Essays

Why Not Impose the Death Penalty on Bankers?

If imposed, it would be cause for great celebration.

by David Sims

THE DIRECTORS and officers of the usurious central banks are harmful to the country, so why don’t our soldiers simply shoot them as enemies? It seems like a good, swift object lesson would do much to deter the international bankers from renewing the danger. If their simultaneous hanging in every country throughout the world could be arranged, it would be cause for a great celebration.

There are degrees of guiltiness. Some capitalists (industrialists) actually do good things with their wealth, things that benefit others and maybe all of mankind. But other capitalists, who aren’t worth what they cost the rest of mankind, should be prevented from doing further harm and punished in proportion to their guilt.

Being a capitalist doesn’t automatically make someone guilty of harming other people, but typically capitalists do have the means at their disposal to harm other people. If they do harm, they deserve punishment, just as if they had used any other device or means to harm people.

The worst of the bunch are the bankers: especially the directors, governors, and shareholders of the Federal Reserve System, the Bank of England, and other central banks in the Western countries. For their crimes, death is the only penalty that satisfies the ends of justice.

Historically, when a public official, such as a Congressman or a President, gets in the bankers’ way, the bankers don’t hesitate to send an assassin to remove the obstruction. Abraham Lincoln, James Garfield, and Louis T. McFadden — and probably John F. Kennedy — were killed because of the greed of the bankers.

So what in the world can be said against, legally, turning the tables and killing the bankers? Not one thing, I should think.

And the politicians who enabled the bankers? They are traitors who have allied themselves with those who make war against their own country. It should not be necessary to mention what should be done with them.

* * *

Source: David Sims

For Further Reading

Previous post

Israel Won’t Take Venezuela Converts

Next post

Exodus Redux: Jewish Identity and the Shaping of History

5 Comments

  1. Anthony Collins
    January 12, 2017 at 5:39 am — Reply

    Sad to say, the following passage from Gustave Le Bon’s book, The Psychology of Socialism (New York: Macmillan, 1899), has proven to be unduly optimistic (p. 294):

    “As the danger of allowing the intervention of financiers in public affairs has not yet become too conspicuous, the [American] public does not trouble about the matter. When this danger does appear, which will probably happen before very long, the Americans will employ their usual energy in remedying the evil. In such matters their proceedings are abrupt but efficient. We know how they rid themselves of Chinese and negroes who embarrass them. When their financiers and prevaricators embarrass them too much they will have no scruples in lynching a few dozen of them in order to make the others reflect on the utility of virtue.”

    Why these things did not happen may be explained by a preceding passage (pp. 292-93):

    “There is plainly no possible excuse for the financial manners of the United States. They are a disgrace to the country. However, since the Americans accommodate themselves to them very well and do not find them in the least dishonouring, it must be because they correspond to a certain ideal, which we must try to comprehend. The love of wealth is at least as widespread in Europe as in America, but we have preserved certain ancient traditions, so that even though our shady promotors and slippery financiers are envied when they succeed, they are none the less despised, and regarded much in the light of fortunate pirates. They are tolerated, but we should never think of comparing them with our scientists, artists, soldiers, and sailors — with men, that is, who lead careers that are often ill-paid, but that demand a certain elevation of thought or sentiment of which the greater number of financiers are completely destitute.

    “In a country such as America, a country without traditions, almost exclusively devoted to commerce and industry, in which a perfect equality reigns, and in which no social hierarchy exists, since all employments of any importance, including those of the magistracy, are filled by holders who are incessantly being renewed, and, for the rest, enjoy no more distinction than the smallest of shopkeepers; in such a country, I say, only one distinction can exist — that of fortune. The worth of an individual, his power, and his social position are consequently measured solely by the number of dollars he possesses. The pursuit of dollars, accordingly, becomes the ideal which is constantly kept in sight, and all means are good means to realise it. The importance of a career is measured only by what it brings in. Politics are regarded as a simple trade which ought largely to remunerate those who engage in it. Although this conception is plainly very dangerous and very base, the public accepts it in entirety, since it does not scruple to give its voice to politicians who are most notorious for their habits of pillage.

    “Politics considered as a matter of commerce implies the formation of syndicates to exploit it. . . .”

    The kind of materialist culture and institutionalized corruption described here is not easily reformed, and it surely did much to enable to the Jewish conquest of America in the twentieth century. The Jews, after all, excel at “the formation of syndicates” and at “gaming the system.”

    • Anthony Collins
      January 13, 2017 at 8:53 am — Reply

      In 1919, Adolf Hitler wrote the following in a letter to Adolf Gemlich:

      “If the ethos of the Jews is revealed in the purely material realm, it is even clearer in their thinking and striving. Their dance around the golden calf is becoming a merciless struggle for all those possessions we prize most highly on earth.

      “The value of the individual is no longer decided by his character or by the significance of his achievements for the totality, but exclusively by the size of his fortune, by his money.

      “The loftiness of a nation is no longer to be measured by the sum of its moral and spiritual powers, but rather by the wealth of its material possessions.

      “This thinking and striving after money and power, and the feelings that go along with it, serve the purposes of the Jew, who is unscrupulous in the choice of methods and pitiless in their employment. . . .

      “His method of battle is that public opinion which is never expressed in the press but which is nonetheless managed and falsified by it. His power is the power of money, which multiplies in his hands effortlessly and endlessly through interest, and which forces peoples under the most dangerous of yokes. Its golden glitter, so attractive in the beginning, conceals the ultimately tragic consequences. Everything men strive after as a higher goal, be it religion, socialism, democracy, is to the Jew only a means to an end, the way to satisfy his lust for gold and domination.”

      Materialism works to denature the goyim and empower the Jews. In a materialistic society, money is the measure of all things, and the Jews are free to exercise what Theodor Herzl called the “terrible power of the purse.”

    • February 19, 2017 at 11:09 am — Reply

      It’s time to reward Jew banksters for their service in the cause of enslaving mankind.

  2. George Wright
    January 12, 2017 at 8:48 pm — Reply

    An astute observation of the financial system and the people who pull it’s levers. Well done, David.

  3. February 19, 2017 at 11:14 am — Reply

    Sounds like a good, solid plan.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Slander, crude language, incivility, off-topic drift, or remarks that might harm National Vanguard or its users may be edited or deleted, even if unintentional. Comments may be edited for clarity or usage.