A DEFINITION OF CAPITALISM
By JOE PEARCE
ONE OF THE MOST encouraging features of the National Front's Five Year Plan is the call for extensive ideological development. Few would dispute that this can only strengthen the Nationalist Movement for the struggles ahead.
However, now that such a commitment to the development of ideology has been made, it is to be hoped that some of the past shortcomings of NF policy can be rectified. The most obvious of these is the apparent inability of Nationalists to comprehend the real meaning of capitalism.
There has always been confusion within Nationalist circles as to what our attitude to capitalism should be. Although most people have grasped that International Finance is an enemy that has got to be defeated, many still cannot bring themselves to condemn capitalism outright. This hesitation is due primarily to the NF's past association with the so-called 'right', which sees communism as the overriding, all-important number one enemy. These short-sighted 'right-wingers' have drawn the simplistic conclusion that because the communists oppose capitalism we must support it. Such a conclusion is so idiotically shallow as to be ridiculous. On that basis one might as well conclude that we should support higher unemployment because the Reds want the 'right to work'!
This complete lack of understanding as to what capitalism actually is necessitates an article which is designed specifically to define. It is therefore the purpose of this article to do just that; to show how capitalism has developed and what it has become, and ultimately to show that nationalism and not communism is the only alternative to the corrupt capitalist economic system.
WHAT CAPITALISM IS NOT
In order to comprehend exactly what capitalism is, it is first necessary to understand what it is not.
Capitalism is not system whereby private enterprise and individual initiative are able to express themselves and prosper. On the contrary, capitalism has the effect of stifling individual enterprise.
Neither is it true to say that small family businesses and corner shops are the basic economic units in a capitalist society. In fact, capitalism has been responsible for the destruction of all types of small family businesses. Tradesmen, craftsmen and farmers had prospered since time immemorial prior to the advent of capitalism. But since the dawning of the capitalist era, all of these healthy 'private enterprises' have been gobbled up in the path of industrial and financial monopolisation.
In order to understand fully how capitalism has led to the destruction of private enterprise and individual initiative, we must trace the development of capitalism to its very roots.
MARXIST THEORY OF HISTORY INCORRECT
In Britain, the roots of capitalism can be traced back to the practice of usury during the thirteenth century. This fact exposes the Marxist interpretation of history as being fundamentally inaccurate.
According to Marx, capitalism replaced feudalism as the dominant socio-economic system with the advent of the Industrial Revolution in the eighteenth century. This is an over-simplification of the historical facts, largely neglecting as it does any reference to usury and the evolution of the banking system. This major flaw in Marxist teaching is one of the main reasons why communism is unable to eradicate the root causes of capitalism.
JEWISH USURY AND THE RISE OF THE BANKING SYSTEM
The importance of usury to the growth of capitalism cannot be over emphasised. It was the expansion and growth of usury which eventually led to the birth and development of the banking system. The eventual acceptance of usury as a legitimate part of economic life led to the growth of banking throughout the whole of Europe.
In England, rudimentary forms of banking probably began with the scriveners of Elizabeth's time, but it was the goldsmiths of the 17th Century who were most responsible for the development of what eventually became the modern banking system.
At first, these goldsmiths merely acted as caretakers of money. They possessed strongrooms which provided a safe repository for money and valuables for those who were afraid of robbers.
However, these goldsmiths soon began to realise that although some people were requiring repayment of their money others were continually depositing more, and there was always a large sum on hand. They therefore began to make loans of this money at interest. This money-lending by the goldsmiths began a process which was to put the control of the money supply and ultimately the control of the whole economy into the hands of alien bankers.
The economic dominance of the banks was finalised in 1694 with the foundation of the Bank of England, which was given the sole right of note issue. From that moment onwards, the control of the flow of credit by Finance Capitalism was ensured.
DECAY OF THE GUILDS
Another important step towards the growth of capitalism came with the degeneration of the guilds in the sixteenth century.
In its heyday the guild system fulfilled a very important role in the socio-economic life of the nation. But it degenerated due to human fallibility and corruption and left the way open for further capitalist growth.
This quote by Lipson explains the full importance and the inevitable implications which arose from the decline of the guild system: ―
"The essence of the guild system lay in the control of industry by the industrial workers themselves, through an elected authority appointed by them. In the capitalist system, on the other hand, this control is transferred to men who stand outside the ranks of the industrial workers, and are frequently in conflict with them."
The degeneration of the guild system meant that the guidance and control of industry passed from the hands of the craftsmen themselves into the hands of the early capitalists.
In fact, just as the acceptance of usury heralded the birth of Finance Capitalism, then the decline of the guilds marked the early beginnings of Industrial Capitalism. Thus, with the decay of guild socialism and the tolerant acceptance of usury and banking, the age of capitalism began.
The agrarian and industrial revolutions and the migration of the peasantry to the towns all helped to accelerate the growth of the capitalist system, and by the end of the eighteenth century the whole face of society had changed completely.
The advent of capitalism brought misery and starvation to the majority while a small minority grew very rich. Whole sections of the population were delivered into a form of wage slavery which was morally and ethically barbarous.
The famous poet Oliver Goldsmith condemned the rise of capitalism during this period, denouncing the new system as being immoral. In 1770 he wrote: "III fares the land to hastening ills a prey, Where wealth accumulates and men decay."
EFFECTS OF CAPITALISM
The evil effects of capitalism, however, are not confined to the early days of its development. Most of the social and economic ills which afflict Western society today can be blamed on its further expansion.
Capitalism is, by its very nature, internationalist. It has to break down barriers in the interests of profits and power ever since the sons of Mayer Rothschild founded Banking Houses in London, Berlin, Paris, Vienna and Naples in the early 19th Century. Since then, International Capitalists have spared no effort in to nation states in favour of a Super-Capitalist World Economy.
Capitalism is destroying small businesses of every type because of its relentless monopolisation of the economy. Multi-national corporations are tightening their grip on the economic life of individual nation states, squeezing small firms out of business in order to seize a greater share of the market. Unless this process of monopolisation is stopped, more and more small firms will be gobbled up by the expanding multi-nationals. The final result of this process will be the complete ownership and control of whole national economies by a handful of International Capitalists.
Finance Capitalists are able to control the economies of individual nations through their control of the issue of credit. They can cause inflation and unemployment just by altering the flow of credit into the economy. Through this control of credit, International Financiers are able to exert complete control over National Governments.
Ultimately, however, it is not only the internationalising effect of modern day capitalism which is evil, but the whole capitalist economic system. Any system which puts the control and ownership of the means of production into the hands of a few bankers and industrialists has got to be immoral.
Gregor Strasser summed up the unethical nature of capitalism in 1926 when he wrote: ―
"The capitalist economic system with its exploitation of the economically weak, with its robbery of the workers' labour power, with its unethical way of appraising human beings by the number of things and the amount of money they possess, instead of by their internal value and achievements must be replaced by a new and just economic system."
COMMUNISM IS NOT THE ANSWER
Once we have accepted that capitalism "must be replaced by a new and just economic system", problem of deciding upon an alternative system presents itself.
The most well known advocate of an alternative economic system is of course Karl Marx. However, a closer examination of Marxist principles will show that communism, offers no alternative whatsoever to capitalism. In fact, a comparison between these two apparent alternatives exposes some remarkable similarities.
Communism, like capitalism, belives in an international world economy. An economy in which nation states have no role to play and in which a small group of super-economists rule the world.
Communism, like capitalism, believes wholeheartedly in multi-racialism and the mongrelisation of all the races of the world. Both of these so-called 'alternatives' see racism as being incompatible with the true progress of the 'world economy'.
Communism, like capitalism, believes in the alien philosophy of materialism. The spiritual well-being of Nordic Man has been sacrificed over the last few hundred years by the relentless materialism of capitalist society. The Marxists, however, far from opposing the disastrous effects of materialism, support vehemently the continuation of this philosophy.
Communism, like capitalism, advocates the monopolisation of the economy. Both communists and capitalists alike believe in dispossessing the workers of the control of the means of production, and both believe that this control should be put into the hands of a small group of economists.
Communism, like capitalism, thrives on the alien doctrine of liberalism. Under both systems liberalism will flourish, creating havoc with the traditional modes of life of the Nordic populace. Under the corrupt, money-worshipping capitalist system family life has been crumbling amidst the perpetual onslaught of Jewish decadence. Under the communist system this process would continue unhindered, due to the shared belief by both systems that a strong family unit is an obstacle to the fulfillment of their own aims.
Under close scrutiny then, it can be seen that communism is not in any way an alternative to capitalism. The differences between the two systems, where they exist at all, are so small as to be negligible.
NATIONALISM IS THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE
It is evident from what has already been discussed that Marxism is nothing more than capitalism's alien twin brother.
Further examination will show that only through a comprehensive programme of Social Nationalism is the real alternative to be found.
Nationalists see the preservation of the Nation State as a necessary safeguard against the further growth of capitalism. As we have seen, capitalism requires the breaking down of national barriers if it is to continue to grow. International Financiers and multinational corporations require the unhindered, international movement of labour and capital if they are to become even more powerful. The maintenance and strengthening of independent nation states will, therefore, effectively stunt the growth of International Capitalism.
Nationalists also advocate the preservation of the White race and demand the termination of all forms of racialism. This is also necessary in order to ensure the maintenance of nation states. A nation is not only a geographic entity, it is also very much a biological entity and, as such, the purity of the race is necessary to the survival of nations.
Nationalists regard all forms of capitalism as evil ― be it the alien capitalism of Wall Street, or the State Capitalism of Moscow. In view of this, nationalists seek the dissolution of all sectionally owned monopolies. These monopolies will either be divided into smaller privately-owned units or, where this is not possible, they will be socialised and handed over to the work-force.
These various aspects of our ideology show indisputably that nationalism and not communism is the only alternative to the alien doctrine of capitalism. Only when these principles of Social Nationalism are fully implemented will the twin evils of capitalism and communism be destroyed once and for all.