Why did Andrew Jackson fight the Second Bank of the United States if he was a Freemason...

Why did Andrew Jackson fight the Second Bank of the United States if he was a Freemason? Is a public debt not one of the chief desires of the NWO/Masons?

No, exactly the opposite.

The opposite of what?

>my little roofucker cannot be this bluepilled

Of what is desired.

Can either of you answer my question truthfully please? It seems to be contradictory.

It's not contradictory, you're just working from bad info. Remember (((they))) want you to hate the masons, use places like GLP to have you think it's been "infiltrated", or a proponent of things which serve things you don't like.

You should get a hold of first hand literature to see what the aims are.

What first-hand literature?

When did the masons split from Illuminati?

Ritual books. Things masons use to make more masons.
>When did the masons split from Illuminati?
Never? The Illuminati was founded much later in life, and failed to accomplish anything of worth. If you examine records from before and after said formation, you'll see that not a hole lot changed.

The private sector argued for full privatization. The US bank was obligated to the Treasury, so financiers found it restrictive, and Jackson did not support its recharter. Banking remained integral, however, as it always has under capitalism.

Are you arguing that there is no conspiracy from Jackson's perspective?

Practically, no. Politically, yes.

The American Freemasons defied the European Freemasons. Washington made a deal to start a "false" insurrection in the Colonies in exchange for greater British control, but then the Council found that they were double-crossed by an actual revolution too late. In the same year that the US declared independence, the Illuminati was created for fear of any moles in the original Masons. The Founding Fathers, Jackson, and Lincoln are probably one of the only few examples we have of a group of men who successfully defeated the Globalists (known as Internationalists back then).

If you want to know what Washington's mock deal would've been if true, look at the French Revolution.

Breaking news. Some elites do things other elites don't like.

Thank you I think you answered my question best.

Thanks I just needed to hear someone else say it.

I think we're done here.

thank you, i could never square away why the revolution was kicked off via false flag

what's your take on McKinley?

>the Council
Which council would that be? And which groups are you referring to? You do know that there aren't unified continental bodies, right?

>Thank you I think you answered my question best.
By making stuff up?

A short rebellion of American masons over the jew loving satanic/Luciferian European ones.

Sadly it did not last, and modern N.A. masons are just as judaized as all others. Masons are seduced with the ideology that all men are spiritually dead, and that only through Lucifer's light can they create a spirit "form" (astral light) of which they live on in forever.

The reality is that we exist in multiple frequencies in infinite variation, and that when we die we are always going to be immortal because of it. Masonic initiation actually involves moving to the opposite of ascending to Godhood, in that they glorify ego and commit sadistic and pedophilic acts in order to ingratiate their ego in the service of saturn (another representation of the primordial not All)

Freemasonry is of course a jewish trick, the jews functioning as the tempters and punishers of mankind for sin, and a people who do not actually believe in heaven or hells, and when a jew dies he becomes one with nothing, the demiurge Jehovah from the Talmud.

Contrary to the jew is the aryan, who has a pantheistic view, understanding that in order to get closer to God you follow natural law (serving in heaven) as opposed to trying to get around and breaking it (freemasonry, thelema, satanism, and judaic qaballah)

The reason freemasonry is subversive is not solely due to associating with the false enticing light of Lucifer, which can be a common mistake, but rather their desire to be above natural law. Which in itself is a desire to transcend morality. Yet we know from basic arithmetic and algebra that we cannot get a positive from mixing both negative and positive, and so the ideology of moral transcendence only equals a negative, [(1+(-1)] = 0.

The goal instead should be to understand Lucifer not as evil, but as tempter created by the creator himself, and that his role is to entice you to want to be God, as opposed to being one with God as a piece of the mind of All.

bumping for McKinley

The lure of Lucifer is the pride and prestige that could come of being lord and master of your own universe. To become a God, not in the assuming of archetypal Jungian sense, but to quite literally be a lord of your own universe within the infinite infinity.

The falsity and arrogance here leads to lower chakra behavior and belief. Freemasons are often pedophiles, sadists, murderers, and thieves. They work with jews to betray their own people, and they disdain the uninitiated as they call them as nothing but animals, which is a reflection of exactly what their initiation creates in them.

Ironically they become even less spiritually enlightened than before their initiation, engaging in depravities in the quest to transcend the boundaries of dualistic morality, and in so doing creating a relativistic framework and perception of reality. This is of course the jewish mindset, that nothing matters, there is no up or down or good or evil, merely perspective in the infinite all.

The reality is God is not both good and evil, there is a necessary dichotomy and spectrum between the two, in which chakra raising is specifically about reaching closer to ultimate good, and to shun ultimate evil.

This relativistic framework is why the modern freemasons and jews are so readily accepting of mongrel races, and actually encourage race mixing within their own ranks. It stems from the belief that nothing matters, and that clear defined lines between things do not exist, a reductionist mindset as opposed to the aryan holistic one.

This is why the supposed "illuminati" of the modern age are engaged in things like pedogate, and why they push for race mixing and globalism. They wish there to be a great nothing, a void of meaning and discerning between things. No pickiness, just variations and "diversity" of perception. It is echoed in their jewish literature, even in popular literature like star trek, the spock quote "infinite diversity in infinite variation"

What they fail to realize however, is that without the judgmental attitude towards morality, sex, race, preference, and belief, there does not exist anything at all. It is a tending to the great emptiness, which is the jewish master.

Without clearly defined differences and hierarchy, there is nothing at all but mush.

I know a lot of secret things about Andrew Jackson. My direct ancestor was Martin Van Buren, Jackson got a lot of money from the banks so he could fund the mitary effort to expand white territory into indian territory. He forced the Cherokees to relocate from NC to Oklahoma. Before that there was a special division of land given to the elite families of the time several years before the Oklahoma land rush, land given was in Missouri and Oklahoma before it was called that it was just indian territory.

...

And he fought back against the debts owed to the banks because he didnt owe them as much as they said he did. They also tried fucking the gov out of land.

Get the rakes. Wew lads.

Fuck off jew. Your race is going to fucking burn.

...

So this is what alex jones/ben carson was talking about

Damn, we're at war with a bunch of nihilists.

A lot of people from Missouri lived peacefully with the natives until the Americans came desu.

Basically ya. They're also jealous bastards who cannot do anything but bring everyone down to their level.

Have you heard of the Sedona Forum? It's some pretty creepy, bilderburg-esque stuff.

>thinking above government groups like masons,illuminati, opus dei etc actually work together

Mason user here, most of us are conservatives and nationalist. I here Continental Freemasonry is different.

I doubt very much a secret organization can keeps its integrity over the many hundreds of years the freemasons have been around

Wasn't there some kind of shadowy organization that sells carriers and has private millitary? something about former east indian trade

10/10 Interesting Perspective
Keep preaching Leaf, I recommend getting a proxy so people take you more seriously. I appreciate anons that have accepted the esoteric redpill.

>When did the masons split from Illuminati?

go ask the catholics

Haha, ya I might have gotten more of a genuine attention if I wasn't a leaf it's true.

Still even though I am a leaf, I am one with the spirit of the national socialists. Of which we all are on Sup Forums well at least the genuine ones on here.

>look at the French Revolution.

most of the French aristocracy who helped the American revolution were executed during the French revolution

>Which council would that be?

council of 300, the black nobility, Guelphs etc

>due to associating with the false enticing light of Lucifer,

which is the exact same El thats in the bible

>Freemasons are often pedophiles, sadists, murderers, and thieves. They work with jews to betray their own people, and they disdain the uninitiated as they call them as nothing but animals, which is a reflection of exactly what their initiation creates in them.

so you're saying they are just like everyone else with unhealthy addictions? which is like all of humanity?

George Washington was a fucking freemason. If you're using that as a the litmus test for whether someone is trust worthy you're going to be very confused.

They're worse. They're closer to demons than anyone else. Further away from the All.

That's good to hear, I feel like I'm starting to go beyond my NatSoc stage however. It's not that NatSoc is wrong but I think that it's right because it captures a lot of elements of a greater ideal. You should read some Julius Evola if you haven't already I believe he walks the perfect line between NatSoc/Fascism and Traditionalism.

Free Masons were not originally "evil". They may be or at least seem that way now but Masons are the ones who wrote the constitution and fought for this country to exist.

Not only did they fight and found, they fought to preserve its purity. Without getting too conspiratorial before bed, it's almost like "Masons V Iluminati" is a thing...or was a thing.

DUDE WEED

L M A O
M
A
O

If by traditionalism you mean golden age ideology then I'd agree, but monarchies are degenerate filth and we all know it. Inbred and generally just ugly and nasty.

Golden age racial purity and spiritual emphasis is what we need, not monarchy, which is actually the first dark ideology which led us from golden to iron age. Monarchy affirmed class over race, and hereditary lineage of a specific class above the others in the race as superior. It is a subversive jewish ideology, and precisely how the jew thinks of itself in modern society.

Is it any surprise that we see the modern royals engaging in pedophilia and other depravities?

The only class is racial and spiritual purity taken together. If you attempt to create a separate sub class, you will invariably end in inbred filth, which of course the jews used to manipulate their ideology into white aryan civilization.

My best guess as to why the golden age of man failed is precisely this. The pride of the top performers of the time trying to divide themselves further, creating a false manmade narrative alien to the original racial archetype. It was a cruel attempt by man to control nature, to be above that which he naturally is, which ultimately manifests into what we see today: transhumanism, anti racism, and universalism.

>The only class is racial and spiritual purity taken together
this is the key

the underlying truth that matters. we are divided racially by a spiritual war. One for our ethos.

Monarchy or an Aristocratic Republic would fall under the idea of Traditionalism.

The idea you're missing is the necessity of inequality and hierarchy. The natural order of this Universe is a Grand Heirarchy. Before all is God, then Angels, Man, Spirits, Demons, and Lucifer. In all systems there is hierarchy, be it ecosystems or the human family. Much the same, society necessitates that.

I get where you're coming from with the belief that if a country was all white it would run better than it does now, but our ancestors had that and things were not always great, especially when things fell out of balance and into anarchy.

The monarchies left around today are all shit though, and you are right for thinking it. The Queen of England is a crypto-Jew as well as the Saudi family. A monarch or emperor should live as a stoic/philospher King, much like Aristotle envisioned and Marcus Aurelius ruled (pic related).

The Bible has the answer this time.

Right, the rich and poor are also well defined and will always exist in the world of man.

None the less, I very much agree with you, everything you believe are the steps we need to take towards the golden age of humanity.

>our ancestors had that
you're mistaken.

There should be more to define heiarchy than wealth, capitalism has fabricated the that idea. Heiarchy should be based on merit and social class. A social class can perfect itself to behave in a cultured way in order to guide society.

>?
You're saying there were never homogenous nations?

Hierarchy can only be based in nature user. If you try to create abstractions like "King" or "Queen" you are already deviation from natural law.

Hierarchies in nature exist as merging of both genetic and spiritual. In other words, a family of inbred bastards should not be the leaders, rather the leader should be the most deserving and radiant specimen of the species (I do not consider non whites human) should express authority.

Authority however is not in line with higher spiritual consciousness. It is inherently of the lowest chakra. One of tribe, domination, sexual lust etc.

The way we avoid having mongrel subhumans in position of power in our society is being racially homogeneous, and in naturally delegating authority to those who know most or are best suited to tasks to take command temporarily. I stress the word temporarily, because prolonged rule always decays, as it is channeling the lower consciousness.


Golden age society was likely Erisian, not traditional roman esque monarchy. Leaders only existed in so far as necessity arose, and only temporarily until a specific mission was achieved. As I said before, I believe the golden age decayed into silver specifically because we implemented monarchy based on the flawed position you hold. Your contention that a family of "upper class" peoples should hold authority indefinitely is jewish and antithetical to aryan spirituality and racial theory.

A single family is a terrible sample to pick perpetual leaders from in genetic terms. It will always result in inbred abomination, because it is not in line with nature of drawing superior specimens from large n or population.

In other words, how likely do you think superior specimens are going to come from one family, when the natural tendency among breeding over time is the dilution of genius and beauty? Drawing from multiple aryans avoids sub class creation (jewish idea) and the race mixing that inevitably comes with it.

>Is a public debt not one of the chief desires of the NWO/Masons?


It wasn't until The Grand Orient of France and (((B'nai B'rith))) subverted the rest of the lodges... and then The Holy See (see: "Vatican 2" aka Novus Ordum)

Civil War was basically a fuckton of B'nai B'rith Zio-bankers working hand in hand with the Scottish Rite out of Charleston.

History sadly becomes (((His))) Story though, and that's what 99.5% of you get and believe.

you will always have poverty of the mind- while I am wealthy.

Nothing you can prove then?

>but monarchies are degenerate filth
>(((you)))

>It wasn't until The Grand Orient of France and (((B'nai B'rith))) subverted the rest of the lodges
The GoDF have been excommunicated for quite a long time, and any lodges even looking to be similar to the are wiped out. And the BB aren't anything related to Masonry.
>Civil War was basically a fuckton of B'nai B'rith Zio-bankers working hand in hand with the Scottish Rite out of Charleston.
Is this the tinfoil version of "the civil was was about slavery"?

No he's not mistaken, the jewish "sciences" of today are mistaken, and they are specifically manipulated by masons to be so.

he's mistaken. we always had slaves pushed on our countries. "Illegal immigration 1.0"

You guys are brainwashed stooges who smoke too much weed. I'm out.

You must not be white, did you even read everything I wrote?

How could anyone who read the full text think I am jewish? I have called them multiple times the servants of pure evil, and a mongrel race of bastards and degenerates.

Aussies truly are the worst posters. Even worse than leafs.

Sounds like Evola to me.

freemasonry was a gift to this country. i wish it still had influence

>I'm out

Back to plebbit you mongrel subhuman cancer.

kike

Cool story babe, now why don't you go back to the kitchen and make me a sandwich

The NWO is not the Masons. Tangentially related, but only in one of the higher level sects, for lack of a better word. There are sects that most master masons have never heard of until approached by one.

Terrible trolling jewish filth. 0/10

...

Go look at the rules governing the first and second national bank. They were not fractional reserve banks but rather equity banks. They were forbidden from making loans greater the capital held:


>1. be forbidden to buy government bonds.
>2. have a mandatory rotation of directors.
>3. neither issue notes nor incur debts beyond its actual capitalization.

So you can see pretty quickly that the national bank set up by Washington/Hamilton was not very useful to the usurers in robbing the people. They couldn't bring the government into debt to the bank, nor could they rob through unlimited printing presses.

This is partly why Jackson fought the national banking system on behalf of the freemasons.

Of course there are bigger perspectives to take like destabilizing the nation in preparation for an attempted balkanization program (civil war) where both sides were funded and instigated by the freemasons (see Golden Circle, Skull & Bones, Russell Trust).

>When did the masons split from Illuminati?

You're looking at it wrong. The Illuminati is there, it just remains hidden from the vast majority of masons.

These threads are beyond autistic, it's like stepping into an asylum every single time

We understand the nature of genetics at this point so we would never inbreed, and I never expressed that individuals would have family only within their class.

You seem to feel that heiarchy would somehow cause fragmentation in society but it wouldn't because there would need to be some social mobility. It would simply be that enlightened individuals climb the social ladder towards forms of leadership. I agree that a specific leader wouldn't be necessary, we could easily have a Republic. An Aristocratic Republic really is the best form of government. It is a Jewish idea that Aristocracy be inflated to Plutocracy, when in reality Aristocracy meant "rule of the best" which essentially made it meritocracy which is what the Classical Greeks and Romans prospered under. It was their fall into extravagancy and warfare that caused their decline, not any form of an inbred nobility.

>You must not be white, did you even read everything I wrote?
I am, and i did, my Inuit friend. Which is why i disagree with your petulant, and pro-Zionist spiel.
If you did care about race, you would want monarchy. Not this hippy fantasy land you speak of.

lol @ Lincoln defeating the globalists. Dude was the same sort of big government/big business whore as the current crop of globalist politicians. Jackson was the complete opposite of Lincoln politically and would have hated his guts.

Freemasonry isn't inherently evil. Like all knowledge its a neutral tool.

Yes, but the problem with that ideology is that the "best" who are given authority (authority being lower consciousness mentality) for a long time go mad. They become evil, and they begin to sacrifice to heathen Gods and rape children for more occultic power.

This is the reason why I do not think prolonged authority should ever exist. While human being are one with all chakras, we should always tend to the higher. Which means that only temporarily should the lower consciousness be invoked.

Leadership when needed, dissipated when not. So basically we should have no formal hierarchy that is abstract, because invariably roles shift due to different goals. If we have a monarchy hierarchy, even if by meritocracy. it will not always be by meritocracy, because where one gains power due to skills in one area, they may be inferior in another, but refuse to give up their power due to ego and other satanic emotions.

Erisiainism is the best way, because here civilization is holistic, in that it cannot devolve into power struggles and wars for glory and ego, because the ego is kept in check by roles being switched and only the most worthy doing the tasks to which they are best suited.

>Stage 3
>Trump

Pick too.

Lefties were right all along.

Monarchists in the modern age are the biggest proponents of the jews, and engage in the same depravities they do. They are mixed with jews, and it's testament to the depravity that retarded ideology brings us.

It is a perversion of natural law. No man may have authority over another, we may only temporarily engage in roles to achieve ends.

Breaking of natural law always leads to pain and suffering. Always.

Hmmm, just like Trump.

Actually it is, because their entire goal is to transcend morality. To become amoral, which really is just being immoral (not caring for morals).

A positive+negative= negative.

Consider this quote from George Washington:

>It was not my intention to doubt that, the Doctrines of the Illuminati, and principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more truly satisfied of this fact than I am.

>The idea that I meant to convey, was, that I did not believe that the Lodges of Free Masons in this Country had, as Societies, endeavoured to propagate the diabolical tenets of the first, or pernicious principles of the latter (if they are susceptible of seperation). That Individuals of them may have done it, or that the founder, or instrument employed to found, the Democratic Societies in the United States, may have had these objects; and actually had a seperation of the People from their Government in view, is too evident to be questioned.

Let us start to break it down.

He calls the Illuminati "diabolical" and the jacobins "pernicious."

Now, diabolical might naively be interpreted as evil but it isn't obvious that it was Washington's meaning. As a very educated man, knowing that both Jesus and the snake in the garden are identified as the morning star, we might take the hint that in this case diabolical is simply meant to convey good aims taken with extreme cleverness.

On the other hand, the jacobins who are unquestionably birthed from the established secret societies (freemasons) are described as pernicious which can only be interpreted as bad.

Then Washington goes on to tell you that the the founder (himself) had the principles of the illuminati so clearly that it was "too evident to be questioned."

And what of the separation of the people from their government?

Well, if you are familiar with history at all and therefore know that mankind has been governed and trodden upon by secret societies (the actual government before the revolution) then it makes sense why the founder (Washington) had in mind a separation of the people from their government.

Well put!

>Monarchists in the modern age are the biggest proponents of the jews
So it's Jewish to support something anti-Jewish? Are you actually preferring (((politicians)))?
>No man may have authority over another
God you're naive. You sound like a tumblr sap spouting "we're all equal!"

Are you guys arguing with the leaf just for the sake of it? Nothing he's said sounds outrageous.

The truth is it will be easy to keep government out of our lives once jews niggers and spics are gone.

Lincoln tried. Never forget that.

What he's saying is the opposite of naive imo

Washington even tells you that the American revolution was indeed a war against the old ways of the secret societies by saying,

> that I did not believe that the Lodges of Free Masons in this Country had, as Societies, endeavoured

that there was division within the ranks. Pretty much the only time you have seen this on any significant scale before was when Jesus started an insurrection against freemasonry 1800 years prior.

So you can start to see how the Illuminati (origin 1776) was a psy-op by American intelligence (the real revolutionaries) to sow discord, confusion, and division within the ranks of freemasonry and therefore make possible the success of the revolution.

Washington was later assassinated for this, showing conclusively that he was fighting them all along and they didn't know what had hit them until it was too late.

1) Monarchy is completely pro jewish. From the jew lover Charlemagne making usury legal and welcoming the jews, to modern british elites raping and murdering children in the name of jewish satanic qaballah.

2) You're the naive one. You know nothing of esoteric natural law, and the harsh consequences to breaking it.

I am spouting precisely the opposite to "we're all equal" I am saying races are different, and racial purity is the only class there ever can be, because it is based in the natural world, something real, as opposed to abstractions like politics, monarchy positions etc.

Abstraction = jewish mindset

Holistic naturalism = aryan mindset

Abstraction breaks down and catalogs arbitrarily, holistic naturalism allows nature to do what she does naturally, without the arrogant interference of low conscious imbeciles like you.

Costantly shifting our leaders out would cause more harm than good. There would never be a unified vision or anyone to enforce the form of government when a strong-willed and charismatic individual gets into a position of power. An Aristocracy or Monarchy is a system that bars out individuals who have the wrong end goals. Everyone in a position of power would be against any one individual gaining too much power and would do something to stop them. All the same, the court of the monarch wouldn't want an overly ambitious individual coming into too much favor of the King.

I absolutely agree that an aristocracy or monarchy can be flawed and fall into deviency, but that is why they should be replaced by a revolution/renewal every couple of hundred years-- sort of in line with the discordian ideals you have.

How could a society be based on racial purity of it becomes homogenous at some point? Would it be that if person A is 1% less white than person B that he is of a lower class/caste? That would be imbecile.

That cycle is quite literally hell. Insanity. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a newer better result.

You're misunderstanding. I am not saying we switch dictators every so often, I am saying there is no such thing as centralized authority at all. Except in the extraordinary time in which it is needed (some crisis etc.)

There would be a unified vision. Natural racially pure and spiritually pure society, living for the sole purpose of improving both racial (eugenics good breeding) and spiritual (chakra awakening).

Ultimately our goal is to be one with God or ultimate good. That's the greater vision, not petty buildings to ingratiate lower emotions and monetary wealth.

Eugenics practiced. Along with spiritual ascendance.

Both are valued equally, and both go together. As above so below. As below so above.

>1) Monarchy is completely pro jewish.
Oh, are we ignoring all the monarchs who expelled Jews from their nations, as well as ignoring the (((democratic))) governments who welcomed them back?
Face it. Jews can't buy a monarch. They can buy a parliament.
>2) You're the naive one. You know nothing of esoteric natural law,
This from a Discordian?
>I am spouting precisely the opposite to "we're all equal" I am saying races are different
And that's where you stop. If you listened to yourself, you'd realise that some people are better than others.

Maybe do more research into what you think are your own views?

Andrew jackson was a cut above the normal. A step ahead of most schemes.

Lincoln fought the freemasons. Identity politics is a weapon of the freemasons. Stop it.

>some people are better than others

Yes this is true, hence my emphasis on eugenics and arranged marriages and natural racial castes.

>Jews can't buy a monarch

Yes they can, they needed only to infect the monarchy with notions of their own ionherent superiority over their fellow whites, which led them to practice degenerate shit like qaballah and satanism. This later degraded them to hedonistic fools, and they became susceptible to corruption. Jews have ran the british empire since the early 1700's. One might say even earlier, given their subversion in roman catholicism.