The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewGuillaume Durocher Archive
Orbánomics, or the Return of National Economics
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

I do not believe that GDP growth – or the pursuit of wealth in general – ought to be an end in itself. Nonetheless, the fact is that virtually all countries today do consider the production and redistribution of wealth to be a fundamental goal. In this context, GDP per capita (minus wealth from national resources) is a decent proxy for a society’s organizational capacity, which certainly is a very relevant metric in any case.

A particular concern is that heterodox and populist governments, whether leftist or nationalist, tend to be economically incompetent. This would presumably be due to populist movements’ lower human capital (intelligent, prudent, and/or conformist managers avoiding “controversial” movements) and to their emotional intensity and demagogy. One thinks of Britain’s postwar socialist economic stagnation, post-Perón Argentina’s perpetual economic mediocrity, and Venezuela’s current economic collapse.

Leonid Bershidsky has a refreshingly balanced overview in Bloomberg of the economic situation in Hungary under Prime Minister Viktor Orbán – the closest thing we have to an identitarian European leader. Bershidsky says:

When Orban took over in 2010, Hungary was near collapse. The country was soldiering through a Greek-style debt program administered by the International Monetary Fund and the European Union. He moved decisively to clean up the country’s finances, slash the budget deficit from 5.3 percent in 2011 to 2.4 percent in 2012 (it was down to 1.9 percent last year) and pay off the debts to the EU and the IMF, cutting the share of foreign currency-denominated debt. To be able to do that, Orban nationalized Hungary’s private pension funds and raided their cash stash. He introduced a flat 15 percent income tax (which greatly improved collection) and raised value-added tax to 27 percent, the highest rate in the EU. He imposed special taxes on sectors dominated by foreign-owned companies — energy, utilities, finance, telecoms, retail and media — taxing revenue and assets, not profits, to make optimization unfeasible. And he renationalized some key firms to sell them on to Hungarian investors, often to his friends and allies.

According to the latest economic forecast of the European Commission – no friend of the Orbán government – Hungary’s annual economic growth should moderate (as in the rest of Europe) from 4.3% this year to 2.6% in 2020, inflation will remain low, and already remarkably low unemployment of 3.6% will continue to fall to 3.2%. Hungary’s public debt, which peaked at 80.7% in 2011, is projected to fall to 68.6% by 2020. The country maintains healthy budget and current account surpluses.

Compared to other Central European countries such as Poland and Czechia, Hungary has slightly underperformed in recent years in terms of GDP growth. Interestingly, Hungarians’ household debt has considerably declined in recent years, from over 40% of GDP in 2011 to under 20% today, while that of the Poles and Czechs has remained steady. This suggests the frugal finances of Hungarian consumers may have reduced domestic demand and thus growth.

Overall, it would seem that Hungary’s economic performance is well in line with that of the rest of Central Europe, notwithstanding the usual kvetching about the Orbán government’s corruption (although I am in no position to judge whether that is worse than the region’s usual mediocre-to-awful standards). All this suggests that national-populist regimes are economically viable, notwithstanding globalist complaints.

As in everything else, in “patriotic economics” there needs to be an Aristotelian happy mean. Having completely open economic borders means being vulnerable to every economic dysfunction and predatory practice in the rest of the world. Being completely closed means poverty and stagnation relative to the outside world.

With the triumph of the “Washington Consensus” (not to mention what ought to be called the “Brussels Consensus”) in the 1990s, the pendulum clearly swang too heavily in favor of open borders, particularly concerning the free movement of capital. The unlimited free movement of capital means that your economy is now distorted by whatever goes through the minds of the capital-holding investors, who are by no means “rationally omniscient,” but are as prone to fashions, prejudice, and panics as the rest of us. Hence, your economy is liable to get overheated due to excess investment (which, for the investing country, also means your banking sector could now collapse because of economic problems in another country) and international capital runs. If your consumers take loans in a foreign currency, they also risk ruining themselves if the national currency’s value declines significantly, for whatever reason.

In general, increased economic “interdependence” between countries means added complexity and fragility. If anything goes wrong anywhere, it means everything collapses everywhere. Simplicity and antifragility are your friends. Do you really want the global economy to be a game of Jenga?

The recent historical record suggests a moderate regime of “national economics” is best. The Asian Financial Crisis in the 1990s was one example, in which countries resorting to capital controls to kill financial panics recovered most quickly. The more recent Eurozone Crisis has been very instructive in the same sense, stressing the benefit of having a national currency, representing and responsive to local socio-economic conditions, in order to guarantee financial confidence and adjust (devaluation) if necessary.

National currencies and relatively autonomous national financial systems are generally good, because they allow every nation-state to develop and adjust according to its own socio-economic rhythm. Faith in a currency, meaning its value, is a reflection of confidence in a society’s collective ability to redeem that money for actual goods and services. This ability is naturally often misestimated by economic actors and currency fluctuations, ideally not too erratic, are actually a pretty good way to recognize and adjust to this.

Open borders reduce national economic independence and therefore the real republican sovereignty of citizens (hence why classical republicans tended to favor economic autarky). Of course, for some the goal is to limit national sovereignty and encourage “market discipline,” which incidentally is official EU doctrine.

I am instinctively repulsed by this notion. But, to be fair, dependence on international markets is probably why smaller countries tend have more efficient economic policies, on the whole. Larger economies are big enough to maintain their own (often suboptimal) economic choices for longer. Sad but true. The Scandies, Dutch, and Irish – formerly a basket case – adjusted long ago and are thriving, and the Baltic States are probably on a similar path. (Nordicists will of course point out that being small and vulnerable has however not led southern European economies, notably Portugal and Greece, to be particularly prosperous.)

National economics means staying closer to the real economy and it means less brutal adjustments. It means maximizing real sovereignty. It also means ensuring, to the greatest degree possible, the coinciding of self-conscious socio-economic entities with political power and responsibility. A nation is a consciousness, an emotional group identity, a national conversation. Each national economy furthermore has its own socio-economic rhythm, with its labor-capital negotiations, its social norms, its economic performance, etc. A nation-state ensures that decisions are, to the extent possible, taken within a coherent socio-economic unit, rather than having decisions imposed by foreigners one does not understand, does not feel for, and who typically face different economic conditions.

Open borders means a perpetual economic mess, which can only be solved by “consensus” between governments. Therefore the usual farce of diplomatic chicanery, lowest-common-denominator “solutions,” brinksmanship, etc. All this is very inefficient and undemocratic too.

In multinational states, such as Belgium and Canada, there is no shared national feeling or conversation. The “national conversation,” such as there is, is mediated by journalists and other elites, speaking for (instead of) citizens. There is a near-infinite supply of such bug-men, willing to talk down their fellow nationals, in the name of unfeeling and arbitrary “consensus.” Politics is dominated by constant negotiations and compromises between politicians from the two nations, a highly opaque process of wheeler-dealing which favors abandoning electoral promises. Multi-nations are inevitably “governed-by-committee.” Admittedly, Canada and Belgium are very functional societies, but then again they have a high level of human capital and no one has ever expected anything from them. Under pressure, these “nations” collapse: the Québécois rioted when the Anglos tried to draft them to fight Hitler in World War II and the Flemish enthusiastically collaborated with the Third Reich in the hope of securing independence from Belgium and/or a favorable position in the Germanic-dominated New Order (the latter was a realistic ambition).

National economics is good for civic sovereignty, political responsibility, economic effectiveness, and national self-confidence. Generally, you ought to encourage local industry in every viable sector, according to what is possible given the local scale and human capital. Hungary cannot make its own Google (Europe could, if it had a will, which it doesn’t).

Bershidsky writes that many people have left Hungary in recent years: “educated, adventurous people driven out of the country as much by a stifling sense of missing opportunity under Orban’s rule as by economic considerations.” Central Europe’s low fertility means it cannot really afford much emigration and brain-drain. However, the departure of people with left-liberal and anti-national apatride inclinations may be good for the region’s survival in the long run. Anyway, emigration from Hungary is (unfortunately) about the same as elsewhere in there region, namely a bit worse than Czechia, a bit better than Poland, and remarkably better than Portugal and Greece.

Orbán’s critics claim he has brutally slashed the “education” budget in half. To which I say, if this blessed news be true: God bless Orbán! God bless the Magyars!

All this is admittedly very macro, whereas things like corruption and policy competence are granular and difficult to measure. Their negative effects may only be felt in the medium term. Nonetheless, so far, Hungary’s populist government, which has been around for a while, seems very normal in these terms.

Green squares: Eurozone. Blue: Czechia. Beige: Portugal. Brown: Hungary. Pink: Poland. Green triangles: Romania. (Source: Eurostat)
Green squares: Eurozone. Blue: Czechia. Beige: Portugal. Brown: Hungary. Pink: Poland. Green triangles: Romania. (Source: Eurostat)

Central Europe in general will continue to slowly converge with Western European standards of living. How far they converge is a very interesting question. So far, Czechia has overtaken Portugal and looks set to enjoy Western European standards of living. I would not be too surprised if Hungary and Poland do the same, although I am more pessimistic about the Balkans.

In general, Central Europe has furthermore been converging with the West while adhering to greater fiscal discipline: Central Europeans are used to some degree of poverty, their economies are growing, and their governments still remember difficult “transitions” in the 1990s. National debt is then typically lower in these countries than in spoiled Western Europe.

If your national economics are spooking foreign investors – because your rulings are erratic or punitive – you are probably doing something wrong.

Bershidsky also writes:

Europe may be wise to finance the experiments of Orban and other nationalist governments, such as the one in Poland, just to see how their results hold up next to neighboring countries’ more orthodox policies. As long as the nationalists don’t engage in gross macroeconomic and fiscal mismanagement — and with Orban, that hasn’t been a danger — it’s useful to watch different models implemented rather than imagined by academics. Europe, with its diverse governments, provides a unique opportunity for policy competition and comparison. Orban’s experience is relevant to Trump’s U.S., too: Some of his methods might just work there if the Republicans get up the courage to try them.

I couldn’t agree more!

The rejection of borders and national economics was widespread across Western academic, media, and political circles (e.g. Bill Cliton’s notorious September 2001 comments on “the ultimate wisdom of a borderless world”). However, it was in the European Union that these doctrines were theorized and actualized most explicitly.

Innumerable second-rate academics extolled the virtues of the EU as a “post-national,” “post-political,” and even in effect post-statal entity (whatever that could mean), with a steady flow of verbose and inscrutable PoMo discourse. The Jewish-Polish academic Zygmunt Bauman dazzled students with talk of the inevitable rise of “liquid modernity.”

What all of this amounted to was an apology for and rationalization of the political impotence of contemporary Europeans in the face of the economic and political forces of globalism. The most prominent discourser in this vein was none other than one of the last living members of the Frankfurt School: Jürgen Habermas.

The Frankfurt School has become famous, being attacked by nationalists for spreading Marxism and attacking traditional values in Western universities. Wikipedia claims this is a “conspiracy theory” rather than simply an observation of historical fact, as notably documented by Kevin MacDonald (see Chapter 5 of his classic The Culture of Critique). The Frankfurt School both encouraged and was a reflection of the hard leftward shift of postwar Western culture. These academics were influential. Herbert Marcuse, a member of the School, was the guru of the 1960s student movement in the United States. Habermas, for his part, is practically the official intellectual of the European Union and the Federal Republic of Germany, with more awards than a Brezhnev-era apparatchik.

Anyway, all this is beginning to fade into the background. The state is still here. The nation is still here. The idea of republic is still here. Orbán represents a return to the reality principle, towards a world based on the realities of states and nations, rather than the fashions of the Davos set.

 
• Category: Economics, Foreign Policy • Tags: EU, Hungary, Nationalism, Neoliberalism 
Hide 137 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. phil says:

    On a scale of 0 to 10, where 10 represents pure capitalism and 0 represents complete government control over economic decision-making, Hungary’s most recent score (2016, Fraser Institute index) is 7.22, a lower score than the US and comparable to the score for France. The Hungarian government sector is bloated with government enterprises and subsidies, but the economy is much freer than it was in the bad old days.

    In general, Hungarians are a people of rather high average IQ, and the economy fits in well with the rest of Eastern Europe, whose average living standards are gradually converging towards those in Western Europe. Greece and Portugal have lower average IQ, and Hungary has been in the process of passing them up.

    Chile has been more of a free-market darling and has somewhat surpassed Uruguay and Argentina in terms of average living standards, but even the most productive Latin American economy has been surpassed by most of Eastern Europe by now because average IQ throughout Latin America is significantly lower than in Eastern Europe.

    The lesson is that IQ trumps free-market purity as far as average living standards are concerned, as long as the degree of capitalism is above 5 or 6 on a 10-point scale.

    • Agree: Dieter Kief
    • Replies: @Wally
  2. Thanks for the comment! I basically agree. Assuming a mixed market economy, most countries will converge to their “natural” degree of wealth, essentially determined by intelligence * social trust.

  3. “A particular concern is that heterodox and populist governments, whether leftist or nationalist, tend to be economically incompetent.”

    China’s government is both heterodox and populist (with 95% popular policy support) and tends to be the most economically competent in world history.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  4. Tusk says:

    Thanks for the wonderful piece Guillaume, it is always enjoyable.

    • Agree: densa
  5. “Assuming a mixed market economy, most countries will converge to their “natural” degree of wealth, essentially determined by intelligence * social trust.”

    Interestingly enough, mass immigration is bad for both of those factors.

    Hungary in the long run is still in big trouble from migration. In fact, all of EE is in big trouble. Poland is making the idiotic and suicidal decision to bring in Pakis, Indians and other non-whites to address labour issues. Czechia has Arabs moving to small towns and reproducing like rabbits.

    Ultimately, Hungary cannot stay Hungary if it remains in the EU. It must leave, because while it can stop muslim migrant redistribution, it cannot stop EU passport holders from relocating. Meaning that all the Muslims have to do is get passports and then it is operation-take-over-hungary.

    We were thinking of moving there, but so long as it is in the EU, forget it. I’d rather deal with the less rapidly decreasing IQ in Russia. Plus the Uzbeks and Chechens are better than Pakis or Afghans, if I have to choose between third world invaders.

    • Replies: @YourBunnyWrote
  6. Franz says:

    Having completely open economic borders means being vulnerable to every economic dysfunction and predatory practice in the rest of the world. Being completely closed means poverty and stagnation relative to the outside world.

    This is subject to some hair-splitting, but I think you know that.

    Before Japan was “liberated” into the industrial age by US gunboats, it had farms that produced bigger and healthier crops per hectare than Europe during the same era. More important, what goods it did produce was by Japanese craftsmen for their own people. Economists consider such trifles “intangibles” but they have a way of adding up. How many European-derived people would settle for a lower standard of living in a nation that reflected their beliefs and ideals, and not that of mega-corporations or faceless bureaucrats?

    Still, the real problem is staring us in the face, viz:

    True autarchy is now technically possible. Mini-mills making steel from tons of available scrap can serve a human-sized nation without any outsourcing at all. American and Canadian micro-breweries have been gaining customers on both sides of the US-Canadian border for two generations now, and as they have, others have followed suit elsewhere in the world.

    The best argument of all: Movie making. Anybody with a smartphone, much less a fully dedicated media computer and software programs, now has more power and inventive capacity than Hollywood had for the first fifty years it existed. And that goes for the Italian, French, German… all national-level film studios. All!

    No time like the present. We just don’t need economics of scale anymore. True freedom would consist of the sort of world we desire to live in, along with the ability to participate in the shaping of it with like-minded people. The USA, EU, and other mass pacts allow for none of this.

    Viktor Orbán has simply seen the truth early: Globalists and super trade pacts are the dinosaurs of our era. Time for the tar pits to swallow them up.

    • Replies: @niteranger
    , @Anonymous
  7. LondonBob says:

    Ireland still struggles when you remove the distorting effects of multinationals running profits through there. Adopting the Euro when Ireland has completely different business cycle and economy is a grave error.

    https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/budget-2019-who-still-owes-more-the-irish-or-the-greeks-1.3625800

    Even at the IMF it is now understood completely liberalised capital flows are damaging, speculative capital flows will move in and out accentuating the business cycle.

    • Replies: @Digital Samizdat
  8. @LondonBob

    Yup. Ireland was especially hard hit ten years ago, during the economic crash. I certainly wouldn’t hold the place out as a model. But then, which EU country these days would I regard as a model? That’s the question. Maybe Denmark?

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  9. R. says:

    I don’t know about their economy, but I drove through Hungary last year.

    Being used to Slovakia and Czech Republic, seeing Hungary up close strongly reminded me of 1990’s.
    Everything-private houses, airport, infrastructure seemed shabbier and poor.

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    , @AnonFromTN
  10. German philosopher (and sociologist) Jürgen Habermas is getting old now and losing steam. In one of his last interviews last July with El Pais – the English version might still be online – – – he claimed, he’d be a supporter of Macron, but that he wasn’t that sure, what Macron really stands (!) for: Is he really a left-leaning Liberal? – He wished (!), Macron was!

    Yep – still online:
    https://elpais.com/elpais/2018/05/07/inenglish/1525683618_145760.html

    I agree though: The national perspective is important. I agree too, that it might help society, to make more realistic economic decisions. Habermas, by the way, helped a lot to establish the idea in the German discourse, that it makes sense to discuss this question: Whether or not economic decisions within a capitalist system are rational? Because he pretty much destroyed the idea, that economic discussions had to be Marxist in order to be rational.

    By and large, Habermas left nothing of value from Marx’ economic ideas – especially Marx “Arbeitswerttheorie” (the idea, that the amount of work, that goes into a product, represents the worth – = the reasonable price of this very product, was absolutely declared “unsound” by Habermas – as well as the Marxian “Verelendungstheorie” (the capitalist necessity to enslave people and make them poorer and poorer – the longer, the more).

    What Habermas left over from Marx is, that communication is crucial – and fair communication even more so, for any modern society to flourish. And that seems quite right. The devil, as always, lies in the – – – pudding (=in the real world practicality of Habermas communication theory), so to speak.
    For me, unz.com is a good example, for Habermas, it might well be a horrible one. Even though it definitely is quite American*** – and that then would be my argument against Habermas’ attack – I’ll keep that in mind- – – just in case…

    *** Habermas likes the USA quite lot!

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  11. truthman says:

    Is the EE demographic situation all that bad? What % of newborns are non-European?

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    , @Tyrion 2
  12. densa says:

    On another thread someone mentioned the story of how Phillip Morris had argued to the Czech government that, far from being harmful, smoking would cut down on government costs for healthcare, pensions and housing because people would die earlier.

    This resonated with me as I had been working on opposing the government licensing an LNG export port, in which they admitted it would raise prices, reduce jobs and opportunity for new job growth. Despite that, they accepted it as a benefit to the public because, basically, it would increase LNG exports. They acknowledged that ordinary people were unlikely to share in that benefit, but because some would be enriched it was okay to make all pay through higher costs and lost wages.

    This is the why ordinary people are wearing yellow vests and voting for Brexit and Trump. Globalist financial dogma has failed nations and the people who inhabit them. A national government worth the name would regulate capitalism instead of allowing it to prey on its people and resources.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  13. @R.

    No wonder the private houses looked shabby when you visited. With a 27% VAT, buying paint and other minor improvements are possibly seen as expensive luxuries that take a back seat to essentials.

    VAT is a regressive tax that hurts the poorest in society the most and 27% is outrageously high. It seems that working people are under attack from the left and the right everywhere.

  14. @NoseytheDuke

    Yup. In the US today, voters have a choice between a right-wing that is covertly anti-White (the Republicans) and a right-wing that is overtly anti-White (the Democrats). So both of them hate my class, and one of them hates my race as well. Some choice!

  15. TG says:

    “Being completely closed means poverty and stagnation relative to the outside world.”

    Uh, not really. Not if you have enough domestic resources. From the founding to about 1970 (ish) the United States was a functional autarky. Foreign trade was nearly zero. When that Smoot Hawley tariff thing was enacted AFTER the start of the great depression, foreign trade made up about 4% of total GDP. In fact, I can still remember when for the United States GDP was the same as GNP! because trade was so minor.

    With abundant resources and no need to trade with other countries, and a large domestic market closed off to the rest of the world, the United States rose from a backwards agricultural colony to the greatest military and industrial power the world had ever seen. Just saying.

    Of course as third-world migration boosts the population towards a billion and beyond, and ‘free’ trade results in our industrial base being shipped overseas, that is no longer something we can go back to.

    • Replies: @John Gruskos
    , @Franz
  16. @jbwilson24

    Chechen’s can be most pleasant to be around, the city of Grozny is a remarkable example of how to rebuild after a civil war. On the other hand care should be exercised around bender minded Chechen’s in Derbent on the Caspian Sea.

  17. @TG

    Foreign trade was nearly zero.

    Nonsense.

    The United States had a very high protective tariff for most of the 19th and early 20th century and became self-sufficient in manufactured goods, but the sheer size of the American economy guaranteed that America had one of the world’s largest foreign trades.

    In the last year before WW1, American foreign trade was the third highest in the world, after Britain and Germany.

    The US exported agricultural surplus (food and cotton) to NW Europe, and imported tropical luxuries such as sugar and coffee from Latin America.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  18. @Franz

    Excellent points! We cannot survive the super globalist consumer economies and scale has a lot to do with it including controllable populations. The global scale limits freedoms because they want to control totally the economic, social, and environmental pathways.

  19. Most correct economic system is Chinese where state owned economy coexist with private economy.
    Hungarian seem to follow Chinese pattern,
    Point here is that if you can make something by yourself why you would import it.

  20. Nonetheless, the fact is that virtually all countries today do consider the production and redistribution of wealth to be a fundamental goal.

    The fact is that in EU countries the income distribution between labour and capital changes indeed, but labour getting a steadily lower share in the national income and capital a higher.

    What is seen by whom in the EU as a fundamental goal is debatable, what politicians say is not important, what is important is what they do, and even more, what the result is of what they do.
    The French Yellow Vest movement is a poverty movement.
    For over ten years we were many months in France, life in France we saw becoming more and more expensive.
    Food prices, taxes.
    And, very important for French people, job security disappearing.
    France was a highly protectionist country, Renault, for example, a state owned industry.
    Renault in France has hardly any jobs there any more, production now is in S America and E European countries.

    But in the Netherlands and Germany similar developments.
    A family with children, one parent working, even with an above median income, say € 33.000, has difficulty making end meet.
    In Germany since a few years exists the new word Altersarmut, armut = poverty, alter = old age, pensioners no longer able to pay the rent, moving to trailer parks.

    What our politicians think, if they think at all, a few days ago became clear when the CO2 emission reduction plans became known with regard to costs.
    They really seem to think that petrol cars can be replaced by elelectric ones, that heat pumps can replace gas heating.

    What the background of all this is is guessing, clear is that in the pro EU countries most politicians have lost any contact with common people, those at the Brussels court live completely isolated lives.

    Then about economics.
    More and more I get the impression that in the USA is not understood what economics as a science is.
    Just read a book in which the influence of Chicago and Harvard universities is described, Alan Friedman.
    What is taught there is not science in my opinion, it is ideological brainwashing.

    We see this here in the article too, is my idea, national economics does not exist, as Marxist economy does not exist.

    Economics as a science has no preferences for or against free trade zones, the science explains the consequences.
    Open borders is acompletely hazy concept nowadays, is it a free trade zone, an area where people can settle anywhere theh like, or what ?
    Hazy ideas dominate discussions.

    Just after the Brexit referendum on BBCW Hardtalk there was a discussion with a former Polish minister Sikorski.
    The man could hardly control his anger that GB wanted a free trade zone, but rejected free movement, that is settlement, of people.
    I wrote the man, asking where he’d got such ideas, no reply, of course.

    The E European countries, sometimes alled Visigrad countries, in this town long ago a treaty was concluded, are deeply religious catholic countries.
    They simply reject Islam.
    Yet the EU, that is Brussels, with considerable support from Soros, try to force Hungary into accepting Muslims.
    The EU motives are clear to me, just after destruction of the cultures of the EU member states the USA clone that often is called EUSSR can be established.
    What motivates Soros, I can just guess, from revenge to really believing he’s creating a better world.

    Anyhow, nationalism has not disappeared.
    The nationalist Dutch party FvD now has more members, barely a year and a half after it was created, than Rutte’s pro EU party VVD.
    The French Yellow Vests, a nationalist movement, in my opinion.
    Similar developments already existed in Austra, Brexit of course is nationalism, Sweden and Belgium have become ungovernable.
    I’m quite curious what the Dutch March elections will bring, more nationalism, I expect.

  21. @John Gruskos

    Around 1900 a USA politician was quite clear ‘just after we can control the world economically we will try to establish free world wide trade’.

  22. @densa

    smoking would cut down on government costs for healthcare, pensions and housing because people would die earlier.

    Completely true, of course.

  23. @Dieter Kief

    What Macron stands for, globalism, in my opinion, world rule, by the Rothschilds and Soroses, I fear.

  24. @truthman

    What is bad ?
    The Netherlands now has some 17 million inhabitants, seven million too many, in the opinion of quite a number of Dutch.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  25. @Digital Samizdat

    Fintan O’Toole, ‘Ship of Fools, How Stupidity and Corruption Sank the Celtic Tiger’, 2009, 2010, London.

  26. Tyrion 2 says:
    @truthman

    That’s not the problem in Eastern Europe. The problem in Eastern Europe is that the total number of newborns looks like a percentage.

  27. Tyrion 2 says:
    @NoseytheDuke

    Taxing consumption rather than work seems rational in a time of general insolvency and no famine.

  28. Tyrion 2 says:

    The Frankfurt School has become famous, being attacked by nationalists for spreading Marxism and attacking traditional values in Western universities. Wikipedia claims this is a “conspiracy theory” rather than simply an observation of historical fact

    The conspiracy theory isn’t that Marxists were Marxists, obviously they were.

    It is instead the opposite – that Marxists were not actually believers in Marx’s ideas and simply proposed them to hurt the peoples they secretly hated.

  29. niceland says:

    I have been under the impression one doesn’t have to look far and wide to discover the model for the E.U. and it’s pillars of free flow of goods, capital and people across borders inside it’s domain. Including the single currency the Euro. Of course it’s the USA.

    Just like in the U.S. the idea is that labor would follow the jobs and be blown back and forth across (former) national borders. Single currency to simplify trade and open internal market. All surrounded by external trade barriers against the rest of the world. United States of Europe.

    Largely a bureaucratic, economic wet dream.

  30. Anon[424] • Disclaimer says:

    The east europeans should not have joined the EU , or at least not all , not so fast .

    The franco-german greed forced the admission of the euro easteners to gobble them , ” drang nach osten ” , ” lebensraum ” .

    The french descendants of Napoleon and the german descendants of Hitler still want to invade and conquer all Europe , but they forgot how their monsters Napoleon and Hitler ended up .

    The ” old ” EU could have survived and prospered without enlargement , just making trade agreements with all the easteners , Russia included . But what can you expect from the sons of Napoleon and Hitler ??? , they still covet Russia , and they still despise and underestimate the european south and the european east ….

    England is in the way out of the UE , Greece has been lynched by the EU , Italy is fed up with the EU , Spain and Portugal will soon rise against the UE , even the french people are rising against Macronapoleon , even the german people are fed up with their arrogant and incompetent führerin .

    Good bye EU , good bye french napoleons and german hitlers , your drang nach osten failed once again , you never learn , idiots .

  31. Franz says:
    @TG

    Uh, not really. Not if you have enough domestic resources. From the founding to about 1970 (ish) the United States was a functional autarky.

    Close. The devil is in the details.

    Around the turn of the century (19th to 20th) the US was to Europe what Japan was to the US in the 1980s, the big bugbear that ate up all competition. We had (for certain) a third world labor force up against very settled populations, and lots of them were furious about the cheap, high quality stuff coming from America. It took over forty years and two world wars to stop that.

    It was in 1950 that foreign trade was around 3% and could have (should have) stayed that way. We had an immense consumer market, growing year by year. Dorothy Day and the Catholic League won a brief victory by coaxing corporations to pay a “family wage” which allowed mothers to stay home if they wanted. Companies had to develop strategies to train and retain workers, ’cause if Ford screwed a skilled welder he could always take his skills to General Motors, make the same money or even more.

    American workers were the envy of the world. For a short period of time, also the highest paid. The bitter steel strike in 1958 happened because Big Steel kept trying to pretend it was still the Depression, and the lads at the mills just weren’t buying it.

    While it lasted it was seen as “happy days” but it was a pretty short ride. By the 1973 “oil shock” American managers had been so meager with capital expenditures that any steel or auto company in Germany or Japan could beat us all on the quality front alone. American were working at mills and factories that were literally falling apart; elsewhere industries were brand new.

    But by the time Jimmy Carter was sworn in (1977) the American worker’s pay wasn’t even in the top ten, and that was the year the Youngstown steel shutdown signaled the start of the Rustbelt and Downsize years.

    The happy days lasted less than twenty years. American managers were only too happy to feed work to foreigners and let the great cities of the USA turn to rubbish. Since we had two “free trade” parties since the end of WWII, I guess it was inevitable.

    • Agree: Ilyana_Rozumova
    • Replies: @densa
  32. So, we are informed that:

    ”A particular concern is that heterodox and populist governments, whether leftist or nationalist, tend to be economically incompetent. This would presumably be due to populist movements’ lower human capital (intelligent, prudent, and/or conformist managers avoiding “controversial” movements) and to their emotional intensity and demagogy. One thinks of Britain’s postwar socialist economic stagnation, post-Perón Argentina’s perpetual economic mediocrity, and Venezuela’s current economic collapse.”

    You know I think that Britain’s post-war economic stagnation might have been due to reasons other than incompetence. To wit: the British state was in a state of virtual bankruptcy due to the war effort and also in the throes of losing an empire. With regards to Venezuela this unfortunate country have been subject to siege warfare and internal subversion by the US and its local proxies.

    Moreover, economic nationalism, mercentalism, protectionism, call it what you will was widely practised and met with considerable success in both the US and Germany in the late 19th century. These were policies which broke British free-trade industrial hegemony. The same state-capitalist policies were applied in East Asia with stunning success.

    I would go further and say that ‘free-markets’ don’t exist, have never have existed and never will exist. In contemporary capitalism the state and the economy are twins.

    • Agree: Digital Samizdat
  33. Anon[424] • Disclaimer says:

    Durocher :

    The EUSSR wanted to profit from the USSR collapse and eat all the USSR satellites , about 100 million people , from Estonia to Bulgaria , plus even Ukraina with another 50 million at the time of the USSR collapse ( about 30 million left now ) .

    Too many , too fast . you napoleonians , hitlerians , have short memory

    The eastern front is collapsing , Durocher , Moscow holds https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Moscow

    and and you still have to cross the Berezina

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Berezina

  34. @Anon

    The french descendants of Napoleon and the german descendants of Hitler still want to invade and conquer all Europe ,

    Anything to back this up ?
    And what is ‘old EU’ ?

    • Replies: @Anon
  35. @Donald Duck

    You know I think that Britain’s post-war economic stagnation might have been due to reasons other than incompetence.

    Losing a complete generation of the brightest young men in the attempted genocide on German civilians, and artificially keeping the value of the British £ far too high

  36. I suppose this is intended to be anti-EU propaganda but it doesn’t come off. What the author is actually saying is that Hungary is prosperous because it does thing the EU way! In other words, the regionalist approach of the EU is working where the globalist approach of American presidents and the Brexiteers, including, in his own way, Donald trump, isn’t.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  37. Here in the U.S. we have Zionist economics ie a Zionist controlled economic system with the privately owned unconstitutional FED and IRS and with this the economic system of the U.S. is entirely in the control of the Zionist banking kabal and the Zionist wall street insiders and has been for over 100 years since 1913!

    The Zionists create money 0ut of thin air via the FED and tax we goyim on any gains on this ether created money via the IRS and besides this the Zionists use the FED as their private ATM to buy stocks and bailout their banks when in dire straights as when in the 2008/2009 period the Zionist bankers created out of thin air some 27 trillion and loaned this ether money at zero interest to themselves here and in their banks in Europe, these thieves are special, they do it big time and right in our faces!

    America is a Zionist controlled economy and nation and will be as long as they are allowed to create money out of thin air and tax the gains on this ether created money, abolish the FED and IRS and return America to debt free money under the constitution!

    • Agree: 2stateshmustate
  38. Anonymous[305] • Disclaimer says:
    @Franz

    True autarchy is now technically possible. Mini-mills making steel from tons of available scrap can serve a human-sized nation without any outsourcing at all. American and Canadian micro-breweries have been gaining customers on both sides of the US-Canadian border for two generations now, and as they have, others have followed suit elsewhere in the world.

    I disagree. Your examples only show that very low technology endeavours can be localised, whereas i can testify that reaching the peak of technological progress requires global connections. To give an example, thousands of factories the world over manufacture DN flanges in 304 stainless steel and it’s possible to buy locally. But what if you’re dealing with a corrosive environment and need titanium? Maybe a few dozen factories. Hastelloy? Fewer. Tantalum? Less than a handful.

    Economic isolation is really no different then and now. It’s just that modern technology is sufficiently impressive that it’s possible to preserve the wow factor on a smaller scale.

    • Replies: @MEFOBILLS
    , @Franz
  39. Anon[424] • Disclaimer says:
    @jilles dykstra

    Genes , Dijkstra , genes . Carolingian genes

    Do not you think that Macron looks like Napoleon ? Do not you think than Merkel looks like Adolf ? look at photos of them , observe , compare . Oh mein Gott !!

  40. onebornfree says: • Website
    @Donald Duck

    Donald Duck says: “Moreover, economic nationalism, mercentalism, protectionism, call it what you will was widely practised and met with considerable success in both the US and Germany in the late 19th century. “

    Sure, if by “success” you mean the 1st. and then the 2nd. World Wars! Yup, highly” successful” .

    Nah.. those wars could not possibly be the end result of “economic nationalism, mercentalism, protectionism” now, could they ? What was I thinking? 🙂

    Reards, onebornfree

  41. Anonymous[370] • Disclaimer says:

    National economics is good for civic sovereignty, political responsibility, economic effectiveness, and national self-confidence. Generally, you ought to encourage local industry in every viable sector, according to what is possible given the local scale and human capital.

    This is absolutely crucial. Ideally a nation must produce as much as it can locally – especially high value-added goods/services like electronics, machinery or IT. Unfortunately, for a lagging country in the EU, that is impossible with open borders and trade agreements because they don’t have the tools to nurture those industries into viability – even locally.

    Globalism is poison.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  42. onebornfree says: • Website

    Guillaume Durocher: “All this is admittedly very macro, whereas things like corruption and policy competence are granular and difficult to measure. Their negative effects may only be felt in the medium term. Nonetheless, so far, Hungary’s populist government, which has been around for a while, seems very normal in these terms.”

    “…. whereas things like corruption …… are granular and difficult to measure. ”

    No, corruption in governments is not hard to measure , and yes, it’s all “very normal” :

    “Because they are all ultimately funded via both direct and indirect theft [taxes], and counterfeiting [central bank monopolies], all governments are essentially, at their very cores, 100% corrupt criminal scams which cannot be “reformed”,”improved”, nor “limited” in scope, simply because of their innate criminal nature.” onebornfree

    “Taking the State wherever found, striking into its history at any point, one sees no way to differentiate the activities of its founders, administrators and beneficiaries from those of a professional-criminal class.” Albert J. Nock

    “The state is the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly it lies, too; and this lie creeps from its mouth: `I, the state, am the people.’… Everything about it is false; it bites with stolen teeth. ” – Friedrich Nietzsche

    “The whole government is a Ponzi scheme” -Bernie Madoff

    “Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.”– Frederic Bastiat

    “The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants.” ~Albert Camus

    The “new ” nationalism [in Hungary or anywhere esle] is nothing more than the application of fresh lipstick to the pig- the pig known as the state.

    “Orbanomics” indeed. What a joke!

    It’s all just more “smoke and mirrors” – a “dog and pony show” designed to distract the easily distracted from the truth, that they are all still slaves.

    Regards, onebornfree

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  43. @Michael Kenny

    Brexit is not about prosperity, it is about nationality, the British want their country back.
    How the Brexit will influence the British standard of living, impossible to say now.

    Brussels does anything it can to prevent other countries leaving, just the same as why there was a USA Civil War.
    What Brexit will bring GB cannot be seen until say two years from now, when hopefully there will be a stable situation, and economic realities, such as German and French export to GB, have brought EU politicians to their senses.

    But maybe this is all idle speculation, will the EU, especially the euro zone, survive 2019 ?
    The anti Macron, in fact anti EU demonstrations continue is France, today until now without much material damage.
    Even the Dutch SCP, a government paid organisation that investigates social circumstances, attitudes, and gives advice, recently warned about increasing Dutch preparedness for insurrection, and using violence.

    Hungary, the conflict with Brussels is also about nationality.
    The deeply catholic Hungarians in my opinion are far more patriotic than the British.
    In how far the centuries old Balkan conflicts between Muslims and christians still influence the Hungarian identity, do not know.

    • Agree: English Yobbo
  44. wayfarer says:

    All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence, and then success is sure.

    source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Twain

    Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is Clueless on Taxes and Economics

    • Replies: @onebornfree
  45. Orbán represents a return to the reality principle, towards a world based on the realities of states and nations, rather than the fashions of the Davos set.

    Orbán was not afraid to stand up to the bullies in Moscow. Now he is not afraid to stand up to the bullies in Brussels and Washington. I wish Orbán and Hungary the best of luck.

  46. Wally says:
    @phil

    I believe that most people will support a Hungarian style economy if it supports a unified ethic / racial group and only that group. Otherwise the system is doomed.

  47. @Godfree Roberts

    You are subconsciously comparing economic competence of Chinese government with that of the US government and its blind followers. This is not fair: compared to those, a dog is a genius.

    Chinese government made its economic blunders and did not admit many of those. However, it is certainly much more competent than the governments of the collective West.

  48. densa says:
    @Franz

    Agree, American citizens had a brief golden era, since ruined by two free trade parties. It is worth remembering why capitalism was ever thought to be superior to communism. The argument was that it created more wealth for everyone. Competition drove companies to deliver the best goods at the best price. Trade with other countries was premised on exchange of goods, not labor.

    The last several decades have seen goods being made not worth the name, more like landfill, which is a tax on the consumer as they are on a replacement treadmill. No one even considers whether or not their product pleases, only if they can squeeze another 10% out.

    War produces inflation and central banks step in to print the hot money that somehow never trickles down. Concentrated wealth at the top has allowed the buying out of all power, both political and regulatory. International corporations set national policies and ignore the destruction of middle classes who once, briefly, shared in the prosperity.

    Capitalism it glad to tell us its only obligation is to make profits for its shareholders, but capitalism without morality is headed toward cataclysmic failure because it has excused itself from acting as a citizen even as it claimed the legal authority of one.

  49. @R.

    I drove through Hungary a few years ago. Yes, it is relatively poor (say, compared to Prague), but it is in much better shape than those blindly following IMF/Brussels/Washington recipes (say, Croatia).

    But I agree with commenter #5 – to do well in the long run, Hungary should leave the EU, which is committing collective suicide even as we speak.

  50. I like what Organ has done for his nation, and it’s warming to read a positive report. How loud would the EU scream if Orban suddenly offered a 2000 euro bonus for each new birth that came from a natural born Hungarian couple, married of course, and woul it be enough of an incentive to offset the declining population?

    • Replies: @Ilyana_Rozumova
  51. MEFOBILLS says:
    @Anonymous

    I disagree. Your examples only show that very low technology endeavours can be localised, whereas i can testify that reaching the peak of technological progress requires global connections

    You will have to square you disagreement with the economic accomplishments of Nazi Germany.

    Germany would substitute what it couldn’t make with alternatives.

    A world of autarchial nation states would ideally trade with each other using a bancor. ALL INTERNATIONAL TRADE IS ONLY BARTER.

    This barter rule of economics is like gravity, but humans try to pretend it is not true, by lying to themselves.

    Autarky means doing as much as you can for yourself, putting the maximum numbers of citizens to work, where they work for each other. If you don’t have titanium in your soil, then you will have trade with those that do.

    The conceit of the “international” is they are to make debt instruments against the world, and to buy up the world by running roughshod over history and communities.

    Russia is a good example of “sanctions” benefiting Russian economy. It is becoming more diversified and hence delivers locally sourced product for its citizens. Russia of the 90s was a drawer of water and hewer of wood, whose oligarchial (((elites ))) bought up the country to then extract oil, timber, minerals to be sold onto dollar markets to pay dollar debts.

    Anybody who is not for sovereign money and sovereign markets doesn’t understand Keynes statement: All Trade is ONLY BARTER.

    It is neo-liberal nonsense that there has to be a reserve currency so nations can trade. Nazi Germany under Schacht came up with the trading bank scheme, which worked very well and was a “threat” to the international credit issuers.

  52. Miro23 says:

    Overall, it would seem that Hungary’s economic performance is well in line with that of the rest of Central Europe, notwithstanding the usual kvetching about the Orbán government’s corruption (although I am in no position to judge whether that is worse than the region’s usual mediocre-to-awful standards).

    It would be useful if someone could make a judgment on the Orbán government’s level of corruption.

    The U.S. suffers from a high level of special interest corporate/political corruption, and U.S. economic performance since 1980 has failed in terms of real wages, loading up the economy with debt while outsourcing production (economic activity/skills and jobs).

    How does Orbán’s special interest corruption compare with US special interest corruption?

    He’s running a “Hungary First” policy, and doesn’t have to deal with a giant US style politically connected Military Industrial Complex or have the obligation to engage in Trillion $ Middle East wars on behalf of resident Zionists, so what kind of special interest corruption does he engage in?

  53. Miro23 says:

    Under pressure, these “nations” collapse: the Québécois rioted when the Anglos tried to draft them to fight Hitler in World War II and the Flemish enthusiastically collaborated with the Third Reich in the hope of securing independence from Belgium and/or a favorable position in the Germanic-dominated New Order (the latter was a realistic ambition).

    True enough about the Flemish.

    “…. we have the magnificent conduct of the Flemish on the Eastern front. The Flamands have indeed shown themselves on the Eastern front to be more pro-German and more ruthless than the Dutch legionaries. This is certainly due to the fact that the Flemish have for centuries been oppressed by the Walloons. The lack of harmony between the Flamands and the Walloons has not escaped the attention of the Duce. When he speaks of the Europe of the future, he is wont to group the Flemish and the Dutch on one side, and the Walloons and the French on the other.”

    Adolf Hitler HTT, Conversation Nº 241 27th June 1942

    • Agree: Guillaume Durocher
  54. @Miro23

    The problem with corruption of course is that most of the time it is not avertised publicly.
    So how does one compare corruption between countries.
    France is a great example these days, before the last presidential election corruption with quite a few politicians was made public.
    Even Macron was accused of corruption, money in overseas tax havens.
    He never could explain satisfactorily where the millions were he was paid as a Rothschild banker.
    EP parliament members get some € 4400 a month for expenses, they do not have to show in any way that they have these costs.
    Cannot imagine what they need these amounts for.
    Corruption ?

  55. @the grand wazoo

    Not Organ but Orban it means Elephant trunk. (strange name.)

  56. @MEFOBILLS

    Brilliant comment! But anyway International communism is already dying.

    • Replies: @Wally
    , @MEFOBILLS
  57. Anon[424] • Disclaimer says:

    I just finished the book that wrote one of the collaborators of this Unz blog, thank you Unz , Michael Hoffman : ” Usury in Christiendom , The mortal sin that was and now is not ”

    I have really appreciated the book , Hoffman explains very clearly how since Rennaisance usury has been corroding civilization . Thank you Hoffman .

  58. niceland says:

    This article is weird. How is Orban returning “national economics” when Hungary is inside the E.U. with free flow of capital, people and goods across it’s borders?
    He isn’t and he can’t.

    Nationalizing pension funds to pay off government debt – while this can make economic sense – I doubt future pensioners are very happy with it. Would you be? Try floating this idea in the U.S. or northern Europe and you will be hung out to dry. For a good reason I might add! However if Orban can brag about any economic success over his neighbors this is probably the main reason for it. Because they didn’t raid the pension funds. All in all this can give Hungary temporary economic boost but you can only raid pension funds once and down the line you pay for it when pensioners have less to live on.

    EU countries have full control over their national tax system (more or less at least) and Hungary returning to flat 15% income tax is what it is, but hardly supporting the idea of “nationalized economy”. Neither is 27% VAT.

    This is from the Bloomberg article the author cited:

    He imposed special taxes on sectors dominated by foreign-owned companies — energy, utilities, finance, telecoms, retail and media — taxing revenue and assets, not profits, to make optimization unfeasible. And he renationalized some key firms to sell them on to Hungarian investors, often to his friends and allies.

    In theory this might look like “national economic” policy but think about it: Who pays if these sectors are really dominated by these companies? The consumers probably do because these sectors simply forward the tax burden into the price for their goods or services. So while telling his citizens he is taxing the bad foreigners – he doesn’t tell them they are the one’s footing the bill.

    This re nationalizing clause sounds strange. Inside the E.U. you have to play by the rules and foreign (E.U.) investors enjoy the same rights as domestics and I find it difficult to believe Orban can nationalize what ever he likes without serious trouble from the EU. The last sentence might give away what Orban is all about.

    I have no idea what the future holds for Hungary or it’s economy but cutting the budged for higher education in half doesn’t sound very promising going forward. They can probably survive without gender studies and such but overall this doesn’t look good.

    Anyone interested in this subject should finish reading the Bloomberg article the author cited. He left out the critic on Orban’s policies. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-04-13/orban-s-economic-model-in-hungary-is-trump-s-dream

    It seems to me people are lifting Orban to hero status because of his stance against refugees. And perhaps his image as a strong man, kicking the ass of the bad guy George Soros. I can’t say I am impressed, he really looks like just another authoritarian political thug. He uses the state power to: hammer his political opponents, curbing free speech and the media. He is playing the old textbook of scaring his population with terrible foreign enemies, while enjoying net flow of E.U. funds flowing into Hungary. Without this flow of funds there would be no GDP growth in Hungary and even more brain drain than is already happening.

    In economic sense this all looks like a storm in a teacup.

    • Agree: Peter Akuleyev
    • Replies: @Guillaume Durocher
  59. onebornfree says: • Website
    @wayfarer

    “Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is Clueless on Taxes and Economics”

    You mean Alexandria Occasional Cortex ?

    However even that is way too kind a nickname for this particular blithering idiot, as there does not appear to be any actual activity in the cortex area of her brain whatsoever! 🙂

    Regards, onebornfree

    • LOL: wayfarer
  60. Franz says:
    @Anonymous

    Your examples only show that very low technology endeavours can be localised, whereas i can testify that reaching the peak of technological progress requires global connections.

    If total isolation, true; but autarchy always allowed for reciprocal agreements which negates the objection.

    Since I used the USA-1950s as a “base autarchy” example, let’s follow it a moment.

    Because American auto giants considered all of North America their natural market, Canadians quite rightly raised a point: They were a foreign nation with interests of their own. So in a three-way deal that considered the needs of the US, Canada, and (properly) the workers in both nations, a deal was struck.

    The deal was simple: Every US car sold in Canada was required to employ Canadian workers to make up the cost of the vehicle by other means. It often meant that Chrysler, Ford, GM. etc., had to put a parts plant in Quebec or an assembly plant in Ontario. So it went, quite smoothly, for about a quarter century till what Ross Perot called the “giant sucking sound” sent most US and Canadian jobs to Mexico.

    The key to autarchy has always been reciprocal agreements for what cannot be crafted or obtained locally. Been working since the Phoenicians traded glass trinkets for ivory 25 centuries ago, and did a fine job when practiced after WWII between the US and Canada.

    But international finance won’t be happy till it pounds the world flat for capital and a decreasing number of trillionaires. Real nations and real humans can no longer afford them.

  61. Anonymous[305] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    This is absolutely crucial. Ideally a nation must produce as much as it can locally – especially high value-added goods/services like electronics, machinery or IT. Unfortunately, for a lagging country in the EU, that is impossible with open borders and trade agreements because they don’t have the tools to nurture those industries into viability – even locally.

    The Ukraine provides a fabulous counter example. Thanks to the global availability of cheap computer hardware and the global markets for their services, Ukraine s software industry is doing well even as the rest of Ukraine descends into failed statedom. This would not have been possible if each country insisted on rolling their own software.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  62. Anonymous[305] • Disclaimer says:
    @onebornfree

    In practical terms, the most agreeable government is one whom the people habitually work around and have developed elaborate systems to help themselves do so.

    It’s not the most efficient state of affairs, but it’s certainly the most free.

    • Agree: onebornfree
  63. Anonymous[305] • Disclaimer says:
    @MEFOBILLS

    You will have to square you disagreement with the economic accomplishments of Nazi Germany.

    Germany would substitute what it couldn’t make with alternatives.

    You mean they took a super nation of the one of the worlds cleverest hardest working and most desperate races and they got some stuff done? That’s unremarkable.

    This agrees with my point. Because the nazis didn’t invent much new technology, they just refined existing technology.

    • Replies: @Wally
    , @MEFOBILLS
  64. Anonymous[305] • Disclaimer says:
    @Franz

    The key to autarchy has always been reciprocal agreements for what cannot be crafted or obtained locally. Been working since the Phoenicians traded glass trinkets for ivory 25 centuries ago, and did a fine job when practiced after WWII between the US and Canada.

    It seems what we’re talking about is absolute trade parity enforced by the lack of any international debt mechanism. By and large, this seems pretty reasonable, although it’s just one end of a sliding scale. Eg. Probably some kind of short term trade imbalance would need to be tolerated to make up for seasonal variations in production, but who would make sure it didn’t grow out of control?

    I think, as with most things in politics, no system provides any answers in of itself and the most important metric of success is the intelligence and goodwill of the people in charge.

  65. Wally says:
    @Ilyana_Rozumova

    “But anyway International communism is already dying.”

    Except in the US & Europe, unfortunately.

  66. MEFOBILLS says:
    @Ilyana_Rozumova

    But anyway International communism is already dying.

    Thanks for the compliment. International Communism and Finance Capitalism are flip sides of the same coin.

    It is a dialectic. We hold the axis of the world in our hands and control its spin.

    Bouncing populations between finance capitalism and communism is a dialectic created by our parasitic friends, which funds their operations.

    It was finance capital out of Wall Street and London which funded Bolsheviks into existence. Bonus if you can degrade the population simultaneously!

    Finance Capitalism differs dramatically from Industrial Capitalism. Industrial Capital is formed out of sovereign banks, and channels into the commons, or into industry. Both improved commons and improved industry benefit the people of the nation. Examples are the American System of Economy under Peshine Smith and Henry Clay, and also Frederick List of Germany (who learned from Smith). The Manchurian railroad engineers who ran Post WW2 Japan also used industrial capitalism. Industrial Capital ALWAYS out-peforms finance capitalism, yet no discussion about this type of economy. It shows how far the propagandists have gone to put ideas down the memory hole.

    Finance Capitalism is “international” capital sourced as private bank credit from private banks, and the objective is to have one money type and one world government. This finance scheme of debt instruments putting nations and their people into debt started with Bank of England in 1694, and is attempting to spread worldwide.

    My point: International Communism dies, but our ((friends)) presto changeo have finance capitalism waiting in the wings.

    Bottom line: Money’s true nature is law, and legal issued money will immediately put a nation into the cross-hairs of our neo-liberal cabal friends. At some point the war between the banks and the people will have to be joined, and that time is now.

    • Replies: @Miro23
  67. Wally says:
    @Anonymous

    said:
    “This agrees with my point. Because the nazis didn’t invent much new technology, they just refined existing technology.”

    LOL

    Is guess that’s why the Allies stole so many German patents that were awarded to Germans during the period.

  68. MEFOBILLS says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    This agrees with my point. Because the nazis didn’t invent much new technology, they just refined existing technology.

    Good try.

    https://csglobe.com/15-mind-blowing-technologies-invented-by-the-nazis/

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  69. onebornfree says: • Website
    @MEFOBILLS

    MEFOBILLS says: “You will have to square you disagreement with the economic accomplishments of Nazi Germany.”

    “Hitler and his clique conquered Germany by brutal violence, by murder and crime. But the doctrines of Nazism had got hold of the German mind long before then. Persuasion, not violence, had converted the immense majority of the nation to the tenets of militant nationalism.

    If Hitler had not succeeded in winning the race for dictatorship, somebody else would have won it. There were plenty of candidates whom he had to eclipse: Kapp, General Ludendorff, Captain Ehrhardt, Major Papst, Forstrat Escherich, Strasser, and many more. Hitler had no inhibitions and thus he defeated his better instructed or more scrupulous competitors.

    Nazism conquered Germany because it never encountered any adequate intellectual resistance. It would have conquered the whole world if, after the fall of France, Great Britain and the United States had not begun to fight it seriously.

    The contemporary criticism of the Nazi program failed to serve the purpose. People were busy dealing with the mere accessories of the Nazi doctrine. They never entered into a full discussion of the essence of National Socialist teachings. The reason is obvious. The fundamental tenets of the Nazi ideology do not differ from the generally accepted social and economic ideologies. The difference concerns only the application of these ideologies to the special problems of Germany.

    These are the dogmas of present-day “unorthodox” orthodoxy:

    1. Capitalism is an unfair system of exploitation. It injures the immense majority for the benefit of a small minority. Private ownership of the means of production hinders the full utilization of natural resources and of technical improvements. Profits and interest are tributes which the masses are forced to pay to a class of idle parasites. Capitalism is the cause of poverty and must result in war.

    2. It is therefore the foremost duty of popular government to substitute government control of business for the management of capitalists and entrepreneurs.

    3. Price ceilings and minimum wage rates, whether directly enforced by the administration or indirectly by giving a free hand to trade-unions, are an adequate means for improving the lot of the consumers and permanently raising the standard of living of all wage earners. They are steps on the way toward entirely emancipating the masses (by the final establishment of socialism) from the yoke of capital. (We may note incidentally that Marx in his later years violently opposed these propositions. Present-day Marxism, however, endorses them fully.)

    4. Easy money policy, i.e., credit expansion, is a useful method of lightening the burdens imposed by capital upon the masses and making a country more prosperous. It has nothing to do with the periodical recurrence of economic depression. Economic crises are an evil inherent in unhampered capitalism.

    5. All those who deny the foregoing statements and assert that capitalism best serves the masses and that the only effective method of permanently improving the economic conditions of all strata of society is progressive accumulation of new capital are ill-intentioned and narrow-minded apologists of the selfish class interests of the exploiters. A return to laissez faire, free trade, the gold standard, and economic freedom is out of the question. Mankind will fortunately never go back to the ideas and policies of the nineteenth century and the Victorian age. (Let us note incidentally that both both Marxism and trade-unionism have the fairest claim to the epithets “nineteenth-century” and “Victorian.”)

    6. The advantage derived from foreign trade lies exclusively in exporting. Imports are bad and should be prevented as much as possible. The happiest situation in which a nation can find itself is where it need not depend on any imports from abroad. (The “progressives,” it is true, are not enthusiastic about this dogma and sometimes even reject it as a nationalist error; however, their political acts are thoroughly dictated by it.)

    With regard to these dogmas there is no difference between present-day British liberals and the British labor party on the one hand and the Nazis on the other……”:

    Excerpt from “Omnipotent Government- The Rise of Total State and Total War”
    (1944), chapter 7] ” by Ludwig Von Mises
    https://fee.org/resources/the-economic-policy-of-the-nazis/

    Regards, onebornfree

    regards, onebornfree

    • Replies: @MEFOBILLS
    , @Wally
  70. Anonymous[297] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    That’s not a counterexample. Fabulous or not.

    IT sector is much more than having cheap programmers for foreigners. Their piece of the pie is minuscule (that’s why they’re employed, before someone cheaper appears) so creating local employers would be much more effective.

    Just look at China. They’ve used their position as a cheap labour platform to learn and create their own high-tech industries.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  71. MEFOBILLS says:
    @onebornfree

    Thanks for the reply one born:

    Here is the root economic equation, and you will see that Industrial Capitalism under List (the Kaiser, and also Hitler) is in alignment.

    Earth + Labor = tool. (For example a flint arrowhead.)

    Labor + Tool = Machine (Advanced tools that increase productivity.)

    Labor + Earth (minerals, food, etc.) + Machine = Goods.

    Goods become priced in monetary terms.

    Labor + Earth + Machines = Goods as prices.

    Smart machines are invented:

    Labor + Earth + Smart Machines = Prices. Labor becomes a diminishing factor, and Oligarchy takes rents on the surplus.

    ______-

    In a money economy, goods become prices and fetch money, money is then thrown backward through the industrial system to pay labor.

    In finance capitalism, virtually all money is created at source as a debt instrument. Further debt instruments are conflated as if they are assets such as goods/land. This sort of hypnosis is rampant.

    In an industrial capitalism economy (such as Nazi Germany) state credit funnels toward industry, and labor value is improved continuously. Note: America also ran an Industrial Capitalism economy called the American system, which was overturned in 1912. Thanks bunches globo homo schlomo!

    America got rich behind tariff walls and using its own credit to improve labor and the commons. Nazi germany had to return to Industrial Capitalism of List after the Wiemar years, especially to combat the hyperinflation. The reichsbank was re-nationalized and the Dawes plan dumped in order for Schact to do combat and bring things back under control.

    Don’t be triggered by your programming about Nazi’s. A lot of Westerners need to be re-programmed as they are filled with false narrative.

    Besides, one can easily put aside emotion, and look at the Nazi economy dispassionately for the lessons we can learn. What went wrong and what went right should inform our reality.

    Autarky allows local labor and local economy to flourish. Under the American system, labor was improved with better water, health, roads, ports, etc. Henry Clay talked specifically about American’s not becoming “Coolie labor” but instead to multiply their productivity with machines and energy.

    • Replies: @onebornfree
  72. Hungary’s ‘Slave Law’ Has Sparked Nationwide Protests
    New legislation allows businesses to impose a massive amount of overtime on workers—and citizens are furious.
    https://www.thenation.com/article/hungary-slave-law-mass-protests/

    The current protests erupted on December 12, when a group of parliamentarians from across the political spectrum tried to filibuster a legal change that opponents say would allow Fidesz to enhance its already-impressive manipulation of elections, as well as a bill that would increase from 250 to 400 the number of annual overtime hours businesses can “ask” their employees to work.

    Critics have termed this second bill “the slave law,” and it seems to have galvanized Orbán’s opponents in a way nothing else could so far, in part because the government tried to sell the law by arguing that it would help relieve purported labor shortages in Hungary’s big auto factories. These factories are, truth be told, German auto factories located in Hungary, where the going rate for labor just happens to be significantly lower than it is in places like Bavaria. This has allowed some protesters to turn Orbán’s nationalism against him: He claims to defend Hungary, but he’s really making you work overtime for the Germans. “Rumors are spreading all around the country that this is the reason for the law,” Andras Pulai, a pollster with Publicus Research in Budapest, told me.

    László Andor, an economist close to the Socialist Party and a former European Commissioner, told me that the slave law, an attempt to deal with a labor shortage by getting the current labor force to work more hours, is the logical outcome of Orbán’s broken labor-market policies, which have featured anti-union measures that have “facilitated wage stagnation and boosted emigration.” Andor thinks the slave law runs afoul of the EU Working Time Directive anyway, but rather than waiting to get it overturned in court, “apparently for trade unions, like for many others in Hungary, this was the last drop in the glass, and anti-Orbán emotions have erupted.”

  73. Anonymous[392] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    Just look at China. They’ve used their position as a cheap labour platform to learn and create their own high-tech industries.

    China’s a pretty good example of how a huge market with no borders encourages fast industrialisation.

    You see, in pure population terms, the domestic Chinese market is 30x Ukraine and more than twice that of the European Union. If we follow your logic, we can say that fully localised development works, but only if you already have 20% of the world’s population. Or we could say ‘first, merge Ukraine with the entire rest of Europe and Russia and then put lots of external trade barriers in place’.

    Try the Chinese method again with a country the size of Laos and see if it gives results.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  74. Anonymous[392] • Disclaimer says:
    @MEFOBILLS

    Good try.

    https://csglobe.com/15-mind-blowing-technologies-invented-by-the-nazis/

    Sorry, not impressed.

    1. nuclear weapons – total failure. they didn’t get far at all.
    2. a theoretical design? oh wow…
    3. yes, they made it bigger
    4. yes, they made it bigger
    5,6,7 – neat, but not earth shattering
    8 – pipe dream
    9 – UFOs? really?
    10 – dark side moon base?

    Dude seriously can I stop reading now?

    • Replies: @MEFOBILLS
  75. Miro23 says:
    @MEFOBILLS

    Finance Capitalism is “international” capital sourced as private bank credit from private banks, and the objective is to have one money type and one world government. This finance scheme of debt instruments putting nations and their people into debt started with Bank of England in 1694, and is attempting to spread worldwide.

    Creating credit is actually a neutral process. It’s easy to do, and it’s happening continually in societies around the world. The complicated question, is what to usefully do with the credit once it’s created.

    Credit creators (banks) spend most of their time evaluating borrowers to see if they are a good credit risks or not. In other words, if the borrower has a viable project that can pay back the capital with interest.

    IMO, this is where special interests come into the picture.

    A lot of people without viable projects (but with political power) want to get their hands on newly created money and they can 1) force the banks to create it 2) force the banks to channel it to themselves.

    The FED is the classic example. It’s a group of private banks hiding behind a government sounding name (Federal Reserve) with a government sounding leadership (Federal Reserve Board) consulted by Presidents and making periodic “official” statements.

    The FED creates trillions of dollars of credit used to fund Middle East wars (there was no special Iraq War Tax or Afghanistan War Tax). The net result of the “investment” isn’t Chinese style electronics factories, high speed railways or improved education facilities. It is destroyed Middle East cities, millions of killed or homeless people and a bloated and useless US Military Industrial Complex.

    Middle East wars are not “investment” in any real sense for the US public (although the government claims that it is “keeping Americans safe”). It’s only a mechanism used by the Zionist special interest to force the Congress/FED combination to fund Israel/Likud policies and dump the $ trillion cost on the US public in the form of new debt.

    • Replies: @Ilyana_Rozumova
  76. @Franz

    When you try to talk about deals, you have to tell the all story.
    The other side of the deal was that Canada had to stop making their own cars.

    • Replies: @Franz
  77. @redmudhooch

    I do not know! But when I was in Hungary in 2000 there was high unemployment.

  78. @Miro23

    Do not forget. You pay interest on credit. That is where most of the profits for the banks are created.

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  79. Wally says:
    @onebornfree

    “Nazism conquered Germany because it never encountered any adequate intellectual resistance. It would have conquered the whole world if, after the fall of France, Great Britain and the United States had not begun to fight it seriously.”

    That’s about as ridiculous as the ‘6,000,000 Jews’ nonsense.

    – Look at a political map of the world of the period in question, the world was already conquered.

    “The state of German armament in 1939 gives the decisive proof that Hitler was not contemplating general war, and probably not intending war at all.”

    “Even in 1939 the German army was not equipped for a prolonged war; and in 1940 the German land forces were inferior to the French in everything except leadership.”

    – Prof AJP Taylor, The Origins of the Second World War,

    recommended:
    The Hossbach ‘Protocol’: The Destruction of a Legend: http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p372_Weber.html
    Responsibility for WW2 : https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7544

    http://www.codoh.com

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  80. @niceland

    TBH if Central European identitarians can stop Afro-Muslim immigration while still milking the EU for € I won’t be complaining!

    • Replies: @niceland
    , @Anonymous
  81. @redmudhooch

    The Sorosjugend marches in Budapest, is my interpretation.
    Suppose thouands of jobs disappeared since Soros’es organisations were outlawed in Hungary.
    A complete university was closed.
    A Dutch newspaper published a list of Soros organisations in the EU, my wife was flabbergasted.
    Not all this is paid for by philantropist Soros himself, he has 226 followers in EP, so I suppose a lot of money from taxpayers in the EU member states flows to what in fact are Soros propaganda organisations.
    Luckily the tide is turning in the EU member states, against Soros.
    Dutch Baudet called recently Soros ‘jew not to be trusted’.
    Dutch AIPAC, CIDI, of course furious.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  82. A Flemish article:

    https://doorbraak.be/er-is-geen-morele-reden-om-tegen-trumps-muur-te-zijn/

    Er hangt namelijk een filosofische strijd aan vast tussen ‘nationalisme’ en ‘kosmopolitisme’. Trump doet alsof hij het land redt van zuidelijke hordes, terwijl de Democraten in woord een grenzeloze wereld bejubelen. Hillary Clinton zei in 2016 tijdens de campagne dat echte Amerikanen ‘geen muren bouwen, maar bruggen slaan’.

    No moral reason to be against a wall.
    Summary of the §:
    A philosophical battle is going on, between nationalism and cosmopolitanism, Trump pretending saving the country from southern hordes, while Democrats cheer a world without borders. Clinton: real Americans do not build walls, but bridges.

    Conclusion of the article, a world cannot function without borders.

  83. Anonymous[297] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    I can’t talk to you if you believe that China has a “market with no borders”. If that were the case, they’d never be able to develop their own high value-added industries.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  84. onebornfree says: • Website
    @MEFOBILLS

    “….Two efficacious and irrefutable objections could well have been raised against the plans of German aggression. One is that the Germans themselves had contributed as much as they could to the state of affairs that they considered so deplorable. The other is that war is incompatible with the international division of labor. But “progressives” and nationalists were not in a position to challenge Nazism on these grounds. They were not themselves concerned with the maintenance of the international division of labor; they advocated government control of business which must necessarily lead toward protectionism and finally toward autarky.

    The fallacious doctrines of Nazism cannot withstand the criticism of sound economics, today disparaged as orthodox. But whoever clings to the dogmas of popular neo-Mercantilism and advocates government control of business is impotent to refute them. Fabian and Keynesian “unorthodoxy” resulted in a confused acceptance of the tenets of Nazism. Its application in practical policies frustrated all endeavors to form a common front of all nations menaced by the aspirations of Nazism…..”[ my emphasis]

    Excerpted from “Omnipotent Government- The Rise of Total State and Total War”
    (1944), chapter 7 ” by Ludwig Von Mises

    Regards, onebornfree

    • Replies: @MEFOBILLS
  85. The fallacious doctrines of Nazism cannot withstand the criticism of sound economics, today disparaged as orthodox.

    Such a pity that this criticism w’re not supposed to know

    What do you think you accomplish by assertions without any argument ?

    • Replies: @onebornfree
  86. @Miro23

    In my judgment the charge of corruption against Orbán’s government is less than well-established. This charge is a political slogan and lacks verified substance. — Hungary left the communist era as a relatively well-developed country with a living standard up to 50% os Austria of that time. After 20 years of capitalism, Hungary lost its developed agriculture, food industry and big chunks of traditional industry (i.e. truck production). The welfare level sunk to 25% of Austria by 2010. Orbán made fundamental changes both in economics and politics thanks to which the economy begun to function, not to say flourish, finances got in order and people have again money to spend (new car purchase is up with 30% as compared to 2010). One of the key elements of Obánomics is that his government helps the rise of national, Hungarian proprietors. This is what Orbán’s political opponents call “corruption” — in spite of the fact that these rich man invest their money at home, create workplaces and strengthen the welfare level of the country. So in my view the charge of corruption is a political slogan without any significant substance to mention. Of course, there is crime on Hungary, for instance the level of murder is higher than in Austria, but lower than in Bulgaria, Ukraine, not to mention the South-American states or — the USA.

  87. @Ilyana_Rozumova

    Nope, most of the profit is created by the loan itself. Money out of thin air.

    • Replies: @Ilyana_Rozumova
  88. niceland says:
    @Guillaume Durocher

    I can understand that. However, all kind of dirtbags can jump on the nationalistic train and play heroes for their own gains or to galvanize power for elites.

    My local news report, just this morning, that his government is putting forth laws enabling companies to demand up to 400 annual overtime hours from workers!?
    -And wait, it just gets better – now they can postpone paying for the overtime up to three years! This is a change from 250 hours and one year.

    If I understand correctly this is to grease the wheels for getting assembly plants for cars into the country, via of course the EU, from Germany.

    I am not sure if this falls into the category of “national economy” policies, but this guy is getting a bit too authoritarian for my taste. I smell a rat!

    Thanks for the response.

    • Replies: @Barna Memics
  89. @niceland

    The problem bears again the name “fake news”. Of course it happens that “dirtbags jump on the nationalistic train”, but the problem is that Hungary up to 2010 (when Orbánomics began) was fully exploited by international companies paying salaries on the level of India — in the heart of Europe (and in India the cost of living is 1:5 as compared to the EU). As to the 400 annual overtime hours: wait a minute! So far the law was 250-300 overtime hours and that was OK for the workers and the unions. Yet companies demanded more overtime, which was illegal and paying was not secured at all. What now happened is that the new law secured the legal framework for overtime hours and regulated also the paying. In Hungary today, the percentage of workers doing overtime hours is 1,4%. In the US it is 3, and in France it is 5%. It is also fake news that paying for overtime hours would be due after 3 years, indeed a ridiculous lie. You cannot read the law but if you still want to try, you’ll find it here: https://www.portfolio.hu/gazdasag/munkaugy/te-is-osszezavarodtal-a-tulorazas-miatt-itt-van-minden-amit-tudnod-kell.307135.html — In Hungary there is rule of law and the law is good. It helps the workers as against exploitation. “Authoritative” is a word never to be used for Orbán. This is democracy, even more so than what you find in many EU countries or in the US where never such demonstrations are imaginable as those in Hungary during the past two months. Some people can demonstrate, that is also legal, yet the government has a very stable support by the majority of the population.

  90. Anonymous[297] • Disclaimer says:
    @jilles dykstra

    Dutch Baudet called recently Soros ‘jew not to be trusted’. Dutch AIPAC, CIDI, of course furious.

    Nice. The tide is turning.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  91. Anonymous[297] • Disclaimer says:
    @Guillaume Durocher

    Exactly. Every other policy a nation can have – money, war, gendered toilets – is irrelevant if that nation decides to suicide itself.

  92. @Anonymous

    I must correct myself.
    Baudet criticised Soros, because of his effort to let many migrants come, his Open Society.
    CIDI stated this was equivalent to saying that Soros was an untrustworthy jew.
    A usual trick, twisting someone’s words.
    The difference with what I wrote is not essential, but I like to be precise.
    Nevertheless, for me Baudet’s criticism surprised me.
    Baudet was, or still is, an Israel supporter, he had good relations with CIDI.

  93. Anonymous[297] • Disclaimer says:
    @Barna Memics

    Thanks for the info. It’s only a matter of time before the globalists accuse him of leaving incubator babies un-incubated.

  94. @Barna Memics

    Wage level has something to do with productivity.
    As economic theory predicted, increasing efficiency in Poland resulted in higher wages there, so much that many German firms that moved to Poland because of cheap labour, are going back to Germany.
    The wage difference no longer compensates the greater distance to markets and customers.
    I do not know much about Hungary, but it seems to me that the inefficiëncy of the communist era still lingers there.
    Never forgot the DDR refugee who had worked for some time in then West Germany.
    When he was asked what he thought of the west he said ‘had I known I’d had to work here so hard I would not have come’.

    • Replies: @Barna Memics
  95. phil says:

    Your numbers are bogus. Please check. According to the World Bank (based on what US dollars were worth in 2011). Hungary’s real per capita GDP was 54% of Austria’s in 1990. By 2010, its per capita GDP had increased by 43 percent, but Austria’s had increased proportionally so that Hungary was 52% of Austria in 2010.

    On a scale from 0 to 10, the degree of capitalism in Hungary was below 5 at the end of the communist era. Now it is 7.22. The transition has been difficult, but Hungary is better off for it. Under Orban, the country has a chance to become more cohesive as well, but politics and corruption are always lurking.

  96. @jilles dykstra

    Yes there are productivity numbers and statistics. Accordingly, the average productivity level of companies in Hungary (Audi, Mercedes, Suzuki, Opel, Richter, Raab, Videoton etc.) are up to 80% of the productivity level of the same companies in Germany. Yet the wages are around 25-30% of the wages in Germany. To be honest, Audi and Mercedes in Hungary just started to raise salaries, so they may reach 40% today. — But overtime working hours is a different question. Industry needs a flexible framework of overtime possibilities, because for instance in China people may start buying more and then stop buying more some reason. So a big company needs a secure amount of possible work power and they ASKED the Hungarian government to make that possible in a legal way. I note here that the unions originally agreed to the rise of overtime up to 350 hours/year… Plus there is a growing hunger for workers, because of the growing output of the industry and you cannot hire always new workers. — So the kvetch about 400 overtime hours is bullshit. And so is “autocracy”. In Germany, isn’t it autocracy what the politics and the mainstream media do with AFD? They try to stage them as an extremist-fascist political bagage, but when you listen to what AFD politicians say about themselves on youtube, you have the impression that they are closer to social-democracy than A. Merkel today.

  97. @Anon

    The east europeans should not have joined the EU , or at least not all , not so fast .

    The franco-german greed forced the admission of the euro easteners to gobble them , ” drang nach osten ” , ” lebensraum ” .

    To be fair, the UK, under Tony Blair, pushed hard for the inclusion of Eastern European countries into the EU.

    The most important collective achievement of the EU during the Blair years has been enlargement. If anything is remembered in European history it is likely to be the EU’s achievement in stabilising central and eastern Europe after the end of communism. That Britain played a leading part in this goes without saying: British politicians have always been in favour of enlargement, some with the (mistaken) hope that of a larger and looser union, some to relativise Franco-German dominance, some because it was the only thing they could find to be positive about in Europe. In the case of Blair there is no need to attribute negative motives; in this and in Nato enlargement he was motivated by a strategic vision. Britain played a leading part, as did Germany.

    https://www.opendemocracy.net/tony_blair_and_europe.jsp

    Margaret Thatcher made a speech in the Hague in 1992 which perhaps gives a clue that this was not entirely Blair’s idea: https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/108296

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  98. @English Yobbo

    The monster EU should never have been created, the EU did not stabilise former communist countries because it did not exist during the stabilisation period.
    What the monster now tries is destabilising these countries.

    • Replies: @English Yobbo
  99. @Barna Memics

    Yet the wages are around 25-30% of the wages in Germany

    I’m not going to analyse protit and loss acccounts etc in order to debate if this 30% could be higher.
    What is not mentioned is that considerable investments must have been before one itiem of production came out of any factory.

  100. @jilles dykstra

    The monster EU should never have been created, the EU did not stabilise former communist countries because it did not exist during the stabilisation period.
    What the monster now tries is destabilising these countries.

    I don’t disagree with most of what you say there.

    The main point I was trying to make was that Tony Blair was very keen on bringing the former communist Eastern European countries into the EU and pushed quite hard for it. I’m reasonably sure that up until the Iraq war he had an ally in the German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder.

    I seem to remember it was thought Blair pushed for the inclusion of Eastern European countries into the EU in order to weaken the EU to undermine the EU for the purposes of Anglo-American domination. However, since Brexit he has campaigned vigorously for the UK to remain in the EU. So I guess he is just a Neoliberal stooge.

    • Replies: @Barna Memics
  101. MEFOBILLS says:
    @onebornfree

    Excerpted from “Omnipotent Government- The Rise of Total State and Total War”
    (1944), chapter 7 ” by Ludwig Von Mises

    Mises was a Jew doing the bidding of his International buddies.

    Money’s true nature is law, not gold and not debt instruments. All these claims about free markets and market derived money are being proven to be lies, and anybody with their eyes open can see it plainly in today’s world. Russia is doing just fine in the face of sanctions; sanctions are actually helpful.

    Hitler laughed at the “goldmen” and the very fact that the Nazi economy operated well puts lie to libertarian dogma. To those that DONT KNOW THINGS, the German economy did NOT have a great depression, and was churning out new homes, new factories, new roads, etc. during the period in question. Russia will become increasingly productive under their quasi autarky.

    Look, you cannot make claims, including quoting Mises, that are at variance with observable reality.

    The “exporting” of American industry to China was done under “free market” mantra. Prices are not the final arbiter of economy, especially when you factor in rent seeking, monopoly, and distortions that private market derived “credit money” makes.

    • Replies: @onebornfree
    , @peterAUS
  102. @English Yobbo

    If you build a factory in Germany, you need more or less the same amount of investment. Plus, the governments support investment with granting freely millions of euros in exchange for the new factories. Plus, in Eastern Europe you have good basic infrastructure. — But the whole debate was about overtime hours and I wanted to call your attention to the fake news many people buy spontaneously. That is the psychological mechanism used by fake news propagators.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  103. lavoisier says: • Website

    Hungary cannot make its own Google (Europe could, if it had a will, which it doesn’t).

    Why not?

    It may not be able to build an atomic bomb, put a man on the moon, or find a cure for cancer, but I have little doubt that there is enough human capital in Hungary to devise search algorithms useful in navigating the internet.

    Moreover, I suspect an algorithm devised by Hungarian scientists would not lead to some of the ridiculous search results we have come to expect from Google.

    • Replies: @MEFOBILLS
  104. MEFOBILLS says:
    @lavoisier

    but I have little doubt that there is enough human capital in Hungary

    How many monkeys are required to type out a Shakespearean sonnet? No nothing economy theorists constantly use the “numbers” fallacy to bolster their fallacious arguments.

    BRAZIL WILL BE THE NEXT U.S. – it is a continental country with enormous resources, navigable rivers, etc. LoL

    Never mind that Brazil has an overall low IQ due to a pre-ponderance of racial types KNOWN to have low IQ’s.

    To those of you who are steeped in libertarian or leftist mantra, that markets should be open fully because all human capital is equal, then I enjoin you to wake the hell up.

    Hungary has a reasonably high IQ population, which speaks one language, which has a shared history, which has strong family structures. All of these STRENGTHEN a country, so then it can have a low friction economy.

    Yes, absolutely, Hungary could create an alternate Google. How hard is it to write an algorithm? It is just software. You only need a few geniuses to make things move forward, but if you end up with a country full of monkeys, you will never get a Shakespearean output. Never.

    Russia’s avangard hypersonic system was invented by about 15 people. There is some basis for economy of scale in heavy industry – but light industry, especially software coding can be done by only a few people, and good software typically takes a small team of genius.

    Hungary had a Constitutional Kingdom that lasted nearly 1000 years. During that period they were able to resist both Jewish and Muslim depredations, which allowed Western Civilization to develop.

    Of course, a continuous high civilization that lasts and doesn’t fall from internal contradictions is off the radar of most people, because they have been fed lies most of their lives.

    • Replies: @lavoisier
  105. @Barna Memics

    If you build a factory in Germany, you need more or less the same amount of investment

    Have no figures to support what I’m writing now, but in my opinion setting up a factory in Hungary is something quite different than in Germany.
    I was in the Baltic states shortly after they became EU members, and in Poland.
    Quite backwards countries compared to Germany, in anything.
    Maybe the Danzig shipyards are an example, when I was there no work being done, yet the installations were there.
    Why ?
    I suppose technologically behind, inefficiënt, things like that.
    Despite high wages Damen Shipyard in the Netherlands is quite busy, knowledge.

  106. @Barna Memics

    What Merkel is trying, I fear, is creating a new, less evil German, through mass immigration.
    The allies began brainwashing the Germans immediately after the 1945 capitulation with guilt for two world wars and the holocaust.
    Merkel believes these fairy tales.
    This is the conflict with AfD, they have quite other ideas about WWII.
    Germany has a special secret police, Verfassungsschutz, a thought police, they must prevent any idea or statement about Germany in WWII in conflict with the state ideology of evil Germans.
    AfD is not even allowed to state that Germans in WWII were professional soldiers, what they were.
    France in 1940 was beaten in three weeks.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  107. @Wally

    1940 the German land forces were inferior to the French in everything except leadership.”

    Simply not true, for example German tanks could reach 40 kmh, French 15.
    German tanks had radio communication.
    French airforce, nothing compared to the Stuka.
    German anti aircraft artillery, far superior to the French.
    But indeed, leadership was quite important, French generals fought WWI again.

  108. @MEFOBILLS

    MEFOBILLS says: “Hitler laughed at the “goldmen” and the very fact that the Nazi economy operated well puts lie to libertarian dogma….”

    I’ve heard it all before, Hitler was a great guy who knew how to “run” an economy. Yeah, right.

    I really have to “facepalm” every time I’m confronted by “persons” such as yourself.

    Understand, I used to believe the exact same crap you obviously still do, until I studied hard and learned about how economies actually work in the real world .

    You really don’t have a frickin’ clue, do you? A new dictator to “save the country” and make the economy “work properly”. Yup, right. Uh huh.

    It ain’t rocket science: The freer a society is, the smaller the government, the less laws, the less interference in the economy via the government and banks, the more peaceful that society is and the higher the general standard of living per individual is .

    A Slave Psychology

    But persons such as yourself view just about everything in this world, including government, economies and people, from your pre-existing , long indoctrinated [via society and “education”] slave psychology point of view , which you are apparently entirely unable to see through and discard.

    You are a slave, and as far as I can tell from the Hitler -worshiping crap you post here, probably always will be one, and, quite frankly, you deserve to be one.

    Well, good luck with that and your “Hitlerized” economy fantasy clap-trap [which is already here, everywhere, as far as I can tell 🙂 ] .

    But please, by all means carry on with your “Hitlernomics” plan to save your country [or whatever]. After all, I’m always in need of some good entertainment. 🙂

    onebornfree

    The Story of Your Enslavement:

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  109. MEFOBILLS says:

    I really have to “facepalm” every time I’m confronted by “persons” such as yourself.

    Back at ya

    It is always stunning to me to run into people who cannot see objective reality, and avoid facts. They usually devolve to name calling when they lose their arguments.

    Libertarians often fall into this trap. Muh Free-dumb. Never mind that the U.S. sent its jobs to China using Free Market mantra. Ideology supercedes reality.

    Sovereign economies that were similar to the Nazi economy are: Canada 1938-1974, The American system 1868 to 1912, Japan post WW2 up until Plaza Accord.

    Then there is the pre-Nazi economy of List and the Kaiser, which got England riled up because she could not compete.

    People that are triggered by anything Nazi are either Jews or have been brainwashed by Jewish ideology.

    Autarky in Germany worked! It is working today in Russia. Deal with the facts.

  110. onebornfree says: • Website
    @jilles dykstra

    jilles dykstra says: “Such a pity that this criticism we’re not supposed to know”

    I forgot to post a link previously. Although you probably won’t read the book anyway here’s a link to a pdf file:

    “Omnipotent Government- The Rise of Total State and Total War”
    https://mises.org/library/omnipotent-government-rise-total-state-and-total-war

    However, Von Mises ” magnum opus”, “Human Action” is far longer and more detailed than “Omnipotent Government”, but, what the hell:

    https://mises.org/library/human-action-0

    Regards, onebornfree

  111. MEFOBILLS says:
    @Anonymous

    Dude seriously can I stop reading now?”
    ____________________________

    I knew any comment favorable to Nazi economy would bring out the knee-jerk NPC types.

    It is an objective fact that the German economy was advanced beyond that of the Allies, especially at the onset of war.

    During the war they continued to innovate.

    It only takes a few ergs of energy to do your own research. I have to post every link and every innovation of this period to make my case?

    If the ideologies that you hold dear are faulty, then sack up and change it, rather than lashing out.

    Hungary will do just fine, which is the point of this article. Most of the West is caught in bad thinking, and part of that thinking is to demean anything positive that the Nazi's did.

    It was objectively GOOD, when the Nazi's mass produced housing for young families. It was objectively GOOOD, when Nazis issued coupons to then build up her farming sector, to then become food independent.

    It was objectively Good when Nazi's built out roads and infrastructure to then improve the commons, so that all German's would become more productive.

    It was objectively good that familes were given loans and/or stipends to then renew their civilization with higher birth rates.

    All of these policies worked then and they would work now, except for the triggered NPCs who start bleeting in the face of reality.

    Russia is paying stipends directly to families rather the immigrating third world peoples and thus preserving their civilization.

    What is the monetary price for losing your civilization and history my LIbertardian friends?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  112. peterAUS says:
    @MEFOBILLS

    Money’s true nature is law

    Yup.
    And, for law to work it has to be enforced.

    And, the enforcer is…let me think..ah, yes, an organized class of accomplished debaters. Or economists. Or politicians. Or mass media. Or education system.
    Yeah…………

  113. MEFOBILLS says:

    Yup.
    And, for law to work it has to be enforced

    .

    Yes, for law to work there has to be force. If you get hauled before the courts, there is always threat of violence, including jail.

    Sorry that life is hierarchical. Everything in life is hierarchy, including the workings of your body.

    An economy is organized…. .it used to be called the body politic. Economics used to be called political economy. Anything organized is hierarchical.

    Libertardian’s are sophomorists of the first order. There is no such thing as human action. Most humans are cattle and easy to maneuver. Today’s narratives spewed by the owned media is a perfect example of how humans can be controlled. Also, prices and money control people. Oh say it isn’t so… the media isn’t owned and false narratives are not issued so in-groups can take rents. That doesn’t happen! The recent congressional elections in America, the voting patterns are entirely predictable along racial and interest group lines.

    You do know Mises was a Jew and hence did things that were good for the tribe? The entire Austrian movement found succor with Rockefeller monies. Rockefeller in turn was loosely allied with Rothschild. Libertarianism is a dialectic of communism, where control is done through monopoly and Oligarchy. Today’s western world is an example of Oligarchy maneuvering the body politic.

    Hungary is having none of this Western nonsense, and is protecting its civilization, especially from invasion of wage slave orcs from the third world.

    There always has to be a King or some sort of final arbiter in a hierarchy, better that top of the pyramid be close to the people, rather than some alien group intent on taking rents and acting as a parasite.

    Autarky works, it has worked in the past – I gave you examples of big economies where it worked for significant periods of times. Eject your false narratives. Sack up.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  114. onebornfree says: • Website
    @MEFOBILLS

    Comrade MEFOBILLS says: “Autarky in Germany worked! It is working today in Russia. Deal with the facts”

    Yeah right! Oh it “works” alright, but not in the way you oh so blithely assume :

    “If one understands that Socialism is not a ‘share the wealth’ program but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of super rich men promoting Socialism becomes no paradox at all. Instead it becomes logical, even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs. Communism, or more accurately Socialism, is not a movement of the down-trodden masses but of the economic elite.” From: “None Dare Call It Conspiracy” -Gary Allen

    Murray N. Rothbard said: “All States are governed by a ruling class that is a minority of the population, and which subsists as a parasitic and exploitative burden upon the rest of society. Since its rule is exploitative and parasitic, the State must purchase the alliance of a group of “Court Intellectuals,” whose task is to bamboozle the public into accepting and celebrating the rule of its particular State. The Court Intellectuals have their work cut out for them. In exchange for their continuing work of apologetics and bamboozlement, the Court Intellectuals win their place as junior partners in the power, prestige, and loot extracted by the State apparatus from the deluded public…”

    “Court Intellectual[s]” . Sounds just like you and others here [ plus all of the original Nazi promoters/apologists] 🙂 .

    This just in:

    If your new dreamed of Nazi type system comes into power in your home country, people like yourself will be among the first to be gotten rid of. Count on it. Thats the way it always works in those types of political environments. Yourself and others like you are mere “useful idiots” . Once in power, this system would crush you like a bug. It would not give a flying fuck about your life, or your friends, family or other naive, dreamy eyed NAZI sympathizers! You all be gone in less than a heartbeat, you poor, naive fool!

    Comrade MEFOBILLS says: “It is always stunning to me to run into people who cannot see objective reality, and avoid facts. They usually devolve to name calling when they lose their arguments.”…

    …and : “Mises was a Jew” and, in the follow up post: ” Mises was a Jew doing the bidding of his International buddies.

    So I would counter that anyone who thinks they make valid er, “logical” points by attempted racial character assassination in the first place definitely “has a screw loose”, and also has no right to then expect anything other than name calling in return . So think yourself lucky that thats not all you got from me.

    And let’s not forget while I’m at it: “Sieg Heil ” mein comrade! [ Can’t wait to see the new uniforms!]

    onebornfree

  115. peterAUS says:
    @MEFOBILLS

    You know, thanks to more or less free speech here, I’ve come to realization that a lot of guys on alt-Right/Light lack basic social intelligence. It appears that more read and dedicated a person is, less of that intelligence he/she possess. Makes you think.Maybe.
    Make of this what you will. Actually, cancel that. Funny.

    But, let’s stick to the point at hand.
    Yes, for law to work there has to be force. If you get hauled before the courts, there is always threat of violence, including jail.

    You could’ve continued along that path and in more detail.

    Most humans are cattle and easy to maneuver. Today’s narratives spewed by the owned media is a perfect example of how humans can be controlled.

    Yes……

    Eject your false narratives. Sack up.

    Haha…..

    So, having, hopefully, completed your online therapy (no need to thank me for that, I understand that pent up frustration), any chance you could tell us here how would you fix this mess?
    Say…..you have a power of..let me think….ah, yes, that fellow Karellen from “Childhood’s end”.
    Just a brief outline, not more than, say…….3 paragraphs, tops?
    All yours now.

    • Replies: @MEFOBILLS
  116. Anonymous[392] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    I can’t talk to you if you believe that China has a “market with no borders”. If that were the case, they’d never be able to develop their own high value-added industries.

    You don’t get it. I’m saying China has no internal borders. A factory in Henan can sell to any damned province they please. For a small country to duplicate this market reach, they’d need to have no external borders. It’s all about size.

  117. Anonymous[171] • Disclaimer says:
    @jilles dykstra

    Merkel believes these fairy tales.

    I don’t think so. When a politician like that publicly proclaims their “beliefs” – it’s what their masters, and their PR team constructed for the occasion. So she in possession of all the data about the effects of the invasion but still somehow believes that it will be good for Germany? Nigga please.

  118. Anonymous[171] • Disclaimer says:
    @MEFOBILLS

    Russia is paying stipends directly to families rather the immigrating third world peoples and thus preserving their civilization.

    I believe Hungary and Poland are also doing something similar. Good for them.

  119. MEFOBILLS says:
    @peterAUS

    Just a brief outline, not more than, say…….3 paragraphs, tops?

    Easy.

    Canada’s Sovereign economy from 1938 to 1974.

    This experiment was already ran in history and it was successful. It failed after 1974 when the Bank of International Settlements came along and bribed Parliament. BIS forced Bank of Canada to stop issuing debt free, and also broke the relation of Crown Bank.

    By 73 or so, Canada had no real public debt, their population was highly educated, and they were pooling their savings to start small business.

    Their crown bank stock was completely owned by Ministry of Finance. MOF would demand that BOC isssue debt free into the commons. Canada built a transcontinental railroad, built out the great lakes lock system (almost equivalent to panama canal), dredged the St. Lawrence, built colleges, built hospitals, and direct spent into households. This from a very small base of 40 million or so people. So much for the “need more people” theory to have good economy.

    The benefit from this MOF BOC action was that by 1974 young people were borrowing money (not bank credit) from their parents who had saved. They did this through trusts, something like Savings and Loans in the U.S. (now defunct – thanks Jews!). So if you bought a home, your interest paid your parents, who bought your goods and services. If you were young, you went to a college campus where the infrastructure was already paid for, and you went to hospitals that were paid for. It was a virtuous cycle and spun out young citizens ready to contribute and not in debt.

    LoL-bertarians understand none of this stuff, and when you bring up real world examples their eyes glaze over because it is hidden information. Hidden on purpose to keep people down and in debt.

    The lesson: The money power has to be surrounded by iron clad constitutional law, and people with guns. Canada failed because it wasn’t locked down tight enough, and predators maneuvered their way in. The money power is part of law, it is not “market derived credit.”

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  120. @NoseytheDuke

    With all the respect I have to disagree.
    If you buy a house for example. You borrow the money from the bank. After the paper work Bank has to pay off the seller. Than you have to pay off your debt to bank your loan with interest.
    You pay it of with your earned money. So it is clean actual transfer of money.
    There is no money created in this case,
    Only if you pay for credit he money is created from thin air.

    • Replies: @MEFOBILLS
  121. niceland says:
    @Barna Memics

    Thanks for the info, I hope you are right. Often when I read international news from my own country I am amazed how wrong they can be. Given the controversy regarding Orbans policies I shouldn’t be surprised the international isn’t accurate.

  122. Anonymous[343] • Disclaimer says:
    @onebornfree

    Damn nice video. Thanks onebornfree.

    • Replies: @MEFOBILLS
  123. MEFOBILLS says:
    @Ilyana_Rozumova

    With all the respect I have to disagree.
    If you buy a house for example. You borrow the money from the bank. After the paper work Bank has to pay off the seller.

    At the instant the loan is made, you have hypothecated a new debt instrument. Upon signature of the new loan new bank credit is “found” in your account. Note I did not say the word deposit, no deposit was done.

    Double Entry bookkeeping at the bank made a new loan (debt) and an accounting for that debt in the form of bookkeeping entries. Banks call this action on-accounts.

    After the Paperwork YOU INSTRUCT THE BANK, to transfer your new credit to pay off the seller. This is the same action as a three party check, where there is a drawer, drawee, and the bank as an agent.

    IN ALL CASES WHEN A NEW DEBT INSTRUMENT IS MADE AT A BANK I.E. A HYPOTHECATION EVENT, new bank credit is created, not transferred.

    If you buy a new house by pulling from your savings, that is somebody elses bank credit that you grabbed and stored. At source 97% of the money supply (more in some countries) is bank credit, which means the other side of the ledger has a debt instrument making demands.

    If you have a money supply with too many debt instruments making claims on their bank credit, then you must find some way to reduce these claims, especially if it is private debts.

  124. MEFOBILLS says:
    @Anonymous

    Damn nice video. Thanks onebornfree.

    Anonymous,

    Molyneaux like oneborn free is a Lol Bertarian who is confused on cause and effect. Don’t fall into the trap. Below is Paul Craig Roberts schooling Molyneaux. When a person doesn’t modify their behavior or thought processes when shown they are in error, that that person has something wrong with their brain function – they have become an ideologue.

    At about 1 hour and 20 minutes in, PCR lays down the wood onto Moly.

    • Replies: @bjondo
  125. peterAUS says:
    @MEFOBILLS

    Interesting.

    The gist of the comment, I assume as pure layman, is to implement Canadian model at state level?

    A couple of questions remain:
    If the system was so good, how come Canadians changed it? I mean, they were smart, apparently, had it good and ….changed it. Just like that? Doubt it.
    Second, more important: if the system was so good how come nobody else picked it up?

    Now, the most important:
    If the system was so good, why we don’t see an organized campaign, anywhere, to implement it? I mean, Russia and China regimes are desperate to challenge the global game as it is.
    Some other countries, deep in problems if not so powerful, too.And, still….they don’t do it.
    Pure coercion? Don’t buy it.

    My take:
    The system worked well for certain period and certain place because circumstances favored it; circumstances changed and the system had to be changed.

    Ah, one more thing:
    Let’s say you implement, by some miracle, that system of yours in, say……Belorussia.
    WHO would control the system?

  126. @MEFOBILLS

    You will have to square you disagreement with the economic accomplishments of Nazi Germany.

    There were no “economic accomplishments”. The Nazis ran a ponzi scheme they had to finance by continually invading new countries and stealing their wealth. The material standard of living in 1930s Germany was actually worse than under Weimar in the late 1920s, and far worse than Germany in 1913. People had to drink ersatz coffee, butter was rationed, and even grain yields plummeted.

    A common rhyme in the late 1930s was

    “Der Hitler hat keine Frau,
    Der Bauer hat keine Sau,
    Der Fleischer hat keine Fleisch,
    Das ist das Dritte Reich.”

    It was only after Hitler conquered France and the Nazis were able to start sending loot back home that ordinary Germans saw any real economic benefits from Nazi rule, and those were short lived.

  127. MEFOBILLS says:

    There were no “economic accomplishments”. The Nazis ran a ponzi scheme they had to finance by continually invading new countries and stealing their wealth.

    Peter,AK that is a myth. By 1938 the tax-roles had tripled. In other words tax uptake in 1938 was three times that of 1933. There was danger of over-heating the economy. Hitler fired Schacht because Schact refused to over-heat the economy as he was worried about another bout of Inflation. Hitler then turned to war in 1939. The West won the war, and has filled the history books with nonsense that doesn’t comport with hard facts.

    Peter,Au

    A couple of questions remain:
    If the system was so good, how come Canadians changed it? I mean, they were smart, apparently, had it good and ….changed it. Just like that? Doubt it.

    In 74 BIS bribed stupid parliamentarians. Politicians as a rule are dumb-asses, who don’t understand money. A study was done recently in Britain, where Parliamentarians were asked where money comes from…. the majority of them got it wrong. Also, BIS lied to Parliament and claimed that the State Bank of Canada should not be emitting credit, that “function” belonged to the market and private banks. The laws are still on the books in Canada to return to sovereign money.

    In the same way, the first articles of Constitution in the U.S. clearly put the money power into the hands of the Senate and Treasury. In the U.S. this was undermined with 16’th, 17’th amendment and Federal Reserve Act. The banksters knows that money has to have “government” backing, and hence made their banking credit good for paying taxes. This was also done by bribing congress critters, or threats, or assassination, etc.

    With regards to what individual states in the U.S. can do, probably the only avenue they have open to them is a stop-gap (non ideal) but still better than what they do now, and that would be to model a state bank on how Bank of North Dakota operates. That then pulls private banks of individual states out of the Federal Reserve System, and allows local credit and local economy. Think of it like a state run reserve system with phlegmatic and practical men running the operation.

    Some loony tune “Greens” are for this system, but them being wrong on other subjects doesn’t make them wrong with regards to the money.

  128. Franz says:
    @Ilyana_Rozumova

    The other side of the deal was that Canada had to stop making their own cars.

    Sort of, sort of not.

    Canada was only too happy during the generation they allowed their Ontario plant to churn out Ford’s Crown Victoria, the gold standard of police cars for the whole continent, and a gold mine for politicians in Canada during that era.

    I grant the point gladly, however: Real autarchy (+ trade reciprocity) would have demanded a Canuck car company, complete with their own engineers and assemblers, but Ford had most of the world’s best engineers after WWII when the deal was struck, so they went with it. Too bad,

    My point remains that Eternal Vigilance is the price of economic independence, and from the last quarter of the 20th century on, both US and Canadian politicos were asleep at the switch.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  129. MEFOBILLS says:

    Peter Ak,

    There were no “economic accomplishments”. The Nazis ran a ponzi scheme they had to finance by continually invading new countries and stealing their wealth.

    I hope this doesn't post twice?

    In the period between 1933 and 1938, German tax roles tripled. In 38 Schact was fired by Hitler because Scacht refused to stimulate the economy further.

    Autarky required substitution. Remember, our Jewish friends declared War on Germany in 33 with a blockade of goods. World Zionism was trying to starve the Germans out, especially as Germany required exports to buy food (they didn't grow enough). This is why Germany had to use coupons which made farm goods higher priced, but had the net effect of building up the farm sector.

    Russia's situation is analogous. This year, Russia passed up the U.S. in wheat exports. Like I said earlier, autarky works, especially if you are a smart country and able to deploy all of your assets. Russia has a brief period of difficulty as they substitute and learn how to do things themselves. The situation in Nazi Germany is one of history rhyming with that of today's Russia, where the "international finance capitalist" West is attacking.

  130. MEFOBILLS says:

    My point remains that Eternal Vigilance is the price of economic independence, and from the last quarter of the 20th century on, both US and Canadian politicos were asleep at the switch.

    Agreed.

    I will go even further and say they are brainwashed. Neo-Liberal economic orthodoxy makes claims that money is a “neutral veil.”

    In other words, the usury out of banking has funded a pall of hypnosis that has settled over the West.

    If you start up an economic school, there will be free “text books” offered to make sure you stay on the path.

    Hudson claims that UMKC students, since they are heterodox, cannot get jobs, even with PHD’s.

    During the Henry Clay, Peshine Smith era, the “new American system” was promoted through the new agricultural schools. The “main-line” schools had to be bypassed.

    Notice how violently our libertarian tard friends react. Even Molyneaux, who is intelligent, and was beaten soundly by PCR will not adjust his positions. If you are paid to be wrong, you will continue on that path, especially if you lack moral integrity.

  131. peterAUS says:
    @Franz

    …. Eternal Vigilance is the price of economic independence…

    and for a lot of other things worth living, too.

    US and Canadian politicos were asleep at the switch.

    Looks like it.
    The problem was, is, that the Western masses were and are asleep too.

    That “External Vigilance” was supposed to work re all the voting people. It hasn’t.

    My take: the core of the problem, and not just this “money” thing is that the voting majority does not care.
    It got soft and weak from good living. And the smarts are focused on soft and weak pursuits.

    The result is the world around us.

    Back to “external vigilance” thing. To fix it will require something……..”exciting”.

  132. @MEFOBILLS

    It is working today in Russia.

    Ha! Have you spent any time in Russia? Russia under Putin has degenerated into a dig-and-deliver economy. It still has a legacy weapons and aerospace industry and some decent software developers, but is otherwise a hollowed out shadow of an economy. Russia’s peak as an economic power and innovative country was in 1913, when she was well integrated into the world economy.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  133. bjondo says:
    @MEFOBILLS

    Steppinfetchit Molyfaux
    for those he serves.
    Heard mr fake twice.
    Enough.

  134. Mefobills says:
    @Peter Akuleyev

    Russia was a resource extraction economy in the 90s. The Harvard (((boys))) convinced Yeltsin to privatize the commons and put natural resources into dollar debts. This then accelerated Oligarchy. Digging holes in the ground is not what high value labor like nuclear scientists are trained for.

    Anybody can look at the data and see that Russia is improving year on year, especially after the devastating 90s

    For the most part the Oligarchy has been put into a box and regular producing sectors are improving rapidly.

    Many NPC comments here repeating false nostrums not in accord with data. Also anecdotes are bad logic. Exceptions don’t make the rule.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  135. Anonymous[362] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mefobills

    Thank you for your contribution. You obviously know what you’re talking about. Ignore the shills and their victims.

  136. augusto says: • Website

    well, for me the central points are absolutely clear.
    In the end 18th, all 19th and early 20 century nations were sovereign to use national economic policies: the big ones got a reward, the less competent ones were punished and the small ones had a choice: try their own models with mixed results or follow the so called leaders. The US, UK and a few others got the big prize of early development
    (because of their abundant home made, home found energy supplies of coal and oil).
    Welll there is the parenthesis the thatcherists and neoliberals don t like to admit: the URSS went in 35 years from a 4th rate peasant, agro subsistence country to a powerful industrial and science giant, even losing 26 plus million people in the war… The
    he name of the game: socialism like it or not.But Facts are not subject to quarrels.
    SO today what to say about this momentous discussion.
    Simple: the big, populous and underdeveloped countries like Mexico, nigeria, Brazil
    or even Egipt or Indonesia should be nationalistic in their economic policies. Period.
    They have internal markets, potentials and can build up international alliances at will.
    Of course, it is advisable they get into WTO and a few others, but by a PARTIAL Acceptance of its commandments. That s to say, Brazil should ideally impose certain practices contrary to WTO temporarily and negotiate its terms and conditions. tHE others with time would have not other choice and accepting, simply because it is a big market, it turns bigger with national policies and the first rule of capitalism is: EXPANSION to concquer new markets, raw materials and usable manpower.
    The second point is that the small countries like singapore, uruguay, malta or even Panama by its geographical position should enthusiastically follow the neoliberal
    bible… of no borders, no nationalism. They don t have a different option which would be pragmatic suicide…

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Guillaume Durocher Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The sources of America’s immigration problems—and a possible solution
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?