Unlike the Republic of California, with the bear flag the state still has, the Republic of Texas was not a short-term stopgap. It existed for over eight years and three men were elected President of the Republic, two serving out their full terms.
The United States recognized the Republic of Texas in 1836, after they had defeated Mexico. The US did not send a full ambassador but a Charge d’Affaires. That is a rank below ambassador, but that has nothing to do with the extent of recognition. The United States sends no ambassador at all to Liechtenstein, whose foreign affairs are handled by Switzerland, but it has full recognition of its sovereignty.
The Texas Navy actually drove the Mexican Navy completely out of the Gulf of Mexico.
One President of Texas did not want Texas to become part of the United States. He wanted it to take the whole West from Mexico and set up a Republic that consisted of everything from the east border of the Lone Star Republic to the Pacific.
None of this happened in New England, so it is not part of American History.
One special thing about the Republic of Texas is that, for its entire history, it outlawed banks.
Not just a National Bank, which Alexander Hamilton proposed and Jefferson and Jackson opposed, but ALL banks.
Banks were very different then. A bank lent people money when THEY needed it, but they also took the money or the farm when THEY needed it. This was usually at the worst possible time, because if the bank was in financial trouble, it was in bad economic times. The practice of making loans for a set period was for rich people, and it did not become common until fairly recently.
The old banks also set the rate of interest very high for those who were less liable to be able to pay it back when the time came. The value of a farm on the market moved very, very fast, as did the value of its crops. When things were bad, the Cruel Banker was there to take everything.
In other words bankers could not afford to be nice guys.
In the Middle Ages, the rates at which even kings borrowed money would make a street loan-shark today green with envy. You can only imagine what they charged regular people.
People know these simple facts but they never THINK about them. That was the introduction our ancestors had to Jews.
If you want to know how Jews were viewed before the Greatest generation, there is one story in the Raffles, the Gentleman Burglar series that shows Raffles dealing with a Jewish moneylender. It’s worth reading because it is genuinely pre-PC thought.
This Jew was not a cringing, tiny, peace-loving type hated by the Authorities. He was tough and he was MEAN. He was a big-time loan shark, all of whose activities were then legal, and the cops liked him a lot more than they liked Raffles.
Our people didn’t like Jews and they didn’t like banks. For bankers and Jews, cruelty and ruthlessness was a way of life. They could not have survived otherwise.
It is always said that the Church allowed Jews to lend money because there was no Jewish law against usury. Actually there was one. They weren’t supposed to charge OTHER JEWS interest. I’ve never seen that mentioned, but the laws against usury come from the JEWISH Old Testament.
When your business requires cruelty, you HAVE to develop an attitude towards the people in general that you can see in the attitude of one New Yorker towards humanity in general. The fact that there is a reason for a person to become brutal does not change he fact that he IS brutal.
Our ancestors did not understand banking, but they did understand ruthless, vicious people without mercy. That, too, is normal human behavior.
But then again, Political Correctness says that white goyim don’t have reasons.
#1 by Dave on 04/29/2010 - 11:11 am
There are scores of Jewish families primarily in NY and LA that are incubators for Jewish business skills that are to business what Ichiro’s batting skills are to baseball.
Many on our side have an extremely difficult time coming to terms with these Jewish masters of business and money.
Americans have not found a way to keep them in line politically, but you have to remember that this particular brand of Jew has a history of compatibility with right wing structures such as in the Franco regime in Spain or the Trujillo regime in the Dominican Republic.
Maybe a military dictatorship is required to keep them in line.
#2 by DeepfriedElvis on 04/29/2010 - 9:36 pm
They do slip in depictions of just how mean they are, but hide it from naive gentiles by calling them “Russian mafia.” In the Dubai hit we also got a glimpse of what vicious thugs those “innocent violinists” really are. Matt Dillon directed a whole movie “City of Ghosts” about a Jewish Madoff type swindler (played by James Khan) on the run from the FBI being hunted down by Russian Jews he double crossed and a crooked Khmer General he is in Business with. Of course only those with Jewdar figure this out. A dozen years ago before the internet I had assumed it was just random white guys pulling off all these swindles.
#3 by backbaygrouch4 on 04/30/2010 - 6:34 am
Last month Gilad Atzmon gave a more elaborate presentation of this point. Money quote:
“Jewish history is a set of fables tied clumsily together to portray a false image of a victorious narrative. Jewish history is a set of blind spots bundled together by myth, fantasies and lies, in order to present the illusion of a coherent past narrative and a vague semblance of chronology…. In Jewish history texts chronology always launches when Jewish suffering begins. Jewish history transcends itself beyond the notion of causality. It persuades us that persecution of Jews occurs out of nowhere. The Jewish historical text avoids the necessary questions as to why hostility evolves time after time, why do Jews buy so many enemies and so easily.”
For the complete article:
http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/judea-declares-war-on-obama-by-gilad-atzmon.html
#4 by backbaygrouch4 on 04/30/2010 - 6:48 am
Dave, I am familiar with the Franco regime and cannot recall any allegations or insinuations of business connections with Jewry. Could you indulge me with details? It is a matter of interest.
During WWII some Jews entered Spain, mostly as a way stop. A few lingered but were marginalized as they were often communists and poor. During my years in Mallorca during the Franco era I met a couple of such individuals. Their lot was not privileged nor were they favored.
#5 by Dave on 04/30/2010 - 11:22 am
Backbaygrouch,
I don’t have details. The famous story is of Franco refusing to hand Jewish refugees over to the Nazis, but that was not my point. I assumed Franco did this in order not offend Spain’s indigineous Jews. As a devout Catholic he could tolerate Jews as long as they supported his regime.
Trujillo brought in Jews for the same reason Canadians allow anyone to immigrate with a net worth of over one million dollars. He wanted their investment.
#6 by unjew on 05/02/2010 - 7:55 am
I don’t have details. The famous story is of Franco refusing to hand Jewish refugees over to the Nazis, but that was not my point….
Wow. After the Danish king declaring that “We’re all jews now!!!~1” and the Bulgarian king *refusing* to give his precious jews to Hitler, this is the third time I’ve encountered that tired bullshit fable.
I am sure you’ll find it (or a variation thereof) in every European country, if you cared to look. It is always for local consumption, after all, we are all guilty for not saving gods’ precious pets from ZE NAZIS. The gullible goyim in each European country KNOW how they saved THEIR jews and if it wasn’t for the craven cowards in the rest of Europe, the world wouldn’t have lost the sixty million genius whatevers we’re reminded to mourn for at least 20 times a day.
Fact: Hitler didn’t need anyone else’s jews – he had enough trouble putting his own to work.
Fact: Bulgarian jews were interned in Bulgarian labour camps, just like everywhere else in Axis countries. Hitler didn’t need the added cost of shipping jews all across Europe just to have them do more lousy work – they could do lousy work anywhere. It simply didn’t make any economic sense. Still doesn’t.
Fact: Nobody cared what the Danish king said. Certainly not Hitler.
Common sense: If Hitler wanted them dead, the jews would be dead.
For people who have a taste for the peculiar and the bizarre when inventing stories, jews tend to be really unimaginative and dull. Same erzatz lies, supplications, threats plus the absolute certainty that everyone is just dying to listen all day long about thejewsthejewsthejews and the obstacles they incessantly battle.
*That* goes a long way towards explaining pogroms.