provided “room for the application of arbitrary criteria in the selection of the beneficiaries of the monopoly,” the reality is that Jews, even in the freest of markets, are notorious for developing and using ethnic monopolies in precisely this fashion. Indeed this is a major theme of (Kevin) MacDonald’s “A People That Shall Dwell Alone” where he observes that from “the standpoint of the group, it was always more important to maximize the resource flow from the non-Jewish community to the Jewish community, rather than to allow individual Jews to maximize their interests at the expense of the Jewish community.”

The massive extent of Jewish nepotism in their business dealings is so exhaustively documented (very frequently by Jews themselves) as to be beyond dispute. Such is the rarity of instances where Jews use other Jews in a purely instrumental manner that they are cause for great shock and trauma  within the Jewish community (witness the Madoff affair). Given this, it seems to me that while, as Friedman, von Mises and Rand assert, the free market may work efficiently to hinder ethnocentric discrimination among Whites (a group that MacDonald characterizes as, owing to their evolutionary history, strongly predisposed to individualism), the hyper-ethnocentrism of the Jews (and the Chinese) predispose them to transcend this “rational” discipline imposed by the free market.

It is clear from the domination of Jews in the media, the banking system, and the government, that the European based people cannot compete with them because the Jews (Ashkenazi) have a higher mean IQ and higher ethnocentricity. A free-market society that has both a highly ethnocentric and a highly intelligent minority will eventually be taken over by those people. I would say a purely free market may work in the long term if society was completely composed of members predisposed towards individualism. But even if a society was composed of nothing but individualists what is to stop some of them from forming a group with a goal of controlling society? The traits of cohesiveness, high intelligence, and feelings of superiority could slowly evolve with the practice of eugenics.

“You say that Marxism is the very antithesis of capitalism, which is equally sacred to us [The Money Power] It is precisely for this reason that they are direct opposites to one another, that they put into our hands the two poles of this planet and allow us to be its axis. These two contraries, like  Bolshevism and ourselves, find their identity in the International.”
– Otto Kahn, Investment Banker

the real Syrian Free Press

War Press Info ~ Archive of Most Important Reliable Global War News

The Rabbit Hole

Denying the truth doesn't change the facts.

Levant Report

the Real Middle East, debunking the sound bites

Mothman777's Blog

A different perspective, suggestions for a better way of life for a better future for all