naughty (adj.)

"late 14c., nowghty, noughti "needy, having nothing," also "evil, immoral, corrupt, unclean," from nought, naught "evil, an evil act; nothingness; a trifle; insignificant person; the number zero" (from Old English nawiht "nothing;" see naught)) + -y (2).

"Specific meaning "sexually promiscuous" is from 1869. The mitigated sense of "disobedient, bad in conduct or speech, improper, mischievous" (especially of the delinquencies of children) is attested from 1630s. Related: Naughtily; naughtiness. In 16c.-18c. a woman of bad character might be called a naughty pack (also sometimes used of men and later of children)."

A mere century and a half after the Magna Carta established that the profits of the money lenders who accompanied the French-speaking Normans across the channel to rule the English-speaking Anglo-Saxons, having no possessions was equated with being evil. The impact of the Magana Carta was not limited to withdrawing the protection of the church from the nobility and severing the traditional duty of the King to protect the commoners from its ethno-moral hinge—for the King was now of alien blood—but also manifested itself in the most obscene manner, equating acquisitive success with high morality. This would later manifest itself in the prosperity gospels preached in Plantation America and to this day.

The fact that someone who did not succeed on the material plane—perhaps having his back wrenched over a plow, thrown from a horse while delivering a message, or maimed in battle protecting the Faith or the Fief—was now regarded as an accursed creature, socially unclean and morally corrupt, was a clear and absolute victory of ancient money system morality imported from the Near East by Merchants of Venice, Templers, Lombards [de-heroized and banned from warrior status and cursed to usury by Charlemagne] and others. The Magna Carta was a triumph of spiritual colonization.

By the 1400s stiff penalties in England were levied for not having a master, for not staying in the place of one's birth, using the old medieval tradition of the serf being owned by the land, which was owned by a lord, to leverage the unsuccessful into the gripes of the soul trafficker. This would put people in increasing jeopardy in coming ages as these systems accreted and the monarchy eliminated public lands and enclosed them for the nobility and generated a vast multitude of homeless poor, who were, according to long-held tradition, intrinsically evil as evidenced by their failure to economically thrive.

Famines brought about by the Little Ice Age, which peaked between 1600 and 1816 [the precise arc of Plantation America economics] would produce many homeless and starving folk in the British Isles. With over 100 enclosure acts put into play in the same 200 year period, what resulted was a multitude of English folk who were no longer permitted to farm, fish, hunt or raise livestock on public lands, which had been awarded to the rich. This swelled cities such as London with real and potential criminals in the late 1500s, spurring the 1571 Vagabond Act, which reiterated and rejuvenated the traditional malice of the state towards the homeless, an act which also equated pennilessness and joblessness with evil, as would the Constitution of the United States of America just over 200 years later, continuing the severing ethnic ties between the elite and the common man.

Note that in the 1630s this term of "naughty" or should we say "zeroness" tended to be applied to the children of the poor. This happened to coincide with mass trafficking in English children, which, by 1680, according to a dedicated contemporary pamphleteer, exceeded 10,000 kidnapped children and as many legally trafficked children per year. The displacement of rural folk into cities also produced the combat art of boxing in the London Prize Ring, as "likely" bruisers from the countryside with few job prospects would be taken under the care of a patron who would match him in bouts more vicious than any dog fight, for bet money stakes.

Women were, as early as 1619, being trafficked as unwilling wives and hoe wives [being a laboring concubine] and came under the shroud of evil described as naughtiness if they failed to be obedient slaves. A woman being called "a naughty pack" might have something to do with the fact that those women who ran away from servitude tended to steal as many of their mistress' or master's clothes and blankets as possible.

Note that naughty is not applied to sexually promiscuous women until after Plantation Economics collapsed in 1865. At this time the remaining forms of slavery were the heavily coerced mining operations in Appalachia, forced service of kidnapped and unpaid sailors, and the exploitation of any woman who could be found without the protection of a man, all of whom were considered free game for abduction and brothel imprisonment [often enforced by police] and pimping, which was risky as it went against the brothel system supported by the police.

The ideal of naughtiness, under the long shadow of Plantation America, was the belief, upheld in a great body of English poor laws, that a man who was not either an owner of another man or owned by another man, neither master nor mastered, was regarded as free game for anyone who wished to abduct and exploit them, including municipal entities! Englishmen and Virginians were actually owned by local communities in the 1500s and 1600s! Children of unsuccessful parents were also fair game for chattel roundups as was any woman who was not under the protection and implied ownership and mastery of a man. This last category, unbound women, had a long tradition of being viewed as fair game for enslavement around the world and in olden times. However, the money machinations that went into enslaving the common man and his children—even snatched from the family bed under state sanction—and of turning familied children into economic orphans so that they could be sold, was not commonly paralleled in the medieval or ancient world, but stands as a unique contribution to human suffering by the Anglo-Norman elite of England.

When one wonders why tens of thousands of European American slaves ran away and fought as Indians and pirates and rebels against the state, one must consider that the Magna Carta and the half-millennia of predatory poor laws that followed, did the following to the relationship between society and it's most vulnerable members:

-If, in a cash poor economy, even as a leading citizen, if you ever find yourself in debt, than the Church, which views usury as a sin, will side with the often non-Faithful usurer in the dissolution of your estate.

-If, in a nation where the King—your once and nevermore protector—gifts the public lands you live on to wealthy supporters, rendering you homeless, jobless and penniless, you are then declared naughty—a zero—and open game for abduction and enslavement.

-If, in the nation of your birth, you, as a child, are orphaned either mortally or economically, the people of that nation have no moral duty to nurture and protect you as a member of your race, but rather look upon your misery as a boon—that boon your exploitation as human waste, literal fertilizer for a plantation where tobacco will be nourished by your moldering bones above your unmarked grave, in a land whose people will be taught that you did not exist, because you were naughty, having committed the sin of poverty by birth.

Other than the fact that the birth of our nation was an act of base social fornication presented to us as a high benediction, imbuing us with a false view of our heritage, what effects does the above stream of descending morality in Western Society have to do with us, today, in a post-ethnic, world, where national identity has been raised on the pedestal previously occupied by ethnic identity in traditional societies?

About 70% of the lands in the largest states in the union are Public Lands, national parks and BLM administration zones.

The U.S. government is already as morally bankrupt as Queen Elizabeth or Cromwell and is fiscally more bankrupt than all of the English and British traitor monarchs from 1215 through the present. If those monarchs sold their people to the money fiends, what would stop the geometrically more indebted America government from doing the same?

In 2008 millions of Americans lost their homes and jobs due to government-sanctioned banker machinations, and the 9 titanic banking firms were then rewarded with money extracted from American tax slaves!

Not long after the housing scheme made millions of Americans homeless or bankrupt, the U.S. Government sold about 50% of our Uranium to Russia, supposedly an enemy state.

As we are being replaced by imported peoples, just like the Caucasian-Amerindian tribes of Eastern North America had been displaced in Plantation America, bus loads of Chinese tourists are crawling all over the west. Private property owners in the Rocky Mountain Region are thirsting to sell their land tracks and even their whiskey distilleries to these foreigners. So how far behind will the U.S. A. be in selling public lands to international corporations, foreign nations, NGOs and domestic campaign contributors, leaving the people of these mountains with only the tiny slivers of private property for their sustenance?

Manhattan, Silicon Valley and Hollywood types are already colonizing the last zones of pure European American habitation, driving the scions of settler families away by raising property tax rates, even as rural European Americans are decried in every movie and media reference as evil because the cling to their guns and their bibles?

Has anything really changed other than perception from the year of the Magna Carta when God was driven from the world of Men and their King was relieved of his core job, that being the protection of his race and limiting their exploitation by enemies foreign and domestic?

To support this project and view some graphics go to: