We need mass construction of new homes

Grow Bag

Kingfisher
We don't need to reinvent what was once the norm in agrarian societies. Throughout old Europe there are many, many deserted villages where those with a will can buy up properties and establish Christian communities. Hippies have been paleo-homesteading for decades. They had the right intentions, but were infested with enlightenment, humanistic ideology and mostly failed because of it. Christians united by faith and tradition would fair much better if they honour God, hierarchy and tradition.
 
We don't need to reinvent what was once the norm in agrarian societies. Throughout old Europe there are many, many deserted villages where those with a will can buy up properties and establish Christian communities. Hippies have been paleo-homesteading for decades. They had the right intentions, but were infested with enlightenment, humanistic ideology and mostly failed because of it. Christians united by faith and tradition would fair much better if they honour God, hierarchy and tradition.

They do exist:
More important than any of these personal endeavors, I have a dense, solid community of family, friends, and chosen family who are all passionate about the same stuff. I hesitate to describe them with the labels that spring up in the quest for brevity – anarchists, queers, witches, etc. I bring up these labels because the people I’m referring to are a far cry from the typical caricature that gets painted of such ppl in the comments here and elsewhere. We are rural, working class or downwardly mobile. We are gun owners. We are meat eaters. We march in the local Black Lives Matter protests in our small towns, and we also organize mobile heating stations and soup kitchens for homeless folks in the area. We are volunteer firefighters. We are mushroom hunters and ppl who survey for endangered species to stop clearcutting. We are used to navigating spaces with all kinds of ppl, including those who normally don’t agree with us on cultural or social issues. I don’t think we would be very legible to anyone who carries a caricature of the “Left” in their head. Transwomen in real tree camo and gay men with hunting rifles and feminist farmers with dirt under their fingernails and Post-Colonial Studies majors who tan deer hides for fun are not typically what comes to mind for people, seemingly.But here we are. Reading Bookchin and having get-togethers to chop wood and fix dilapidated barns. Being millennials, most of us don’t own any land and are laboring to pay off various debts. With increasing urgency, we speak of collectivizing our burdens and aspirations to be able to afford such things, together.


I also read John Michael Greer because he got good takes on modern Technological society. And his comments are all across the political spectrum.


So there are modern day SJW's who eat meat. Are sodomites and feminists and they do everything that Rural people do.
 
Last edited:
We need more nuclear families. A man, a woman, three or more children. Obviously there are numerous obstacles to this such as there not being enough good women, the manchild problem, media encouraging women not to marry and not to have children, infertility, divorce. A frequently mentioned barrier is lack of housing.

We need another Levitttown.


We need a massive number of new homes, then married couples can have a nice place to live and raise their children in. Married people are more traditional and Christian. These nuclear families would be the building blocks of America and a right leaning Christian nationalist party.

Cheap, affordable housing is a bipartisian issue that younger millennials on the right and left want but because of greedy NIMBYs, developers and corrupt politicians it is buried as a political issue. I think one of the easiest solutions to America's problems is for native born Americans to have more kids. To enable Americans to have more kids we need more cheap homes.
Yes we do, and the worst part about it all is that while the controllers want to remove all Jobs from Men and replace it with AI and Robots, the last industry they want to use this in is the Home-Building sector, because they actually have 3D Printer Robots which can literally build houses quicker, faster, more efficiently and with less error than Humans, and with many cost-saving elements as a result of production. They intend on having houses built by these 3D printing methods long after removing Men and bankrupting them from the workforce when needing to build housing in the New Order. It really puts things into a whole different perspective when you analyze what is the value of work vs the cost of things when they have the ability to literally price any Human worker out of the market to just build anything at any given price and can do it for much cheaper. That's why this world is so messed up. Imagine how much of the poverty situation could be alleviated?

It wouldn't even be a question. The 3D Printing Robots allow you to select your materials between concrete, wood, nails and other products in the house building project for the Robot to utilize during the entire construction phrase.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
You don't need ultra high tech 3d printing tech to alleviate poverty, you just need to change the monetary system, which is centered around usury. China did it, their poverty rates are already lower than those of the US, France, UK, Canada etc and they are on a path to get to the level of countries like Switzerland and Norway within this decade.

China uses an industrial capitalism model, which is based on the state building a modern infrastructure, providing healthcare, cheaper housing, and the financial resources being put in productive use financing industry. This used to be the model in the West up to the 1950s, that model has shifted to financial capitalism, where wealth is created mostly through capital and the financial industry dominates the economy, society and culture. Leveraged buyouts, Mitt Romney's Bain Capital or Paul Singer's hedge fund pillaging middle America and stripping its productive industrial assets for short term financial gains is at the core of financial capitalism. Globohomo is that system reshaping culture, atomizing society in order to perpetuate its technological serfdom and political stranglehold on society.

If you want to understand this, watch economist Michael Hudson. He's a hardcore leftist, but unlike your typical leftist economist, he's very red-pilled because he has worked for decades for the likes of David Rockefeller and Chase Manhattan, and knows exactly how the system works. He also has an expertise on the history of debt, from pre-biblical mideast through the Christian era.

His work has a lot in common with EMJ's Barren Metal work on debt and labor, though Hudson, like many classic leftists, fails to make that "last mile" connection between marxism and modern culture due to his ideological blinders, but his pure economical assessment is even more solid than EMJ, by virtue of his being an expert economist who was part of the system, unlike your average liberal freemarket, or your "eat the rich" leftist economist. Still, his viewpoint is one of the most salient and sharp assessment of our modern economic predicament, here's a good start on that:


More related to the subject of this thread, the housing crisis in the West, Hudson attacks the situation in the worst hit western city, Vancouver, which has sky high RE prices and a relatively weak economy (no local industrial base):

 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
I also read John Michael Greer because he got good takes on modern Technological society. And his comments are all across the political spectrum.

Right wingers rejecting technology and modernism is a bit like leftists rejecting "capitalism", failing to separate the baby from the bathwater.

Capitalism is good, if it's reined in through antitrust and its political influence curtailed. Freemarket small-business capitalism is the basis for an economically healthy society.

Similarly, technology is good, if used as a tool and maintained under a healthy Christian moral framework as opposed to being worshiped in a darwinian/luciferian cultural and political framework. There is a right middle path between cavemen and transhumanist luciferian degenerates.
 

Elipe

Kingfisher
Right wingers rejecting technology and modernism is a bit like leftists rejecting "capitalism", failing to separate the baby from the bathwater.

Capitalism is good, if it's reined in through antitrust and its political influence curtailed. Freemarket small-business capitalism is the basis for an economically healthy society.

Similarly, technology is good, if used as a tool and maintained under a healthy Christian moral framework as opposed to being worshiped in a darwinian/luciferian cultural and political framework. There is a right middle path between cavemen and transhumanist luciferian degenerates.
I don't believe for one minute that technology is inherently anti-Christian. If anything, technology has been a constant thorn in (((their))) sides for decades. The internet, especially, originally had them very worried because it circumvented their platform gatekeeping.

It's a game they've played for millennia. Yes, this has happened in societies where the highest tech was the aqueduct.
 
Technology is a tool folks, it has no mind and therefore no morality. A birth control pill is not evil and destructive too society, it's use however is. Much the same can be said about guns, it's the man behind the trigger that kills you, not the gun itself.
 

Max Roscoe

Kingfisher
Right wingers rejecting technology and modernism is a bit like leftists rejecting "capitalism", failing to separate the baby from the bathwater.

Capitalism is good, if it's reined in through antitrust and its political influence curtailed. Freemarket small-business capitalism is the basis for an economically healthy society.

Similarly, technology is good, if used as a tool and maintained under a healthy Christian moral framework as opposed to being worshiped in a darwinian/luciferian cultural and political framework. There is a right middle path between cavemen and transhumanist luciferian degenerates.
I don't expect you to reject capitalism over a blog post. Indeed, I had years of libertarian indoctrination that teach you to worship "muh free markets" and "muh unrestrained capitalism" and it was a long and lengthy journey to realize the very things I loved and thought were great and beautiful were the very tools of societal destruction.

Take a step back and think about what capitalism actually is.
Capitalism is an economic movement that gives greater control to the capital arm of the three legged stool (land, labor, and capital). The usurious class that controls the capital (international bankers, and the rich elites you, I and everyone else reading this will never ever become or even meet) are therefore due the lion's share of the rewards in a given society, and the laborers, families, priests, children, etc. are given the scraps. If you are a capitalist, you are implicitly supporting the idea that the worker should take a lesser reward from his labor, as the gains of the capital class must come from the expense of labor.

When you say capitalism is good, what are you comparing it to? Do you think the CHICOMS don't have a plethora of products to buy in their stores? In what way did Mother Russia have a bad economy? What does capitalism bring that other economic systems are lacking? Competition? You think there weren't competing firms in Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia?

What is the most anti-capitalistic nation on earth today? The only one that comes to mind for me is Libya (you could probably find some absurd choice like Somalia, but the truth is regardless of the political or economic system in any of those countries they are a mess).

Libya offered: all citizens the right to education and healthcare
Highest income in all of Africa
The largest irrigation project on the planet, converting desert lands to livable farmland
Electricity was free
Highest literacy rates in Africa (at one point higher than 'Murica)
Government support for being a farmer (provided seeds, livestock, farmland, etc to those who chose to feed their fellow countrymen)
Financial aid to mothers after childbirth so they could nurse and raise their family instead of rushing back to work in a cubicle
Zero interest rate loans (I am wary of borrowing in general so not sure how much this is a helpful thing)

What did Gaddafi get?
Mass bombing of his infrastructure projects, destroying the massive irrigation system, and he was jammed up the anus with a bayonet and dragged through the streets, so that the Libyans could have democracy and slavery. Yes, slave markets exist in Current Year in Libya. And all that good stuff is gone. This is not a defense of the Libyans per se, just pointing out what happens if you oppose capitalism in any way. Who else opposes capitalism? North Korea. Venezuela. All our "enemies". Right?

One of the biggest lies was convincing people that capitalism and democracy was good for them.
 
Right wingers rejecting technology and modernism is a bit like leftists rejecting "capitalism", failing to separate the baby from the bathwater.

Capitalism is good, if it's reined in through antitrust and its political influence curtailed. Freemarket small-business capitalism is the basis for an economically healthy society.

Similarly, technology is good, if used as a tool and maintained under a healthy Christian moral framework as opposed to being worshiped in a darwinian/luciferian cultural and political framework. There is a right middle path between cavemen and transhumanist luciferian degenerates.
He wrote a book about an ecotechnic society that he thinks we may be moving towards. Looking much more like steampunk rather than our modern forms.
 
I don't expect you to reject capitalism over a blog post. Indeed, I had years of libertarian indoctrination that teach you to worship "muh free markets" and "muh unrestrained capitalism" and it was a long and lengthy journey to realize the very things I loved and thought were great and beautiful were the very tools of societal destruction.

Take a step back and think about what capitalism actually is.
Capitalism is an economic movement that gives greater control to the capital arm of the three legged stool (land, labor, and capital). The usurious class that controls the capital (international bankers, and the rich elites you, I and everyone else reading this will never ever become or even meet) are therefore due the lion's share of the rewards in a given society, and the laborers, families, priests, children, etc. are given the scraps. If you are a capitalist, you are implicitly supporting the idea that the worker should take a lesser reward from his labor, as the gains of the capital class must come from the expense of labor.

When you say capitalism is good, what are you comparing it to? Do you think the CHICOMS don't have a plethora of products to buy in their stores? In what way did Mother Russia have a bad economy? What does capitalism bring that other economic systems are lacking? Competition? You think there weren't competing firms in Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia?

What is the most anti-capitalistic nation on earth today? The only one that comes to mind for me is Libya (you could probably find some absurd choice like Somalia, but the truth is regardless of the political or economic system in any of those countries they are a mess).

Libya offered: all citizens the right to education and healthcare
Highest income in all of Africa
The largest irrigation project on the planet, converting desert lands to livable farmland
Electricity was free
Highest literacy rates in Africa (at one point higher than 'Murica)
Government support for being a farmer (provided seeds, livestock, farmland, etc to those who chose to feed their fellow countrymen)
Financial aid to mothers after childbirth so they could nurse and raise their family instead of rushing back to work in a cubicle
Zero interest rate loans (I am wary of borrowing in general so not sure how much this is a helpful thing)

What did Gaddafi get?
Mass bombing of his infrastructure projects, destroying the massive irrigation system, and he was jammed up the anus with a bayonet and dragged through the streets, so that the Libyans could have democracy and slavery. Yes, slave markets exist in Current Year in Libya. And all that good stuff is gone. This is not a defense of the Libyans per se, just pointing out what happens if you oppose capitalism in any way. Who else opposes capitalism? North Korea. Venezuela. All our "enemies". Right?

One of the biggest lies was convincing people that capitalism and democracy was good for them.
They went off the petrodollar and sought to make their own goldbacked currencies. Off the usury system of the federal reserve.

Capitalism doesn't work and is even detrimental when usurers control the money supply.
 

Slim Whitman

Sparrow
They went off the petrodollar and sought to make their own goldbacked currencies. Off the usury system of the federal reserve.

Capitalism doesn't work and is even detrimental when usurers control the money supply.
Not only do usurers control the money supply, they do it through the unaccountable Federal Reserve which is never audited and has no congressional oversight. To make matters worse, fractional reserve requirements for banks were recently scrapped altogether, meaning there is no limit to their leverage. The bankster class has literally been granted the exclusive right to coin "money" out of thin air and lend it to those of their choosing. When the returns are good, they pocket the interest. When the returns are bad, they make the public pay for their losses through federal bailouts. Even if capitalism were favorable, which it's not, what we have today is an absolute perversion of the free market. The bankster class gets to choose the winners and losers of society on their whim, with absolutely no downside for them when egregious mistakes are made. This is the logical conclusion of capitalism - he who has the capital runs the table, and that is inevitably going to be International Shysters and their lackeys.
 
Not only do usurers control the money supply, they do it through the unaccountable Federal Reserve which is never audited and has no congressional oversight. To make matters worse, fractional reserve requirements for banks were recently scrapped altogether, meaning there is no limit to their leverage. The bankster class has literally been granted the exclusive right to coin "money" out of thin air and lend it to those of their choosing. When the returns are good, they pocket the interest. When the returns are bad, they make the public pay for their losses through federal bailouts. Even if capitalism were favorable, which it's not, what we have today is an absolute perversion of the free market. The bankster class gets to choose the winners and losers of society on their whim, with absolutely no downside for them when egregious mistakes are made. This is the logical conclusion of capitalism - he who has the capital runs the table, and that is inevitably going to be International Shysters and their lackeys.

International shysters also financed Lenin and the Russian Revolution. Which goes to show even the so called alternatives to Capitalism is likewise compromised.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
Industrial capitalism is healthy, it was the economic system in the US up to the middle of the 20th century, and is the current system in China. In this system banks (often small/midsize institutions) partner with local firms and capital is invested towards industrial output and long-term growth.

Financial capitalism, the main economic system in place in the US since the 1980s, isn't. In this system you have large financial conglomerates that use capital to generate short term profits. See leverage buyouts, hedge funds and vulture capitalism, which strips productive assets for short term gains.

This is covered very well in the first Michael Hudson video here:

 

ISR92

Pigeon
As another commenter said above, living with your relatives in one home makes a lot of sense. The older relatives can take care of the children while you go to work. Their knowledge can be imparted on the children. Wealth can be preserved more easily etc.

This is quite a normal arrangement around the majority of the world. It just so happens that in The West it isn't so. In part due to the fact that we can afford to move into our own homes, but also due to the social welfare system which Western nations have.

You would lose privacy though which is a big drawback. In other countries, young couples get around this by renting hotels for the night or even by the hour when they need intimacy. Still, the lack of privacy is still more optimal than outsourcing the raising of your children to workers who could care less about them.
 
Top