Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall
March 17, 2015
One of the things white Americans are going to have to come to grips with is that that within 15 years (probably less) our race will be a minority in this country.
I am of an age that I well remember being told in the 1950s that the world was headed for over-population. It would, we were told, result in mass starvation and responsible American families should have no more than two children. The birth rate in white America subsided almost immediately.
Communism, socialism, tribalism, and oligarchies all have one thing in common: Someone else is responsible for your life. From paying for your education, determining what kind of information will be contained in that education/indoctrination, to your career choices, the fuel your car will use (or whether you will be allowed to have a car or be forced to live in cities of six million in population where people are stacked and packed on top of one another that are scattered around the country), who/if you marry, how/if children can be had, at what age medical care will be withdrawn… all (according to Agenda 21) are decisions about you to be made by others.
A large percentage of people who live in nations of the world that subscribe to one of these political philosophies like the idea of having someone else determine what they can and cannot do. They like being relieved of the responsibilities that go with decision making. Every decision we make in life involves risk and a lot of people are uncomfortable with risk management. If they are not the ones making decisions, they feel they won’t be blamed for failure that results from them.
For those of us who think the ultimate glory of life is controlling our own destiny, this is not just a strange human reaction to government power, it is downright insane. It reeks of malignant, evil energy. For Christians, the “it takes a village” mentality totally violates the message of individual responsibility imparted by Jesus Christ, turning His words into group thought with no personal responsibility for individual behavior, no judgments between good and evil because God tells us He will render judgment. If that interpretation of Biblical text was accurate, He would a) not have given us a brain so we can judge what is good and what is evil; b) He would not have provided the Ten Commandments without specific definitions as to what each means (He leaves that to our judgment); and c) we would confess our sins as a group, not individually.
As I look back on those messages of reduced births from the 1950s (my teenage years) and evaluate the misbegotten illegal immigration policies implemented by various government administrations and departments, a pattern emerges.
When one views illegal immigration from a totally neutral position, it is easy to see from actions taken that government has preferences about which illegals they will welcome by ignoring their presence, and which ones they will pursue for being in America illegally. You can say “that’s not true” all you want but the statistics defeat your words. The President’s own words prove my point and his Attorney General’s actions – or lack of them – prove it, too.
Those who cross the Rio Grande River with impunity and receive great rewards for their law breaking have similar traits: 1) They come from tribal cultures where a chieftain of one kind or another has controlled their lives with the same authority royalty once had in old Europe. 2) They are “breeders.” They have far more children than they can afford to feed or educate and depend on the generosity of others to take care of their parental responsibilities which they abrogate (if they recognize such responsibilities exist at all). 3) They are not white. 4) The people who are white and would like to immigrate to America are denied the opportunity and if they enter America illegally they are pursued by law enforcement which ignores illegals from categories 1), 2), and 3).
I do not refer here simply to the financially poor Mexicans who illegally cross our border, but to the Central Americans who do the same. I refer also to Middle Easterners of whom almost all are Muslims (who also have many children). What we saw in Paris during the second week of January 2015 is reflective of the problems being caused everywhere by Muslims who can’t stand the countries in which they live and run away to London or Paris – or Detroit – where they make demands that their adopted government change their country so it is more like the old country they were forced to leave because of despicable living conditions. The message is: “I want all of the advantages that a free enterprise economy produces relative to advancement of civilization without any of the responsibilities that people who live in a free enterprise economy must bear if those advantages are going to be maintained.” Sharia law provides an escape route from decision making because it makes decisions for you in every area of your life.
It can thus be said that those who breed, those to whom being a member of a tribal community comes naturally, and those who are not white are welcomed to our shores. Others are rejected by our immigration policies. I dare anyone reading this who thinks my words are racist or are otherwise slanted to provide meaningful evidence that there is one factual error in my comment. There is not. It is an accurate evaluation of immigration policy in America today.
I mentioned above that tribal cultures are run by authority figures with the same power royalty once had throughout the world. Why do you suppose the influence of royal rule was so dramatically diminished over 200 years ago? Gee, you don’t suppose the establishment of a free nation called the United States of America had anything to do with it, do you? You don’t suppose that the tremendous growth of this new nation – its economic success and stability, offering opportunity for all to prosper without a class system that had outlived its usefulness – had anything to do with it? Of course it did!
Here is my theory which is based on thinking long and hard about the logical outcome of our current immigration policy. It is simple logic.
The white race is the only one that has throughout history resisted long-term slavery of any kind, including tribalism, communism, and socialism. As far back as 1100, citizens of England demanded and got the Charter of Liberties signed by their king because of royal abuses of power over the people of that nation. When that didn’t work, they got the Magna Carta signed. When that did not provide sufficient protection from the royal abuse of power, in 1628 they demanded King Charles sign the Petition of Rights. In 1641 came the Grand Remonstrance and Charles was gone. In 1688 King James was forced to sign the Glorious Resolution which was the English Bill of Rights… it became official in 1689. All of these “Agreements” were demanded by the people because royalty becomes tyrannical and abusive. And then because of the royal abuse of power in 1776 we had the document so meaningful to Americans: The Declaration of Independence.
The white race is the only one that has throughout world history resisted long-term slavery – has been a proponent of the “give me liberty or give me death” philosophy since we began recording history.
Since America’s immigration policies favor admitting only illegal immigrants who consider tribalism not only an accepted but a preferred way of life, it gives rise to a question. Is the reason behind America’s immigration policy – amnesty for illegals – required so tribal types can take from whites their majority status in historically white nations? Does government need to replace whites as the dominant race in these nations so the final plans for a New World Order can be implemented with minimum objection or opposition by whites who resist tribalism, communism and socialism as a form of slavery? One world government cannot be established without America if our standard of living is too high. That standard must be brought down to the level of other nations. Otherwise, other nations will not accept world government because of the perceived preferential treatment of those with a higher standard of living than is available to people of less advanced countries of the world. Why are they less advanced? Because they subscribe to tribalism, socialism, or communism.
The Mexicans and Central Americans who enter our country illegally with the hidden invitation and blessings of government are the poor of those nations. People born in poverty in Mexico and Central America generally descend from Indian bloodlines. Indians, in general, proudly prefer the tribal culture to that of individualism. There’s nothing wrong with that. Whites prefer individualistic social orders – and individualism opposes communism and socialism and oligarchies… forms of government required if there is to be a world government – a New World Order. Tribal cultures not only accept but approve of communism, socialism and oligarchies which are compatible with tribal philosophies. The forms of government from which they all flee throughout the world provide the hard evidence of the truth of my words.
The same is true of Muslims… their history is one of tribal cultures. It is one of the reasons that no matter how hard America tries to nation build in its own image in the Middle East, there will be no individualist free enterprise system of government established with these tribal people. They are tribal to their Muslim souls. All tribal people are. It is not something that can be changed… nor can the individualistic nature of those who seek the opportunity to manage the risks of controlling their own destinies be changed.
If there is fault to be assigned here, it is the arrogant fault of nations who believe they can force an individualist-based system of government on people whose natural inclinations require tribalism.
These needs inside of people to be either an individualist or a tribalist don’t go just an inch or two deep. They run very deep and are not subject to change. They encompass a total social order – which is why Muslims have Sharia law (and want it wherever they re-settle when they leave their homeland behind to seek more opportunity – which, under Sharia, is impossible to achieve).
If we look at the two different cultures, tribalism and individualism, we see that each comes naturally to certain groups of people. Both cultures have positives; both have negatives. Each is needed by the other to achieve at maximum levels of productivity, but because neither understands the other and because each fears the other, our modern culture discourages either group from doing what it was put on earth to do. Each tries to force itself on the other and war always follows such attempts. Instead, both groups need to use their positive strengths to work together.
Individualists are mostly entrepreneurs who consider control of their own destiny the ultimate objective. They are the inventors and business owners of society. In America, they provide employment for 70 percent of the total population. The fact that not all whites are individualists is obvious by merely looking at the tribal mentalities of Progressive Liberals. The fact that not all Muslims or Mexicans or Central Americans are by nature tribal can be seen in independent business ownership.
Each group has a purpose. Entrepreneurial individualists invent things… Steven Jobs who started Apple is a good example of that. His business partner at the beginning, Bill Gates, is a good example of the tribal (or corporate) mentality. I have always believed it was this basic difference between the two that caused the break between them. After the break, Steven Jobs and Apple came close to failure. Gates was brought back into the Apple picture to help solve the problems caused by Jobs’ inability to deal with the large corporate environment that resulted from his successful entrepreneurialism at Apple. The job of creating belongs to the individualist; the job of creating corporate structure – safety and security – belongs to the security-motivated tribal person.
The rogue political elements currently running things worldwide understand this and are taking advantage of overly confident individualists, using their own successes and money to quietly eliminate them. They do so by preying on the security drives of tribalists, giving them as many something for nothing deals money can buy… money wrung out of individualist wallets. They think they’re pretty smart – but haven’t yet come to grips with the fact that innovation does not come from either the elitist or tribalist segments. It comes only from the imaginations of individualists. As I said, both groups are a necessary commodity to a successful social order. If they succeed in eliminating the individualist segment, they will succeed at eliminating innovation and progress.
To come to a reasonable conclusion as to whether a society is tribal or individually dominated, look at the decision-making authority of government in opposition to the people, and look at the court system that supports or doesn’t support it. When one looks at these two things in America today, it can be said that we have become (or are darned close to) a tribal/socialist society. But one must look closely enough to see if tribalism exists because it is what the people want or because the people have the socialist boot of tyranny firmly planted on their necks.
Tribalism will exist in America when freedom-loving whites are no longer the majority population and will be quickly morphed into socialism and then communism (even though the communist system has failed everywhere it has been tried).
Due to the bloody violence used by Muslims who have absolutely no respect for “civilized wars” (if there is such a thing), there is an attitude of disrespect towards Islam and the Muslims who subscribe to it. Who can respect any people whose social barbarism permits the live burial of Christian children? The beheading of innocents? To those Muslims who say Islam is a religion of peace, all I can say is I believe what I see, not what you say. I say the same thing to those who call themselves Christians but who approve of abortion.
The attitude is quite similar to the disrespect and hatred shown towards Jews by the National Socialist (NAZI) Party in Germany prior to World War II. I do not suggest there is a correlative in place that justifies the comparison. The Jews so hated by the Nazis were not beheading people or raping young girls or burying young boys in sand while they were still alive as Muslims do. They didn’t burn a pilot shot down in war while holding him in a cage. The Jews were not barbaric. They were (and are), however, the bankers of the world – the name Rothschild is not the best liked around the world.
I suggest to white people that we understand what is being done to us. The populations of the world are being restructured so those with tribal histories can replace whites in nations throughout the world. It is being done purposefully with the end objective being a New World Order that embodies one world government.
I suggest to you that is the only logical reason for the immigrations policies of Europe (as well as other Continents) and for the illegal alien policies of the United States. We are being replaced to get rid of the “give me liberty or give me death” mentality that goes hand-in-hand with being white (which makes a majority of us individualists) so an oligarchic system of socialism (which always, according to Karl Marx, leads to communism) can be implemented.
[The book: The Coming Battle, published in 1899, documents how the politicians of that period didn't want the debt to be paid off. They wanted the debt to be rolled over from generation to generation. It continues to this day. It's a must read.]
Click here for part -----> 1,
� 2015 Marilyn M. Barnewall - All Rights Reserved
Marilyn MacGruder Barnewall began her career in 1956 as a journalist with the Wyoming Eagle in Cheyenne. During her 20 years (plus) as a banker and bank consultant, she wrote extensively for The American Banker, Bank Marketing Magazine, Trust Marketing Magazine, was U.S. Consulting Editor for Private Banker International (London/Dublin), and other major banking industry publications. She has written seven non-fiction books about banking and taught private banking at Colorado University for the American Bankers Association. She has authored seven banking books, one dog book, and two works of fiction (about banking, of course). She has served on numerous Boards in her community.
Barnewall is the former editor of The National Peace Officer Magazine and as a journalist has written guest editorials for the Denver Post, Rocky Mountain News and Newsweek, among others. On the Internet, she has written for News With Views, World Net Daily, Canada Free Press, Christian Business Daily, Business Reform, and others. She has been quoted in Time, Forbes, Wall Street Journal and other national and international publications. She can be found in Who's Who in America, Who's Who of American Women, Who's Who in Finance and Business, and Who's Who in the World.
Web site: http://marilynwrites.blogspot.com