Starve This Beast

Post image for Starve This Beast

by Keoni Galt on January 26, 2011

Many people simply write off  “conspiracy theory” as nothing more than fantastic SyFy channel fantasy, defined by stories of reptile aliens and satanic Boehmian Grove carnival freakshows.

They couldn’t be more wrong.

A conspiracy is nothing more than a group of people conspiring to carry out some action or actions to achieve certain goals, using their resources to effect deception, dishonesty, and misdirection so as to gain from the peoples ignorance as they focus on all of the mass media misinformation and disinformation promulgated as weapons of mass distraction.

For instance, when one encounters left wing liberals who are staunch anti-capitalist and anti-free market ideologues, they will sometimes make reference to the need for more Government regulation of business and the marketplace…otherwise you get the conditions for those dreadful “Robber Barons” who exploited the masses back in the early 20th century to amass fantastic wealth.

For example, note how this self-identified lefty blogger discusses “robber barons” and “unbridled capitalism.” He effectively describes the system of corporatism…which is really nothing more than a new name for fascism.

Real capitalism, by definition is “unbridled.” Pure capitalism is a free market.

The Robber Barons were not capitalists. They were Corporatists…aka Fascists. They used their wealth to finance elections to gain influence on the politicians to pass laws that would benefit their bottom lines by eliminating their competition through regulations and enforcement, thereby granting these Robber Baron’s corporations industry-wide cartels.

They CONSPIRED.

Conspired to take over the country and institute their vision of Government by the Corporations, for the Corporations…unbridled corporatism, not capitalism.

Yet those same robber barons that the leftist will decry as the primary example for why we need the Government to “regulate” the economy…

…are the same who financed, supported and lobbied to create the Federal Reserve in the first place…and who also now own significant shares of the stocks of the Fed’s member banks.

From the FDIC Learning Bank:

The term robber baron was revived in the 19th century in the U.S. as a pejorative term describing businessman who allegedly used unscrupulous tactics in their business operations and on the stock market to amass huge personal fortunes.Many of their massive businesses controlled a large majority of all activity in the respective industry, often arrived at through predatory pricing schemes that are now illegal.

Some of the most notable robber barons were J.P. Morgan (banking), John D. Rockefeller (oil), and Andrew Carnegie (steel).

Take special note of those three names.

Check out the Congressional Committee on Banking, Currency and Housing Report of 1976. Note that all three names figure prominently in the formation and ownership of the Federal Reserve member banks.

All three amassed vast fortunes and enormous political control. All three had their wealth turned into multi-generational dynasties. All three estates eventually formed Foundations to protect the family wealth from the normal taxes We the Sheeple have to pay, as well as effecting the means of influencing society for their long term benefit.

For instance, The Rockefeller Foundation funded Feminism…they CONSPIRED to change the very fabric of society by attacking the Patriarchal structure of the nuclear family.

Here’s an interviewer with film maker Aaron Russo, recounting a conversation he had with Nick Rockefeller before Rouss0 died in 2007:

Excerpt from Aaron Russo’s last interview before his death in 2007:

Well one of the things he told me was that.. he was at the house one night and we started talking and he was laughing and he said,

“Aaron what do you think Women’s Liberation was all about?”

And I had pretty conventional thinking about it at that point and I said,

“I think it’s about women having the right to work to get equal pay with men just like they won the right to vote.”

He started to laugh and he said,

“Your an idiot.”

And I said,

“Why am I an idiot?”

And he said,

“Let me tell you what that was about. We the Rockefellers funded that.”

“We funded Women’s Lib and we’re the ones who got it all over the newspapers and television (through) the Rockefeller Foundation…”

And he says,

“You wanna know why?

There were two primary reasons.

And one reason was we couldn’t tax half the population before Women’s Lib and the second reason was now we get the kids in school at an early age.. we can indoctrinate kids on how to think and with it break up their family. The kids start looking at the state as the family.. As the schools as the officials as their family.. not the parents teaching them. And so those were the two primary reasons for Women’s Lib.”

Some people will ignore this quote and say that conspiracy theories are nothing more than reptilian alien sex fiend delusions promoting female supremacy.

These same folks will laugh and criticize the likes of one of the internet’s most famous conspiracy theorist, Henry Makow, as a complete moonbat who hurts the cause of Men’s Rights.

Yet Henry Makow repeatedly issues the most basic and simplest of challenges for people who think he’s a loon to see how right or wrong he is: Google “Rockefeller Foundation” and “Women’s Studies.”

The Rockefeller Foundation literally has bankrolled the primary transmitter of Cultural Feminism for the last several decades in the US – the Women’s Studies programs in colleges and Universities across the country.

All the aspiring journalists, film makers, screenwriters, and other news media and entertainment industry focused students took these women’s studies classes during their educational careers, and hit the mass media production industry after graduation, fully indoctrinated in the attitudes and ideas of the feminist zeitgeist. And it literally embedded itself into the mass media propaganda we now call “info-tainment” to make it a cultural influence that has perfectly socially engineered our modern feminist society.

But remember…this is crazy conspiracy theory. It couldn’t possibly be true…feminism was an organic, grass roots movement born of women who were truly oppressed by Western Patriarchy!

The Carnegie Foundation has also been a big supporter of feminist scholarship.

But for this article, I’d like focus primarily on the third Robber Baron’s Estate listed: JP Morgan.

While Carnegie and Rockefeller’s wealth were used to create Foundations to exert influence over society, JP Morgan became one of our present day banks “too big to fail.”

But don’t be mistaken if you think that JP Morgan doesn’t have anything to do with feminism either.

In fact, JP Morgan has ingeniously positioned itself to reap massive profits from one of the lynch pins of effecting Feminist policy in the U.S. – the Food Stamp programs now using debit cards instead of the Federally printed paper “stamps.”

As the Economic Collapse Blog points out:

JP Morgan is the largest processor of food stamp benefits in the United States. JP Morgan has contracted to provide food stamp debit cards in 26 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. JP Morgan is paid for each case that it handles, so that means that the more Americans that go on food stamps, the more profits JP Morgan makes. Yes, you read that correctly. When the number of Americans on food stamps goes up, JP Morgan makes more money.

Food stamps is one of the programs that enable women to create more single mother households. Women don’t need Men to be providers now…they have JP Morgan to assist the Federal Government in taking money from working taxpayers and feeding single mother households and their illegitimate broods!

JP Morgan also administers child support debit cards in 15 States, making it more efficient for child support agencies to take money from Dads and deposit them via electronic funds transfers into these debit card accounts so women will have a much easier time spending the support payments with their JP Morgan child support debit cards.

Isn’t JP Morgan just great?!

I say it’s time to starve this beast.

If you have a JP Morgan bank account, close it. Take your business elsewhere.

If you have a JP Morgan credit card, pay it off or transfer your balance to a smaller bank that isn’t a part owner of the Federal Reserve banking system nor a profiteer off of the feminazi welfare state.

Reduce your tax obligations to the least amount possible. It’s our tax dollars being used to pay the likes of JP Morgan to administer these debit card programs.

Better yet, expatriate to some country where Rockefeller and Carnegie sponsored social engineering – aka “feminism” – has yet to take a demographically destructive hold on the populace (if such places even exist anymore).

All things considered, I realize that realistically, such actions taken by the amount of readers who would take this seriously still wouldn’t even come close to being able to starve this beast. It’s grown to large, too menacing and too rapacious.

But at least you won’t be supporting it’s continued devouring of Western Civilization. After all, even if you can’t effectively starve the beast, that doesn’t mean you should help to feed it either.

{ 66 comments… read them below or add one }

Joe Zamboni January 26, 2011 at 10:29

Much more could be said about the intentions behind Feminism, for example its intention to impose a new level of fascist governmental control. But the notion of “starving the beast” is a worthy topic for this comment thread. Yes, great, don’t earn any more taxable money than you absolutely need, so you won’t contribute to the draconian Feminist system under which we live. But there are many other ways to starve the beast. Engage in barter and mutual-support arrangements with neighbors. Don’t get married. Don’t buy Valentine Day’s gifts. Don’t engage in the wine-and-dine dating process. Home school your kids if you have them. Better yet, don’t have kids and make sure you don’t by getting a vasectomy. In what other ways are people starving the beast?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 5
Elusive Wapiti January 26, 2011 at 10:35

One doesn’t need to have a buncha guys and gals in smoke-filled rooms to be a conspiracy.

One need only to look at the etymology of the word to see that “conspiracy” can have a very wide application:

“con”, meaning “with” or “together”, and

“spire” meaning “breathe”.

Thus a “conspiracy” is merely a collection of people who think alike and act in a congruent way…they “breathe together” in unison.

We are truly surrounded by conspiracies.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 2
AntZ January 26, 2011 at 10:53

The author thinks that big business funded the birth of feminism in order to weaken collective bargaining and increase profits.

Maybe, maybe not. Who cares? That was long ago. Today, the feminist crusade for privilege, pampering, and entitlement is killing the economy, and corporate profits along with it. I guess you could say “what goes around, comes around.”

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 19 Thumb down 14
Matt K January 26, 2011 at 11:00

Excellent news from the UK, chaps: a government MP has called for men to rise up against anti-mail discrimination, stating, and I quote, “Feminists are now amongst the most obnoxious bigots. ”

Even feminist Fay Wheldon had this to say…
“Our family courts show gross bias towards mothers at the expense of fathers …Boys fail at school because education itself has been feminised …Women still feel free to speak about men in such an insulting way that if the roles were reversed hate laws would be invoked. A general rule should apply: if women make sweeping statements about men let them reverse the roles – and see what it feels like. ”

Original statement
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/2109/dominic_raab_we_must_end_feminist_bigotry.html

News coverage…
The Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/conservative/8279200/Dominic-Raab-men-should-burn-their-briefs-in-protest-at-obnoxious-feminist-bigots.html

The Daily Mail
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1350128/Tory-MP-Dominic-Raab-calls-male-equality-Feminists-bigots.html

The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jan/24/tory-mp-dominic-raab-feminists

Follow up articles:
Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/8281812/Are-men-victims-of-obnoxious-feminism.html

Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/26/dominic-raab-feminism

Matt

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
Keoni Galt January 26, 2011 at 11:01

The author thinks that big business funded the birth of feminism in order to weaken collective bargaining and increase profits.

No, the author thinks that Big Business became BIG because they were able to buy influence and power to gain control of the government to pass laws and promote ideas to shape society via educational institutions and mass media.

Feminism is one of those things they deliberately promulgated, for a variety of reasons.

Today, the feminist crusade for privilege, pampering, and entitlement is killing the economy, and corporate profits along with it.

Except for the Corporations of the likes of JP Morgan. As the economy continues to tank, more people become dependent on foodstamps. The more people on the foodstamp debit card program, the more JP Morgan profits.

You think JP Morgan and all the other corporations “too big to fail” are hurting with the rest of us? Hardly…they’re profiting mightily off of our misery!

Keyster January 26, 2011 at 11:11

One could argue George Soros is the modern day version of those guys, with his manipulation of currency markets and financial influence in the liberal media. He’s at the top of the NWO hierarchy.

The beast IS starving right now. The “American Dream” is over and people sense it. We’re getting make to basics. Gone are the days of McMansions, SUV’s and massive consumerism. The well has run dry. States will default to get out of public worker pension debt. The federal government will need to slow printing money. Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid will HAVE to be cut, along with defense. The big three are 80% of the budget. We lack the political will to make the hard choices now, so the pain will only be greater later.

Without the current level of government entitlements women as a group will be facing some harsh realities about life. They may even take to liking men again.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 3
Keoni Galt January 26, 2011 at 11:12

At least part of the reason why I’ve written this piece, was in response to a number of people who’ve been trolling my blog as of late, anonymously attacking me and calling me crazy for being a “conspiracy theorist.”

Others have written blog posts or commented on other blogs, all deriding me as some kind of loon or mangina, simply because I’ve written about conspiracy theories that I find plausible, and for which the evidence that they are real can be found and cited.

Yet some would seek to marginalize the provable, evidence based ones as the equivalent to the outlandish and crazy theories like reptilian alien overlords.

The Rockefellers funded feminism.
The Rockefeller foundation gave the funding to Albert Kinsey to produce his research that was instrumental in overturning the sexual morality of the formerly Patriarchal nation.
The Rockefellers are part owners of the Federal Reserve (as evidenced by the Congressional Report Showing the tree of elites who own the Federal Reserve).
The Rockefellers have outright stated their desire for global population control and a one world government (you think it’s a coincidence that the U.N. building was built on land donated by the Rockefellers? Hint: it’s located in a place called Rockefeller Plaza).

There’s a reason the elite, super wealthy Foundations created by the Robber Barons have caused Feminism to become a cultural paradigm reflected in our educational institutions, Government policies and mass media content.

I’m tired of being conflated with ridiculous misinformation and disinformation campaigns whenever I try to point these things out.

Lovekraft January 26, 2011 at 11:24

@ Keoni:

take opposition to your message as proof you are on the right track. And IMO, internet debate has evolved beyond troll-sniping where any flaming gets quickly ignored/down-voted. Call it the awakening of materialistic delusion as Western status erodes and resources dwindle. The more the opposition, the closer to the awakening.

As for this article, I think there may be some deeper, darker forces involved than just a few greedy families – witchcraft, ancient Arabic bloodfeuds etc. Anyone who tries to ‘connect these dots’ requires incredible focus and stamina. Thankfully, you have maintained focus in exposing the Rock/Carn/Morg trifecta.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3
Alan B January 26, 2011 at 11:28

@antz
Maybe, maybe not. Who cares? That was long ago. Today, the feminist crusade for privilege, pampering, and entitlement is killing the economy, and corporate profits along with it.

its killing the economy for the Regular Joe/Jane, but dont get it twisted.. corporate profits are only going HIGHER. 16% real unemployment but magically the market is back up to 12,000 and revving up..
its the people that cant afford a ticket to the “big show” that are getting shafted. both Men AND Women.

this is about 3 things, money power control. The people at the top have it, they want to keep it (forever), and they will destroy those below them to do that. As long as they maintain that buffer that separates them from the rioting masses beneath them, they are safe.
How do they maintain that safety net? DIVISION.
repubs vs dems vs conserve vs neocon
men vs women vs homos vs retards vs kids
jew vs muslim vs christian vs terrorist
jets vs steelers vs packers vs michael vick
color vs color vs label label label
you get it. slap a label on someone and someone ELSE will attack.. if they don’t, make that “labeled” person PRIVILEGED with laws and PROTECTION from the non-labeled and guess what… CONFLICT.

As long as everyone’s attention is focused on the fight in the ring, no one sees the vault getting robbed.

the ones robbing the vault …. conspirators
the ones robbing the vault control the media… therefore we can only theorize what happened since they control the flow of (dis)information
Conspiracy Theory

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 1
Robert January 26, 2011 at 11:39

Feminism = the mother of many criminal conspiracies.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2
Firepower January 26, 2011 at 11:40

Keoni Galt

The Rockefellers funded feminism.
The Rockefeller foundation gave the funding to Albert Kinsey to produce his research that was instrumental in overturning the sexual morality of the formerly Patriarchal nation.

If the Rockefellers are so evil, how come nobody ever attempted to assassinate one of them? Even Hitler was targeted multiple times.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9
Keoni Galt January 26, 2011 at 11:44

Easy Firepower…the Rockefellers and their ilk control the media.

They have half the population wanting to assassinate Obama, and the other half wanting to assassinate Palin (metaphorically speaking for the most part…).

Most people don’t even realize that there is a man behind the curtain pulling the levers.

silent January 26, 2011 at 11:45

Don’t get married.
Check. Learned my lesson the first time

Don’t buy Valentine Day’s gifts.
Check. H8 that shit.

Don’t engage in the wine-and-dine dating process.
Even the women I see introduce me as her ‘friend’ to their friends/family. Women my age don’t even call it dating anymore, this hook-up culture really can’t go on much longer. It’s kind of like the housing market, it’s all good, until it’s really REALLY bad

Vasectomy.
Check. I went and blabbed to everyone I’m seeing that I did it though. Probably should’ve kept my mouth shut

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 1
zed January 26, 2011 at 11:46

I’m tired of being conflated with ridiculous misinformation and disinformation campaigns whenever I try to point these things out.

And therein lies the heart of the problem. This post starts to address it in going the next obvious step beyond saying that there is conspiracy to talking about what to DO about it.

The most powerful, wealthy, well-connected people in the world did not get that way overnight. In many cases these families have been accumulating wealth and political power for hundreds of years – generation after generation. That much really should not be news to anyone.

Where things get sticky is when we get to the “so what” stage.

Let me give one example. I might say to people that television is the most powerful brainwashing mechanism of all time and that the first step toward mental freedom is to get rid of it. Inevitably they will twist themselves in knots trying to come up with excuses for their continuing addiction to it.

Well, there is still “good stuff” on – like the History Channel, and…, and…, and…, well, and FOOTBALL!

Is anyone walking into their homes, tying them in their chairs, and propping their eyelids open like the protagonist in Clockwork Orange and forcing them to watch the slime from the video?

No, 99.999% of the issues are things that people do not just voluntarily do, but that they demand the “right” to do.

Maybe using the idea that some nefarious influences are gaining from what they do is a better way of motivating them to stop doing it than pointing out how much better off they would be if they did stop. But, the bottom line is that they have to be the ones who choose to stop for themselves, and I have had so little luck convincing people that I don’t consider the actions of the “illuminati” to be the controlling factor at all.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0
silent January 26, 2011 at 11:54

Just remember that these organizations (and, to a much lesser extent, their agents) are your true enemies. Try to keep focused after the stuff hits the fan.

Alan B’s comment about labels and the divide-and-conquer strategy will be our downfall, but only if we break concentration when men begin to pick up the pieces. I suspect the “Rock/Carn/Morg trifecta” (as Lovekraft puts it) will certainly be trying to step into the power vacuum that results. At which point, ‘grass roots’ justice should be administered, if you catch my drift

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Alan B January 26, 2011 at 11:56

@keyster
The beast IS starving right now. The “American Dream” is over and people sense it. We’re getting make to basics. Gone are the days of McMansions, SUV’s and massive consumerism. The well has run dry. States will default to get out of public worker pension debt. The federal government will need to slow printing money. Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid will HAVE to be cut, along with defense. The big three are 80% of the budget. We lack the political will to make the hard choices now, so the pain will only be greater later.
—–

not sure about the cutting of the big 3, but i dont think the days of mcmansions and suvs are quite done. i think if those in (true)power ever feel that the beast is starving (the BEAST is not starving.. WE are) they will tap the still few untouched markets we have brewing.
1. illegal aliens. AMNESTY
they will not be illegal anymore, and oBAMa an additional 30million on the tax rolls. yes yes, i know.. theres only 5-10 million illegals here..
BUUUULLLLSHITTTTTTT. theres probably 1 million in new york CITY alone.
2. Drugs (not pot, not thru the pharmacy system)
the govt TRULY does not want pot legal. the main reason is, there is no processing or skill needed to grow it on your friggin windowsill. they will legalize chemical hallucinogens (ritalin anyone? no scientist claims to knows anything about pot, but we happen to know ALOT about every age group and how they react on psychotropics) long before pot is legalized.. i’ll even go on a limb and guess they will legalize chemical opiates before pot, peyote, dmt, coca, etc. The main reason is, your average person doesnt know how to make those things.
the reason they arent legalized yet? because of the internet, and any kid that went to an AP chem course can write out the instructions on how to make almost anything and put that on the net.. anyone see how u make meth with 2 bottles and some ammonia in 10 minutes??
3. The north american union
Once the americans are used to living under a police state, (arent we tho?? ban everything that makes me feel bad or that will get me a vote) they will merge north america. they will say look how awesome it works in europe.
then the richest people (in power) in north america can OPENLY plot against those below them without pretending they need to hide behind borders and nationality.

the beast is not starving.. its just killing off/jailing/silencing anyone that dares take a morsel off its plate..
The beast is fine.
We need a BIGGER beast, A smarter beast.
We need a beast that will not succumb to the human condition (greed, corruption, power, control).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
Firepower January 26, 2011 at 11:56

Keoni Galt

Easy Firepower…the Rockefellers and their ilk control the media.

They have half the population wanting to assassinate Obama, and the other half wanting to assassinate Palin (metaphorically speaking for the most part…).

Most people don’t even realize that there is a man behind the curtain pulling the levers.

How strange that these who oppress millions are never targets. You at least seem to know about the machinations. Usually, strident opponents (in large groups) with true knowledge of evil take action.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
DEI January 26, 2011 at 12:06

Brilliant article. It’s nice to see some people talk a bit of sense about economics and politics. Lefties are usually clueless idealists, you only have to listen to one prattle on about the evils of ‘capitalism’ to realise this.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3
Coastal January 26, 2011 at 12:26

I suspect for a lot of us it’s not opposition to conspiracy theories per se, it’s the two unlovely corollaries that usually come along with them.

Firstly, there’s the idea of belief in these theories as a kind of litmus test to separate true MRAs from the secret manginas. Hey, believe what you want, but that doesn’t mean you get to be King of the MRAs and declare everyone else a chump. We can start the squabbling and the infighting after the war is won.

Secondly, these theories implicitly let women off the hook. However feminism started, the whole reason why it has become so endemic is it gives women moral cover to behave how they always wanted to behave anyway. Women haven’t been duped into, say, rampant hypergamy – that’s just who they are. It’s just that functional civilisations usually constrain that kind of behaviour.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1
Firepower January 26, 2011 at 12:36

Coastal

I suspect for a lot of us it’s not opposition to conspiracy theories per se, it’s the two unlovely corollaries that usually come along with them.

Sadly, conspiracy theorists become obsessed into inaction against the typical “Hopelessly Unbeatable Giant.”

Hating an entity is safe.

When one has CLEAR enemies living in your own city – on your OWN block – it’s foolish to fixate on some anointed family cabal enjoying Kingly living in their 30,000 sq.ft. gold mansion in Zurich.

First things first. In order to execute a war criminal, you have to defeat his foot soldiers.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2
IronLowrider January 26, 2011 at 13:23

“People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public…”
Adam Smith

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
zed January 26, 2011 at 13:32

Secondly, these theories implicitly let women off the hook. However feminism started, the whole reason why it has become so endemic is it gives women moral cover to behave how they always wanted to behave anyway.

Thirdly, it is probably that dumbshit sitting right next to you that, if he caught his wife red handed (or even worse his “pure-as-the-driven-snow-who-never-had-a-sexual-thought-in-her-life” daughter) cheating with a teenage boy, would absolutely refuse to even see the cheating whore and threaten to kill the boy.

With idiots like this all around us, who the hell needs to worry about what the people in the house on the hill are doing?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 2
Rebel January 26, 2011 at 13:34

“In what other ways are people starving the beast?”

There are many more ways.
Ghosting is one. Using only a fraction of your work capacity is another.
Picture three or four doctors sharing the same job: working one week out of four each one.
What about garbage collectors, or firemen, or construction workers demanding huge raises or… or go on unlimited strike.
Or doing what the Russians have done :just PRETEND to work, but manage to be unproductive. I link that to .. sabotage.
Finding all possible ways to avoid paying income tax is yet another.
Yes, I believe that sabotage on a grand scale will topple any govmnt.
If you think that you are betraying your country by doing so, forget that notion: your country will remain exactly where it is and unchanged, no matter what is done.

I like to say that I keep one foot inside society: the one foot that can drain resources for your own benefit, the other foot outside society to signify no contribution to said society. That should result in a net loss for our masters.

Compensation must come from somewhere: women reap all the benefits; men must manage to “beg, borrow or steal” at least the same amounts of benefits.

Repeating this behavior with enough thousands of men should help tank the system.

Once the economy has collapsed, feminism , like a wild fire, will become extinct, eventually.

Then, when that is done, it will be time to rebuild. See it as some kind of “reload”.

A collapsed economy doesn’t remain long in that state: think of Argentina and Russia, as two examples.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 2
Keyster January 26, 2011 at 14:21

To this day The Rockefeller Foundation is the single largest contributor to NOW and her liberal sister organizations. This is what funds the myriad of satellite offices in cities, towns and college campuses across the nation. Their membership fees alone would never be able to fund their operations. The lease on their prime real estate, within walking distance of the white house alone is thousands, not to mention payroll.

They’re one of the biggest not-for-profit lobbyist groups in Washington DC. When Terry O’Neill and the grrls say they want to see you, you make the time. That’s how laws against men are passed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1
Gx1080 January 26, 2011 at 16:10

I love how the cute people on the Internet say stuff like “manly men should grab guns and start killing” (or the extremely long winded version of it) while hiding under a pseudonym.

Ok, that out:

The beast will starve, though their owners will probably be safe.

I predict a great part of the world looking like Russia. Worst case scenario, of course.

As I’ve seen written before “America Inc., a subsidiary of World Corporations R’ Us”. Recognizing how the money pulls levers and who do gets benefited from this mess isn’t being crazy, is simply putting 1+1 together. But then, people don’t like when you point that their indoctrination is a lie.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
Anonymous January 26, 2011 at 16:14

Hypergamy could swell again in that case. Women will not just want to sleep with men, they will start sleeping with them only if there will be a material benefit.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
Alcuin January 26, 2011 at 17:07

This article reflects the fact that women can be easily manipulated, chiefly through their emotions. It was a stroke of genius when the buggers-that-be decided to engineer society through women rather than men. By making education female-oriented, the sky’s the limit to what they can do.

How many more men, for instance, can they cram into American jails? We all know that if the situation were the reverse, with females in jail at 20-1 or whatever, the feminazis would be screaming to high heaven. Why the complete silence in the femistream media over the injustices done to men?

You’d have to be pretty stupid, or a miseducated woman, to reject conspiracy as the root of all this.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3
Qae January 26, 2011 at 17:49

It’s pretty clear that large corporations and wealthy elites work toward increasing their own wealth and power, but I’m not sure I can agree that we’re any closer to a ‘one world government’ or that mass indoctrination has occurred to such a scale that we’re near to being reduced to some sort of Orwellian drones.

One world government? Really? I certainly don’t see China and the Muslim world laying down and surrendering sovereignty along with the various self-cannibalizing African nations and the drug cartel-driven or strongman-driven South American nations. Certainly not in the next 100 years, anyway.

As to the Western world being converted, there’s certainly been obvious drift Leftward (with all its concommitant Feminist dissolution), but it’s not very near any ’1984′ scenario. Hell, that this post (and thousands like it every day) sees the light of day is evidence that this nearly-mystical cabal isn’t even close to having the power you ascribe it.

Evolution gives us an insight – there can be motion without direction. Cheetahs are supremely adapted to hunt gazelles, but no one told the cheetahs that was the point. If you see what I’m saying. Society is definitely changing, I’m just not sure there’s a plan big enough and powerful enough to blame for the changes.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 9
Keoni Galt January 26, 2011 at 18:27

Evolution gives us an insight – there can be motion without direction.

Except, in this case, the direction of the motion of feminism is clearly and plainly obvious to see if you care to look into it.

Or do you think there was no direction intended when these Foundations donated millions of dollars to create these women’s studies programs all over the country?

That this just “happened?”

Alcuin January 26, 2011 at 18:33

Qae: “Hell, that this post (and thousands like it every day) sees the light of day is evidence that this nearly-mystical cabal isn’t even close to having the power you ascribe it.”

That’s why the manosphere is so important. We are central to taking back the pro-freedom, pro-human initiative. Otherwise, the West will become a scrap for religious people and feminists to fight over.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Qae January 26, 2011 at 18:50

Keoni Galt said:

“That this just “happened?””

It ‘just happened’ due to more factors than a simple conspiracy can be credited for. Societies are extraordinarily complex things, and trying to reduce the causes for the way things turned out to be is not anything that can be really successful.

Of course there are political groups and families and cultural artifacts and texts and even secret societies that are trying to change things – but I think some people need to believe that *everything* has a volitional direction just because it gives them the idea that control is possible. For every force moving people in one direction, there are several forces working to move them in other directions. For every influence we see bearing down on individual choices, there are dozens of other influences being felt that aren’t ever acknowledged.

This whole idea always strikes me as some sort of compensatorial measure; it says a lot more about the people who believe in these conspiracies than it does about the world they’re trying to describe.

I find these ideas helpful:

Heinlein’s Razor:
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

Occam’s Razor:
The simplest explanation is more likely the correct one.

Run the conspiracy theories through those 2 and see what comes out. Is the entire world being run by a fantastic secret society bent on nefarious ends, or are we just bumbling along, making about as many bad choices as good choices, each selfishly hoping to improve our lot?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8
Pro-male/Anti-feminist Tech January 26, 2011 at 19:25
And one reason was we couldn’t tax half the population before Women’s Lib and the second reason was now we get the kids in school at an early age.. we can indoctrinate kids on how to think and with it break up their family. The kids start looking at the state as the family.. As the schools as the officials as their family.. not the parents teaching them. And so those were the two primary reasons for Women’s Lib.”

Some people will ignore this quote and say that conspiracy theories are nothing more than reptilian alien sex fiend delusions promoting female supremacy.

Of course we ignore that quote. It’s impossible since it’s historically and economically inaccurate. Kids were going to school at an early age since the time of Horace Mann, the guy who created the monstrosity of American public schools in the 19th century. Feminism couldn’t have accomplished something that already happened.

Women were taxed before feminism too. Women paid taxes just like men especially when you consider the gamut of taxes like sales taxes and property taxes. The only thing women didn’t pay was income tax since you had to have an income but that only applied to the 50s and even only a certain social strata in the 50s. More important, women aren’t being taxed now. In the “best case” scenario “taxing women” led to a glut of labor halving what men were paid. Thus no new tax money was being collected. It’s really “worse” than that since with women taking up useless, unproductive government jobs and quasi-government jobs. Women aren’t being taxed. They’re being subsidized. If women weren’t being taxed before, then they’re being negative taxed (aka subsidized) now. What happened is the opposite of what Russo claims.

Beyond the known facts why would Nick Rockefeller tell Russo anything? That’s like a movie villain and not a real person. Why would Nick Rockefeller tell Russo about their secret plans knowing that Russo disagrees with such things? That only leaves it’s wrong or it’s disinformation as possibilities.

And what has Russo ever done to fight feminism? Has he spoken out against no fault divorce, what’s happening to boys in schools, fathers rights, etc.? No. All he did was appear on some DVDs. What was his cut from the DVD sales? Must be nice work if you can get it.

These same folks will laugh and criticize the likes of one of the internet’s most famous conspiracy theorist, Henry Makow, as a complete moonbat who hurts the cause of Men’s Rights.

Yet Henry Makow repeatedly issues the most basic and simplest of challenges for people who think he’s a loon to see how right or wrong he is: Google “Rockefeller Foundation” and “Women’s Studies.”

David Icke and Alex Jones are way more famous than Henry Makow.

When you google “Rockefeller Foundation” and “Women’s Studies” there’s a lots of pages of conspiracy theorists repeating, “Google Rockefeller Foundation and Women’s Studies”.

Maybe if Makow focused on issues actually affecting men such as no fault divorce, fathers rights, feminist government programs, paternity fraud, false sexual harassment claims, false rape claims, etc. instead of things like magic rocks, Bohemian Grove satanist orgies, Illuminati pedophiles and sex slaves (which needed to include a link to a photoshopped picture of Dick Cheney’s crotch), moral panics about porn, and falling victim to trolls claiming to be satanists and part of the conspiracy, he wouldn’t be regarded as such a loon and dangerous to the cause of mens rights (and actually interested in the cause of mens rights).

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 5
Traveller January 26, 2011 at 19:39

Probably who started feminism, according to the conspiraciy theories, did not account the most important characteristic of women; they are somewhat stupid. They do not plan the future, they live by emotions, they do not reason and simply let their hamster rationalize.

With this premise, the fundamental characteristic of a conspiracy, the secret planning, is not anymore in place. Any female judge or journalist hysterically overreact, any stupid single mom feels entitled to the universe, any stupid girl with some money will spend it in fat food becoming a whale.

If it is difficult track the origin of the conspiracies, in the case of the feminism it is easy recognize the supporters, just follow the rage and the stupidity. Combating the visible effect of a conspiracy is already a good result.

Notable thing, a big theme for conspiracy thinking is about the elites controlling the wealth and the news being all Jews. A lot of conspiracy theories debate if Rockefellers were Jews… question open.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
stickman January 26, 2011 at 19:48

This is a fine article !!!

a lot of what you have mentioned here I have been trying to tell my friends for years.

well done! thank you for the article.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
fmz January 26, 2011 at 20:05

Yeah, yeah. All very rational. But that type of fair-minded rhetoric plays into their hands. Ya know… the Big Daddy Conspiracy. Da Patriarkee.

Sheesh, that end of town is a political game. Forget being reasonable, rational, logical, fair or sensible.

Take their nonsense, their language, their games, their shiat and throw it all back at them.

Better still, let them wallow in their swill and, dare l say it….

Go Your Own Way.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Pro-male/Anti-feminist Tech January 26, 2011 at 20:20

Firstly, there’s the idea of belief in these theories as a kind of litmus test to separate true MRAs from the secret manginas. Hey, believe what you want, but that doesn’t mean you get to be King of the MRAs and declare everyone else a chump. We can start the squabbling and the infighting after the war is won.

Secondly, these theories implicitly let women off the hook. However feminism started, the whole reason why it has become so endemic is it gives women moral cover to behave how they always wanted to behave anyway. Women haven’t been duped into, say, rampant hypergamy – that’s just who they are. It’s just that functional civilisations usually constrain that kind of behaviour.

Thirdly, it is probably that dumbshit sitting right next to you that, if he caught his wife red handed (or even worse his “pure-as-the-driven-snow-who-never-had-a-sexual-thought-in-her-life” daughter) cheating with a teenage boy, would absolutely refuse to even see the cheating whore and threaten to kill the boy.

With idiots like this all around us, who the hell needs to worry about what the people in the house on the hill are doing?

All of this is the truth.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
Jay Hammers January 26, 2011 at 22:14

Maybe, maybe not. Who cares? That was long ago. Today, the feminist crusade for privilege, pampering, and entitlement is killing the economy, and corporate profits along with it. I guess you could say “what goes around, comes around.”

Who cares?

Seems to me it would be valuable to understand the root causes of what we face today.

Now you see why humanity never learns anything from its mistakes.

And nothing really changes.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Keoni Galt January 26, 2011 at 22:31

Of course we ignore that quote. It’s impossible since it’s historically and economically inaccurate. Kids were going to school at an early age since the time of Horace Mann, the guy who created the monstrosity of American public schools in the 19th century. Feminism couldn’t have accomplished something that already happened.

Yes, but back in the 19th century, most kids only went to school until the 5th or 6th grade. Only a few went to school until their late teens.

What feminism did was drive both mom and dad into the workforce, so that kids would have to spend alot more time in schools as well. After the advent of feminism and women in the workforce, kids began to spend almost all of their time away from the influence of both parents for the majority of their school day and after school programs.

To say there is no difference in family dynamics before and after is ludicrous.

Beyond the known facts why would Nick Rockefeller tell Russo anything? That’s like a movie villain and not a real person. Why would Nick Rockefeller tell Russo about their secret plans knowing that Russo disagrees with such things? That only leaves it’s wrong or it’s disinformation as possibilities.

Purportedly, Rockefeller was trying to recruit Russo, because he admired Russo’s movies. But whatever, you don’t have to believe him.

David Icke and Alex Jones are way more famous than Henry Makow.

Reading comprehension. I said “One of the most famous…”

When you google “Rockefeller Foundation” and “Women’s Studies” there’s a lots of pages of conspiracy theorists repeating, “Google Rockefeller Foundation and Women’s Studies”.

Now you’re being obtuse and disingenuous.

Gimme a fucking break PMAFT, surely you didn’t miss all the links showing the Rockefeller fundings and grants to women’s studies programs all over the country? Nah…you’re just ignoring that to stick to your narrative.

http://www.umich.edu/~womenstd/background.htm

In 1970, seventeen courses in Women’s Studies were taught in American colleges and universities. Ten years later, there were at least 350 programs and 20,000 courses (Stimpson & Cobb, 1986). By 1986, 503 programs were recorded by the National Women’s Studies Association (Academe, July-August, 1989). Increasing numbers of universities are making tenure-track appointments in Women’s Studies; in 1988-89 alone, more than two dozen universities advertised tenure-track appointments in Women’s Studies (Beck, 1989)…

…this volume of research and publication in Women’s Studies has been supported by foundations and federal agencies. In the past few years, at least two major sources of funding of dissertation research have been specifically designated for Women’s Studies (Woodrow Wilson Women’s Research Grants; American Association of University Women). The National Science Foundation, Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, Russell Sage Foundation, National Institute of Education, National Endowment for the Humanities, National Institute of Mental Health, and other agencies have given both support and visibility to research on women’s studies.

Oh here…Rockefeller foundation funding of the Women’s Studies programs at my alum, the University of Hawaii:

http://www.h-net.org/announce/show.cgi?ID=131335

Oh, and here, we have a listing of grants and scholarships for women’s studies programs at FSU: http://www.fsu.edu/~womenst/grantschol.htm

Oh look…here’s a founder of the women’s studies program at MIT, who received a fellowship from the Rockefeller Foundation to help start up the program. http://www.mit.edu/~womens-studies/people/perry.html

Why look what the Worlwide Organization of Women’s Studies says about the Rockefeller foundation: “This is a very important funder, with a very important website”

Or how about searching for women’s studies on the Rockefeller Foundation.org website? http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/search/?q=Women%27s+studies. It returns 85 results.

That’s just the first two pages of links from Makow’s suggested search terms. Need I go on, or are you going to keep denying the truth of the matter that Makow exposed here?

So PMAFT, are you going to continue to ignore the basic facts? Are you going to say that all of this money that the Rockefeller Foundation has poured into women’s studies programs for over 50 years is meaningless? Amounts to nothing?

You say Russo’s account of Nick Rockefeller is unbelievable…

…yet there it is, plain for all to see: the Rockefeller Foundation is most certainly one of the biggest funders of feminist academic programs in the world.

Yet the only thing you can say to this is:

“When you google “Rockefeller Foundation” and “Women’s Studies” there’s a lots of pages of conspiracy theorists repeating, “Google Rockefeller Foundation and Women’s Studies”.

It’s one thing to disagree with someone and present facts and evidence to back up your assertions.

It’s quite another to be so contemptibly disingenuous and intellectually dishonest.

Kave January 26, 2011 at 22:36

So much for you guys trying to look less crazy.

Either that or all the posts are all trolls.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 7
Hawaiian Libertarian January 26, 2011 at 22:53

Of course we ignore that quote. It’s impossible since it’s historically and economically inaccurate. Kids were going to school at an early age since the time of Horace Mann, the guy who created the monstrosity of American public schools in the 19th century. Feminism couldn’t have accomplished something that already happened.

Yes, but back in the 19th century, most kids only went to school until the 5th or 6th grade. Only a few went to school until their late teens.

What feminism did was drive both mom and dad into the workforce, so that kids would have to spend a lot more time in schools as well. After the advent of feminism and women in the workforce, kids began to spend almost all of their time away from the influence of both parents for the majority of their school day and after school programs.

To say there is no difference in family dynamics before and after is ludicrous.

Beyond the known facts why would Nick Rockefeller tell Russo anything? That’s like a movie villain and not a real person. Why would Nick Rockefeller tell Russo about their secret plans knowing that Russo disagrees with such things? That only leaves it’s wrong or it’s disinformation as possibilities.

Purportedly, Rockefeller was trying to recruit Russo, because he admired Russo’s movies. But whatever, you don’t have to believe him. Just because you speculate that this account is unbelievable doesn’t mean your speculation is factual.

David Icke and Alex Jones are way more famous than Henry Makow.

Reading comprehension. I said “One of the most famous…”

When you google “Rockefeller Foundation” and “Women’s Studies” there’s a lots of pages of conspiracy theorists repeating, “Google Rockefeller Foundation and Women’s Studies”.

Now you’re being disingenuous.

Gimme a break PMAFT, surely you didn’t miss all the links showing the Rockefeller fundings and grants to women’s studies programs all over the country? Nah…you’re just ignoring the facts to stick to your narrative.

http://www.umich.edu/~womenstd/background.htm

In 1970, seventeen courses in Women’s Studies were taught in American colleges and universities. Ten years later, there were at least 350 programs and 20,000 courses (Stimpson & Cobb, 1986). By 1986, 503 programs were recorded by the National Women’s Studies Association (Academe, July-August, 1989). Increasing numbers of universities are making tenure-track appointments in Women’s Studies; in 1988-89 alone, more than two dozen universities advertised tenure-track appointments in Women’s Studies (Beck, 1989)…

…this volume of research and publication in Women’s Studies has been supported by foundations and federal agencies. In the past few years, at least two major sources of funding of dissertation research have been specifically designated for Women’s Studies (Woodrow Wilson Women’s Research Grants; American Association of University Women). The National Science Foundation, Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, Russell Sage Foundation, National Institute of Education, National Endowment for the Humanities, National Institute of Mental Health, and other agencies have given both support and visibility to research on women’s studies.

Oh here…Rockefeller foundation funding of the Women’s Studies programs at my alum, the University of Hawaii:

http://www.h-net.org/announce/show.cgi?ID=131335

Oh, and here, we have a listing of grants and scholarships for women’s studies programs at FSU: http://www.fsu.edu/~womenst/grantschol.htm

Oh look…here’s a founder of the women’s studies program at MIT, who received a fellowship from the Rockefeller Foundation to help start up the program. http://www.mit.edu/~womens-studies/people/perry.html

Why look what the Worlwide Organization of Women’s Studies says about the Rockefeller foundation: “This is a very important funder, with a very important website”

Or how about searching for women’s studies on the Rockefeller Foundation.org website? http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/search/?q=Women%27s+studies. It returns 85 results.

That’s just the first two pages of links from Makow’s suggested search terms. Need I go on, or are you going to keep denying the truth of the matter that Makow exposed here?

So PMAFT, are you going to continue to ignore the basic facts? Are you going to say that all of this money that the Rockefeller Foundation has poured into women’s studies programs for over 50 years is meaningless? Amounts to nothing?

You say Russo’s account of Nick Rockefeller is unbelievable…

…yet there it is, plain for all to see: the Rockefeller Foundation is most certainly one of the biggest funders of feminist academic programs in the world.

Yet the only thing you can say to this is:

“When you google “Rockefeller Foundation” and “Women’s Studies” there’s a lots of pages of conspiracy theorists repeating, “Google Rockefeller Foundation and Women’s Studies”.

It’s one thing to disagree with someone and present facts and evidence to back up your assertions.

It’s quite another to be so contemptibly disingenuous and intellectually dishonest.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Johnycomelately January 27, 2011 at 00:48

I guess the Russian Czar should have paid more attention to conspiracies, that and the ‘tribe’.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
post-modern devil January 27, 2011 at 01:44

Hypergamy could swell again in that case. Women will not just want to sleep with men, they will start sleeping with them only if there will be a material benefit.

Not a problem really. One of the strongest forces of society is imposing the idea of desire of women by men. The reality in regards to nature is that men truthfully don’t care all that much about the welfare of women (though men don’t desire to hurt women either) or how women think about them because men realized women were parasitical manipulators in regards to men. Women desire powerful, high status men but men just do whatever the hell they feel like with small groups of other men. Only the promise and expectation of women has truly succeded in getting the masses of men to produce beyond their means (strong-arming was only as effective as the men under your command afterall).

The key flaw of Western totalitarianism is simply that the the Government and the populace itself despises masculine nature itself. Other totalitarian regimes are repressive, but they are smart enough to at least recognize the benefits general masculinity has for the State. The simple fact is that The West will eventually suffer cultural death because there eventually won’t be anymore strong men left willing to fight for Western culture and the few remaining will be cultural independents or feminized manginas. Fuck even Nazi Germany at its final days as the Soviets marched in had old men and young boys willing to fight, as hopeless as the situation was. America was too enamored by its technological superiority to realize that the strength of its culture was dependent young men with a strong belief and sense of loyalty towards it.

The Western elites may actually escape justice during their existance on this Earthly realm. But their very power base, unlike that of Russia, China, or various Muslim countries, will be lost forever following the collapse of Government simply because there won’t be enough men loyal to the Western idealogy to rebuild the West at that point (and no non-Western developed country will employ feminism; no matter how oppressive they may be, they will be patriarical and they won’t allow Rockofeller or any others like him to actively subvert their power base).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Logan January 27, 2011 at 01:46

I’ve heard, read, and quoted all of this before. I do not disagree with the article per se, but I do disagree with how you frame it.

The use of the term “robber baron” should be seen as offensive and misleading. The word was coined by a German-American journalist in 1934 who supported America’s socialist programs. The word originated from Medieval German lords who charged excessive tolls for shipping on the Rhine. Using the term is like speaking out against racism but always referring to blacks as niggers. You’ve written a pro-capitalist, anti-corporatist, anti-socialist article but with socialist language.

Also, it is speculated that the one man with the will, skill, and means to have stopped the formation of the Federal Reserve was John Jacob Astor, but he died on the Titanic that earlier that year. He was classed as a “robber baron”.

Also, you put Rockefeller and Carnegie on the same pro-feminist page. This is misleading as well. Carnegie left foundations while Rockefeller left heirs. Carnegie’s foundations may have supported feminism, but Carnegie himself was long dead. Rockefeller on the other hand left a dynasty that appears to be following a singular course, as you’ve laid out in the article.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Migu January 27, 2011 at 01:50

HL,

Good work. It’s like trying to tell a neo-con muslims are responsible for developing algebra and trigonometry. Bahh that was Galelio and Newton they say, or they will fall back in time to Euclid and Pythagoreas. Anything to hold onto the delusion of dirty backward ragheads.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3
post-modern devil January 27, 2011 at 02:00

@ Alan B

1. illegal aliens. AMNESTY
they will not be illegal anymore, and oBAMa an additional 30million on the tax rolls. yes yes, i know.. theres only 5-10 million illegals here..
BUUUULLLLSHITTTTTTT. theres probably 1 million in new york CITY alone.

Mestizos aren’t loyal to American culture. Hell, even blacks who like America as a country, don’t share the views of the modern American white “culture” of woman worship. America’s ability to repair itself will be dependent on the strength and conviction of white men to be willing to repair it; unless America collapses VERY soon while whites are still a majority (and still have faith in the American ideal), the entire culture will die in flames as blacks, hispanics, and muslims supplant whites in the West. And the powerbase of feminism built by Rockofeller and whoever else will die as the West will be inable to repair itself in any timely fashion (if ever) much like Ancient Greece and Western Rome.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Philip January 27, 2011 at 04:36

For all the people who doubt that conspiracy’s exist at at all, i put it to you that it is against the law! Yes it is written into law, conspire to defraud, conspire to sell arm’s etc, or even racketeering.
Any meeting’s or important decision made in secret are conspiracy’s in my opinion, good works are done in the light, evil works are done in the dark/private.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Peter-Andrew:Nolan(c) January 27, 2011 at 05:34

Well said HL!! Well said.
Now lets see if some of these men who are so wilfully ignorant will wake up.

Some things you didn’t mention.
1. Lenin was a HUGE feminist.

2. The only family allowed a bank in communist russia were…..surprise, surprise, the Rockefellers.

3. What was the last name of the US mbassador to China when the chinese ran tanks over some unfortunate students? Rockefeller.

4. What is the name of the family that donated the land the UN stands on? Rockefeller.

5. What was the name of the man who was tipped by Nixon to head up the POPULATION GROWTH COUNCIL in 1970? Rockefeller.

6. What was about #5 on his list of recommendations about POPULATION GROWTH (for which you can read NEGATIVE GROWTH)? That the Equal Opportunity legislation be passed.

Now why would a Rockefeller be talking about ‘equal opportunity legislation’ in relation to POPULATION CONTROL? Duh.

7. What was one of the top recommendations from the UNs (remember, land donated by the Rockefellers) WORLD POPULATION COUNCIL in Bucharest (note it was a communist country) in 1974? That all member states ensure EQUAL PARTICIPATION in the workplace for women. Not ‘equal opportunity’. EQUAL OUTCOMES.

But hey. This is all just a fabulous co-incidence, right? That the communists pushed feminism, no fault divorce, high child support, that the communists had the Rockefellers as their bankers, that the Rockefellers turned up as the promoters of feminism…it’s all just one great big COINCIDENCE.

I say to people. I am happy for you to call me a ‘conspiracy theorist’ if you are happy for me to call you a ‘co-incidence theorist’. And the possibility that the Rockefellers could be involved in all these things by ACCIDENT are astronomical.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4
Gunn January 27, 2011 at 05:35

Good work. It’s like trying to tell a neo-con muslims are responsible for developing algebra and trigonometry. Bahh that was Galelio and Newton they say, or they will fall back in time to Euclid and Pythagoreas. Anything to hold onto the delusion of dirty backward ragheads.

Off topic slightly, but almost certainly the arabs gained a lot of their mathematical knowledge from India. Some have argued that the greeks also got their knowledge from India, however in many cases I think its fair to say that there could have been independent discoveries.

A lot of the discoveries in mathematics pre-16th century (probably most in fact) are not particularly ‘hard’; people with extreme intelligence could probably independently work out most of the stuff we’re talking about from first principles.

‘Heavy machinery’ like advanced calculus and group theoretic generalisations of algebra came later and are arguably things which would be beyond the ability of a single man to formulate from first principles (largely because they require a combination of insight and time spent already familiar with the building blocks that came before).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Peter-Andrew:Nolan(c) January 27, 2011 at 05:49

zed January 26, 2011 at 11:46
“This post starts to address it in going the next obvious step beyond saying that there is conspiracy to talking about what to DO about it.”

Well, in Australia 54 of the most senior political and legal figures are now charged with mis-prison to treason. The attempt to hide treason. The penalty for this is life in prison. Jeremy Rapke (Public Prosecutor for Victoria) was forced to resign over this and the cover story of ‘inappropriate relationship’ was used.

As I have pointed out here many times. I will be bringing accusations against two magistrates, Rudd and Gillard, and the Attorney General of Australia. The two magistrates have already accepted their guilt in stealing my house by non-response.

We are having our second Grand Jury sit in the next two weeks. Some men have issued a writ to the Australian High Court ordering the shutting down of the Australian Federal Government because it is a criminal enterprise operating outside the law.

THAT is what we are DOING about it. But most men won’t believe us. Even when one of us, myself, comes out into the open in his own name and places much of the evidence of this onto the web.

Gee. Thanks for all your ‘support’ guys.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Gunn January 27, 2011 at 05:53

The belief that there is a guiding hand acting behind the scenes that controls man’s destiny is a superstition, as old as the hills.

Indo-european religions (greeks, romans, vikings, hindus) all portray their gods as larger than life but subject to the same foibles as the common man. I think this was deliberate, in order to dispel the notion that higher powers guide the direction of mankind through active policy.

Conspiracy theorists by and large attribute superhuman ability to the people at the centre of the conspiracy, despite the fact that in many cases these people are no smarter, fitter, strongly-willed, or otherwise better than the common man.

If feminism is the creation of these conspirators, why is it that western culture is not the first (nor will it be the last) to adopt it?

The more logical view (imo) is that sure, these conspirators have/had an agenda based on self-interest, but that this self-interest coincided with certain things that are an intrinsic part of human nature. Women are hypergamous (just as men are promiscuous), risk averse, and materialistic. If the policies that these people/organisations sponsored did not play to these attributes, then its unlikely they would have become entrenched.

As others here have pointed out, putting the blame on this unlikely group of people takes the focus away from the real problems and the real solutions. Sure, we may argue that corporations should not be allowed to create government policy that favours themselves (and which, as has been pointed out, is in fact corporatist rather than capitalistic) but this is not the primary problem eating away at western culture. Feminism and the socialist state are.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Pro-male/Anti-feminist Tech January 27, 2011 at 06:57

Yes, but back in the 19th century, most kids only went to school until the 5th or 6th grade. Only a few went to school until their late teens.

Which means that kids were going to school from an “early age” long before feminism even if they didn’t stay as long. Even by 1950 the only reason a kid didn’t finish high school was if they dropped out. So feminism had nothing to do with putting kids in school.

It also had nothing to do with “taxing women” but you ignored that.

Purportedly, Rockefeller was trying to recruit Russo, because he admired Russo’s movies. But whatever, you don’t have to believe him. Just because you speculate that this account is unbelievable doesn’t mean your speculation is factual.

Street gangs have better recruitment procedures than that. Given that Russo’s politics were obvious by the point he was being “recruited”, it would have been stupid to try and recruit him.

I’m not claiming Russo’s story is just unbelievable. I’m claiming it’s impossible for all the reasons I gave plus:
Nick Rockefeller doesn’t exist.

Reading comprehension. I said “One of the most famous…”

Missed the point.

Gimme a break PMAFT, surely you didn’t miss all the links showing the Rockefeller fundings and grants to women’s studies programs all over the country? Nah…you’re just ignoring the facts to stick to your narrative.

http://www.umich.edu/~womenstd/background.htm

Yeah my narrative is that some grants and fellowships in a massive sea of grants and fellowships don’t constitute funding of a movement especially when every time they’re listed as one of many private groups and government agencies. That hardly constitutes the “majority” funding much less all.

I could google any number of foundations or government agencies and “womens studies” and get a bunch of links too only without the conspiracy theorists. Why am I supposed to believe that the Rockefellers are so special? The Rockefeller Foundation seems to be a bunch of leftists so supporting feminism is something leftists do out of ideology. There’s nothing special about that. They have lots of fellowships and grants for non-feminist leftist nonsense too and it seems that dwarfs anything for feminism.

I can think of any number of private groups which provide grants, scholarships, and fellowships all over the place for various academic disciplines. No one accuses them of a conspiracy if they appear a lot in a google search.

You say Russo’s account of Nick Rockefeller is unbelievable…

And impossible.

It’s one thing to disagree with someone and present facts and evidence to back up your assertions.

It’s quite another to be so contemptibly disingenuous and intellectually dishonest.

No what’s intellectually dishonest is making a person up like Russo did. There is no Nick Rockefeller. There is no one with the name, “Nick Rockefeller”, anywhere in the Rockefeller family. Rockefeller is a common enough name that there may be a “Nick Rockefeller” somewhere but if there is he’s not a part of Rockefeller family that we’re talking about. Since Nick Rockefeller doesn’t exist, Russo is either a fool or a fraud. Either Russo got trolled like Makow has, or more likely Russo made it up. One way or another everything Russo said is a lie.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4
Alonso Quijano January 27, 2011 at 09:17

Sigh. Wikipedia, the one true source of truthful truth, and nothing but. Seems, hoho, the guy was deleted, just like this: http://deletionpedia.dbatley.com/w/index.php?title=Nicholas_Rockefeller_%28deleted_18_Aug_2008_at_08:08%29

It’s sad to observe when people just can’t seem to be able to connect the dots. And in the age of Internet there’s no excuse not to try, at least.

I’m with HL, leaving Plato’s cave and seeing things for what they are is a tough experience since most people simply lack the mental capacity to do the same and will inevitably hate you for the cognitive dissonance you’re giving them. Globalman and others here willing to pierce other shields of ignorance get mostly the same reaction.

I’m not going to argue, just present two people for you to do your own research and judging: Please read about Ezra Pound and his Protegee Eustace Mullins. There’s many great (underground) books & videos out there. And the second is, listen to the famous speech of Benjamin Freedman of 1961. Or, you can just go on fighting windmills. That’s fun, too.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Keoni Galt January 27, 2011 at 09:22

PMAFT, what is it, you friends with a Rockefeller? Your company receive funding from them?

Just because he’s not on the Wiki family tree means he doesn’t exist?

LMAO…now you’re coming across as desperate.

2 seconds worth of googling turns up all kinds of info on Nicholas Rockefeller:

Nicholas Rockefeller

His securities practice includes litigation before the United States Supreme Court and a number of his transactions have been featured in leading periodicals. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, the International Insitutute of Strategic Studies, the Advisory Board of RAND, the Pacific Council on International Policy, the Committee on Foreign Relations in Los Angeles, the Western Justice Center, and has served as a participant in the World Economic Forum and the Aspen Institute. He is a member of the Board of Visitors of the Law Schools of the University of Oregon and Pepperdine University and is active in the affairs of his alma mater, Yale University. He recently chaired a panel at the United Nations on E-Commerce and is a co-author of “Economic Strategy and National Security”.

It’s like you NEED to try and discredit or misdirect any attention given to the likes of the Rockefellers.

Good day PMAFT. You don’t debate objectively. You use conjecture and speculation and act as if the things I’ve pointed out and linked to are all the equivalent to reptilian UFO alien garbage.

Maybe “Thomas George” was right….LOL

chi-town January 27, 2011 at 10:51

The best term for it is “monopoly capitalism” which of course can be distinguished by winning the market by curtailing the competition. What most people have in mind as positive is competitive capitalism. Contrary to popular belief, Adam Smith was very wary of the threat of monopoly capitalism as is obvious to those who read his works as opposed to being misquoted in a text book produced by a monopoly capitalist publishing house. Adam Smith was certainly concerned with government encroachment but made it quite clear that it was a symptom of the monopoly capitalist behind the policy.

I suspect feminism is a population control device that came from the Malthusian thought that was certainly circulating around the “elites” before the 20th century.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Anthony Johnson January 27, 2011 at 11:08

My Chase Business Checking account will be closed tomorrow. Was switching anyway, but have not yet spent the time to close it.

Good post.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Keoni Galt January 27, 2011 at 11:28

Anyways, to those of you that find the evidence unconvincing regarding the Rockefeller Foundation’s role in promulgating feminism….put that aside for a moment.

What do you think about JP Morgan profiting from their food stamp and child support card programs? Is this something you think is acceptable?

TomJW January 27, 2011 at 15:49

Hi all. Not here to comment on the good article. Just introducing myself. Got here after my second reading of the ‘Misandry Bubble’ article by the Futurist.
Looks like a good website. Do you keep goblin counts like DuToit did?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Pro-male/Anti-feminist Tech January 27, 2011 at 19:12

PMAFT, what is it, you friends with a Rockefeller? Your company receive funding from them?

Yes I am friends with a Rockefeller. Of course he has no relation to THE Rockefeller family as their are lots of people with the surname Rockefeller who aren’t related to THE Rockefellers. (I’m sure this will be used as “evidence” to “prove” I’m in with the Rockefeller family.)

Just because he’s not on the Wiki family tree means he doesn’t exist?

LMAO…now you’re coming across as desperate.

2 seconds worth of googling turns up all kinds of info on Nicholas Rockefeller:

Nicholas Rockefeller

There’s only 150 (give or take) members of the Rockefeller family, specifically the super rich Rockefeller family that everyone refers to when they’re talking about the Rockefellers. Finding out who they all are isn’t hard. Wikipedia tried to substantiate Nick Rockefeller’s existence but couldn’t find anything. If you’re so sure he’s a member of the Rockefeller family then it wouldn’t be hard to figure out how he’s related.

Your webpage doesn’t even make the claim that he’s related to the Rockefellers. That website also didn’t go up until a few months after Russo’s article on prisonplanet. There may be someone with the name of “Nick Rockefeller” but the CFR has never heard of him.

It’s like you NEED to try and discredit or misdirect any attention given to the likes of the Rockefellers.

Yeah, me and a bunch of internet skeptics going back years.

You don’t debate objectively.

Making a person up isn’t objective.

Maybe “Thomas George” was right….LOL

When in doubt accuse me of being in with the Rockefellers.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Tiger Supporter January 28, 2011 at 05:15

A faster way to bring down JP Morgan and not loss all your hard earned money is to buy SILVER. Yup thats right silver, that shinny metal that your Mom (if you were brought up in a post 1990′s generation) only brought out on special occasions (anniversary, graduation).

Reason: JP Morgan has a hugh financial position against silver, and the more people buy silver, the higher its value increases (simple demand and supply) thus exposing JP Morgan (Financial Terrorist) to hugh financial loses (which they cant cover by the way). And two you’ll be saving your money in real hard valuable materials, not the fiat currency (worthless paper) and the SS system, pension funds etc that financial terrorists are already robbing blind as we speak. Silver is not as costly as gold right now, and you don’t have to have soo much money in order to buy it. You can buy silver little by little, think of it as your new savings account.

P.S: I’m not going to post any website or dealer selling sliver *just so you know*. I hope you guys do your research and begin to starve the BEAST. God Bless or Destiny smile on you (for the atheists) lol

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Logan January 28, 2011 at 07:34

In the interview referenced with Russo, the Rockefeller in question was called David not Nick.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Logan January 28, 2011 at 11:20

Here is the link where Russo discusses his friendship with David Rockefeller Jr.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oygBg6ETYIM

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Logan January 28, 2011 at 11:34

Please excuse my previous two posts. I was under the impression that it was David, however in the interview Russo clearly refers to “Nick”. So the plot certainly thickens. I wondered if perhaps David Jr. has the middle name “Nicholas” or some variation and goes by Nick to distinguish him from his father, but that is only wild speculation on my part and I can find no evidence.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
fmz January 28, 2011 at 21:26

Starve the beast.

Take the RED pill. For farks sake.

Blue pill eating pussies. Who feel rubbish like shayme. Until you disabuse youeslef of such abuses as having being programmed with a shayme button, you will forever dance to da femmy tune.

Take the red pill. Go on. Dare to Dare, pussies. Grow back that pair that the programmers of shayme taken from you and pickled in that jar on their femmy mantle piece.

Take the red pill. Bitch-Boyz.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
Migu January 29, 2011 at 07:37

‘Heavy machinery’ like advanced calculus and group theoretic generalisations of algebra came later and are arguably things which would be beyond the ability of a single man to formulate from first principles (largely because they require a combination of insight and time spent already familiar with the building blocks that came before).

So something like a 9th century blast furnace and the accompaning factory?

Integration……http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Karaji A bit before newton, and its opposite the derivative and differential equations used to engineer heavy machinery. circa 1000 a.d.

But yes India did have a bit to do with and so did the chinese.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
David K. Meller January 31, 2011 at 14:55

A very informative and intelligent article! I don’t know how effective “starving the beast” strategies are going to be, since the bankers (and their allied politicians and mediacrats) have unlimited access to the Federal Reserve which creates “money” out of air simply by electronic depositing and lending to member banks, but their is a mass-movement in our society to end the Fed, and establish sound and honest money in our economy. The central bank (and its fraudulent and specious ‘notes’) serves as their own private piggybank–at OUR expense!!

Indeed, one of the main differences between a sound-money production and saving based economy and a corrupt corporatist kleptocracy–like ours–is precisely that in a FREE MARKET, the only way to acquire wealth is to create it, exchange for it, or receive it as a voluntarily offered gift! The primary, if not the only, way wealth is acquired in this UNFREE MARKET is the issuing and relentless pyramiding of debt, piled on debt, and piled upon more debt! Production and exchange are ever more irrelevant as the increased debt is simply entered into new deposits for outgoing “loans” which can never really be repaid! I don’t have to repeat to any readers where food stamps, housing vouchers, “child-support” payments, Medicaid payments, etc figure in all this!

Extended discussion is beyond the scope of this website, but you can learn more from http://www.dailypaul.com, campaign4liberty.org, http://www.LewRockwell.com, and the website of Congressman Ron Paul -TX(14CD). People who inform themselves about the Federal Reserve will also have the satisfaction of seeing a great many people in that movement whose beliefs and opinions regarding feminism and its attendent welfare State often strongly coincide with their own here on the-Spearhead.com.

While restoring sound money and sound families are very different issues, and require expertise, or at least strong familiarity in alatogether different disciplines, I think that we each have a great deal to learn from each other, and many ways to help each other!

All in all, wonderful food for thought! Thank you, Hawaii Libertarian!

PEACE AND FREEDOM!
David K. Meller

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
David K. Meller January 31, 2011 at 14:58

I’m ashamed to admit it, but the website(s) location for Ron Paul (he has several) have temporarily slipped my mind! Please google Ron Paul. Your attention will be well rewarded!

PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K. Meller

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

Leave a Comment

{ 2 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: