What did stonetoss mean by this?

because the ones who would gain from NWO Communism aka Bolshevik-type communism are the elites. So they promote it because they know it would allow them to totally enslave humanity. commiefags are too stupid to understand this or why Hitler opposed communism.

"Competition is a sin." - John D. Rockefeller

GAZ or Gorkovsky Avtomobilny Zavod (Russian: ГAЗ or Гópькoвcкий aвтoмoби́льный зaвóд, lit. 'Gorky Automobile Plant') is a Russian automotive manufacturer located in Nizhny Novgorod (a city named Gorky 1932-1990). It is the core subsidiary of GAZ Group Holding, itself part of the Basic Element business group. JSC Russian Machines Corporation is the controlling shareholder in OAO GAZ.

In May 1929 the Soviet Union signed an agreement with the American Ford Motor Company.[3] Under its terms, the Soviets agreed to purchase $13 million worth of automobiles and parts, while Ford agreed to give technical assistance until 1938 to construct an integrated automobile-manufacturing plant at Nizhny Novgorod. Production started on 1 January 1932, and the factory and the first marque was titled Nizhegorodsky Avtomobilny Zavod, or NAZ,[3] but also displayed the "Ford" sign. Its first vehicle was the medium-priced Ford Model A, sold as the NAZ-A, and a light truck, the Ford Model AA (NAZ-AA). NAZ-A production commenced in 1932 and lasted until 1936, during which time over 100,000 examples were built.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAZ

Capitalism and communism are two sides of the same shekel.
Although libertarians and fascists disagree on things, their hearts are in the right place.

In 1933, the factory's name changed to Gorkovsky Avtomobilny Zavod, or GAZ, when the city was renamed after Maxim Gorky; similarly, models were renamed GAZ-A and GAZ-AA. From 1935 to 1956, the official name was augmented with imeni Molotova (literally, named after Molotov).

The GAZ-A was succeeded by the more modern GAZ-M1 (based largely on the four-cylinder version of the Ford Model B), produced from 1936 to 1942. The M letter stands for Molotovets ('of Molotov's fame'), it was the origin of the car's nickname, M'ka (Эмкa).[3]

During the war, GAZ assembled Chevrolet G7107 and G7117 (G7107 with winch) from parts shipped from the USA under Lend Lease.

Experience with the A and the M1 allowed the GAZ engineers to develop their own car model independently of Ford. Called the GAZ-11, this more upscale model entered production in 1942 and remained in limited wartime production until 1946. The M2's bodyshell entered limited production in 1941, mounted on a four-wheel drive chassis and sold in small quantities as the GAZ-61.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAZ

Fred Chase Koch (/ˈkoʊk/; September 23, 1900 – November 17, 1967) was an American chemical engineer and entrepreneur who founded the oil refinery firm that later became Koch Industries, a privately held company which, under the principal ownership and leadership of Koch's sons Charles and David, was listed by Forbes in 2015 as the second-largest privately held company in the United States.[2][3]

This extended litigation effectively put Winkler-Koch out of business in the U.S. for several years. "Unable to succeed at home, Koch found work in the Soviet Union".[13] Between 1929 and 1932 Winkler-Koch "trained Bolshevik engineers[14] and helped Stalin's regime set up fifteen modern oil refineries" in the Soviet Union. "Over time, however, Stalin brutally purged several of Koch's Soviet colleagues. Koch was deeply affected by the experience, and regretted his collaboration."[13] The company also built installations in countries throughout Europe, the Middle East and Asia.[1] Koch partnered with William Rhodes Davis to build the third-largest oil refinery serving the Third Reich, a project which was personally approved by Adolf Hitler.[15] The refinery was significantly important, for it was one of the few refineries in Germany that could produce the high octane fuel needed for fighter planes.[16] Koch President and COO David L. Robertson acknowledged that Winkler-Koch provided the cracking unit for the 1934 Hamburg refinery, but said that it was but one of many "iconic" American companies doing business in Germany at the time.[17]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_C._Koch

It means that you are a spastic

rainbow capitalism being mistaken for communism by stonetoss

Olof Aschberg (22 July 1877 – 21 April 1960) - Swedish banker of Jewish descent, head of Stockholm bank Nya Banken (Nya Banken). From August 18, 1922 - Director General of Roscombank, which was later transformed into Vnesheconombank. Aschberg was a leftist sympathizer and helped finance the Bolsheviks in Russia. In gratitude, the Bolshevik government allowed Aschberg to do business with Soviet Union during the 1920s. His codirectors included prominent members of Swedish cooperatives and Swedish socialists, including G. W. Dahl, K. G. Rosling, and C. Gerhard Magnusson.[1]

Olof founded in Stockholm the first Swedish bank for trade unions and cooperatives (Nya Banken) in 1912 and became a friend of Hjalmar Branting. When financial operations in favour of the Germans in 1918 caused him trouble with the Allies of World War I, the bank was renamed Svensk Ekonomiebolaget.[2] He was already a successful banker and businessman when he met first Willi Münzenberg who visited the Stockholm Youth Socialist Congress of 1917.[3] Later, during the Bolsheviks aspirations to rebuild the Russian economy, it was Münzenberg's task to expand their modest pool of capital by floating a so-called "workers' loan" using his "Workers International Relief" (WIR).[4]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olof_Aschberg

By means of this subterfuge the money used for buying machines and goods in the West looked like being the outcome of proletarian support, in reality it came directly from the Kremlin, confiscated from Russia's rich and the Church.[4] Established in Berlin in the 1920s, Aschberg's Guarantee and Credit Bank for the East was charged with repayment of the WIR workers' loan, although he had not been very fond of it from its very beginning on and had even contributed to deep six it soon after the launch. Aschberg had already gained the Soviet leaders' esteem by being one of the main connections in the early years after 1917 in evading the international boycott on gold robbed by the Bolsheviks, which he offered on the Stockholm market after having the bullions melted down and given new markings.[4] At the end of the 1920s Aschberg moved to France, where he bought Château du Bois du Rocher at Jouy-en-Josas (in 1950 offered to the Unesco and subsequently sold to the Yvelines department[2]).

There is in the State Dept. files a Green Cipher message from the U.S. embassy in Christiania (named Oslo, 1925), Norway, dated February 21, 1918: "Am informed that Bolshevik funds are deposited in Nya Banken, Stockholm, Legation Stockholm advised. Schmedeman".[5]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olof_Aschberg

Armand Hammer (May 21, 1898[1] – December 10, 1990) was an American business manager and owner, most closely associated with Occidental Petroleum, a company he ran from 1957[2] until his death, though he was known as well for his art collection, his philanthropy, and his close ties to the Soviet Union.

Hammer's business interests around the world and his "citizen diplomacy" helped him cultivate a wide network of friends and associates.

Hammer was born in New York City, to Jewish parents who immigrated from what was then the Russian Empire, Rose (née Lipschitz) and Julius Hammer.[6][7][8] His father came to the United States from Odessa in what was then the Russian Empire (now Ukraine) in 1875 and settled in the Bronx, where he ran a general medical practice and five drugstores.[9][10]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armand_Hammer

Hammer originally said that his father had named him after a character, Armand Duval, in La Dame aux Camélias, a novel by Alexandre Dumas, fils. According to other sources, it was later said that Hammer was named after the "arm and hammer" graphic symbol of the Socialist Labor Party of America (SLP), in which his father had a leadership role.[11] (After the Russian Revolution, a part of the SLP under Julius' leadership split off to become a founding element of the Communist Party USA.) Late in his life, Hammer confirmed that this was indeed the origin of his given name.[1]

Due to socialist and communist activities Hammer's father Julius had been put under federal surveillance.[12] On July 5, 1919, federal agents witnessed Marie Oganesoff (the 33-year-old Russian wife of a former tsarist diplomat) enter Julius' medical office located in a wing of his Bronx home.[12]

After Julius was imprisoned, he sent Armand Hammer to the Soviet Union to look after the affairs of his company Allied Drug and Chemical.[17] Hammer traveled back and forth from the Soviet Union for the next 10 years.[17]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armand_Hammer

In 1921, while waiting for his internship to begin at Bellevue Hospital, Hammer went to the Soviet Union for a trip that lasted until late 1930.[20] Although his career in medicine was cut short, he relished being referred to as "Dr. Hammer." Hammer's intentions in the 1921 trip have been debated ever since. He has claimed that he originally intended to recoup $150,000 in debts for drugs shipped during the Allied intervention, but was soon moved by a capitalistic and philanthropic interest in selling wheat to the then-starving Russians.[21] In his passport application, Hammer stated that he intended to visit only western Europe.[22] J. Edgar Hoover in the Justice Department knew this was false, but Hammer was allowed to travel anyway.[23] A skeptical U.S. government watched him through this trip and for the rest of his life.[citation needed]

In his 1983 book, Red Carpet, author Joseph Finder discusses Hammer's "extensive involvement with Russia."[27] In Dossier: The Secret History of Armand Hammer, Edward Jay Epstein called Hammer "a virtual spy" for the Soviet Union.[28]

After returning to the U.S., Hammer entered into a diverse array of business, art, cultural, and humanitarian endeavors, including investing in various U.S. oil production efforts. These oil investments were later parlayed into control of Occidental Petroleum. National Geographic described Occidental chairman Hammer as "a pioneer in the synfuels boom."[29] Throughout his life he continued personal and business dealings with the Soviet Union, despite the Cold War. In later years he lobbied and traveled extensively at a great personal expense, working for peace between the United States and the Communist countries of the world, including ferrying physicians and supplies into the Soviet Union to help Chernobyl survivors.[citation needed] In his book The Prize, Daniel Yergin writes that Hammer "ended up as a go-between for five Soviet General Secretaries and seven U.S. Presidents."[30]

The Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR) was an international NGO established in 1925 to provide a forum for discussion of problems and relations between nations of the Pacific Rim. The International Secretariat, the center of most IPR activity over the years, consisted of professional staff members who recommended policy to the Pacific Council and administered the international program. The various national councils were responsible for national, regional and local programming. Most participants were elite members of the business and academic communities in their respective countries. Funding came largely from businesses and philanthropies, especially the Rockefeller Foundation. IPR international headquarters were in Honolulu until the early 1930s when they were moved to New York and the American Council emerged as the dominant national council.[1]

IPR was founded in the spirit of Wilsonianism, an awareness of the United States' new role as a world power after World War I, and a belief that liberal democracy should be promoted throughout the world. To promote greater knowledge of issues, the IPR supported conferences, research projects and publications, and after 1932 published a quarterly journal Pacific Affairs.[citation needed] After World War II, Cold War charges that the IPR was infiltrated with Communists led to Congressional hearings and loss of tax exempt status. Many IPR members had liberal left orientations typical of internationalists of the 1930s, some ten IPR associates were shown to have been Communists, others were sympathetic to the Soviet Union, and the anti-imperialist tone of the leadership aroused resentment from some of the colonial powers, but the more dramatic charges, such as that the IPR was responsible for the fall of China, have not been generally accepted.[citation needed]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Pacific_Relations

He meant pic related is a thing and Commies hate it.

Attached: (((ClassTreason)))meme (2) (1) (1) (2) (1).jpg (1155x2000, 303.18K)

example first from shore
the people that are for unregulated migration the most are usually those who self identify as commies
the only people that benefit from unregulated migration are turbocapitalists like landlords (more people equals house scarcity equals higher housing prices) and capitalists that employ hordes of low skill workers (bigger supply of workforce drives wage down). The people that lose is pretty much everyone who has to rent his house or does low skill work, so majority of USA.
Do you get it now?

The IPR was the result of two sets of organizers, one in New York, another in Hawai'i. The New York-based effort was organized by Edward C. Carter, after graduating from Harvard in 1906, joined the Student Volunteer Movement with the YMCA in India, then worked with the Y in France during World War I. After the war he joined The Inquiry, a liberal Protestant commission with a flavor both genteel and militant which organized conferences and publications on labor, race relations, business ethics, and international peace. Among Carter's constituents were John D. Rockefeller, III, Abby Aldrich Rockefeller, daughter of the Rhode Island U.S. Senator, and Dr. Ray Lyman Wilbur, President of Stanford University. Wilbur argued that a new organization devoted to Pacific affairs would fill a gap not addressed by East Coast foreign policy groups. Meanwhile, in Hawai'i, another group was organizing under the leadership of local business interests.

Not everyone approved. Time Magazine called Carter, Wilbur, and The Inquiry a "strange and motley crew", a "little band of élite and erudite adventurers."[citation needed] Some in the American State Department and Navy opposed discussion of Pacific affairs, fearing that it might interfere with strategic planning at a time when Chinese and Japanese nationalism were on the rise. Carter countered with support from the Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Foundation. Using networks of the International YMCA, independent National Councils were organized in other countries, with an International Secretariat in Honolulu.[2]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Pacific_Relations

The IPR sponsored other important scholarly excursions into Asian history and society: R.H. Tawney's long memo for the 1931 Conference was published as his Land and Labor in China (1931); a Marxist analysis of geography by Chi Ch'ao-ting; the collaboration between Lattimore and Wittfogel which used an eclectic array of approaches including Arnold Toynbee, Ellsworth Huntington, and Karl Marx to develop a social history of China.[5]

Toward the end of the war, the Institute came under criticism for alleged communist sympathies. The first major criticism of the Institute was a wartime study by dissident IPR member Alfred Kohlberg, an American who had owned a textile firm in prewar China. After finding what he believed were Communist sympathies in IPR, in particular Frederick Vanderbilt Field, Kohlberg first wrote to other members of the Board, published an 80-page report, then launched a publicity campaign against the Institute.[7]

The IPR came under further suspicion by government authorities as a result of the Venona intercepts and its close association with Amerasia. Amerasia came under investigation when a classified OSS report appeared as an article in the magazine.

IPR was closely allied with Amerasia. The two organizations shared the same building, and many members of the Editorial Board of Amerasia were officers or employees of IPR.[8] An FBI review of Amerasia and IPR publications found that approximately 115 people contributed articles to both.[9] The Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy was also housed in this building.[10]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Pacific_Relations

Among IPR staffers claimed to be Communists or collaborators with Soviet intelligence agents were Kathleen Barnes, Hilda Austern, Elsie Fairfax-Cholmely, Chi Chao-ting, Guenter Stein, Harriet Levine, Talitha Gerlach, Chen Han-seng (a member of the Sorge spy ring),[11] Michael Greenberg (named as a source in 1945 by defecting Soviet courier Elizabeth Bentley), and T.A. Bisson (Venona's "Arthur"),[12] as well as Kate Mitchell and Andrew Roth, both of whom were arrested in the 1945 Amerasia case.[13]:147–59

After the success of the Chinese Communist Revolution, criticism of the IPR increased. Its detractors accused it of having helped to "lose China" to Communism.

In the early fifties, the IPR came under a lengthy investigation by the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee. Critics charged that IPR scholars had been naïve in their statements regarding Communism, Chinese Communism and Stalinist Russia.

Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin repeatedly criticized IPR and its former chairman Philip Jessup. McCarthy observed that Frederick V. Field, T.A. Bisson, and Owen Lattimore were active in IPR and claimed that they had worked to turn American China policy in favor of the Communist Party of China.

In 1952, the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee (SISS), chaired by Senator Pat McCarran, spent over a year reviewing some 20,000 documents from the files of IPR and questioning IPR personnel. The committee found it suspicious that Marxists had published articles in the IPR journal and that Communists had attended an IPR conference in 1942. In its final report the SISS stated:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Pacific_Relations

"The IPR itself was like a specialized political flypaper in its attractive power for Communists ...The IPR has been considered by the American Communist Party and by Soviet officials as an instrument of Communist policy, propaganda and military intelligence. The IPR disseminated and sought to popularize false information including information originating from Soviet and Communist sources.... The IPR was a vehicle used by the Communists to orient American far eastern policies toward Communist objectives.[13]:223–225"

Elizabeth Bentley testified that NKVD spy chief Jacob Golos warned her to stay away from the IPR because it was "as red as a rose, and you shouldn't touch it with a 10-foot pole."[14] Likewise, Louis Budenz, former editor of the Daily Worker, testified that Alexander Trachtenberg of the Communist Party-affiliated International Publishers told him that party leaders thought the IPR was "too much a concentration point for Communists; the control could be maintained without such a galaxy of Communists in it."[13]

The IPR lost its tax-exempt status as an educational body in 1955, when the Internal Revenue Service alleged that the Institute had engaged in the dissemination of controversial and partisan propaganda, and had attempted to influence the policies or opinions of the government. Under the leadership of William L. Holland, the IPR pursued a long legal action to regain tax-exempt status, which lasted until 1959. The final court judgment rejected all allegations by the Internal Revenue Service.[15]

By the mid-1950s, the IPR was facing other challenges – notably the development of well-funded centers for Asian Studies at major American universities such as Harvard, Yale, Berkeley, Michigan and Columbia. The rise of these centers created an opinion that the IPR was no longer necessary. The large foundations which had previously supported the IPR shifted their financial resources to the university centers.[16]:65–70

Frederick Vanderbilt Field (April 13, 1905 – February 1, 2000) was an American leftist political activist and a great-great-grandson of railroad tycoon Cornelius "Commodore" Vanderbilt, disinherited by his wealthy relatives for his radical political views. Field became a specialist on Asia and was a prime staff member and supporter of the Institute of Pacific Relations. He also supported Henry Wallace's Progressive Party and so many openly Communist organizations that he was accused of being a member of the Communist Party.[1] He was a top target of the American government during the peak of 1950s McCarthyism. Field denied ever having been a party member but admitted in his memoirs, "I suppose I was what the Party called a 'member at large.'"[2]

Field was born on April 13, 1905, a scion of the wealthy Vanderbilt family and a descendant of Corneilus Vanderbilt.[1] A 1923 graduate of the private Hotchkiss School, Field went on to attend Harvard University, where he participated in undergraduate life as chief editor of The Harvard Crimson and a member of the Hasty Pudding Club.[1] Matriculating in 1927, Field spent a year at the London School of Economics, where he was exposed to the ideas of Harold Laski, the Fabian socialist political theorist, economist, and writer.[1] First coming into politics as a supporter of the Democratic Party after returning to the United States, he was disillusioned by the Democrats' unwillingness to take a more uncompromising position toward social reform and endorsed Norman Thomas, the Socialist presidential candidate in 1928 and became a member of the Socialist Party. Having attracted significant attention as an unlikely endorsement for Norman Thomas, Field was cut off without a penny by Frederick William Vanderbilt, his great-uncle, from whom he had been promised an estimated fortune of more than $70 million.[1]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Vanderbilt_Field

Upon Field's return from England in 1928, Edward Clark Carter of the Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR) introduced him to Y.C. James Yen, who was then in the United States to raise money for his Chinese Mass Education Movement. After touring the country as Yen's personal assistant, Field joined the IPR, a group that brought together government and non-governmental elites to study problems of the Pacific rim nations, as an assistant to Carter. Field "took no pay; he was, in fact, one of the institute's most generous contributors."[3] He published several reference works on the Asian economy and organized conferences and publications.

As he grew older, his politics became more radical. He described the IPR as "a bourgeois research-educational organization" funded by the Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations and some of the biggest corporations in the US, which he claimed subsidized his publication of proposals "as anticapitalistic as the articles he wrote for The New Masses and The Daily Worker."[4] New Masses was identified by one scholar as the "semi-official spokesman of Communist letters"[5] He was also Executive Vice-President of the Council for Pan American Democracy, which John Dewey's Committee for Cultural Freedom alleged in 1940 was under "outright communist control"[6] and Provisional secretary of the Board of Directors for the Jefferson School of Social Science, associated with the Communist Party.[7]

He wrote a memo cautioning Owen Lattimore, editor of the IPR quarterly Pacific Affairs, with regard to a certain article that "the analysis is a straight Marxist one and... should not be altered."[8] He donated money and time to Communist causes in the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s,[1] and during the war, he generously donated money to organizations close to the Soviet Union.[9]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Vanderbilt_Field

In his autobiography, Field confesses that during this period he "uncritically accepted" Soviet accounts of their political purges and that was "taken in." "Stalin was infallible," he recalled. "[A]ll my Communist surroundings told me so. So was [American Communist Party Secretary Earl] Browder, although on a lower level of sanctity, and so were the other CP [Communist Party] leaders."

At a time when other erstwhile loyal friends of the Soviet Union were becoming disillusioned by Stalin's Great Purge, Field defended the Moscow Trials "because Comrade Stalin says so, we have to believe the trials are just."[10]

Since the IPR aimed to be nonpartisan and, in theory, still attempted to include even the Japanese point of view, he collaborated with his friend Philip Jaffe to set up the journal Amerasia in 1937 as a vehicle for criticism of Japanese attacks in China. Jaffe later pleaded guilty to "conspiracy to embezzle, steal and purloin" government property after Office of Strategic Services and FBI investigators found hundreds of government documents, many labeled "secret," "top secret," or "confidential," in the magazine's offices.[11]

In 1941, he left his position at the IPR but served as a trustee until 1947.[12] Field attended the 1945 United Nations founding conference in San Francisco as an IPR representative, and also as a writer for the Daily Worker.[13]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Vanderbilt_Field

According to the McCarran Committee's IPR Report, Lattimore, along with President Franklin D. Roosevelt's Administrative Assistant Lauchlin Currie (identified in the Venona decrypts as the Soviets' White House source codenamed "Page"),[19] tried in 1942 to get Field a commission in military intelligence,[20] but, unlike Duncan Lee (Venona code name "Koch"), Maurice Halperin ("Hare"), Julius Joseph ("Cautious"),[21] Carl Marzani, Franz Neumann ("Ruff"),[22] Helen Tenney ("Muse"), and Donald Wheeler ("Izra"), all of whom got into the OSS, Field was rejected as a security risk.[1]

In 1944, dissident IPR member Alfred Kohlberg submitted to IPR Secretary General Edward C. Carter an 88-page analysis alleging that the institute had been infiltrated by pro-Communist elements. Among other things, Kohlberg alleged that Field was a member of the National Committee of the Communist Party.[23] In 1945, former Soviet spy Elizabeth Bentley told FBI investigators that she had attended a conference in Field's home earlier that year.[24] Also present, she alleged, were Browder, John Hazard Reynolds, head of the United States Service and Shipping Corporation (a Comintern front organization for Soviet espionage activities)[25] and "Ray" Elson (Identified in the "Gorsky memo" under the cover name "Irma")[26]

In 1945 Field was one of the founding members of the Committee for a Democratic Far Eastern Policy, which tried to influence US policy to stop supporting the Kuomintang government in China, and after 1949 to recognize the People's Republic of China.[27]

On April 22, 1948, Louis Budenz, former managing editor of the Daily Worker, advised FBI investigators, "Field is a Communist Party member."[28] In 1949, Field identified himself in Political Affairs as an "American Communist."[29]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Vanderbilt_Field

In 1950, Budenz testified before the Tydings Committee to personal knowledge that Field was a Soviet espionage agent.[32] Questioned, Field refused to answer on grounds of potential self-incrimination.[33] The following year, former Soviet spy Whittaker Chambers testified before the McCarran Committee that NKVD "handler" J. Peters told him, in 1937, that Field was a member of the Communist underground.[34] Herbert Romerstein, former head of the office to Counter Soviet Disinformation at the United States Information Agency, and the late Eric Breindel placed Field in the GRU apparat, alleging that he "was an agent of Soviet military intelligence."[35]

Yet, writers Kai Bird and Svetlana Chervonnaya, examining the archives in an article of The American Scholar, disagree:

Documents show that he was in contact with various Soviet representatives in the United States beginning in early 1935. Some of these interactions may be described as 'active measures' on behalf of the Soviet Union. Still, what we know does not prove that Field was a full-blown Soviet agent.[36]

As secretary of the Civil Rights Congress bail fund, Field refused to reveal who had put up bond for eight Communist Party officials, who had jumped bail and disappeared after being convicted by the Truman administration Department of Justice for violations of the Smith Act. Convicted of contempt of court since he would not provide the names of any of his Communist friends, Field served two months of a 90-day sentence in federal prison at Ashland, Kentucky, in 1951.[1]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Vanderbilt_Field

In 1966, Quigley published a one-volume history of the twentieth century, titled Tragedy and Hope. At several points in this book, the history of the Milner group is discussed. Moreover, Quigley states that he has recently been in direct contact with this organization, whose nature he contrasts to right-wing claims of a communist conspiracy:

This radical Right fairy tale, which is now an accepted folk myth in many groups in America, pictured the recent history of the United States, in regard to domestic reform and in foreign affairs, as a well-organized plot by extreme Left-wing elements ... This myth, like all fables, does in fact have a modicum of truth. There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the Radical right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other group, and frequently does so. I know of the operation of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies... but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known.[26]:949–950

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carroll_Quigley

In his book The Anglo-American Establishment: From Rhodes to Cliveden (written in 1949 and published posthumously in 1981),[22] Quigley purports to trace the history of a secret society (Round Table group) founded in 1891 by Cecil Rhodes and Alfred Milner. Quigley notes that "The organization was so modified and so expanded by Milner after the eclipse of Stead in 1899, and especially after the death of Rhodes in 1902, that it took on quite a different organization and character, although it continued to pursue the same goals."[23]

The society consisted of an inner circle ("The Society of the Elect") and an outer circle ("The Association of Helpers", also known as The Milner Kindergarten and the Round Table Group).[24] The society as a whole does not have a fixed name:

This society has been known at various times as Milner's Kindergarten, as the Round Table Group, as the Rhodes crowd, as The Times crowd, as the All Souls group, and as the Cliveden set. ... I have chosen to call it the Milner group. Those persons who have used the other terms, or heard them used, have not generally been aware that all these various terms referred to the same Group...this Group is, as I shall show, one of the most important historical facts of the twentieth century.[25]:ix

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carroll_Quigley

According to Quigley, the leaders of this group were Cecil Rhodes and Alfred Milner from 1891 until Rhodes' death in 1902, Milner alone until his own death in 1925, Lionel Curtis from 1925 to 1955, Robert H. (Baron) Brand from 1955 to 1963, and Adam D. Marris from 1963 until the time Quigley wrote his book. This organization also functioned through certain loosely affiliated "front groups", including the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the Institute of Pacific Relations, and the Council on Foreign Relations.[26]:132, 950–952

In addition, other secret societies are briefly discussed in Tragedy and Hope, including a consortium of the leaders of the central banks of several countries, who formed the Bank for International Settlements.[26]:323–324

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carroll_Quigley

Because corporations wan't more left wing policies because it gives them more power over you - while it gives less freedom to people and small business owners.

Or, you know, a true free society cannot function with non-whites so fascism is needed to get rid of them

the capitalist should be on the ancap side. it's simple really, like joseph gobbels said; accuse your enemy of the same thing you are guilty of.

Libertarians tend to be confused.

Attached: right-wing-catboys-comic.png (1000x500, 58.94K)

mate you can fuck off with your insistent spam hurr durr lefties jews herr durr go and fucking kys faggot I think you will find a lot more jews are right wingers

Cuban Troops In Angola Guard Gulf Oil Works

The United States has sharply protested the presence of Cuban troops in Angola. But, ironically, part of those troops' military task is to guard the operations and workers of a major U.S. corporation - Gulf Oil of Pittsburgh.

Behind a protective screen of about 2,000 Cubans, by State Department estimate, Gulf's 125 offshore wells pump 122,000 barrels per day of petroleum to be shipped to the United States, Japan and Europe. While official U.S. aid to Angola is prohibited by act of Congress, the taxes and royalties from Gulf Oil are estimated to provide 60 to 80 percent of the Angolan government's operating revenue.

The Cuban troops are in Angola to make sure the oil, and the revenue, keep flowing. The explicit threat to the pumping operation is a guerrilla force - backed by neighboring Zaire - which calls for the secession of the oil-rich enclave of Cabinda, a legacy of Portuguese colonialism. Another presumed threat arises from Angolan insurgents who contest the rule of the Moscow-backed Luanda regime.

washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1978/06/18/cuban-troops-in-angola-guard-gulf-oil-works/f984f26d-acfb-410b-add9-596b782487af/

pretty simple. corporation is a legal i.e. state-sanctioned term, so by definition they're anti-capitalist. since they're the state's biggest cash cows, they get special treatment through regulations that hurt their potential competition more than themselves

I don't give a fuck what you think. I'm giving information to people who might not know this stuff and are interested in this subject.

corporations are anti capitalist? they seek to accumulate profit for shareholders you fucking kike. fuck off.

The real redpill is that the communist should be on the left. Bourgeois leftists are purely capitalist regardless of what they call themselves.

At the international political level bitter rhetoric continues, with no sign that Washington is ready even to grant diplomatic recognition to the Havana and Moscow-backed Luanda regime. But at the business level, calm and compromise have characterized nearly completed negotiations between Angola and Gulf over the terms of a new contract. The Angolan side's consultant in the negotiations is no Marxist firebrand but another prominent U.S. firm - Arthur D. Little, the management experts from Cambridge, Mass.

Young in a recent interview with U.S. News & World Report, estimated the Gulf operations in Angola at "almost $1 billion worth of oil a year." A U.S. intelligence agency official told congressional sources that Gulf's payments to Angola are $600 million to $800 million yearly. Oil industry sources put the figure closer to $600 million. Gulf will give no current figure, but said Angola received tax and royalty payments from Gulf last year of $460 million.

Carter said at a news conference Wednesday that the United States would "relish" the departure of the 20,000 Cuban troops estimated to be in Angola. But in the topsy-turvy world of Africa, a complete withdrawal of the Cubans might menace the interests of a U.S. corporation - Gulf.

In the meantime, "hostile" Angola with its Cuban troops makes certain Cabinda, oil-rich enclave of Angola where Gulf Oil has 125 offshore rigs that Gulf continues to pump oil, and that no harm comes to the American company or its employes.

washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1978/06/18/cuban-troops-in-angola-guard-gulf-oil-works/f984f26d-acfb-410b-add9-596b782487af/

From a China Traveler
By David Rockefeller
Aug. 10, 1973

Given China's vastness, it was only due to the remarkable thoughtfulness of our hosts that the six members of our Chase group were able to see and experience so much during just ten days in Peking, Sian, Shanghai and Canton. In terms of simple geographic expanse, a week and a half visit to China is something equivalent to trying to see New York City in less than one and a half minutes.

One is impressed immediately by the sense of national harmony. From the loud patriotic music at the border onward, there is very real and pervasive dedication to Chairman Mao and Maoist principles. Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose.

General economic and social progress is no less impressive. Only 25 years ago, starvation and abject poverty are said to have been more the rule than the exception in China. Today, almost everyone seems to enjoy adequate, if Spartan, food, clothing and housing. Streets and homes are spotlessly clean, and medical care greatly improved. Crime, drug addiction, prostitution and venereal disease have been virtually eliminated. Doors are routinely left unlocked. Rapid strides are being made in agriculture, reforestation, industry and education. Eighty per cent of school‐age children now attend primary school, compared with 20 per cent just twenty years ago.

nytimes.com/1973/08/10/archives/from-a-china-traveler.html

Each step of the trip was choreographed precisely by our hosts and, though virtually all our requests were granted, we clearly saw what they wanted us to. Still, there was little sense of the constant security found in some other Communist countries. Issues such as Taiwan and Cambodia evoke strong positions, but conversation does not founder on ideological shoals. The Chinese seem so totally convinced of the correctness of their own world view that they do not feel they have to push it aggressively.

Despite the constant impressions of progress, however, some gray areas and basic contradictions also emerged. Three major questions remain in my own mind.

First, can individuality and creativity continue to be contained to the degree they are now in a nation with such a rich cultural heritage?

The enormous social advances of China have benefited greatly from the singleness of ideology and purpose. But a stiff price has been paid in terms of cultural and intellectual constraint. There are only eight different theatrical productions in the entire country. The universities are rigorously politicized, with little room for inquiry unrelated to Chairman Mao's thought. Freedom to travel or change jobs is restricted. When asked about personal creativity, one ceramics craftsman answered only that there was not time for individual art if the masses were to be served.

nytimes.com/1973/08/10/archives/from-a-china-traveler.html

Second, will the highly decentralized Chinese economy be able to adapt successfully to expanded foreign trade and technological improvements?

Third, are we and the Chinese prepared to accept our very real differences and still proceed toward the closer mutual understanding that must be the basis of substantive future contact?

nytimes.com/1973/08/10/archives/from-a-china-traveler.html

I fear that too often the true significance and potential of our new relationship with China has been obscured by the novelty of it all. Pandas and Ping‐Pong, gymnastics and elaborate dinners have captivated our imaginations, and I suspect the Chinese are equally intrigued by some of our more novel captitalistic ways.

In fact, of course, we are experiencing a much more fundamental phenomenon. The Chinese, for their part, are faced with altering a primarily inward focus that they have pursued for a quarter century under their current leadership. We, for our part, are faced with the realization that we have largely ignored a country with one‐fourth of the world's population. When one considers the profound differences in our cultural heritages and our social and economic systems, this is certain to be a long task with much accommodation necessary on both sides.

The social experiment in China under. Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history. How extensively China opens up and how the world interprets and reacts to the social innovations and life styles she has developed is certain to have a profound impact on the future of many nations.

nytimes.com/1973/08/10/archives/from-a-china-traveler.html

beep boop ok cia beep boop

Except he is blatantly mistaken and wants to propagandise this idea so that people won't start reading marx. 100% on cia payroll.

you are too retarded to exist

In reality, it should be the ancap the fascist and the boujie guy against the communist.

ok faggot kike

The Select Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organizations was an investigative committee of the United States House of Representatives between 1952 and 1954.[1] The committee was originally created by House Resolution 561 during the 82nd Congress. The committee investigated the use of funds by tax-exempt organizations (non-profit organizations) to see if they were being used to support communism.[2][3] The committee was alternatively known as the Cox Committee and the Reece Committee after its two chairmen, Edward E. Cox and B. Carroll Reece.

In April 1952, the Select Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organizations (or just the Cox Committee Investigation), led by Edward E. Cox, of the House of Representatives began an investigation of the "educational and philanthropic foundations and other comparable organizations which are exempt from federal taxes to determine whether they were using their resources for the purposes for which they were established, and especially to determine which such foundations and organizations are using their resources for un-American activities and subversive activities or for purposes not in the interest or tradition of the United States."

In the fall of 1952 all foundations with assets of $10 million or more received a questionnaire covering virtually every aspect of their operations. The foundations cooperated willingly. In the committee's final report, submitted to Congress in January 1953, endorsed the loyalty of the foundations. "So far as we can ascertain, there is little basis for the belief expressed in some quarters that foundation funds are being diverted from their intended use," the report said.[4]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Select_Committee_to_Investigate_Tax-Exempt_Foundations_and_Comparable_Organizations

Unhappy with the Cox Committee's conclusions, Rep. Reece pushed for a continuation of its work. In April 1954, the House authorized the Reece Committee. Unlike its predecessor, which limited its attention to generalities, the Reece Committee mounted a comprehensive inquiry into both the motives for establishing foundations and their influence on public life. The investigative inquiry was headed by Norman Dodd, a former banker.[4]

Edward "Eugene" Cox of Georgia served as chairman of the committee until his death on December 24, 1952. Wayne Hays of Ohio served as acting chairman after Chairman Cox's death.[5]

The final report was submitted by Norman Dodd, and because of its provocative nature, the committee became subject to attack. In the Dodd report to the Reece Committee on Foundations, he gave a definition of the word "subversive", saying that the term referred to "Any action having as its purpose the alteration of either the principle or the form of the United States Government by other than constitutional means." He then argued that the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, and Carnegie Endowment were using funds excessively on projects at Columbia, Harvard, University of Chicago and the University of California, in order to enable oligarchical collectivism. He stated, "The purported deterioration in scholarship and in the techniques of teaching which, lately, has attracted the attention of the American public, has apparently been caused primarily by a premature effort to reduce our meager knowledge of social phenomena to the level of an applied science."[6]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Select_Committee_to_Investigate_Tax-Exempt_Foundations_and_Comparable_Organizations

Hope you can read it, but this explains why (((bankers))) want communism

Attached: CB22EC0F-4FA8-4E06-AFEA-96BD840E34DF.jpg (1235x1009, 870.41K)

Capitalism and communism are both materialist ideologies that subscribe to the labor theory of value. They're dehumanizing systems in which the people are made to serve the economy rather than the other way around. The libertarian is realizing that his ideas can only flourish when kikery of ALL kinds are stamped out. His only ally in this is the fascist, the third-positionist, the idealist.

He stated that his research staff had discovered that in "1933–1936, a change took place which was so drastic as to constitute a 'revolution'. They also indicated conclusively that the responsibility for the economic welfare of the American people had been transferred heavily to the Executive Branch of the Federal Government; that a corresponding change in education had taken place from an impetus outside of the local community, and that this 'revolution' had occurred without violence and with the full consent of an overwhelming majority of the electorate."[7] He also stated that this revolution "could not have occurred peacefully, or with the consent of the majority, unless education in the United States had been prepared in advance to endorse it."[7]

Although the promotion of internationalism and moral relativism by foundations concerned the committee, it saw their concentrated power as the more central threat. Even if benign, this power posed a threat to democratic government. The Reece Committee's report, submitted in the midst of the ultimately successful efforts to censure Senator Joseph McCarthy, failed to attract much attention. McCarthy's fall led to a discrediting of all efforts that ' smacked of redbaiting '.[4]

The report conceded that, with several exceptions "such as the Institute of Pacific Relations, foundations have not directly supported organizations which, in turn, operated to support communism." However, the report did conclude that

Some of the larger foundations have directly supported 'subversion' in the true meaning of that term--namely, the process of undermining some of our vitally protective concepts and principles. They have actively supported attacks upon our social and governmental system and financed the promotion of socialism and collectivist ideas.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Select_Committee_to_Investigate_Tax-Exempt_Foundations_and_Comparable_Organizations

LOL

Attached: gay-retard-copy.png (1000x1413, 478.61K)

This final report was made up by the majority in the committee, three Republicans: Representatives B. Carroll Reece of Tennessee, chairman, Jesse P. Wolcott of Michigan and Angier L. Goodwin of Massachusetts. However, the two Democrats on the committee did not sign the final report and were extremely critical of it.[2]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Select_Committee_to_Investigate_Tax-Exempt_Foundations_and_Comparable_Organizations

post the original faggot

Attached: 1565650523075.png (644x960, 525.67K)

how can you claim that when your ideology is spearheaded by people like fucking literal jews like ben shapiro

youtube.com/watch?v=YUYCBfmIcHM

Norman Dodd On Tax Exempt Foundations

The same thing i have told before; Marxist douctrine seeks later to reverse its analysis after a period of turmoil, where the lumpenproletariat becomes its ally along with those-many of them prosperous-who benefit from the government's management of capitalism. In contrast, Marx's description of the revolutionary forces sound more and more like a description of a Tea Party premises.
I guess we have all seen this before.

>boujie
>jie
O chang, you are not even trying anymore

youtube.com/watch?v=CRqiJSEj5UY

Yuri Bezmenov - ALL Interviews & Lectures HQ (1984-1983)

youtube.com/watch?v=AE0OCWehDvM

Antony Sutton on Wallstreet's funding of Communism/National Socialism

archive.org/details/WallStreetTheBolshevikRevolution/mode/2up

Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution
by Sutton, Antony C.

Irving Kristol (/ˈkrJstəl/; January 22, 1920 – September 18, 2009) was an American journalist who was dubbed the "godfather of neoconservatism".[1][2] As a founder, editor, and contributor to various magazines, he played an influential role in the intellectual and political culture of the last half of the twentieth century.[3] After his death, he was described by The Daily Telegraph as being "perhaps the most consequential public intellectual of the latter half of the [twentieth] century".[4]

Kristol was born in Brooklyn, New York, the son of non-observant Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe, Bessie (Mailman) and Joseph Kristol.[5][6] He received his B.A. from the City College of New York in 1940, where he majored in history and was part of a small, but vocal, Trotskyist anti-Soviet group who eventually became known as, The New York Intellectuals. It was at these meetings that Kristol met historian Gertrude Himmelfarb, whom he later married in 1942. They had two children, Elizabeth Nelson and Bill Kristol.[7] During World War II, he served in Europe in the 12th Armored Division as a combat infantryman.[8]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_Kristol

>female "humor"
kys