What's biggest threat to civil liberties in the 21st century?

What happenned to the viewpoint that if you develop a product and it's superior to anything else ever developed that you can produce it where it was developed by the people that made it productive and ask a reasonable price for it that covers the costs of those encountered in the country of origin? Why should the company go off shore and outsource the jobs required for it's manufacture? Yet they continue to lobby the US government for protection of their corporate interests. Either they are global and accept the risks of that or they belong to a national interest. Why should they have it both ways.

 

People like to be with people that look like them, act like them and have the same culture as them. I see it at work, at school, at community centers and everywhere even thought the difference are superficial.

Personally, I do not care but most people do.

 

Folk and Nation will defeat Globalization. Folk and Nation will inherently involve discussions on race. Stop being SO sensitive. You've broken your programming on almost everything. Push farther. Be brave.

 

"Nation," as used in a phrase such as "a national movement" or "national liberation" is a reference to the politicization of ethnicity, or the rendering of ethnicity as being primarily political; as in the uses of ethnicity to fight against the bureaucratic violence of any particular state or empire.

However, even this restricted use of the word "nationalism" does in no manner obscure the idea that such politicized ethnic groups, though changing throughout the centuries, are a permanent fixture of world politics. From medieval Scotland to the ancient Levant, appeals to ethnicity and language are plentiful in the historical record. The more important question, though, is the relation between the ethnic group and the state.

The first and primary purpose of the ethnos is the protection of its members. Both in terms of personal security, as well as the equally important sense of community and belonging, the ethnic group is a part of the natural order. It is a human instinct. Contrary to the conservative capitalist mythology, the "free market" is not the default organization of economic exchange, but, in reality, the historical record is unambiguous, as far back as we have written records, that men organized themselves into communes and guilds for protection against the uncertainties of political and economic life.

Human beings must congregate to survive. Within this congregation develop the linguistic and moral codes that primarily serve to preserve the unity of the group from want, foreign attacks and the ravages of nature. The necessity for communication, artistic creation and education, men naturally and spontaneously have created such linguistic and semantic commonalities we now call ethnic groups or tribes.

It is because ethnic groups protect human beings from the dangers of this fallen world that ethnic groups engender loyalty to the point of complete self-sacrifice. Human beings do not die for abstract ideologies; no one ever went into battle because he recently read Rousseau's First Discourse; no one sacrifices their lives because they computed a statistical analysis that morally justifies it. Men go into battle for faith, home, family and nation. In the 21st century, nothing has changed.

It is here, within the cultural and ethnic complex of hearth and home, where a humanoid can become a man. To be immersed in a body of tradition, of experience and folklore is not the trite exercise found in bourgeois ethnic clubs or Anglo-American conservative journals, but is a historical journey into the reasons why one's people are here at all; how they survived; how they flourished.

To understand this body of information, much of it resistant to writing and understood only by immersion, is to understand the means whereby one behaves within a society such that one can contribute at a level the social organism can understand and absorb. All of this is beyond the professional competence of social science or even of philosophy, but is only the domain of life, loyalty and humility.

Without the data that folklore provides, that body of tradition that marks the ethnos as unique, man is left as a mere set of individuals, an abstract body of disconnected men held together solely by force and manipulation; this is the very life blood of the state and the continued reason for its unchecked growth.

The reason why ethnicity is absolutely indispensable to any healthy sense of self, or of any healthy social life, is because any other social grouping, from universities to chess clubs, from labor unions to churches, can only function through a continuous appeal to those commonalities that ethnicity provides.

Without the linguistic, traditional and historical bonds that ethnicity is identical with, men cannot even communicate with fellow citizens, as the universe of shared meaning has broken down; debate makes no sense if words are defined according to whatever elites have come to rule him.

As civil society breaks down due to the dissolution of the ethnos, the state, as well as powerful corporate interests, comes to dominate completely, defining the very nature of the civil arrangement. Money and political power become the only goods worth fighting for. This is the reality of the modern west and is the direct result of ethnic connections breaking down in favor of the abstraction of the "nation state", or, even worse, the so-called "free market.”

Culture is, by definition a collective institution, as is language. Outside of these parameters, personal communication and hence interaction is impossible. Therefore, what I am interested in building is a state of affairs where the free-flow of traditional institutions is preserved, creating a situation where each family, parish or guild is continually interacting, mutually strengthening one another and protecting one another with an eye to maximizing the autonomy of each institution, each with its own traditionally defined function and purpose, but still unified through language and historical experience.

The term "liberty" as an abstraction is meaningless. It should be granted that liberty is a freedom to do something, to commit certain definite actions for some positive purpose, but actions that are socially and culturally useful, actions that make sense within a cultural context, a context in the absence of which action would be impossible. Action is senseless unless a context exists where others can understand, profit from and learn from any action of social or moral significance. This can only take place within a thriving culture, or those shared meanings encapsulated in a common language and historical memory.

The concept of "liberty," in its vulgar and abstract sense, can only come about when the state has largely nationalized institutions and functions formerly the domain of the village, the church, or the commune. Socially useful functions such as education, health and welfare services, police, travel accommodations and public works provide the institutional framework that has always marked out the domain of a specifically ethnic social action. This is the network that defined the rights, obligations, rewards and punishment of any specific people living within their (often informal) parameters. In other words, entitlements, as well as rights and duties, were tied to specific social actions; specific social needs. Once such functions became the domain of the state, "freedom" was quickly redefined to refer to pathetic indulgences and petty vices.

In modern societies, the domination of both corporate capital and the institutions of the state--acting, as they always have, in concert, supporting and protecting one another-has only come to be at the expense of traditional agrarian, ethnic and racial institutions and folkways. Capital and the state are far from opposites as the libertarians might claim, but grew together and therefore dominate together.

The myth of this dichotomy between corporate capital and the state is a damaging one, and it has been maintained by nearly all ideological groupings in modern societies. The development of the capitalist market developed in England due to the actions of the state. For example, the expropriation of monasteries from the time of Henry VIII on, led to thousands of peasants being driven from their ancestral lands to make room for landlords and the use of so called free, or wage labor.

The destruction of feudalism meant that peasants, who, under medieval and Christian law, had a lifetime right to their land, were driven off, and landlords took over the common lands of England (about one fifth), using wage labor then, solely at the discretion of the landlords. The state, then created the modern plantation in English history, as peasants were driven to poverty so that the state could reward its servitors, thereby making its power absolute.

The enclosure movement in England, beginning from the late renaissance and moving right into the 19th century, are a primary example of the state using its power to destroy traditional ethnic institutions and setting the stage for the exploitation of peasant labor, that is, setting the stage for the creation of the "labor market.” (cf. Kevin Carson, "The Iron Fist behind the Invisible Hand: Corporate Capitalism as a State-Guaranteed system of Privilege" for a first-class understanding of this problem)

The point is that our modern, "individualist" sort of corporate ideology was the direct result of the state being used by local oligarchs to destroy traditional and ethnic arrangements that had existed in some cases since ancient times, and replace it with "the rule of law," which meant the rule of those who made the law. Ethnic custom was destroyed by the state so as to facilitate the development of oligarchic capitalism and landlordism.

The state, as feudalism developed into statist capitalism, began its centuries-old war with traditional ethnic arrangements in terms of labor and land tenure in favor of the oligarchy that created the state, and then used it, of course, for their own purposes.

The state might be understood, particularly in its post-medieval genesis, as a means whereby the regional oligarchy was able to create a standard market over a larger and larger area. At least in western Europe, the development of the state roughly went hand in hand with the development of the market.

The traditional peasant institutions and guilds that protected the rights of land tenure and maintained a decent standard of living, needed to be destroyed largely because these institutions were not market based. They were geared to security, stability and protection, while the oligarchy needed a system of "contract law" that would then tie the peasantry to him, rather to ethnic institutions. Therefore, the system of lifetime land tenure, guild protections against unfair completion and price wars, social security and unemployment insurance needed to be destroyed. Therefore, the landlord or the regional oligarchy dominated the now unprotected peasant or artisan completely, creating a situation of radical dependency. This now completely exposed and vulnerable peasant became an "individual."

The butchery of thousands of young boys and girls in the early factory system of England and America cannot be understood without understanding the development of ideological "individualism" so uncritically accepted today.

The entire ideological apparatus of "individual liberties" derived from this obsession of the modern ruling classes. "Individualism" meant the stripping of feudal protections from the peasant, rendering him isolated and alone. Once the peasantry lost their land to the rule of law, they quickly swelled the cities, becoming alienated proletarians. Carson writes:

The working class lifestyle under the factory system, with its new forms of social control, was a radical break with the past. It involved the drastic loss of control over their own work. The seventeenth century work calendar was still heavily influenced by medieval custom. Although there were long days in spurts between planting and harvest, intermittent periods of light work and the proliferation of saints days combined to reduce average work-time well below our own. And the pace of work was generally determined by the sun or the biological rhythms of the laborer, who got up after a decent night's sleep, and sat down to rest when he felt like it. The cottager who had access to common land, even when he wanted extra income from wage labor, could take work on a casual basis and then return to working for himself. This was an unacceptable degree of independence from a capitalist standpoint. . . . The factory system could not have been imposed on workers without first depriving them of alternatives, and forcibly denying access to any source of economic independence. No unbroken human being, with a sense of freedom or dignity, would have submitted to factory discipline. Stephen Marglin compared the nineteenth century textile factory, staffed by pauper children bought at the workhouse slave market, to Roman brick and pottery factories which were manned by slaves. In Rome, factory production was exceptional in manufactures dominated by freemen. The factory system, throughout history, has been possible only with a work force deprived of any viable alternative ("Iron Fist," op cit.).

​

Today, the state is the greatest enemy of the ethnos. It sends its boys to wars, whether it be for the Zionists or for the capitalists, or both; it taxes their labor, nearly 80% of income in parts of Europe, and has destroyed all who have refused to obey; it has promoted open immigration throughout Europe to dilute the competing loyalty that ethnicity represents to the state; it has decimated the infrastructure of the ethnos through open trade agreements which guarantee that the sources of livelihood are sent abroad.

The idea of the nation-state is a fraud, and is a cynical means whereby the inheritance of the ethnos, however distorted by the bureaucracy, is used to further the aims of the a-national, and frankly anti-national, ruling class.

The primary job of all patriots, then, is to rebuild, at the local level, the institutions that create real, communal and ethnic solidarity. Libraries, coffee shops, art galleries, home school co-ops, mutual aid societies and local unions are easily in the grasp of a few activists in every region. Local institution building, low cost and low profile are far more important than participation in the administered "public debate," another cheap publication or another gossip-mongering website. Building an ethnic cellular structure at the local level is indispensable, not to create another bureaucracy, but to render modern life tolerable.

 

Neo-fascism is not a step forward it is a step backward.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Position
Racial Nationalism, the Third Position, and Ethnoviolence
Guide to Third Position on the web

 

Information about the hate group SPLC

Morris Dees Fact Sheet

While sitting in my doctor's waiting room, I was rummaging through the magazines, trying to kill time. You can always tell how successful your doctor is by the dates on the magazines [and whether the subscription labels have his name or it looks like he's been dumpster-diving.] My doctor, of course, had all the latest, and all in his own name. Amongst the heap of glossy paper was a copy of the Southern Poverty Law Center's curiously-named periodical Intelligence Report, Spring 2002 issue. I immediately opened it up and wouldn't you know...there were all my good friends. I was inspired by that viewing to make the following available to you...thanks to the good folks at Aw,Shucks!. --LG
"Til the Cash Comes Flowing Like a River..."

Full Name: Morris Seligman Dees, Jr.
Born: 16 December, 1936 in Shorter, Macon County, Alabama
Education:
- Graduated from Sidney Lanier High School in Montgomery, Alabama in 1955
- Received B.A. & J.D. Law degree [1960] from University of Alabama

In an article titled Poverty Palace, Morris Dees told journalist John Edgerton that "I had a traditional white Southerner's feeling for segregation." [The Progressive, July 1988 - Edgerton, John. Poverty Palace, How the SPLC Got Rich Fighting the Klan]

Dees made a fortune selling cookbooks by mail in partnership with Millard Fuller [who later founded Habitat for Humanity.] [Fuller, Millard. Bokotola. New Century Press: 1977]

Fuller has this to say about his 8 year association with Dees:

Dees and Fuller formed the law firm of Dees & Fuller in Montgomery, Alabama in 1960.

"Morris Dees and I, from the first day of our partnership, shared one overriding purpose: to make a pile of money. We were not particular about how we did it; we just wanted to be independently rich. During the eight years we worked together we never wavered in that resolve."

"But everything has a price. And I paid for our success in several ways. One price I paid was estrangement from the church."

Dees served in 1958 as state campaign manager for segregationist attorney general candidate McDonald Gallion and also worked for George C. Wallace. Fuller stated: "We wanted to be sure of having friends in high places."

In 1961 when Freedom Riders were beaten by a white mob at a Montgomery bus station, Dees [and Fuller] expressed openly his sympathies and support for what had happened at the bus station.

When one of the men charged with beating the Freedom Riders came to their office for legal representation, Dees and Fuller took the case. The legal fee was paid by the Ku Klux Klan and the White Citizen's Council. [Fuller, Millard. Love in the Mortar Joints. New Century Press: 1980 and The Progressive, July 1988]

Dees founded the Southern Poverty Law Center in 1971 with Joseph Levin [who left the SPLC in 1976] and Julian Bond [resigned late 1970's.] [Articles of Incorporation. Southern Poverty Law Center, Inc.]

Acted as Chief fundraiser for George McGovern's 1972 presidential campaign in return for the campaign's mailing list. Raised $20 million for McGovern. [Burlington Times, July 30, 1975. The Progressive, July 1988.]

Arrested and removed from court in 1975 for attempting to suborn perjury [bribing a witness] in the Joan Little murder trial in North Carolina. Little, a black convict, was accused of killing a prison guard with an ice-pick . The felony charge against Dees was subsequently dropped, but the presiding judge, Hamilton Hobgood, refused to re-admit Dees to the case. The refusal was upheld on appeal after the Supreme Court of the United States refused to hear Dees appeal. [Ibid.]

"The great untold story of the JoAnn Little trial was the role of the Communist Party, through its National Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression, in controlling the entire political movement surrounding the case. Angela Davis, a leading figure in both organizations became the most frequently quoted movement figure and constant companion of JoAnn Little... Party members were visible and influential on the defense committee, and the party frequently set up rallies of support around the country." [Columbia Journalism Review. Pirsky, Mark. March/April, 1976.]

Fund-raised for Jimmy Carter in 1976 hoping to be named Attorney-General, but was unenthused by the campaign for its middle of the road appeal " You've got to have a candidate who is way out on the extremes!" [The Progressive, July 1988.]

Acted as a fundraiser for both Ted Kennedy's 1980 and Gary Hart's 1984 presidential campaigns and received their mailing lists as reward. [Ibid.]

Perhaps explaining the SPLC's 'Gay' rights activism, Dees was cited in 1979 by his ex-wife with a homosexual encounter during their marriage. She also cited numerous affairs with women including his daughter-in-law and underage stepdaughter. [Alabama Court of Civil Appeals CIV 2114, 1979]

The SPLC's fundraising practices have provoked the disapproval of watchdog groups that monitor charities: In 1993, the American Institute of Philanthropy assigned the SPLC a 'D' grade on a scale of A to F. [American Institute of Philanthropy xxxx 1993 Charity Watchdog Report]

"By frequently mailing out such persuasive appeals, Dees and his associates have drawn financial support from about half a million Americans [by 1988.] The number of contributors and the amount they have given are probably greater than any left-of-center group has recorded in a comparable period in the history of American philanthropy." [The Progressive>, July 1988.]

"The SPLC is already the wealthiest civil rights group in America...Back in 1978, when the Center had less than $10 million, Dees promised that his organization would quit fund-raising and live off interest as soon as its endowment hit $55 million. But as it approached that figure, the SPLC upped the bar to $100 million, a sum that, one 1989 newsletter promised, would allow the Center 'to cease the costly and often unreliable task of fund raising.' Today, the SPLC's treasury bulges with $120 million, and it spends twice as much on fund-raising-$5.76 million last year-as it does on legal services for victims of civil rights abuses. The American Institute of Philanthropy gives the Center one of the worst ratings of any group it monitors, estimating that the SPLC could operate for 4.6 years without making another tax-exempt nickel from its investments or raising another tax-deductible cent from well-meaning 'people like you.'" [The Church of Morris Dees - Harper's, November 2000]

"What is the Southern Poverty Law Center doing...? Mostly making money...In 1999 it spent $2.4 million on litigation and $5.7' million on fundraising, meanwhile taking in more than $44 million--$27 million from fundraising, the rest from investments...On the subject of 'hate groups' ...No one has been more assiduous in inflating the profile of such groups than the center's millionaire huckster, Morris Dees, who in 1999 began a begging letter, 'Dear Friend, The danger presented by the Klan is greater now than at any time in the past ten years.”...With...a salary close to $300,000 putting him among the top 2 percent of Americans, Dees needn't worry about 'fitting in' with the masses of Montgomery [SPLC headquarters]. Naturally, he'd erect a multimillion-dollar office building that's a monstrosity. 'I hate it,' a security guard across the street told me, as the sun's hot rays bounced off the building's vast brushed-stainless-steel-clad southern exposure and onto his face, making him sweat, roasting his skin while he stood watch for the militia nuts Dees would have his donors believe are lurking around every corner." [JoAnn Wypijewski in The Nation, February 26, 2001, as quoted in FrontPage Magazine.]

Randall Williams who formed Klanwatch in 1981 as part of the SPLC's said in 1988: "We were sharing information with the FBI, the police, undercover agents. Instead of defending clients and victims we were more of a super snoop outfit, an arm of law enforcement. Randall and four staff attorney's resigned from the Center in 1986. [The Progressive>, July 1988.]

In 1994 the Montgomery Advertiser won a journalism award for a series of incisive and penetrating investigative articles exposing the unethical fundraising practices of Dees and the Southern Poverty Law Center including:

Since August 1, 1984, the Law Center has taken in about $62 million in contributions and yet only spent about $21 million on actual programs, according to federal tax records.

In a series of fund-raising letters the Law Center implied it forced the United Klan's of American to pay $7 million to the mother of lynching victim Michael Donald in 1987. Beulah Mae Donald actually received only $51,874.70 from the Klansmen. The Law Center collected millions as the result of fund-raising letters about the case.

The Montgomery Advertiser conducted a "random sampling of donors - people who receive a steady stream of fund-raising letters and newsletters - showed they had no idea the Law Center was so wealthy."

"They're drowning in their own affluence," Pamela Summers, a former SPLC legal fellow told The Montgomery Advertiser. "What they are doing in the legal department is not done for the best interest of everybody [but] is done as though the sole, overriding goal is to make money.""I think people associate the SPLC with going to court. And that's why they get the money. And they don't go to court." There have only been a handful of court cases over the years, many of which remain unresolved.

The SPLC which has crusaded for the rights of blacks for 23 years, is controlled by whites. It has hired only two black staff attorneys in its history, both of whom left unhappy. 12 of 13 former Black employees interviewed by the Montgomery Advertiser complained they experienced or observed racial problems during their employment. Several said the SPLC was "more like a plantation." [The Montgomery Advertiser. Feb. 13-14, 1994.]

In 1986 the entire SPLC legal staff resigned in protest of Dees refusal to address issues such as poverty, homelessness, voter registration and other issues they considered more pertinent to poor minorities rather than to get rich fighting a Klan chimera. [Harpers Magazine. Silverstein, Ken. The Church of Morris Dees. November 2000.]

The Birmingham News has also investigated Dees and the SPLC in 1994 and found the following:

Christine Lee, a Harvard Law School alumnus who interned at the Center in 1989, "I would definitely say that there was not a single black employee with whom I spoke who was happy to be working there." "As I was told [at the SPLC,] they don't need Black people telling them how to handle Black issues," Lee said.

Dees responded by saying, "We don't have black slots and white slots. Probably the most discriminated people in American today are white men when it comes to jobs because there are more of those who had more education opportunities and who the test scores show are scoring better and on paper look more qualified. That's why you have so many reverse discrimination cases around." [Birmingham News. Feb. 17, 1994.]

USA Today reported in 1996 that Dees' Southern Poverty Law Center was the "nations richest civil rights organization" with $68 million in assets. [USA Today. Aug. 3, 1996] Today it is closer to its stated goal of a $100 million endowment.

In the same article Stephen Bright, one of Dees numerous former associates told a reporter that Dees is "a fraud who has milked a lot of very wonderful, well intentioned people." [Ibid.]

At a news conference in Washington in April 1996, Dees announced that "Those [black] churches that have been burned in the South were certainly burned by racists." After subsequent investigation revealed there was no rash of black church burnings, many newspapers, including The Charlotte Observer, concluded that Dees "misinformed" the press. [Charlotte Observer. October 10, 1996.]

Dees has actively campaigned for for laws in which "associations of two or more persons" who train in the use of firearms for defensive purposes are declared "illegal militias." [Selected Speeches and Writings of Morris Dees.]

Dees is well known for putting 'Hate on Trial' in the 1990 Portland. Oregon civil trial of extremist Tom Metzger. One of the witnesses in that trial, Greg Withrow, now accuses Dees of suborning perjury by paying witnesses [and then hush money for another 5 years] for their testimony. [San Diego Times Union. August 25, 2002.]

Dees & the SPLC defames the entire Southern Heritage Community by labeling them 'Neo-Confederates.' [SPLC Intelligence Update. Summer 2000]

Dees assaulted an elderly journalist at a symposium sponsored by the University of West Florida, Pensacola, Florida on January 12, 2002. The journalist had asked Dees a 'bad question.' Dees then had the journalist physically hauled out of the building by two policemen. [The First Freedom. February, 2002.]

 

No, people are to smart for neo-fascist, race centric, far right nationalism

 

I agree Topolm, it's only through making local bonds and loyalties that anything can ever really be accomplished.

Your post was a bit long, but on point for the most part.

Perhaps some of us lower class individuals have lost our economic independence. But without the support of the working class the elite couldn't have their way. If we the workers that develop new products would refuse to go retrain new work forces, simply stand back and tell the bosses that want to move our plants "You go train these new people. I won't be a part of it." I think far fewer plants would move over seas. The executives don't know how to produce the items. But the worker has abdicated their responsibility.

 

I think people are too smart to fall for your opinions.

 

good one

 

This is where the strength and culture of the sixties came from. And most of those institutions and organizations have been dismantled and thrown out in the last 30 years on the grounds of securing the common good, as defined by the Washington elite. The common man was blind in letting this happen.

 

Most of those organizations were abandoned on the premise that by sacrificing them the little man would have their taxes lowered and more money in their pockets. Has that happenned? No. All that has happenned is that the little man has even less control or protection in this world.

 

You are actually saying that topolm is a neo-fascist, race centric, far right nationalist just because he is pointing out the fallicies of the SPLC and the Zionist agenda. Its too bad that calling a spaid a spaid qualifies now as anti-semistism. The corporate propaganda arm has really got double think going in the collective consciousness, I see it everyday.

Shane the ADL and SPLC thank you for doing their bidding.

 

No, i call him neo-fascist, race centric, far right nationalist based on his statements in other threads claiming that the white race is the most intelligent race, and that white americans and white europeans should kick all non-whites out of "the nations the white people built", ect ect ect.

a quick glance over my posts will show i'm not a fan of zionism, but neo-fascism is not the answer.

 

the pseudoconservative mentality is what it has always been and always will be, whatever name chainges it comes up with to try and hide behind.

the corporatocracy is a symptom of it. a world and life destroying desease and not just a threat to civil liberties. but it is the symptom, the pathology, but not the cause.

it is that callus thoughtlessness that masquarades as conservative, while in truith conseving nothing and destroying virtualy everything that is the virus and bactirium at the root and birthing place of the disease.

=^^=
.../\...

 

Very well written and SO true!

 

Sorry for the jump to conclusion, I agree that neo fascism is not the answer, but it is what the elites ideals are grounded in. Fascism is a marriage of corporation and state for the subdual of the people in a totalitarian police state, and that is what they have accomplished in the USA, UK, and elsewhere. I do not know enough about topolms viewpoints to begin to defend them and I wasnt trying to in my previous post. Non-whites are not our enemies.

 

Logically the biggest threat to civil liberties in the 21st century would be the abolition of civil liberties in the 21st century - do I get a prize now?

 

It needent be - you can be a fascist leader even if you dont yet have a police state. so that definition is wrong

 

I think I win with my answer Columbo: Ignorance, and Apathy. We defer all the time to others that promise us security, and they couldn't care less. All they care about is profit in their pockets.