Patriot Resistance Forum

Patriot Resistance Forum

Community for PatriotResistance.com Members
 
HomeHome  PortalPortal  CalendarCalendar  FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  
November 2017
MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930   
CalendarCalendar
Latest topics
» Intell wanted
Sun May 10, 2015 8:37 pm by Blackout

» Maryland Patriot
Sun May 10, 2015 10:22 am by Blackout

» New Member from S. California
Wed Apr 29, 2015 11:39 pm by Stompit

» Oklahoma here
Thu Apr 16, 2015 2:43 pm by Bill Hester

» Greetings From Kansas
Mon Mar 02, 2015 11:21 pm by Delta_Wolf

» New member from Arizona
Sat Jan 10, 2015 2:49 pm by heathenharry

» New member from Virginia
Sat Dec 27, 2014 6:58 am by Will20

» greetings from Maine!
Sat Oct 11, 2014 11:10 am by toekneesee

» New Patriot from northern Nevada
Sat Sep 13, 2014 3:23 pm by CLRedmond

» Greetings from Kentucky
Sun Aug 24, 2014 8:03 am by jsteelpatriot

» Is this the beginning of gun control? 22 LR
Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:31 am by Dreams_pettling

» excellent hunting and defensive / offensive weapon
Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:15 am by Dreams_pettling

» rugged models
Wed Jul 16, 2014 12:17 am by Dreams_pettling

» Greetings, brothers.
Thu Jul 03, 2014 7:54 pm by St42s0n

» Hello to all members!
Fri May 16, 2014 3:51 am by Kyria


Share | 
 

 WARNINGS FROM THE PAST

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: WARNINGS FROM THE PAST    Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:00 pm

WARNINGS FROM THE PAST by Kurt Saxon copyright 1981
The imminent collapse of world civilization is becoming
apparent to more people as the economy grinds down and
international frictions accelerate. Even so, most people still
believe the overall decline is due to some kind of plot, political
bungling or economic miscalculation.
Whatever they believe, they are still blind to the real root
cause of every socio-economic and political upheaval; a surplus of
people, and worse, a surplus of inferior people. Further, they
seem to think it Hitlerian to advocate the destruction of the
millions of parasites who have doomed civilization.
Actually, Hitler's program was plain and simple nationalism,
whereby the German was to be supreme over every other race and
ethnic group. Much is made of his proposed program to sterilize
defectives. But this only involved obvious mental basket cases.
Any German able to tell the difference between one end of a gun and
the other was to become part of the "Master Race". The uniformed
Germanic ape would have been placed over even intelligent Americans.
Hitler's bias in favor of Germans over the superior Americans
and British of his day stems from his being an Urbanite and a
politician. If any bias is valid I'd favor the most dim-witted but
productive clod kicker in the Ozarks over an Urbanite and/or
politician.
I bring up Hitler only because I'm so often accused of
imitating his thinking in my advocacy of sterilization and
euthanasia in regards to ridding our species of inferiors. But as
a reincarnationist, it would be silly of me to be either an active
nationalist or racist. I could be reborn white, black, yellow,
Gentile, Jew, Protestant, Catholic, etc. (There may be no truth in
the doctrine of reincarnation, but so what?).
My only concern in ridding our species of inferior vehicles is
a kind of insurance. This is that I, or anyone else, will be well
born, well reared, well educated and well occupied. Plus, without
morons dropping surplus young onto the welfare rolls, adequate
individuals could keep most of their earnings for the benefit of
themselves and their loved ones. Regardless of the socio-economic
system, there is no justification for public funds being squandered
on demanding parasites.
Our present horde of public charges has become an accepted
obligation on the part of the average American taxpayer. Every
politician falls all over himself apologizing for any fancied
slight to "the truly needy". But who truly needs the truly needy?
And why should the truly needed be enslaved on their behalf? Why
should the lives of the improvident aged prolonged by strangers?
Why should the fertility of welfare parasites be subsidized by
society's workers? There is no logical reason for any of these
miscarriages of compassion.
But modern Urbanites have become so psychologically and
economically locked into the system of perpetuating the useless and
unfit that it will take a nuclear war to rid us of them. It does
no good to try to reason with Urbanites since they're unable to
grasp the basic issues.
In case it's not clear in your mind, let me give you a few
simple illustrations which I hope will put the problem in its
overall perspective.
Say this country was a body and the people were its cells.
Say further that over a third of the cells were either old and worn
out or physically or mentally defective, or predatory, attacking
normal cells.
Now, say your doctor said you had cancer and he was going to
cut it out. But you say, "No. My cancer cells have as much right
to live as my normal cells". You'd be judged insane.
But our country has millions of old people, being kept alive
artificially, in misery, long after Nature/god decreed they should
die, and at great public expense. Millions of physical and mental
defectives are not only allowed to live, but encouraged to
reproduce their blighted kind; again at public expense. Millions
of predators, with known records, are allowed to run free to rob,
rape, maim and kill; still at staggering public expense. If
jailed, they often live better than their victims, to the detriment
of the taxpayer.
So this country is afflicted with collective insanity and
terminal cancer. The terminal cancer is self-explanatory. But the
collective insanity is manifested in the average Urbanite's
ignorance in believing in the timelessness of today.
The Urbanite's mind is beset with thousands of impressions
each day. Rapid change is a natural part of his life. His days
are so full of differences, he can't remember well what life was
like five years ago, much less twenty. And history is a
meaningless panorama of unrelated or foreign impressions.
So it is natural that the laws of cause and effect, so noticed
by those dwelling in more placid rural areas is lost on him. Add
to that the fact that the average Urbanite is possessed of a
hopelessly low I.Q. and the more intelligent is desperately
neurotic and you have an urban populace of nitwits.
It's little wonder that the relatively normal Urbanite can't
see the forest for the trees. Surrounded by the imbecilic and the
twisted, he thinks he's anti-social, out of place and just a
frustrated malcontent if he doesn't see his Disneyland for dummies
as the best of all possible worlds.
If you corner him and give him the facts he'll admit he's
uneasy for himself and his loved ones. But his job is there and
besides, Congress won't let Social Security go bankrupt. The
Russians aren't suicidal enough to start a nuclear war.
Without realizing it, he's been caught up in the hysteria of
the dimwitted and the psychotic Urbanites around him. The wishful
thinking of his inferiors has weakened his instincts for
self-preservation. Living in the timelessness of the parasite, he
has no sense of history or of the laws of cause and effect.
Of course, Rurals have little better sense of history, as
such. Since they are into a more basic economy they seldom need
the education or the broad frame of reference requiring long term
historical evaluations. But they are much more aware of the laws
of cause and effect and so can better understand what happens when
losers reproduce.
So the above and the following will be lost on Urbanites but
will be understood by most Rurals. But after all, the Urbanites
are deservedly doomed and the Rurals are the seeds of the next
civilization. So it's to the Rurals these warnings are redirected
in hopes that humans will finally learn.
Warnings of overpopulation have been given since Plato's time
and probably before. The warnings were all valid, as Greece, Rome
and every following civilization was eventually swamped by vast
numbers of useless and degenerate citizens. Misery and cultural
loss has always been the price of "humans" breeding like animals.
Thomas Malthus put his finger on the problem in 1797 but was
opposed by the Urbanites of his day. The following is from
Chamber's Encyclopedia, 1891:
MALTHUS, THOMAS ROBERT, the expounder of the theory of
population, was born 14 February 1766 at the Rookery near Dorking
in Surrey, where his father owned a small estate. He was ninth
wrangler at Cambridge in 1797, was elected Fellow of his college
(Jesus), took orders, and was appointed to a parish in his native
county. In 1798 he brought out his Essay on the Principle of
Population, which attracted great attention and met with no little
criticism. During the following years Malthus extended his
knowledge of the subject both by travel and by reading, and in 1803
published a greatly enlarged edition of his essay. In 1805 he
married happily, and soon after was appointed professor of
Political Economy and Modern History in the East India Company's
college at Haileybury, a post which he occupied till his death at
Bath on 29th December, 1834.
Personally, Malthus was a kindly and accomplished man, who
followed what he believed to be the truth, and who endured without
a complaint the abuse and misunderstanding to which his writings
exposed him. The aim of the Essay was to supply a reasoned
corrective to the theories regarding the perfectibility of society,
which had been diffused by Rousseau and his school, and which had
been advocated in England by Godwin. Malthus maintained that such
optimistic hopes are rendered baseless by the natural tendency of
population to increase faster than the means of subsistence. He
pointed out that both in the animal and vegetable kingdoms life was
so prolific that if allowed free room to multiply it would fill
millions of worlds in the course of a few thousand years. The only
limit to its increase is the want of room and food. With regard to
man, the question is complicated by the fact that the instinct of
propagation is controlled by reason; but even in his case the
ultimate check to population is the want of food, only it seldom
operates directly, but takes a variety of forms in accordance with
the complexity of human society. The more immediate checks are
either preventive or positive. The former appear as moral
restraint or vice. The positive checks are exceedingly various,
including all unwholesome occupations, severe labour and exposure
to the seasons, extreme poverty, bad nursing of children, large
towns, excesses of all kinds, the whole train of common diseases
and epidemics, wars, plague, and famine. Malthus goes on to
illustrate the action of his principle by a review of the history
of the different nations and races, showing what are the actual
checks that have limited population--celibacy, wars, infanticide,
plagues, vicious practices--and proving that the population
difficulty has affected the development of society from the
beginning.
It cannot be said that Malthus was original in his exposition
of the theory of population. It is a theme of both Plato and
Aristotle. Shortly before the time of Malthus the problem had been
handled by Benjamin Franklin, Hume, and many other writers.
Malthus crystallised the views of those writers, and presented them
in systematic form with elaborate proofs derived from history. In
certain details and in the form of exposition the Essay may be
criticised; but the broad principles of it can be doubted only by
those who do not understand the question. The enormous increase of
the means of subsistence attained by colonisation and modern
industrial development has only for a time postponed the population
difficulty for the world at large, while its pressure is still felt
in the more thickly peopled centers both of Europe and of the
East. At the present time the most interesting feature of Malthus
is his relation to Darwin. Darwin said on reading Malthus On
Population that natural selection was the inevitable result of the
rapid increase of all organic beings for such rapid increase
necessarily leads to the struggle for existence. To prevent
misunderstanding it should be added that Malthus gives no sanction
to the theories and practices currently known as Malthusianism. In
this reference Malthus approved only of the principle of moral
self-restraint; do not marry till you have a fair prospect of
supporting a family.


Back to top Go down
 
WARNINGS FROM THE PAST
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» FLOOD IN THAILAND
» ENFANTS KIDNAPPES Kates diary and Malinka
» Puzzle Pieces and Looking Past the Agendas to See the Big Picture!
» CPPD and paying less legal fees
» Roman Polanski's past catches up with him finally...

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Patriot Resistance Forum :: Survival :: Martial Law Preperations-
Jump to: