The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
Open Thread 38: PortURLgal
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

london-beer-bird

So, updates, updates.

Our ROGPR podcast has been “acquired” by Sputnik & Pogrom. They are mainly interested in the videos produced by our main host Kirill Nesterov, which you can now follow at:

Only available in Russian, unfortunately.

phall-curry Apart from having my phone stolen, I also tried out the phall curry at Aladin Brick Lane – a somewhat more pleasant form of cultural enrichment, if one that I am not eager to repeat anytime soon. However, that’s one thing ticked off on my bucket list, and that is the important thing.

I am going to Portugal tomorrow today.

Will be spending a few days in Faro, a few in Lisbon. Let me know what to visit, what to do, suggest meetups, etc.

Posting will be light, since (1) I don’t have a laptop – but feel free to help change that: http://akarlin.com/donations , but also (2) I want to relax, since I haven’t had a proper holiday in years.

I have another Kholmogorov translation [see archive] in reserve that I’ll post in a couple of days.

***

Featured News

* W.D. Hill et al. (2018) – A combined analysis of genetically correlated traits identifies 187 loci and a role for neurogenesis and myelination in intelligence. James Thompson’s post.

* Count Dankula has been convicted of hate speech in the UK for getting his dog to do a Nazi salute on camera to wind up his girlfriend – and the guy’s a commie, LOL.

* Steve: Brazilian Fertility Clinics Look to American White Guys. Let bleaching commence.

* Nadiya Savchenko arrested in the Ukraine on terrorism charges, which even many Maidanists think are politically motivated (she became a big critic of Poroshenko & Co. after getting released from Russia). At least campaigning for her will be easy since you could just reuse the old memes.

* Jonathan Anomaly and Nathan Cofnas: What the Alt-Right Gets Wrong About Jews. See their article.

* Excellent trad architecture thread via Wrath of Gnon:

***

World

* Turks have finished up with Afrin rather quickly and successfully. Syria’s partitioning proceeds.

turkish-casualties-afrin

* Audacious Epigone:

* Support for gun restrictions is rapidly declining.

poll-us-gun-laws

* Americans today are much more tolerant than in the 1970s [except racists].

poll-usa-free-speech-racists

* Alexander Mercouris: America First? Enter the über-hawks: Pompeo and Bolton

* Matt Forney is going to be covering the Hungarian elections.

* Also check out this unhinged Hungarian SJW (h/t reiner Tor)

* Looks like Venezuela is approaching collapse [1, 2]

* Ann Coulter names the globalist:

* Pan, Jennifer & Xu (2018) – China’s Ideological Spectrum

David Shor: “Ideological belief in China is strongly one dimensional, but economic conservatism is heavily correlated with social liberalism. There are basically no people with beliefs we’d associate with a western center-left party.” Same in Russia.

chinese-political-spectrum

***

Russia

* Artem Zagorodnov: Why I’m Voting for Putin.

Powerful take:

zog-take

* Ben Aris: The fall in Russian interest rates is snowballing

* Bryan MacDonald: Russian election: Western demonization of Putin has made him more popular in Russia

* Paul Robinson reviews two new books on the War in Donbass.

* Leonid Bershidsky: Escalation With Russia Just Became More Likely. Yep. EU stands with Britain on Skripal, and Bolton appointed in the US.

* Sputnik & Pogrom check how many of his 2012 promises Putin fulfilled as President [in Russian]. Answer: 22/65.

* NBF: Beijing city offer US$158K for top AI and biotech talent as Google software engineers make $200-600+K. [Yes, there's a reason this is in the Russia section]

* Election results at my polling station:

* Grudinin shaves his mustache after all.

* In which Russian liberals swap their Gene Sharp handbook for Saul Alinsky’s [1, 2, 3]:

* AP on Polish/Ukrainian/Russian languages:

languages

***

Science & Culture

* NBF: Uber’s technically inferior self-driving system kills an Arizona Pedestrian. Google looks impressively dominant in this sphere.

In 2016, the reported miles before intervention in California were:

Google: 5,127.9 miles (635,868 miles driven, 124 disengagements)
BMW: 638 miles (638 miles driven, 1 disengagements)
Nissan: 263.3 miles (6,056 miles driven, 23 disengagements)
Ford: 196.6 miles (590 miles driven, 3 disengagements)
General Motors: 54.7 miles (8,156 miles driven, 149 disengagements)
Delphi Automotive Systems: 14.9 miles (2,657.7 miles driven, 178 disengagements)
Tesla: 2.9 miles (550 miles, 185 disengagements)
Mercedes-Benz: 2 miles (673 miles, 336 disengagements)
Bosch: 0.68 miles (983 miles driven, 1,448 disengagements)
Uber: 0.67 miles

* NBF: China versus USA in AI potential

* NBF: Interstellar race for the Universe. On Anders Sandberg’s most recent article.

* Rindermann, H. & Carl, N. (2018) – Human rights: Why countries differ.

* James Thompson:

* Emil Kirkegaard: How much should you trust IQ etc. information from The Guardian? Experts answer: not so much

Also congrats to Kirkegaard for getting “recognized” by the SPLC.

* All disk galaxies rotate once every billion years. Our simulators are lazy.

* NBF: Lab Grown Meat will be served in restaurants by the end of 2018 and it will be healthier. I suspect killing animals for meat might be the next great ethical revolution (c.2050).

* New Scientist: Every human culture includes cooking – this is how it began

cooking-food

* Godless Czechia vs. Holy Poland:

godless-czechia-holy-poland

* Steve on B/W qualification gap in law schools:

* Gerald of Rivia vs. Henry of Skalitz

gerald-vs-chad

***

Powerful Takes

* Commenter Thorfinnsson is an endless source of extremely powerful (in a non-ironic sense) takes.

* Some blogger: “His site is a “collective” of writers he says, but in looking at them only a few are named and one of them, Anatoly Karlin, is a straight out conspiracy Nazi connected apparatchik for Putin.

* My very powerful take on Georgian cuisine:

georgian-cuisine

* Clone experiments:

songbird-clone

* I came 3rd/58 people in predicting the results of the Russian elections at Alexander Kireev’s blog.

russia-elections-2018-predictions

* Russia’s /pol/ acknowledges my power.

russias-enemies

***

 
Show 368 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. American Jews – at least those who identify as Jews in religion – are more ethnocentric [loyal to their homeland, in their case, Israel] than the Chinese, Japanese, English/Welsh, Canadians, and Russians.

    You should mention that the data is from 1974-1994, so not exactly recent. Would be interesting to know how it is today.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. Gerald of Rivia vs. Henry of Skalitz

    Henry of Skalitz is the protagonist in that new game that was criticized for not featuring blacks in 15th century Bohemia, isn’t he?
    Any chance you’re doing a review of this one? Not that I want to encourage you to waste time on gaming…but at least it would be somewhat more interesting than Doom since the developers claimed to care about historical accuracy, and there was this controversy about it, so it does have some minor cultural relevance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    Yes, it's certainly on my review list.

    https://twitter.com/akarlin88/status/964997216724189184
    , @Randal

    that new game that was criticized for not featuring blacks in 15th century Bohemia
     
    LOL!

    Last year one of my offspring drew my attention to this game video. For some reason one of my daughters thought I'd be entertained by the following view of the game designers' supposed idea of a typical WW2 British strategic bomber crew;

    https://youtu.be/Pn8dNz858fo?t=128

    Two women, two coloureds and three white men (boo!) with moustaches. I was surprised they hadn't given a couple of the latter rainbow handkerchiefs to signal their sexual "specialness". As long as they are a minority overall, though, eh?

    It did prompt a bit of contemplation on the willingness of virtue signalling propaganda victims to lie barefacedly in order to achieve the "greater good" versus the willingness of greedy moneygrubbers to lie barefacedly in order to sell more product.
    , @LH
    @German_reader

    Henry of Skalitz is the protagonist in that new game that was criticized for not featuring blacks in 15th century Bohemia, isn’t he?

     

    Some colored blogger complained about it ( http://medievalpoc.tumblr.com/post/75252294049/hi-ive-been-looking-at-a-kickstarter-for-a ) and authors of the game were happy for such publicity, since the game was over budget and over time. Czech newspapers had a field day whenever this flared up in Western media.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. @German_reader

    Gerald of Rivia vs. Henry of Skalitz
     
    Henry of Skalitz is the protagonist in that new game that was criticized for not featuring blacks in 15th century Bohemia, isn't he?
    Any chance you're doing a review of this one? Not that I want to encourage you to waste time on gaming...but at least it would be somewhat more interesting than Doom since the developers claimed to care about historical accuracy, and there was this controversy about it, so it does have some minor cultural relevance.

    Yes, it’s certainly on my review list.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. * NBF: Uber’s technically inferior self-driving system kills an Arizona Pedestrian. Google looks impressively dominant in this sphere.

    If Navigant Research is to be believed, this may have changed: https://www.navigantresearch.com/research/navigant-research-leaderboard-automated-driving-vehicles

    Waymo remains a leader, but several of the automakers have caught up. General Motors reported as the leader, which is certainly heartening.

    The big downside for the automakers vs. the tech companies is that they’re highly regulated and do not have monopoly profits to subsidize their R&D efforts.

    See Fiat-Chrysler’s CEO Sergio Marchionne’s excellent slide deck about how brutally competitive the auto industry is: https://www.autonews.com/Assets/pdf/presentations/SM_Fire_investor_presentation.pdf

    Money shot is on page 7. The auto industry invests its entire enterprise value in capital expenditures and R&D every 4.1 years. The average across industries is 17 years, including a surprising 19 years for aerospace and defense. The Boeing-Airbus duopoly and GE-Pratt & Whitney-Rolls Royce triopoly are clearly working.

    The auto industry is consolidating, but the situation might get worse if Chinese automakers become globally competitive OEMs.

    The automakers of course have some advantages over the tech companies. They have vast networks of testing laboratories and closed circuit tracks which the tech companies lack and cannot create quickly.

    Automakers are also much more experienced in writing firmware for hardware, which makes the automaker alliances with hardware-oriented tech companies like Intel and Ericsson interesting.

    And note Daimler’s alliance with Bosch, the world leader in ECUs.

    This also calls into question Tesla’s long-term viability. Not only are they up against global OEMs with hundreds of assembly plants (Volkswagen alone is converting 20 assembly plants to EV production, and General Motors is allegedly going all-electric), but they apparently don’t have an edge in autonomous vehicles at all.

    Their vaunted giga-factory is also being countered by massive projects in Sweden, Germany, and China.

    Tesla has created a great brand in the luxury space (and luxury vehicles are 50% of global automaker profits), but Musk is basically attempting to accomplish the same production rampup Henry Ford achieved in half the time and expecting Wall Street to provide him with unlimited capital.

    Tesla’s future might be to be acquired by a global OEM–if the share price comes down to Earth.

    A negative take on Tesla: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/7-big-worries-that-could-hammer-teslas-stock-price-2018-02-07

    Read More
    • Replies: @Polish Perspective

    This also calls into question Tesla’s long-term viability. Not only are they up against global OEMs with hundreds of assembly plants (Volkswagen alone is converting 20 assembly plants to EV production, and General Motors is allegedly going all-electric), but they apparently don’t have an edge in autonomous vehicles at all.
     
    There was a recent update to Autopilot which was a huge jump in performance. AP2 lagged behind AP1 for quite a while, in no small part because the head of the AP program was changed 3 times in 2 years. But now they have Andrej Karpathy and it seems he had to rewrite the whole thing from scratch. So that was lost time but they are now gaining lost ground fast. The report you referenced is using older data.

    Their vaunted giga-factory is also being countered by massive projects in Sweden, Germany, and China.
     
    That's not the correct way to view it. The goal of Tesla was always to accelerate sustainable transportation. It would have been a failure if they were the only ones doing it.

    Secondly, the advantage of the Gigafactory is that it is vertically integrated. This will give them greater cost control and far greater possibility to do independent innovation on battery prices. They can also custom-designed batteries for only their own cars. People relying on LG, CATL or Samsung have to deal with commodotised products.

    The recent announcements does not change this disparity.

    The auto industry is consolidating, but the situation might get worse if Chinese automakers become globally competitive OEMs.
     
    If you're not all in on EVs, you will be dead. It's that simple. The Chinese made a smart bet. They understood that legacy ICE(internal combustion engine) manufacturers have in some cases a 100+ year accumulated advantage and to break into such a system is very difficult, if next to impossible. So, much better to go all in on EVs. Chinese manufacturers only do well in the domestic market on ICE technology.

    However, with EVs, they will have a shot on the global level. Of all the legacy makers in the developed world, I expect Nissan and Hyundai to do best. They are already having good models. GM's Bolt is essentially the LG Bolt. LG supplied not just the battery but even the powertrain. GM just installed the seats and the chassis and put their sticker on it. But the core tech is Korean.

    Of the legacy Western carmakers, the German ones do well, especially Daimler. Some may recall that Tesla was bailed out by Daimler back in 2008 and they had co-operation on batteries for a number of years.

    Fiat is looking quite grim. Sergio has long been a laggard on EVs. Mazda doesn't look good either. 10 years from now, a company like BYD will probably be a mainstream name like Huawei has become today. China also has the advantage of having the state backing a company like CATL to go up against Samsung, Panasonic and LG in battery production. They will have the complete supply chain needed for EVs.

    Many Europeans are now waking up to this fact, hence the recent decision by the EU to create its own battery production network. But the Koreans acted faster. There are already factories in Poland and in Hungary by LG and Samsung respectively. CATL is also looking at a production base, most likely in Central Europe. LG recently announced they would triple production capacity from the earlier stated goal. The Polish factory will now produce 5 GW, the same as the planned capacity in Sweden (which is still in planning stage).

    We'll see how it shakes out. While Europe is (belatedly) acting on the EV revolution, at least some movement is fortcoming. In the US, aside from Tesla, there is not much. The only domestic manufacturer was GM, but as previously mentioned, the GM Bolt is really the LG Bolt.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. @German_reader

    Gerald of Rivia vs. Henry of Skalitz
     
    Henry of Skalitz is the protagonist in that new game that was criticized for not featuring blacks in 15th century Bohemia, isn't he?
    Any chance you're doing a review of this one? Not that I want to encourage you to waste time on gaming...but at least it would be somewhat more interesting than Doom since the developers claimed to care about historical accuracy, and there was this controversy about it, so it does have some minor cultural relevance.

    that new game that was criticized for not featuring blacks in 15th century Bohemia

    LOL!

    Last year one of my offspring drew my attention to this game video. For some reason one of my daughters thought I’d be entertained by the following view of the game designers’ supposed idea of a typical WW2 British strategic bomber crew;

    Two women, two coloureds and three white men (boo!) with moustaches. I was surprised they hadn’t given a couple of the latter rainbow handkerchiefs to signal their sexual “specialness”. As long as they are a minority overall, though, eh?

    It did prompt a bit of contemplation on the willingness of virtue signalling propaganda victims to lie barefacedly in order to achieve the “greater good” versus the willingness of greedy moneygrubbers to lie barefacedly in order to sell more product.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    Well, at least there were a few black airmen from the West Indies who served in Bomber command during WW2 so that at least is not completely made up (even if obviously exaggerated since the vast majority of RAF airmen were British, from the white dominions, plus some Poles, Czechs etc.).
    There are lots of bizarre examples of this kind though, iirc they recently had some BBC production in which Eleanor of Aquitaine or some other medieval queen was played by an actress of Nigerian origin.
    It also seems to be prominent in some video games now, iirc there's even some shooting game about WW1 in which even German troops fighting in the trenches on the Western front are black.
    I find it rather sinister given Africa's demographic expansion, obviously the intent is to rewrite history to make an ever increasing presence of Africans in Europe seem completely normal.
    , @songbird
    I get a kick out of some of the conventions of "diversity." Often in a group shot, you will see redheads because they are not blond Nazis, unless JJ Abrams is directing like in Force Awakens. If he is then gingers are Nazis and are given menacing aspects, speeches and backdrops.

    There don't seem to be a lot of black-haired whites in many shots. Not as many as one would expect, anyway. If you are going black-haired, you might as well go Asian or Hispanic seems to be the reasoning. Better to virtue signal or else reach a different market.

    Of course, 90% of the miscegenation seems to be black men with white women, and it is so patently funny how artificial so much of it is. I saw one TV commercial recently, and I was struck by how phony the posture of the couple was. I can't ever recall seeing that same "romantic" pose for people of such advanced age ever. It really felt like they were trying to push a message, but what was funny is they usually target women of child-bearing age.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. @Randal

    that new game that was criticized for not featuring blacks in 15th century Bohemia
     
    LOL!

    Last year one of my offspring drew my attention to this game video. For some reason one of my daughters thought I'd be entertained by the following view of the game designers' supposed idea of a typical WW2 British strategic bomber crew;

    https://youtu.be/Pn8dNz858fo?t=128

    Two women, two coloureds and three white men (boo!) with moustaches. I was surprised they hadn't given a couple of the latter rainbow handkerchiefs to signal their sexual "specialness". As long as they are a minority overall, though, eh?

    It did prompt a bit of contemplation on the willingness of virtue signalling propaganda victims to lie barefacedly in order to achieve the "greater good" versus the willingness of greedy moneygrubbers to lie barefacedly in order to sell more product.

    Well, at least there were a few black airmen from the West Indies who served in Bomber command during WW2 so that at least is not completely made up (even if obviously exaggerated since the vast majority of RAF airmen were British, from the white dominions, plus some Poles, Czechs etc.).
    There are lots of bizarre examples of this kind though, iirc they recently had some BBC production in which Eleanor of Aquitaine or some other medieval queen was played by an actress of Nigerian origin.
    It also seems to be prominent in some video games now, iirc there’s even some shooting game about WW1 in which even German troops fighting in the trenches on the Western front are black.
    I find it rather sinister given Africa’s demographic expansion, obviously the intent is to rewrite history to make an ever increasing presence of Africans in Europe seem completely normal.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    the intent is to rewrite history
     
    To confuse. To make history irrelevant. Everything is made up. The world was constructed just yesterday. You are nothing and have no connection to past. No roots. No memory. You are being constructed. Anything goes. Except for Jews.
    , @Randal

    Well, at least there were a few black airmen from the West Indies who served in Bomber command during WW2 so that at least is not completely made up (even if obviously exaggerated since the vast majority of RAF airmen were British, from the white dominions, plus some Poles, Czechs etc.).
     
    A handful out of 125,000. It's always irritating that the liars can so often find the odd black individual to supply a pretext for their wholesale and intentionally deceptive reimagining of reality. But it's the women that annoy me as much as the coloureds (or rather, what annoys me is the dishonest manipulation at the root of their presence, in both cases).

    I find it rather sinister given Africa’s demographic expansion, obviously the intent is to rewrite history to make an ever increasing presence of Africans in Europe seem completely normal.
     
    Indeed.

    Though as noted above it's the cynical manipulative dishonesty of falsely introducing both women and coloureds where they pretty much weren't, that bothers me. And utu's not wrong in his explanation for that, I think.
    , @Doug
    > It also seems to be prominent in some video games now, iirc there’s even some shooting game about WW1 in which even German troops fighting in the trenches on the Western front are black.

    Tangentially this reminds me of how the few black Germans (mostly of Namibian origin) were treated during the Nazi regime. The SS had no idea what to do with them. Sub-saharran Africans were officially considered an inferior race, so by law they were suppose to be sent to concentration camps. But because there were so few, there was never any official policy written down to handle blacks specifically. So, most SS agents on the ground kind of just awkwardly ignored them.

    Very German in character... "Yes we hate this group and want to kill all of them. But we couldn't possibly start until there's some regulatory guidance on the issue."

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. To make it simple for simple minded folks of the alt-right when formulating your program just support the opposite to whatever Jews want. If you are too lazy or too stupid to define your own program watch the Jews and oppose them. Stop entertaining a silly idea of some white nationalists that for your support of Israel Zionist and Jews will help you fighting the left. Your slogan: Europe for Europeans and Palestine for Palestinians and Israel for Jews (each and every one of them).

    Read More
    • Replies: @ussr andy
    unless there's an massive, global, right shift in attitudes, it doesn't look good for .co.il either.
    whatsmore, I think I know which demographic all of the past injustices, real and imagined, will be pinned on. I'd like to be wrong about it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. @German_reader
    Well, at least there were a few black airmen from the West Indies who served in Bomber command during WW2 so that at least is not completely made up (even if obviously exaggerated since the vast majority of RAF airmen were British, from the white dominions, plus some Poles, Czechs etc.).
    There are lots of bizarre examples of this kind though, iirc they recently had some BBC production in which Eleanor of Aquitaine or some other medieval queen was played by an actress of Nigerian origin.
    It also seems to be prominent in some video games now, iirc there's even some shooting game about WW1 in which even German troops fighting in the trenches on the Western front are black.
    I find it rather sinister given Africa's demographic expansion, obviously the intent is to rewrite history to make an ever increasing presence of Africans in Europe seem completely normal.

    the intent is to rewrite history

    To confuse. To make history irrelevant. Everything is made up. The world was constructed just yesterday. You are nothing and have no connection to past. No roots. No memory. You are being constructed. Anything goes. Except for Jews.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. @Thorfinnsson


    * NBF: Uber’s technically inferior self-driving system kills an Arizona Pedestrian. Google looks impressively dominant in this sphere.
     
    If Navigant Research is to be believed, this may have changed: https://www.navigantresearch.com/research/navigant-research-leaderboard-automated-driving-vehicles

    https://www.navigantresearch.com/wp-assets/uploads/2018/01/LB-ADV-18-LB-pic.jpg

    Waymo remains a leader, but several of the automakers have caught up. General Motors reported as the leader, which is certainly heartening.

    The big downside for the automakers vs. the tech companies is that they're highly regulated and do not have monopoly profits to subsidize their R&D efforts.

    See Fiat-Chrysler's CEO Sergio Marchionne's excellent slide deck about how brutally competitive the auto industry is: https://www.autonews.com/Assets/pdf/presentations/SM_Fire_investor_presentation.pdf

    Money shot is on page 7. The auto industry invests its entire enterprise value in capital expenditures and R&D every 4.1 years. The average across industries is 17 years, including a surprising 19 years for aerospace and defense. The Boeing-Airbus duopoly and GE-Pratt & Whitney-Rolls Royce triopoly are clearly working.

    The auto industry is consolidating, but the situation might get worse if Chinese automakers become globally competitive OEMs.

    The automakers of course have some advantages over the tech companies. They have vast networks of testing laboratories and closed circuit tracks which the tech companies lack and cannot create quickly.

    Automakers are also much more experienced in writing firmware for hardware, which makes the automaker alliances with hardware-oriented tech companies like Intel and Ericsson interesting.

    And note Daimler's alliance with Bosch, the world leader in ECUs.

    This also calls into question Tesla's long-term viability. Not only are they up against global OEMs with hundreds of assembly plants (Volkswagen alone is converting 20 assembly plants to EV production, and General Motors is allegedly going all-electric), but they apparently don't have an edge in autonomous vehicles at all.

    Their vaunted giga-factory is also being countered by massive projects in Sweden, Germany, and China.

    Tesla has created a great brand in the luxury space (and luxury vehicles are 50% of global automaker profits), but Musk is basically attempting to accomplish the same production rampup Henry Ford achieved in half the time and expecting Wall Street to provide him with unlimited capital.

    Tesla's future might be to be acquired by a global OEM--if the share price comes down to Earth.

    A negative take on Tesla: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/7-big-worries-that-could-hammer-teslas-stock-price-2018-02-07

    This also calls into question Tesla’s long-term viability. Not only are they up against global OEMs with hundreds of assembly plants (Volkswagen alone is converting 20 assembly plants to EV production, and General Motors is allegedly going all-electric), but they apparently don’t have an edge in autonomous vehicles at all.

    There was a recent update to Autopilot which was a huge jump in performance. AP2 lagged behind AP1 for quite a while, in no small part because the head of the AP program was changed 3 times in 2 years. But now they have Andrej Karpathy and it seems he had to rewrite the whole thing from scratch. So that was lost time but they are now gaining lost ground fast. The report you referenced is using older data.

    Their vaunted giga-factory is also being countered by massive projects in Sweden, Germany, and China.

    That’s not the correct way to view it. The goal of Tesla was always to accelerate sustainable transportation. It would have been a failure if they were the only ones doing it.

    Secondly, the advantage of the Gigafactory is that it is vertically integrated. This will give them greater cost control and far greater possibility to do independent innovation on battery prices. They can also custom-designed batteries for only their own cars. People relying on LG, CATL or Samsung have to deal with commodotised products.

    The recent announcements does not change this disparity.

    The auto industry is consolidating, but the situation might get worse if Chinese automakers become globally competitive OEMs.

    If you’re not all in on EVs, you will be dead. It’s that simple. The Chinese made a smart bet. They understood that legacy ICE(internal combustion engine) manufacturers have in some cases a 100+ year accumulated advantage and to break into such a system is very difficult, if next to impossible. So, much better to go all in on EVs. Chinese manufacturers only do well in the domestic market on ICE technology.

    However, with EVs, they will have a shot on the global level. Of all the legacy makers in the developed world, I expect Nissan and Hyundai to do best. They are already having good models. GM’s Bolt is essentially the LG Bolt. LG supplied not just the battery but even the powertrain. GM just installed the seats and the chassis and put their sticker on it. But the core tech is Korean.

    Of the legacy Western carmakers, the German ones do well, especially Daimler. Some may recall that Tesla was bailed out by Daimler back in 2008 and they had co-operation on batteries for a number of years.

    Fiat is looking quite grim. Sergio has long been a laggard on EVs. Mazda doesn’t look good either. 10 years from now, a company like BYD will probably be a mainstream name like Huawei has become today. China also has the advantage of having the state backing a company like CATL to go up against Samsung, Panasonic and LG in battery production. They will have the complete supply chain needed for EVs.

    Many Europeans are now waking up to this fact, hence the recent decision by the EU to create its own battery production network. But the Koreans acted faster. There are already factories in Poland and in Hungary by LG and Samsung respectively. CATL is also looking at a production base, most likely in Central Europe. LG recently announced they would triple production capacity from the earlier stated goal. The Polish factory will now produce 5 GW, the same as the planned capacity in Sweden (which is still in planning stage).

    We’ll see how it shakes out. While Europe is (belatedly) acting on the EV revolution, at least some movement is fortcoming. In the US, aside from Tesla, there is not much. The only domestic manufacturer was GM, but as previously mentioned, the GM Bolt is really the LG Bolt.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous coward

    The goal of Tesla was always to accelerate sustainable transportation.
     
    Outsourcing the massive environmental damage involved in making and disposing batteries is not "sustainable".

    The whole scam only works because the Chinese would rather manufacture a brazillion rechargeable 18650 batteries rather than get rid of coal powerplants. (In a typically Chinese fashion of favoring dumb brute force over intelligent solutions.)
    , @Thorfinnsson


    There was a recent update to Autopilot which was a huge jump in performance. AP2 lagged behind AP1 for quite a while, in no small part because the head of the AP program was changed 3 times in 2 years. But now they have Andrej Karpathy and it seems he had to rewrite the whole thing from scratch. So that was lost time but they are now gaining lost ground fast. The report you referenced is using older data.
     
    I haven't actually read the report (paywall, not on Torrents), and while I've driven cars with autonomous capabilities I've never used them. I tried radar/laser cruise control a few times and didn't like it. The problem is that when someone in front of you is driving at the incorrect speed the autonomous vehicle adjusts to the incorrect speed rather than making efforts to correct the faggot in question (e.g. flashing your brights). Worse, if you're not paying attention you won't notice your speed has declined to an unacceptable level and that you must immediately take action.

    So in other words I'm not equipped to judge the autonomous capabilities of various marques other than through third party representations made to me. I guess that probably goes for most of us.

    GM's autonomous vehicle program seems to be corroborated by numerous other press reports I've seen.

    That’s not the correct way to view it. The goal of Tesla was always to accelerate sustainable transportation. It would have been a failure if they were the only ones doing it.
     
    No, that is the correct way to view. The purpose of business is to make money. Accelerating "sustainable" transportation is a completely irrelevant goal except to the extent that it helps market the product.

    Goals like accelerating "sustainable" transportation are the proper purview of government, not business. Government can of course incentivize business to achieve such goals as is done in various countries.

    It would be much better for Tesla if they were the only ones doing it as competition is bad for profits.


    Secondly, the advantage of the Gigafactory is that it is vertically integrated. This will give them greater cost control and far greater possibility to do independent innovation on battery prices. They can also custom-designed batteries for only their own cars. People relying on LG, CATL or Samsung have to deal with commodotised products.
     
    Vertical integration has pros and cons like anything else. Did you know that Ford Motor once produced its own steel? On the flip side many early automakers did not produce vehicle bodies...at all. The chassis was shipped to a coach builder (a leftover from the horse and buggy days) for body finishing and fitting).

    I am skeptical of "custom-designed" batteries being much of an advantage, as the custom design can be handle downstream of the manufacture of the cells. The cells can be packaged into battery modules of custom design with proprietary Battery Management System software.

    That said, since the Gigafactory will be the world's largest single production site, it's possible that this sets up Tesla as the industry's lowest-cost producer. This would then allow Tesla to supply other industries, and not just cars.

    The recent announcements does not change this disparity.
     
    Announcements do not change anything of course. The question will be at what price these competing large factories produce batteries at. The point is that this is an extremely competitive and capital intensive industry in which it's hard to get much of a "moat".


    If you’re not all in on EVs, you will be dead. It’s that simple. The Chinese made a smart bet. They understood that legacy ICE(internal combustion engine) manufacturers have in some cases a 100+ year accumulated advantage and to break into such a system is very difficult, if next to impossible. So, much better to go all in on EVs. Chinese manufacturers only do well in the domestic market on ICE technology.
     
    I agree with this, and incidentally Berkshire Hathaway is a major investor in the Chinese electric automaker BYD.

    China also has less need for conventional cars in that their cities are compact and linked by the world's largest high-speed rail network.

    In America electric cars are a poor fit for much of the country and I'm outraged by our government's efforts to destroy ICE cars. You can have my small-block V-8 when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.

    There is an insane proposed increase of current fuel economy requirements by nearly 60% by 2025. No ICE cars available at all other than the Chevy Volt can meet the new requirements.

    These requirements will make every car sold outside of luxury vehicles (which just pay a gas guzzler tax) 100% homosexual.


    However, with EVs, they will have a shot on the global level. Of all the legacy makers in the developed world, I expect Nissan and Hyundai to do best. They are already having good models. GM’s Bolt is essentially the LG Bolt. LG supplied not just the battery but even the powertrain. GM just installed the seats and the chassis and put their sticker on it. But the core tech is Korean.

    Of the legacy Western carmakers, the German ones do well, especially Daimler. Some may recall that Tesla was bailed out by Daimler back in 2008 and they had co-operation on batteries for a number of years.
     
    LG Bolt (and Volt) is right, but let's not forget Tesla's relationship with Panasonic. Incidentally, Daimler is a major equity holdr in Tesla as well.

    The involvement of LG in the Bolt is why electric vehicles are such a depressing proposition for automakers. The most complicated thing about a car has always been the powertrain. That goes right out the window with electrification. They then turn into glorified sheet metal fabricators.

    Fiat is looking quite grim. Sergio has long been a laggard on EVs. Mazda doesn’t look good either. 10 years from now, a company like BYD will probably be a mainstream name like Huawei has become today. China also has the advantage of having the state backing a company like CATL to go up against Samsung, Panasonic and LG in battery production. They will have the complete supply chain needed for EVs.
     
    If you read the slide deck I posted from Marchionne, he's basically asking to merge with someone. The strategy now seems to be to get good profits out of North America with muscle cars and trucks that people love but the government intends to ban since they hate us, and then merge with someone else.

    Mazda doesn't look good in EVs, but they could partner with someone else to get powertrains. They have also finally built their first assembly plant outside of Japan in Vladivostok which is interesting.

    Agree on China. They kind of screwed up their car strategy initially compared to what South Korea and Japan did earlier, but now their EV strategy is smart.


    Many Europeans are now waking up to this fact, hence the recent decision by the EU to create its own battery production network. But the Koreans acted faster. There are already factories in Poland and in Hungary by LG and Samsung respectively. CATL is also looking at a production base, most likely in Central Europe. LG recently announced they would triple production capacity from the earlier stated goal. The Polish factory will now produce 5 GW, the same as the planned capacity in Sweden (which is still in planning stage).

    We’ll see how it shakes out. While Europe is (belatedly) acting on the EV revolution, at least some movement is fortcoming. In the US, aside from Tesla, there is not much. The only domestic manufacturer was GM, but as previously mentioned, the GM Bolt is really the LG Bolt.
     
    White countries are all generally all lacking in strategic economic planning.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. @Randal

    that new game that was criticized for not featuring blacks in 15th century Bohemia
     
    LOL!

    Last year one of my offspring drew my attention to this game video. For some reason one of my daughters thought I'd be entertained by the following view of the game designers' supposed idea of a typical WW2 British strategic bomber crew;

    https://youtu.be/Pn8dNz858fo?t=128

    Two women, two coloureds and three white men (boo!) with moustaches. I was surprised they hadn't given a couple of the latter rainbow handkerchiefs to signal their sexual "specialness". As long as they are a minority overall, though, eh?

    It did prompt a bit of contemplation on the willingness of virtue signalling propaganda victims to lie barefacedly in order to achieve the "greater good" versus the willingness of greedy moneygrubbers to lie barefacedly in order to sell more product.

    I get a kick out of some of the conventions of “diversity.” Often in a group shot, you will see redheads because they are not blond Nazis, unless JJ Abrams is directing like in Force Awakens. If he is then gingers are Nazis and are given menacing aspects, speeches and backdrops.

    There don’t seem to be a lot of black-haired whites in many shots. Not as many as one would expect, anyway. If you are going black-haired, you might as well go Asian or Hispanic seems to be the reasoning. Better to virtue signal or else reach a different market.

    Of course, 90% of the miscegenation seems to be black men with white women, and it is so patently funny how artificial so much of it is. I saw one TV commercial recently, and I was struck by how phony the posture of the couple was. I can’t ever recall seeing that same “romantic” pose for people of such advanced age ever. It really felt like they were trying to push a message, but what was funny is they usually target women of child-bearing age.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. @utu
    To make it simple for simple minded folks of the alt-right when formulating your program just support the opposite to whatever Jews want. If you are too lazy or too stupid to define your own program watch the Jews and oppose them. Stop entertaining a silly idea of some white nationalists that for your support of Israel Zionist and Jews will help you fighting the left. Your slogan: Europe for Europeans and Palestine for Palestinians and Israel for Jews (each and every one of them).

    unless there’s an massive, global, right shift in attitudes, it doesn’t look good for .co.il either.
    whatsmore, I think I know which demographic all of the past injustices, real and imagined, will be pinned on. I’d like to be wrong about it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    which demographic?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. @ussr andy
    unless there's an massive, global, right shift in attitudes, it doesn't look good for .co.il either.
    whatsmore, I think I know which demographic all of the past injustices, real and imagined, will be pinned on. I'd like to be wrong about it.

    which demographic?

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    He refers to Jews. If (or when?) it all comes crashing down, the Jews will be blamed for it. Which is possible. This risk is why I think it’s beyond crazy for Jews to support the multikulti madness.

    Though I’m not sure it will happen. Obviously, by the time it all collapses, it will be mostly nonwhites, who will have more visible and easier to identify targets: whites. Mind you, Jews will be a part of it. But then they will have allies in other persecuted whites. Or the diverse ethnic groups will all have diverse enemies: some whites (some will include Arabs in that?), some Muslims, some blacks, etc. Who knows?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. @utu
    which demographic?

    He refers to Jews. If (or when?) it all comes crashing down, the Jews will be blamed for it. Which is possible. This risk is why I think it’s beyond crazy for Jews to support the multikulti madness.

    Though I’m not sure it will happen. Obviously, by the time it all collapses, it will be mostly nonwhites, who will have more visible and easier to identify targets: whites. Mind you, Jews will be a part of it. But then they will have allies in other persecuted whites. Or the diverse ethnic groups will all have diverse enemies: some whites (some will include Arabs in that?), some Muslims, some blacks, etc. Who knows?

    Read More
    • Replies: @ussr andy
    Sovok Joos, to be precise.
    Top (first-hour Zios, kibbutzniks) and bottom (Palis, "Moroccans", Eritreans) against the middle.
    Look who bears the stigma of racism in Germany - why, the Ossis, of course. Or America - southern whites. It's a bit of a class thing, too.
    And I'm noticing a certain racialization of discourse (Youtube comments), too - Palis increasingly hate Israelis not qua Jews, but qua Europeans.
    , @German_reader
    I think it is quite possible, there seems to be a clear increase in antisemitic sentiment online. Unz review is the most "extreme" site I read regularly (ok, I sometimes read American renaissance as well, but I don't read the readers' comments there), but even on more mainstream sites I read it's noticeable. It's definitely around on German sites in relation to the migration crisis (that Barbara Lerner Spectre video is a favorite, now probably joined by Yascha Mounk's statements on German tv). It's not really surprising since it's what tends to happen in many Western societies in times of crisis. And on some level I would actually agree that it's deplorable and irrational behaviour. But on the other hand, if I'm completely honest, given the absolutely despicable behaviour by the representatives of many Jewish organizations, as well as the Israeli state (e.g. the head of the Jewish world congress Ronald Lauder has opined on the situation in Germany...he would like to see AfD banned, and the Israeli ambassador has made similar noises), I'm not really bothered by it on an emotional level. A lot of prominent Jews in Western countries seem to go out of their way to act in ways inimical to the interests of gentile whites. That doesn't mean they're solely or primarily responsible for our current problems (the demographic explosion in Africa can hardly be blamed on Jews, and Islamist violence isn't just a reaction to the existence of Israel), but it does raise the question why one should be overly sympathetic to their concerns.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. @reiner Tor
    He refers to Jews. If (or when?) it all comes crashing down, the Jews will be blamed for it. Which is possible. This risk is why I think it’s beyond crazy for Jews to support the multikulti madness.

    Though I’m not sure it will happen. Obviously, by the time it all collapses, it will be mostly nonwhites, who will have more visible and easier to identify targets: whites. Mind you, Jews will be a part of it. But then they will have allies in other persecuted whites. Or the diverse ethnic groups will all have diverse enemies: some whites (some will include Arabs in that?), some Muslims, some blacks, etc. Who knows?

    Sovok Joos, to be precise.
    Top (first-hour Zios, kibbutzniks) and bottom (Palis, “Moroccans”, Eritreans) against the middle.
    Look who bears the stigma of racism in Germany – why, the Ossis, of course. Or America – southern whites. It’s a bit of a class thing, too.
    And I’m noticing a certain racialization of discourse (Youtube comments), too – Palis increasingly hate Israelis not qua Jews, but qua Europeans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Oh, you mean in Israel? I have no idea.
    , @Mitleser

    And I’m noticing a certain racialization of discourse (Youtube comments), too – Palis increasingly hate Israelis not qua Jews, but qua Europeans.
     
    That makes more sense.
    Israel was founded by European Jews as a settler colony.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. @ussr andy
    Sovok Joos, to be precise.
    Top (first-hour Zios, kibbutzniks) and bottom (Palis, "Moroccans", Eritreans) against the middle.
    Look who bears the stigma of racism in Germany - why, the Ossis, of course. Or America - southern whites. It's a bit of a class thing, too.
    And I'm noticing a certain racialization of discourse (Youtube comments), too - Palis increasingly hate Israelis not qua Jews, but qua Europeans.

    Oh, you mean in Israel? I have no idea.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. @reiner Tor
    He refers to Jews. If (or when?) it all comes crashing down, the Jews will be blamed for it. Which is possible. This risk is why I think it’s beyond crazy for Jews to support the multikulti madness.

    Though I’m not sure it will happen. Obviously, by the time it all collapses, it will be mostly nonwhites, who will have more visible and easier to identify targets: whites. Mind you, Jews will be a part of it. But then they will have allies in other persecuted whites. Or the diverse ethnic groups will all have diverse enemies: some whites (some will include Arabs in that?), some Muslims, some blacks, etc. Who knows?

    I think it is quite possible, there seems to be a clear increase in antisemitic sentiment online. Unz review is the most “extreme” site I read regularly (ok, I sometimes read American renaissance as well, but I don’t read the readers’ comments there), but even on more mainstream sites I read it’s noticeable. It’s definitely around on German sites in relation to the migration crisis (that Barbara Lerner Spectre video is a favorite, now probably joined by Yascha Mounk’s statements on German tv). It’s not really surprising since it’s what tends to happen in many Western societies in times of crisis. And on some level I would actually agree that it’s deplorable and irrational behaviour. But on the other hand, if I’m completely honest, given the absolutely despicable behaviour by the representatives of many Jewish organizations, as well as the Israeli state (e.g. the head of the Jewish world congress Ronald Lauder has opined on the situation in Germany…he would like to see AfD banned, and the Israeli ambassador has made similar noises), I’m not really bothered by it on an emotional level. A lot of prominent Jews in Western countries seem to go out of their way to act in ways inimical to the interests of gentile whites. That doesn’t mean they’re solely or primarily responsible for our current problems (the demographic explosion in Africa can hardly be blamed on Jews, and Islamist violence isn’t just a reaction to the existence of Israel), but it does raise the question why one should be overly sympathetic to their concerns.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    You can also over-estimate ethnic/religious ties, between people living in different countries - even when they are trying to pretend to be closer (which is Israel's tactic) to try to get more donations and immigrants from the American.

    Imagine if Germany tried to get donations from rich American German protestants and tried to get German Americans to immigrate to Germany.

    That's the kind of picture you would see - pretending to be similar to German American/protestant people like Trump, but with actually a very different mentality, and using various propaganda to try to appeal to what you think is sensibility of the Americans. (For example, Israel is making propaganda showing lots of black people and American style values of rich American Jews like Ronald Lauder).

    American Jews and the richer American Christians are vastly more similar in their mentality with each other, than American Jews are to Israelis (who live in the Middle East - and whose mentality becomes more similar to other people of the region, i.e. Egyptians, Jordanians, Syrians).

    Last month I was staying with my friend and his girlfriend in Israel (they've lived there continuously for four years, he is just qualified as a doctor) - and when we mention politics, they have no idea about America.

    They were sure that Jews must vote for the right-wing party in America. And they were certain that Obama was Muslim (Obama is Christian - the Muslim is only his father). And they love Trump, because he is rich and made his own money (actually Trump is not even so successful as a businessman, but people that don't know English on our level don't have a clue of this).

    The mentality developed living in Israel are liberal, but not in 'messianic American way', but in practical Middle Eastern way (kind of like how Assad was liberal to different religions in his country).

    I am paying for online/Skype Hebrew teacher (I'm preparing to take an intermediate level exam in Hebrew to reach B1-B2 level). My teacher came from a orthodox religious (Arab Jewish) origin, but has become an atheist engineering student. She has better English even than me, and her job in the national service was to teach American Jews Hebrew. She said that she grew up at school, to imagine American Jews as being the same as them. But then now disillusioned that they have different ideas.

    She thinks that American Jewish religion is very different and closer to Christian values, than to Jewish values. Despite being atheist, she is very angry about American initiatives in Israel, like to end the gender-segregation at the Western Wall.

    But Israel will never admit this publicly, as not losing the American Jewish money and support is a strategic objective.

    They have to be careful to hide differences with American culture, because they rely so much on donations from wealthy Americans - for example, if you go to Israel, you can see many donations from Ronald Lauder family to the museums there.

    America is very generous patron for them. But like with most patrons, you have to suck up and appeal to their values. In Israel there is more schizophrenia as well because they also have to appeal to the American Christians. On issues like gun control, rival American factions actually both using Israel to support their arguments.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. @ussr andy
    Sovok Joos, to be precise.
    Top (first-hour Zios, kibbutzniks) and bottom (Palis, "Moroccans", Eritreans) against the middle.
    Look who bears the stigma of racism in Germany - why, the Ossis, of course. Or America - southern whites. It's a bit of a class thing, too.
    And I'm noticing a certain racialization of discourse (Youtube comments), too - Palis increasingly hate Israelis not qua Jews, but qua Europeans.

    And I’m noticing a certain racialization of discourse (Youtube comments), too – Palis increasingly hate Israelis not qua Jews, but qua Europeans.

    That makes more sense.
    Israel was founded by European Jews as a settler colony.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    But the majority of Jews in Israel are primarily Sephardic (middle eastern), not Ashkenazi. I wonder what the proportions were back in 1949 or 1969.

    I guess that a lot of the Jewish Israelis being visibly whiter than the Arabs, makes them a useful target on the basis of “white colonialism.”

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. @German_reader
    Well, at least there were a few black airmen from the West Indies who served in Bomber command during WW2 so that at least is not completely made up (even if obviously exaggerated since the vast majority of RAF airmen were British, from the white dominions, plus some Poles, Czechs etc.).
    There are lots of bizarre examples of this kind though, iirc they recently had some BBC production in which Eleanor of Aquitaine or some other medieval queen was played by an actress of Nigerian origin.
    It also seems to be prominent in some video games now, iirc there's even some shooting game about WW1 in which even German troops fighting in the trenches on the Western front are black.
    I find it rather sinister given Africa's demographic expansion, obviously the intent is to rewrite history to make an ever increasing presence of Africans in Europe seem completely normal.

    Well, at least there were a few black airmen from the West Indies who served in Bomber command during WW2 so that at least is not completely made up (even if obviously exaggerated since the vast majority of RAF airmen were British, from the white dominions, plus some Poles, Czechs etc.).

    A handful out of 125,000. It’s always irritating that the liars can so often find the odd black individual to supply a pretext for their wholesale and intentionally deceptive reimagining of reality. But it’s the women that annoy me as much as the coloureds (or rather, what annoys me is the dishonest manipulation at the root of their presence, in both cases).

    I find it rather sinister given Africa’s demographic expansion, obviously the intent is to rewrite history to make an ever increasing presence of Africans in Europe seem completely normal.

    Indeed.

    Though as noted above it’s the cynical manipulative dishonesty of falsely introducing both women and coloureds where they pretty much weren’t, that bothers me. And utu’s not wrong in his explanation for that, I think.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. @Polish Perspective

    This also calls into question Tesla’s long-term viability. Not only are they up against global OEMs with hundreds of assembly plants (Volkswagen alone is converting 20 assembly plants to EV production, and General Motors is allegedly going all-electric), but they apparently don’t have an edge in autonomous vehicles at all.
     
    There was a recent update to Autopilot which was a huge jump in performance. AP2 lagged behind AP1 for quite a while, in no small part because the head of the AP program was changed 3 times in 2 years. But now they have Andrej Karpathy and it seems he had to rewrite the whole thing from scratch. So that was lost time but they are now gaining lost ground fast. The report you referenced is using older data.

    Their vaunted giga-factory is also being countered by massive projects in Sweden, Germany, and China.
     
    That's not the correct way to view it. The goal of Tesla was always to accelerate sustainable transportation. It would have been a failure if they were the only ones doing it.

    Secondly, the advantage of the Gigafactory is that it is vertically integrated. This will give them greater cost control and far greater possibility to do independent innovation on battery prices. They can also custom-designed batteries for only their own cars. People relying on LG, CATL or Samsung have to deal with commodotised products.

    The recent announcements does not change this disparity.

    The auto industry is consolidating, but the situation might get worse if Chinese automakers become globally competitive OEMs.
     
    If you're not all in on EVs, you will be dead. It's that simple. The Chinese made a smart bet. They understood that legacy ICE(internal combustion engine) manufacturers have in some cases a 100+ year accumulated advantage and to break into such a system is very difficult, if next to impossible. So, much better to go all in on EVs. Chinese manufacturers only do well in the domestic market on ICE technology.

    However, with EVs, they will have a shot on the global level. Of all the legacy makers in the developed world, I expect Nissan and Hyundai to do best. They are already having good models. GM's Bolt is essentially the LG Bolt. LG supplied not just the battery but even the powertrain. GM just installed the seats and the chassis and put their sticker on it. But the core tech is Korean.

    Of the legacy Western carmakers, the German ones do well, especially Daimler. Some may recall that Tesla was bailed out by Daimler back in 2008 and they had co-operation on batteries for a number of years.

    Fiat is looking quite grim. Sergio has long been a laggard on EVs. Mazda doesn't look good either. 10 years from now, a company like BYD will probably be a mainstream name like Huawei has become today. China also has the advantage of having the state backing a company like CATL to go up against Samsung, Panasonic and LG in battery production. They will have the complete supply chain needed for EVs.

    Many Europeans are now waking up to this fact, hence the recent decision by the EU to create its own battery production network. But the Koreans acted faster. There are already factories in Poland and in Hungary by LG and Samsung respectively. CATL is also looking at a production base, most likely in Central Europe. LG recently announced they would triple production capacity from the earlier stated goal. The Polish factory will now produce 5 GW, the same as the planned capacity in Sweden (which is still in planning stage).

    We'll see how it shakes out. While Europe is (belatedly) acting on the EV revolution, at least some movement is fortcoming. In the US, aside from Tesla, there is not much. The only domestic manufacturer was GM, but as previously mentioned, the GM Bolt is really the LG Bolt.

    The goal of Tesla was always to accelerate sustainable transportation.

    Outsourcing the massive environmental damage involved in making and disposing batteries is not “sustainable”.

    The whole scam only works because the Chinese would rather manufacture a brazillion rechargeable 18650 batteries rather than get rid of coal powerplants. (In a typically Chinese fashion of favoring dumb brute force over intelligent solutions.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser
    Why get rid of the coal powerplants if you have lots of coal and there is a huge energy demand?

    Not even Germany which is much more in love with environmentalism than China has done that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. OT Anomaly and Cofnas’ article is sleight-of-hand. First they re-define right wing to mean economically liberal (instead of nationalist.) Then they showcase all of the laissez-faire economists – Jews aren’t left-wing after all, see, see?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  21. I read in a Hungarian Facebook group that Vladimir Solovev, “the main propagandist of the Russian Channel One,” said the following, which means roughly that “once our troops will be stationed in the countries of Eastern Europe, Central Europe, Asia, these countries will all be our allies!”

    The link is here, but apparently it’s a three hour long block:

    https://russia.tv/video/show/brand_id/21385/episode_id/1735867/video_id/1833607/

    Can someone somehow verify if it was really said there, and what the context was? I guess none of you have three hours, but maybe you could crowdsource it to some Russian forum. (Ideally, someone who watched the show could tell the context and where to look for it in the video. Or hopefully someone will do it for us in the Hungarian group, but I wouldn’t bank on it.)

    Как только наши войска будут дислоцированы в странах Восточной Европы, Центральной Европы, Азии, все эти страны тут же станут нашими союзниками!

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Apparently there’s a transcript:

    https://grani-ru-org.appspot.com/Society/Media/Television/m.268082.html

    Злобин: "Как же это так - России все доверяют, но никто не хочет быть ее союзником?" Сатановский: "И не надо!". Соловьев (бесшабашно): "Как только наши войска будут дислоцированы в странах Восточной Европы, Центральной Европы, Азии, все эти страны тут же станут нашими союзниками!"
    Такой способ действительно не раз использовался - но не всегда успешно.
     
    But the last sentence (about the method having been tried) is the grani-ru blogger’s comment. So we still don’t have context, but this liberal Russian site thinks the same as the Hungarians.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. So China finally launched the “petro-yuan”. Sure to get less headlines and clicks than all the Trump doessiers, the Skripal case or the war in Syria, but certainly much more historically significant. Don’t tell that to the Russiagatists (is that a word?), though. Brent tops $70 per barrel again as well.

    https://www.rt.com/business/422314-petro-yuan-futures-dollar-death/

    Sort of related, Alexander Mercouris on China-Russia relations:

    http://theduran.com/china-hails-putin-win-backs-russia-skripal-praises-chinas-alliance-russia/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Polish Perspective
    The faster US hegemony ends, the better for everyone. That said, the article is a bit too triumphalist.


    “It is more of a game changer for the US. As soon as other nations have a real credible alternative to the US dollar, they can dump dollars and switch to the yuan which can spark a dollar crisis. If that happens, not only will there be inflation from the tariffs, but also from the flood of dollars,” said Lee.
     
    This is a variation on the meme that if China sells US treasuries, then the US dollar will tank, cause massive inflation and an economic and/or currency crisis. But this was never on the cards. The greenback is still far and away the most dominant currency. International usage of yuan has actually declined in the last year or two. It remains at a modest 2-3% of global usage. China is also a nightmare from a rule of law PoV, whereas the US offers very good investor protection.

    That said, the petro-yuan will give the Chinese greater domestic variance in the oil market and that can always be a good thing. I would be cautious about the more propagandistic narratives concerning global implications. There, the progress will likely be more modest in the short-to-medium term.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. @anonymous coward

    The goal of Tesla was always to accelerate sustainable transportation.
     
    Outsourcing the massive environmental damage involved in making and disposing batteries is not "sustainable".

    The whole scam only works because the Chinese would rather manufacture a brazillion rechargeable 18650 batteries rather than get rid of coal powerplants. (In a typically Chinese fashion of favoring dumb brute force over intelligent solutions.)

    Why get rid of the coal powerplants if you have lots of coal and there is a huge energy demand?

    Not even Germany which is much more in love with environmentalism than China has done that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hyperborean
    Because it is nice to be able to walk outside without needing to wear a mask and see the clear sky.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. @reiner Tor
    I read in a Hungarian Facebook group that Vladimir Solovev, “the main propagandist of the Russian Channel One,” said the following, which means roughly that “once our troops will be stationed in the countries of Eastern Europe, Central Europe, Asia, these countries will all be our allies!”

    The link is here, but apparently it’s a three hour long block:

    https://russia.tv/video/show/brand_id/21385/episode_id/1735867/video_id/1833607/

    Can someone somehow verify if it was really said there, and what the context was? I guess none of you have three hours, but maybe you could crowdsource it to some Russian forum. (Ideally, someone who watched the show could tell the context and where to look for it in the video. Or hopefully someone will do it for us in the Hungarian group, but I wouldn’t bank on it.)

    Как только наши войска будут дислоцированы в странах Восточной Европы, Центральной Европы, Азии, все эти страны тут же станут нашими союзниками!
     

    Apparently there’s a transcript:

    https://grani-ru-org.appspot.com/Society/Media/Television/m.268082.html

    Злобин: “Как же это так – России все доверяют, но никто не хочет быть ее союзником?” Сатановский: “И не надо!”. Соловьев (бесшабашно): “Как только наши войска будут дислоцированы в странах Восточной Европы, Центральной Европы, Азии, все эти страны тут же станут нашими союзниками!”
    Такой способ действительно не раз использовался – но не всегда успешно.

    But the last sentence (about the method having been tried) is the grani-ru blogger’s comment. So we still don’t have context, but this liberal Russian site thinks the same as the Hungarians.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ussr andy
    it's at roughly the 35min. mark (not 23min. as in the grani transcript.) I think Solovyov was being facetious.
    They're discussing the new Putin documentary and multipolarity and how to make it work, given that there's no way to enforce intl. agreements and whether a big guy with a stick is not better, after all, than many guys each with his own stick. The burly guy (Satanovsky) says that America can't be trusted, not after Ghaddafi etc. Zlobin then asks what kind of design of the world Russia proposes concretely. Satanovsky says that if America played by the rules, that would be a start, which is met by applause but Zlobin doesn't react.
    Zlobin goes on to ask what Russia's "national interests" are exactly and what are the criteria to gauge whether the current foreign policy corresponds with them, in particular the confrontation with the West. Also, the West is interchangeable - Russia may have disagreements with UK in one thing, France in some other thing etc. So how come that no one trusts America but line up to be its allies whereas Russia is alone against many.
    Then Solovyov asks him if he would like that Russia had more allies (obviously setting up a joke) to which Zlobin says of course and then Solovyov responds with the phrase about troops.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Jewish knives now openly out for Jeremy Corbyn, basically for not being subservient enough:

    Jewish groups attack Jeremy Corbyn over anti-Semitism

    As with “Red Ken” Livingstone, the idea that someone like Jeremy Corbyn is actually “anti-Semitic” in any honest sense of the term is literally absurd. Outside of their own supporters, the target’s cynical political enemies and rivals, and the saddest of propaganda victims, jewish groups slinging of the “anti-Semite” smear term mostly discredits only themselves and helps to bring the smear term itself further into disrepute.

    Also as with Red Ken, it’s quite entertaining to see a leftist like Corbyn who has spent his life slinging false smears of “racism”, “homophobia” etc, etc at political rivals and at decent folk alike, basically hoist by his own petard.

    The organisations refer to Mr Corbyn’s apparently supportive message to the creator of an allegedly anti-Semitic mural in 2012 and his attendance at “pro-Hezbollah rallies”.

    Neither of these, of course, have anything to do with “anti-Semitism” in the sense of disliking jews. Support for Hezbollah is simply one legitimate position on a dispute between foreigners (and indeed any honest, neutral observer would have to conclude that Hezbollah has the superior moral position in the dispute, having been formed to resist military aggression and occupation by Israel).

    As for the mural, it’s perfectly clear that Corbyn’s expression of support for the mural was a thoughtless approval of “free speech”, before he realised that the piece of art in question was not the kind of free speech leftist hypocrites like him actually allow.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Polish Perspective

    Jewish knives now openly out for Jeremy Corbyn
     
    Now? Haven't these knives been out ever since he got elected, nay, since he was seriously running for leadership?

    Also as with Red Ken, it’s quite entertaining to see a leftist like Corbyn who has spent his life slinging false smears of “racism”, “homophobia” etc, etc at political rivals and at decent folk alike, basically hoist by his own petard.

     

    Correct, though in the case of Jewish lobbies vs Red Ken/Corbyn, it really is a classic example of "the enemy of my enemy is not always my friend".

    Support for Hezbollah is simply one legitimate position on a dispute between foreigners
     

    Imagine living in a country where your position on a Middle-Eastern political party is not a matter of great political importance and source of much media controversy and debate. But this is what happens when you have organised Jewish groups panicking over perceived loss of influence.

    The problem for the Jewish lobbies is that he is very popular among the grassroots. This is the same problem in which the blairites found themselves in. The UK is interesting from a purely Jewish-political perspective. The Tories won something like 70% of the Jewish vote in the last General Election. This isn't because UK Jews are more "conservative". It's because the Tories are better for Jewish interests.

    The Tories are quite liberal on social matters(they introduced gay marriage), they are good for above-average income groups and they are very pro-Israel. It's a trifecta. In many ways, US dems are quite similar to the Tories. The Dems are not very left-wing. They are pro-Israel, pro-Wall Street and their stance on taxes are quite neoliberal, too. It's just compared to the dumpster fire that is GOP, anyone can look good. I'm referring to the meme that Jews are somehow inherently left-wing, whereas it is more about ethnic interests. It makes more sense to vote for Dems in the US and more sense to vote for Tories in the UK.

    Corbyn in this sense is a break from the past. Blair was of course a neoliberal, too, as well as very pro-Israel. Corbyn is neither neoliberal nor is he very pro-Israel, so he gets almost no Jewish votes. For whites, the actual difference is minimal, because both Blair and Corbyn support the Great Replacement. Jews don't mind that, what they do mind is the unstinting support for Israel that is going down the drain. It is not just about Israel. There's a sense that Corbyn is more pro-muslim than pro-Jewish. Blair (and Obama, Clinton etc) were the opposite. See the previous point about perceived loss of influence.

    We will likely see this in the US, too, over time. It will be the left, not the right, which will go after Jewish interests, such as support for Israel and (serious) tax hikes on the better-off and not the marginal stuff that the centrist/Schumer faction that currently controls the Dems are willing to sign off on.

    Corbyn has shown plenty of spine so far, so it is likely he won't suddenly cave now. That's a good thing. I hope the US left draws inspiration.

    , @Greasy William

    Neither of these, of course, have anything to do with “anti-Semitism” in the sense of disliking jews.
     
    Anti Israel = Anti Semitism. I can't tell if you are intellectually dishonest or just obtuse.

    Corbyn is unquestionably an anti Semite and Livingstone and Galloway were as well.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @Mitleser
    Why get rid of the coal powerplants if you have lots of coal and there is a huge energy demand?

    Not even Germany which is much more in love with environmentalism than China has done that.

    Because it is nice to be able to walk outside without needing to wear a mask and see the clear sky.

    Read More
    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    I agree that we need to transition away from fossil fuels. But it needs to be done gradually to minimize the shock to the economy.

    I’d be fine with a slow but large increase in the gas excise tax, but balanced by a generous long-term income tax credit for the purchase of all-electric and (for now) plug-in hybrid vehicles.

    We generally should be shifting more of the tax burden onto polluting activities, taking some tax burden off of income from work, savings, and investment. Very gradually.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. * Looks like Venezuela is approaching collapse [1, 2]

    When even the oil workers are starving, the end must be near.

    The Russian government’s strategy has always puzzled me. Giving loans secured against the foreign assets of the PDVSA seems a shrewd move. If PDVSA defaults, you get a foreign asset at a knockdown price. Same goes with cargoes of Venezuelan oil outside Venezuela. So far, so sensible.
    However, the actions of Rosneft and others of obtaining exploration and production rights to large areas of Venezuela at “Fire Sale” prices, or as payment for a debt, seems very unwise.
    When constitutional government returns to Venezuela, as it surely will, the likelihood is the new government might declare these actions “odious” debts or transactions. It might confiscate them without payment, or, more likely, repay the knockdown prices at which they were bought. If Rosneft and others wanted to stay in the Venezuelan market long term, their actions seem very counter-productive.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    But Maduro, like Yanukovich, was a democratically elected president! Nothing wrong with supporting him and whatever he does after he won the election, since he won fair and square in 2013 he gets carte blanche.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. @Verymuchalive

    * Looks like Venezuela is approaching collapse [1, 2]
     
    When even the oil workers are starving, the end must be near.

    The Russian government's strategy has always puzzled me. Giving loans secured against the foreign assets of the PDVSA seems a shrewd move. If PDVSA defaults, you get a foreign asset at a knockdown price. Same goes with cargoes of Venezuelan oil outside Venezuela. So far, so sensible.
    However, the actions of Rosneft and others of obtaining exploration and production rights to large areas of Venezuela at "Fire Sale" prices, or as payment for a debt, seems very unwise.
    When constitutional government returns to Venezuela, as it surely will, the likelihood is the new government might declare these actions "odious" debts or transactions. It might confiscate them without payment, or, more likely, repay the knockdown prices at which they were bought. If Rosneft and others wanted to stay in the Venezuelan market long term, their actions seem very counter-productive.

    But Maduro, like Yanukovich, was a democratically elected president! Nothing wrong with supporting him and whatever he does after he won the election, since he won fair and square in 2013 he gets carte blanche.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    This was sarcasm, but it's interesting to see Putin pursuing a similar policy with Venezuela as he did with Yanukovich-era Ukraine.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. @AP
    But Maduro, like Yanukovich, was a democratically elected president! Nothing wrong with supporting him and whatever he does after he won the election, since he won fair and square in 2013 he gets carte blanche.

    This was sarcasm, but it’s interesting to see Putin pursuing a similar policy with Venezuela as he did with Yanukovich-era Ukraine.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Yes, the same stupid policy of supporting an unsuccessful kleptocrat.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. @Randal
    Jewish knives now openly out for Jeremy Corbyn, basically for not being subservient enough:

    Jewish groups attack Jeremy Corbyn over anti-Semitism

    As with "Red Ken" Livingstone, the idea that someone like Jeremy Corbyn is actually "anti-Semitic" in any honest sense of the term is literally absurd. Outside of their own supporters, the target's cynical political enemies and rivals, and the saddest of propaganda victims, jewish groups slinging of the "anti-Semite" smear term mostly discredits only themselves and helps to bring the smear term itself further into disrepute.

    Also as with Red Ken, it's quite entertaining to see a leftist like Corbyn who has spent his life slinging false smears of "racism", "homophobia" etc, etc at political rivals and at decent folk alike, basically hoist by his own petard.

    The organisations refer to Mr Corbyn's apparently supportive message to the creator of an allegedly anti-Semitic mural in 2012 and his attendance at "pro-Hezbollah rallies".
     
    Neither of these, of course, have anything to do with "anti-Semitism" in the sense of disliking jews. Support for Hezbollah is simply one legitimate position on a dispute between foreigners (and indeed any honest, neutral observer would have to conclude that Hezbollah has the superior moral position in the dispute, having been formed to resist military aggression and occupation by Israel).

    As for the mural, it's perfectly clear that Corbyn's expression of support for the mural was a thoughtless approval of "free speech", before he realised that the piece of art in question was not the kind of free speech leftist hypocrites like him actually allow.

    Jewish knives now openly out for Jeremy Corbyn

    Now? Haven’t these knives been out ever since he got elected, nay, since he was seriously running for leadership?

    Also as with Red Ken, it’s quite entertaining to see a leftist like Corbyn who has spent his life slinging false smears of “racism”, “homophobia” etc, etc at political rivals and at decent folk alike, basically hoist by his own petard.

    Correct, though in the case of Jewish lobbies vs Red Ken/Corbyn, it really is a classic example of “the enemy of my enemy is not always my friend”.

    Support for Hezbollah is simply one legitimate position on a dispute between foreigners

    Imagine living in a country where your position on a Middle-Eastern political party is not a matter of great political importance and source of much media controversy and debate. But this is what happens when you have organised Jewish groups panicking over perceived loss of influence.

    The problem for the Jewish lobbies is that he is very popular among the grassroots. This is the same problem in which the blairites found themselves in. The UK is interesting from a purely Jewish-political perspective. The Tories won something like 70% of the Jewish vote in the last General Election. This isn’t because UK Jews are more “conservative”. It’s because the Tories are better for Jewish interests.

    The Tories are quite liberal on social matters(they introduced gay marriage), they are good for above-average income groups and they are very pro-Israel. It’s a trifecta. In many ways, US dems are quite similar to the Tories. The Dems are not very left-wing. They are pro-Israel, pro-Wall Street and their stance on taxes are quite neoliberal, too. It’s just compared to the dumpster fire that is GOP, anyone can look good. I’m referring to the meme that Jews are somehow inherently left-wing, whereas it is more about ethnic interests. It makes more sense to vote for Dems in the US and more sense to vote for Tories in the UK.

    Corbyn in this sense is a break from the past. Blair was of course a neoliberal, too, as well as very pro-Israel. Corbyn is neither neoliberal nor is he very pro-Israel, so he gets almost no Jewish votes. For whites, the actual difference is minimal, because both Blair and Corbyn support the Great Replacement. Jews don’t mind that, what they do mind is the unstinting support for Israel that is going down the drain. It is not just about Israel. There’s a sense that Corbyn is more pro-muslim than pro-Jewish. Blair (and Obama, Clinton etc) were the opposite. See the previous point about perceived loss of influence.

    We will likely see this in the US, too, over time. It will be the left, not the right, which will go after Jewish interests, such as support for Israel and (serious) tax hikes on the better-off and not the marginal stuff that the centrist/Schumer faction that currently controls the Dems are willing to sign off on.

    Corbyn has shown plenty of spine so far, so it is likely he won’t suddenly cave now. That’s a good thing. I hope the US left draws inspiration.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Verymuchalive

    I’m referring to the meme that Jews are somehow inherently left-wing, whereas it is more about ethnic interests.
     
    As Professor MacDonald has ably demonstrated over the years.

    The Conservatives are Conservatives In Name Only. There are few differences between them and the Liberals or Labourites. They are all pro-globalist, pro-EU and pro-Third World Immigration. The fact that some factions may be less Zionist than most is of little comfort or interest to those of us who are concerned about Britain's indigenous population.
    Obviously, the first-past-the-post favours the present parties. Any new anti-globalist party has to overcome high barriers to entry to obtain a parliamentary seat, unless they are highly concentrated in support. This applies in the US and Canada for the same reason.
    Real change will not occur until after the coming Economic Depression. I expect all three present parties to be dissolved or reduced to unimportance
    , @Randal

    Now? Haven’t these knives been out ever since he got elected, nay, since he was seriously running for leadership?
     
    True, it's just becoming ever more shrill. And they've just taken it to a new level.

    Imagine living in a country where your position on a Middle-Eastern political party is not a matter of great political importance and source of much media controversy and debate. But this is what happens when you have organised Jewish groups panicking over perceived loss of influence.
     
    Indeed.

    The problem for the Jewish lobbies is that he is very popular among the grassroots.
     
    Yes, and therefore it's great to see the jewish lobbies discrediting their own smear term tactic by using it against him with such transparent dishonesty. Every little helps.


    The Tories won something like 70% of the Jewish vote in the last General Election. This isn’t because UK Jews are more “conservative”. It’s because the Tories are better for Jewish interests.
     
    That's true, though it's worth bearing in mind that jewish votes, per se, count for even less in the UK than in the US. They are only about 0.5% of the population here, as opposed to 1.7% there, and even given their demographic concentration the jewish vote could only even theoretically swing a maximum of about 10 seats in Parliament. In practice it's just a couple.

    Corbyn has shown plenty of spine so far, so it is likely he won’t suddenly cave now. That’s a good thing. I hope the US left draws inspiration.
     
    Well, I'm not sure I'd really give him that much credit. He still kowtows to the antisemitism smear with the usual abject apologies, but he does stand up to some extent on the substance of policies and personnel. (And as an aside re spine, notice how fast he caved on the Skripal business when the jingoists applied some heat.) The problem is that the control of dissent via hate speech laws is too useful to the wider left for him to oppose the use of it by jewish lobbies, so he won't take any firm stand that threatens to really discredit the pc smear tactic in general.

    The bottom line, as I suggested above and your comment seems to suggest you agree with, Corbyn is in trouble with the jewish lobbies basically for not being subservient enough.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. @Polish Perspective

    This also calls into question Tesla’s long-term viability. Not only are they up against global OEMs with hundreds of assembly plants (Volkswagen alone is converting 20 assembly plants to EV production, and General Motors is allegedly going all-electric), but they apparently don’t have an edge in autonomous vehicles at all.
     
    There was a recent update to Autopilot which was a huge jump in performance. AP2 lagged behind AP1 for quite a while, in no small part because the head of the AP program was changed 3 times in 2 years. But now they have Andrej Karpathy and it seems he had to rewrite the whole thing from scratch. So that was lost time but they are now gaining lost ground fast. The report you referenced is using older data.

    Their vaunted giga-factory is also being countered by massive projects in Sweden, Germany, and China.
     
    That's not the correct way to view it. The goal of Tesla was always to accelerate sustainable transportation. It would have been a failure if they were the only ones doing it.

    Secondly, the advantage of the Gigafactory is that it is vertically integrated. This will give them greater cost control and far greater possibility to do independent innovation on battery prices. They can also custom-designed batteries for only their own cars. People relying on LG, CATL or Samsung have to deal with commodotised products.

    The recent announcements does not change this disparity.

    The auto industry is consolidating, but the situation might get worse if Chinese automakers become globally competitive OEMs.
     
    If you're not all in on EVs, you will be dead. It's that simple. The Chinese made a smart bet. They understood that legacy ICE(internal combustion engine) manufacturers have in some cases a 100+ year accumulated advantage and to break into such a system is very difficult, if next to impossible. So, much better to go all in on EVs. Chinese manufacturers only do well in the domestic market on ICE technology.

    However, with EVs, they will have a shot on the global level. Of all the legacy makers in the developed world, I expect Nissan and Hyundai to do best. They are already having good models. GM's Bolt is essentially the LG Bolt. LG supplied not just the battery but even the powertrain. GM just installed the seats and the chassis and put their sticker on it. But the core tech is Korean.

    Of the legacy Western carmakers, the German ones do well, especially Daimler. Some may recall that Tesla was bailed out by Daimler back in 2008 and they had co-operation on batteries for a number of years.

    Fiat is looking quite grim. Sergio has long been a laggard on EVs. Mazda doesn't look good either. 10 years from now, a company like BYD will probably be a mainstream name like Huawei has become today. China also has the advantage of having the state backing a company like CATL to go up against Samsung, Panasonic and LG in battery production. They will have the complete supply chain needed for EVs.

    Many Europeans are now waking up to this fact, hence the recent decision by the EU to create its own battery production network. But the Koreans acted faster. There are already factories in Poland and in Hungary by LG and Samsung respectively. CATL is also looking at a production base, most likely in Central Europe. LG recently announced they would triple production capacity from the earlier stated goal. The Polish factory will now produce 5 GW, the same as the planned capacity in Sweden (which is still in planning stage).

    We'll see how it shakes out. While Europe is (belatedly) acting on the EV revolution, at least some movement is fortcoming. In the US, aside from Tesla, there is not much. The only domestic manufacturer was GM, but as previously mentioned, the GM Bolt is really the LG Bolt.

    There was a recent update to Autopilot which was a huge jump in performance. AP2 lagged behind AP1 for quite a while, in no small part because the head of the AP program was changed 3 times in 2 years. But now they have Andrej Karpathy and it seems he had to rewrite the whole thing from scratch. So that was lost time but they are now gaining lost ground fast. The report you referenced is using older data.

    I haven’t actually read the report (paywall, not on Torrents), and while I’ve driven cars with autonomous capabilities I’ve never used them. I tried radar/laser cruise control a few times and didn’t like it. The problem is that when someone in front of you is driving at the incorrect speed the autonomous vehicle adjusts to the incorrect speed rather than making efforts to correct the faggot in question (e.g. flashing your brights). Worse, if you’re not paying attention you won’t notice your speed has declined to an unacceptable level and that you must immediately take action.

    So in other words I’m not equipped to judge the autonomous capabilities of various marques other than through third party representations made to me. I guess that probably goes for most of us.

    GM’s autonomous vehicle program seems to be corroborated by numerous other press reports I’ve seen.

    That’s not the correct way to view it. The goal of Tesla was always to accelerate sustainable transportation. It would have been a failure if they were the only ones doing it.

    No, that is the correct way to view. The purpose of business is to make money. Accelerating “sustainable” transportation is a completely irrelevant goal except to the extent that it helps market the product.

    Goals like accelerating “sustainable” transportation are the proper purview of government, not business. Government can of course incentivize business to achieve such goals as is done in various countries.

    It would be much better for Tesla if they were the only ones doing it as competition is bad for profits.

    Secondly, the advantage of the Gigafactory is that it is vertically integrated. This will give them greater cost control and far greater possibility to do independent innovation on battery prices. They can also custom-designed batteries for only their own cars. People relying on LG, CATL or Samsung have to deal with commodotised products.

    Vertical integration has pros and cons like anything else. Did you know that Ford Motor once produced its own steel? On the flip side many early automakers did not produce vehicle bodies…at all. The chassis was shipped to a coach builder (a leftover from the horse and buggy days) for body finishing and fitting).

    I am skeptical of “custom-designed” batteries being much of an advantage, as the custom design can be handle downstream of the manufacture of the cells. The cells can be packaged into battery modules of custom design with proprietary Battery Management System software.

    That said, since the Gigafactory will be the world’s largest single production site, it’s possible that this sets up Tesla as the industry’s lowest-cost producer. This would then allow Tesla to supply other industries, and not just cars.

    The recent announcements does not change this disparity.

    Announcements do not change anything of course. The question will be at what price these competing large factories produce batteries at. The point is that this is an extremely competitive and capital intensive industry in which it’s hard to get much of a “moat”.

    If you’re not all in on EVs, you will be dead. It’s that simple. The Chinese made a smart bet. They understood that legacy ICE(internal combustion engine) manufacturers have in some cases a 100+ year accumulated advantage and to break into such a system is very difficult, if next to impossible. So, much better to go all in on EVs. Chinese manufacturers only do well in the domestic market on ICE technology.

    I agree with this, and incidentally Berkshire Hathaway is a major investor in the Chinese electric automaker BYD.

    China also has less need for conventional cars in that their cities are compact and linked by the world’s largest high-speed rail network.

    In America electric cars are a poor fit for much of the country and I’m outraged by our government’s efforts to destroy ICE cars. You can have my small-block V-8 when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.

    There is an insane proposed increase of current fuel economy requirements by nearly 60% by 2025. No ICE cars available at all other than the Chevy Volt can meet the new requirements.

    These requirements will make every car sold outside of luxury vehicles (which just pay a gas guzzler tax) 100% homosexual.

    However, with EVs, they will have a shot on the global level. Of all the legacy makers in the developed world, I expect Nissan and Hyundai to do best. They are already having good models. GM’s Bolt is essentially the LG Bolt. LG supplied not just the battery but even the powertrain. GM just installed the seats and the chassis and put their sticker on it. But the core tech is Korean.

    Of the legacy Western carmakers, the German ones do well, especially Daimler. Some may recall that Tesla was bailed out by Daimler back in 2008 and they had co-operation on batteries for a number of years.

    LG Bolt (and Volt) is right, but let’s not forget Tesla’s relationship with Panasonic. Incidentally, Daimler is a major equity holdr in Tesla as well.

    The involvement of LG in the Bolt is why electric vehicles are such a depressing proposition for automakers. The most complicated thing about a car has always been the powertrain. That goes right out the window with electrification. They then turn into glorified sheet metal fabricators.

    Fiat is looking quite grim. Sergio has long been a laggard on EVs. Mazda doesn’t look good either. 10 years from now, a company like BYD will probably be a mainstream name like Huawei has become today. China also has the advantage of having the state backing a company like CATL to go up against Samsung, Panasonic and LG in battery production. They will have the complete supply chain needed for EVs.

    If you read the slide deck I posted from Marchionne, he’s basically asking to merge with someone. The strategy now seems to be to get good profits out of North America with muscle cars and trucks that people love but the government intends to ban since they hate us, and then merge with someone else.

    Mazda doesn’t look good in EVs, but they could partner with someone else to get powertrains. They have also finally built their first assembly plant outside of Japan in Vladivostok which is interesting.

    Agree on China. They kind of screwed up their car strategy initially compared to what South Korea and Japan did earlier, but now their EV strategy is smart.

    Many Europeans are now waking up to this fact, hence the recent decision by the EU to create its own battery production network. But the Koreans acted faster. There are already factories in Poland and in Hungary by LG and Samsung respectively. CATL is also looking at a production base, most likely in Central Europe. LG recently announced they would triple production capacity from the earlier stated goal. The Polish factory will now produce 5 GW, the same as the planned capacity in Sweden (which is still in planning stage).

    We’ll see how it shakes out. While Europe is (belatedly) acting on the EV revolution, at least some movement is fortcoming. In the US, aside from Tesla, there is not much. The only domestic manufacturer was GM, but as previously mentioned, the GM Bolt is really the LG Bolt.

    White countries are all generally all lacking in strategic economic planning.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Polish Perspective

    I tried radar/laser cruise control a few times and didn’t like it.
     
    The technology has improved at a very rapid pace over just the last few years. Unless you tried a system which is not continually improving via an over-the-air update (which is to say, most systems right now) then your reaction is not surprising. Even a two year pause can be night and day. Tesla recently released their latest AP2 update and the difference is quite huge.

    https://electrek.co/2018/03/15/tesla-autopilot-update-autosteer/

    /r/TeslaMotors have been very critical of Tesla over the past year, but they have been ecstatic over the performance improvements. There are a lot of mini-reviews on that subreddit to look through if you want to see the differences. Including many with before/after Youtube videos. And that was just one update. Karpathy, after having been forced to re-write the full codebase is only now starting to accelerate.

    Tesla is also making their own AP hardware suite. They are using a clunky Nvidia setup right now, with a full Titan GPU in the car. Jim Keller, who was behind the Ryzen AMD processor and worked on early Apple CPUs, is in charge. In just a few years we will see what a boutique solution can provide in terms of efficiency and pperformance in a given power envelope.


    No, that is the correct way to view. The purpose of business is to make money. Accelerating “sustainable” transportation is a completely irrelevant goal except to the extent that it helps market the product.
     
    It's not either/or and it is a mistake to view it as such. Business is not a charity, but it is possible to combine social goals with economic profit. Keep in mind that the car industry is extremely capital-intensive, as your previous Sergio reference hinted at, and Tesla is building everything from scratch. All the factories, all the supply chain linkages and they are investing in all the new tech at the same time.

    They could slow down and just live off their very fat gross margins, and some have suggested they do so, but that wouldn't appeal to someone like Musk who wants maximum progress at maximum speed. And the price of that is being a loss-leader for the time being.


    Vertical integration has pros and cons like anything else. Did you know that Ford Motor once produced its own steel?
     
    Yes, I'm aware of that I am in fact happy you brought up that example. Ford is an excellent case-study of the importance of vertical integration when there is a paradigm shift.

    Over time, as the car industry matured, the ICE legacy car makers offloaded more and more of their production onto their supply chain. Today, what separates a BMW from a Skoda is really the engine. Sure, the interior fit and finish is nicer, but even that is often outsourced.

    ICE companies have specialised in engine construction and this is why many are sweating bullets over EVs. They have huge amount of sunk costs and the shift to EVs will mean a lot of expertise will become obsolete. Some will likely go under. You can bet that the calls for bailouts will only increase by the 2020s, along with softer emission standards and the like.

    Tesla is doing the same thing now, and so is BYD. We all know about Tesla but few know that BYD is pursuing the same strategy. They are also investing in their own battery tech and manufacturing.

    Compare and contrast with GM, which is so uncompetitive that they not only outsourced the battery but even the entire drivetrain(!) to LG. As the EV business matures, vertical integration will be less necessary but the early years will give an advantage to those who pursued it. Like Ford did a century ago or like Tesla or BYD is doing now.


    That said, since the Gigafactory will be the world’s largest single production site, it’s possible that this sets up Tesla as the industry’s lowest-cost producer. This would then allow Tesla to supply other industries, and not just cars.
     
    Indeed, Tesla is more than just a car company. Their battery production will help with their solar business as well as providing energy storage, both on a large scale (see the recent deal with Australia) as well as to home buyers. The PowerWall 2 is quite competitive and costs are racing down.

    These requirements will make every car sold outside of luxury vehicles (which just pay a gas guzzler tax) 100% homosexual.
     
    :)

    The most complicated thing about a car has always been the powertrain. That goes right out the window with electrification. They then turn into glorified sheet metal fabricators.
     
    Yep, I made a reference to this earlier in my comment. Generally, the US automakers are lagging the most here. The Korean and Japanese are ahead, some German ones are doing okay(at best). The Chinese are rapidly innovating.

    The strategy now seems to be to get good profits out of North America with muscle cars and trucks that people love but the government intends to ban since they hate us, and then merge with someone else.
     
    I can't claim to read his mind, but I'll take your word for it. I will say this, though, Sergio and other dynosaurs have claimed that making EVs profitable is "impossible". But Nissan is making a profit from their Leafs. Tesla could be making a profit if they weren't extremely ambitious and trying to do everything at once, and preferably yesterday. Their gross margins are extremely good for the auto industry(upwards 20-25%).

    The fact that Sergio can't make money off EVs doesn't say much about EVs; it says a lot more about his antiquated leadership and inability to innovate.


    White countries are all generally all lacking in strategic economic planning.
     
    Norway certainly would be exception to that. They are not only rushing ahead to electrify their car fleet, they are even investing in making boats and planes electrified. And they want Norwegian companies to be at the forefront of that innovation. Sweden has been ridicolously reactionary in this, insisting that somehow biofuels must be used in airplanes, which literally nobody outside of Sweden thinks is a plausible idea.

    That's what happens you get when you have a ton of forest to tap into but not any real idea how to sell it, as in the case of the Swedes. But I'm fairly confident that they'll get their act together soon, too. They just have to accept that their huge forests aren't going to be of much help in this instance.

    P.S.

    If you want to read a little bit about self-driving, and why Tesla is doing it "the hard way", this article is a good primer:

    https://cleantechnica.com/2017/11/14/teslas-lack-lidar-autopilot-legit-provides-cost-competitive-edge-research-hints/

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. @Kimppis
    So China finally launched the "petro-yuan". Sure to get less headlines and clicks than all the Trump doessiers, the Skripal case or the war in Syria, but certainly much more historically significant. Don't tell that to the Russiagatists (is that a word?), though. Brent tops $70 per barrel again as well.

    https://www.rt.com/business/422314-petro-yuan-futures-dollar-death/

    Sort of related, Alexander Mercouris on China-Russia relations:

    http://theduran.com/china-hails-putin-win-backs-russia-skripal-praises-chinas-alliance-russia/

    The faster US hegemony ends, the better for everyone. That said, the article is a bit too triumphalist.

    “It is more of a game changer for the US. As soon as other nations have a real credible alternative to the US dollar, they can dump dollars and switch to the yuan which can spark a dollar crisis. If that happens, not only will there be inflation from the tariffs, but also from the flood of dollars,” said Lee.

    This is a variation on the meme that if China sells US treasuries, then the US dollar will tank, cause massive inflation and an economic and/or currency crisis. But this was never on the cards. The greenback is still far and away the most dominant currency. International usage of yuan has actually declined in the last year or two. It remains at a modest 2-3% of global usage. China is also a nightmare from a rule of law PoV, whereas the US offers very good investor protection.

    That said, the petro-yuan will give the Chinese greater domestic variance in the oil market and that can always be a good thing. I would be cautious about the more propagandistic narratives concerning global implications. There, the progress will likely be more modest in the short-to-medium term.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kimppis
    I absolutely agree. I'm not one of those nutcases who thinks that the US/Zionist/Reptilian collapse (whatever that means) is imminent or something. Just no unipolarity and I'd honestly rather see China as the number 1 too.

    Hard to define what that number 1 position would require, to be honest and not even that important IMO, just close enough to the US in all aspects.

    Nominal GDP is probably one those economic indicators where China has the most catching up to do? Although there are things like stock market size, "wealth", overall oil and nuclear energy consumption, etc, but they matter less.

    China also doesn't need as many foreign military bases as the US and certainly not even similar official (nominal) military spending... It's also less of an island than the US, somewhat less focus on blue-water navy (but more than the USSR). Even then, the first two island chains or even largely the whole of Western Pacific should be secure by the early 2030s.

    Militarily Taiwan's location is really quite strategic as well. Taiwan's demise is of course certainly inevitable at this point, but it's not clear when that's going to happen. Possibly sooner than most people realize, however. Not a long time ago I thought it would be really unlikely to happen before atleast 2030-35 or so, but I'm not so sure anymore, depends on Emperor Xi.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. @reiner Tor
    Apparently there’s a transcript:

    https://grani-ru-org.appspot.com/Society/Media/Television/m.268082.html

    Злобин: "Как же это так - России все доверяют, но никто не хочет быть ее союзником?" Сатановский: "И не надо!". Соловьев (бесшабашно): "Как только наши войска будут дислоцированы в странах Восточной Европы, Центральной Европы, Азии, все эти страны тут же станут нашими союзниками!"
    Такой способ действительно не раз использовался - но не всегда успешно.
     
    But the last sentence (about the method having been tried) is the grani-ru blogger’s comment. So we still don’t have context, but this liberal Russian site thinks the same as the Hungarians.

    it’s at roughly the 35min. mark (not 23min. as in the grani transcript.) I think Solovyov was being facetious.
    They’re discussing the new Putin documentary and multipolarity and how to make it work, given that there’s no way to enforce intl. agreements and whether a big guy with a stick is not better, after all, than many guys each with his own stick. The burly guy (Satanovsky) says that America can’t be trusted, not after Ghaddafi etc. Zlobin then asks what kind of design of the world Russia proposes concretely. Satanovsky says that if America played by the rules, that would be a start, which is met by applause but Zlobin doesn’t react.
    Zlobin goes on to ask what Russia’s “national interests” are exactly and what are the criteria to gauge whether the current foreign policy corresponds with them, in particular the confrontation with the West. Also, the West is interchangeable – Russia may have disagreements with UK in one thing, France in some other thing etc. So how come that no one trusts America but line up to be its allies whereas Russia is alone against many.
    Then Solovyov asks him if he would like that Russia had more allies (obviously setting up a joke) to which Zlobin says of course and then Solovyov responds with the phrase about troops.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ussr andy
    correction.
    >says that if America played by the rules
    he said "playing by the rules", w/o saying America.
    >So how come that no one trusts America but line up to be its allies whereas Russia is alone against many.
    whereas Russia is oh-so-trustworthy but alone.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. @AP
    This was sarcasm, but it's interesting to see Putin pursuing a similar policy with Venezuela as he did with Yanukovich-era Ukraine.

    Yes, the same stupid policy of supporting an unsuccessful kleptocrat.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
    Yanukovich was very much forced on the Kremlin. The alternative was, after all, Poroshenko. It was hardly a choice. The Ukraine was and is a vital part of Russia's near abroad.
    There are no Russian vital interests in Venezuela. Getting the foreign assets of PDVSA might have been a sharp bit of business, but that's where it should have stopped. Even viewed as an operation to stir up trouble for the Americans, Venezuela was useless, given its geopolitical irrelevance.
    So maybe you're right. Putin likes unsuccessful kleptocrats. The proof will be what happens after Maduro's deposition. If Maduro ends up in Russian exile, I will regard the matter as proven.
    ( Rather like how Britain used to accept numerous West African kleptocrats in the 1970s, 80s and 90s )
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Read More
    • Replies: @for-the-record
    These are roughly the questions I also have in mind.

    Here are a several others:

    1. How, and at what point, were the Skripals poisoned? (the following have been offered as explanations: Yulia's suitcase, car exhaust, car door handle).

    2. It has been reported that the European "allies" were convinced by the evidence provided by the UK. Is there in fact any actual evidence of Russian culpability, other than that "novichok" is a nerve agent "of a type developed by Russia (sic)", and that there is "no plausible alternative (sic)"?

    3. What news of the doctor who treated them on the park bench for 30 minutes with no apparent ill effect?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. Apart from having my phone stolen, I also tried out the phall curry at Aladin Brick Lane – a somewhat more pleasant form of cultural enrichment, if one that I am not eager to repeat anytime soon.

    Why so, Kemosabe??…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  37. @ussr andy
    it's at roughly the 35min. mark (not 23min. as in the grani transcript.) I think Solovyov was being facetious.
    They're discussing the new Putin documentary and multipolarity and how to make it work, given that there's no way to enforce intl. agreements and whether a big guy with a stick is not better, after all, than many guys each with his own stick. The burly guy (Satanovsky) says that America can't be trusted, not after Ghaddafi etc. Zlobin then asks what kind of design of the world Russia proposes concretely. Satanovsky says that if America played by the rules, that would be a start, which is met by applause but Zlobin doesn't react.
    Zlobin goes on to ask what Russia's "national interests" are exactly and what are the criteria to gauge whether the current foreign policy corresponds with them, in particular the confrontation with the West. Also, the West is interchangeable - Russia may have disagreements with UK in one thing, France in some other thing etc. So how come that no one trusts America but line up to be its allies whereas Russia is alone against many.
    Then Solovyov asks him if he would like that Russia had more allies (obviously setting up a joke) to which Zlobin says of course and then Solovyov responds with the phrase about troops.

    correction.
    >says that if America played by the rules
    he said “playing by the rules”, w/o saying America.
    >So how come that no one trusts America but line up to be its allies whereas Russia is alone against many.
    whereas Russia is oh-so-trustworthy but alone.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Thanks! That’s more context.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @Thorfinnsson


    There was a recent update to Autopilot which was a huge jump in performance. AP2 lagged behind AP1 for quite a while, in no small part because the head of the AP program was changed 3 times in 2 years. But now they have Andrej Karpathy and it seems he had to rewrite the whole thing from scratch. So that was lost time but they are now gaining lost ground fast. The report you referenced is using older data.
     
    I haven't actually read the report (paywall, not on Torrents), and while I've driven cars with autonomous capabilities I've never used them. I tried radar/laser cruise control a few times and didn't like it. The problem is that when someone in front of you is driving at the incorrect speed the autonomous vehicle adjusts to the incorrect speed rather than making efforts to correct the faggot in question (e.g. flashing your brights). Worse, if you're not paying attention you won't notice your speed has declined to an unacceptable level and that you must immediately take action.

    So in other words I'm not equipped to judge the autonomous capabilities of various marques other than through third party representations made to me. I guess that probably goes for most of us.

    GM's autonomous vehicle program seems to be corroborated by numerous other press reports I've seen.

    That’s not the correct way to view it. The goal of Tesla was always to accelerate sustainable transportation. It would have been a failure if they were the only ones doing it.
     
    No, that is the correct way to view. The purpose of business is to make money. Accelerating "sustainable" transportation is a completely irrelevant goal except to the extent that it helps market the product.

    Goals like accelerating "sustainable" transportation are the proper purview of government, not business. Government can of course incentivize business to achieve such goals as is done in various countries.

    It would be much better for Tesla if they were the only ones doing it as competition is bad for profits.


    Secondly, the advantage of the Gigafactory is that it is vertically integrated. This will give them greater cost control and far greater possibility to do independent innovation on battery prices. They can also custom-designed batteries for only their own cars. People relying on LG, CATL or Samsung have to deal with commodotised products.
     
    Vertical integration has pros and cons like anything else. Did you know that Ford Motor once produced its own steel? On the flip side many early automakers did not produce vehicle bodies...at all. The chassis was shipped to a coach builder (a leftover from the horse and buggy days) for body finishing and fitting).

    I am skeptical of "custom-designed" batteries being much of an advantage, as the custom design can be handle downstream of the manufacture of the cells. The cells can be packaged into battery modules of custom design with proprietary Battery Management System software.

    That said, since the Gigafactory will be the world's largest single production site, it's possible that this sets up Tesla as the industry's lowest-cost producer. This would then allow Tesla to supply other industries, and not just cars.

    The recent announcements does not change this disparity.
     
    Announcements do not change anything of course. The question will be at what price these competing large factories produce batteries at. The point is that this is an extremely competitive and capital intensive industry in which it's hard to get much of a "moat".


    If you’re not all in on EVs, you will be dead. It’s that simple. The Chinese made a smart bet. They understood that legacy ICE(internal combustion engine) manufacturers have in some cases a 100+ year accumulated advantage and to break into such a system is very difficult, if next to impossible. So, much better to go all in on EVs. Chinese manufacturers only do well in the domestic market on ICE technology.
     
    I agree with this, and incidentally Berkshire Hathaway is a major investor in the Chinese electric automaker BYD.

    China also has less need for conventional cars in that their cities are compact and linked by the world's largest high-speed rail network.

    In America electric cars are a poor fit for much of the country and I'm outraged by our government's efforts to destroy ICE cars. You can have my small-block V-8 when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.

    There is an insane proposed increase of current fuel economy requirements by nearly 60% by 2025. No ICE cars available at all other than the Chevy Volt can meet the new requirements.

    These requirements will make every car sold outside of luxury vehicles (which just pay a gas guzzler tax) 100% homosexual.


    However, with EVs, they will have a shot on the global level. Of all the legacy makers in the developed world, I expect Nissan and Hyundai to do best. They are already having good models. GM’s Bolt is essentially the LG Bolt. LG supplied not just the battery but even the powertrain. GM just installed the seats and the chassis and put their sticker on it. But the core tech is Korean.

    Of the legacy Western carmakers, the German ones do well, especially Daimler. Some may recall that Tesla was bailed out by Daimler back in 2008 and they had co-operation on batteries for a number of years.
     
    LG Bolt (and Volt) is right, but let's not forget Tesla's relationship with Panasonic. Incidentally, Daimler is a major equity holdr in Tesla as well.

    The involvement of LG in the Bolt is why electric vehicles are such a depressing proposition for automakers. The most complicated thing about a car has always been the powertrain. That goes right out the window with electrification. They then turn into glorified sheet metal fabricators.

    Fiat is looking quite grim. Sergio has long been a laggard on EVs. Mazda doesn’t look good either. 10 years from now, a company like BYD will probably be a mainstream name like Huawei has become today. China also has the advantage of having the state backing a company like CATL to go up against Samsung, Panasonic and LG in battery production. They will have the complete supply chain needed for EVs.
     
    If you read the slide deck I posted from Marchionne, he's basically asking to merge with someone. The strategy now seems to be to get good profits out of North America with muscle cars and trucks that people love but the government intends to ban since they hate us, and then merge with someone else.

    Mazda doesn't look good in EVs, but they could partner with someone else to get powertrains. They have also finally built their first assembly plant outside of Japan in Vladivostok which is interesting.

    Agree on China. They kind of screwed up their car strategy initially compared to what South Korea and Japan did earlier, but now their EV strategy is smart.


    Many Europeans are now waking up to this fact, hence the recent decision by the EU to create its own battery production network. But the Koreans acted faster. There are already factories in Poland and in Hungary by LG and Samsung respectively. CATL is also looking at a production base, most likely in Central Europe. LG recently announced they would triple production capacity from the earlier stated goal. The Polish factory will now produce 5 GW, the same as the planned capacity in Sweden (which is still in planning stage).

    We’ll see how it shakes out. While Europe is (belatedly) acting on the EV revolution, at least some movement is fortcoming. In the US, aside from Tesla, there is not much. The only domestic manufacturer was GM, but as previously mentioned, the GM Bolt is really the LG Bolt.
     
    White countries are all generally all lacking in strategic economic planning.

    I tried radar/laser cruise control a few times and didn’t like it.

    The technology has improved at a very rapid pace over just the last few years. Unless you tried a system which is not continually improving via an over-the-air update (which is to say, most systems right now) then your reaction is not surprising. Even a two year pause can be night and day. Tesla recently released their latest AP2 update and the difference is quite huge.

    https://electrek.co/2018/03/15/tesla-autopilot-update-autosteer/

    /r/TeslaMotors have been very critical of Tesla over the past year, but they have been ecstatic over the performance improvements. There are a lot of mini-reviews on that subreddit to look through if you want to see the differences. Including many with before/after Youtube videos. And that was just one update. Karpathy, after having been forced to re-write the full codebase is only now starting to accelerate.

    Tesla is also making their own AP hardware suite. They are using a clunky Nvidia setup right now, with a full Titan GPU in the car. Jim Keller, who was behind the Ryzen AMD processor and worked on early Apple CPUs, is in charge. In just a few years we will see what a boutique solution can provide in terms of efficiency and pperformance in a given power envelope.

    No, that is the correct way to view. The purpose of business is to make money. Accelerating “sustainable” transportation is a completely irrelevant goal except to the extent that it helps market the product.

    It’s not either/or and it is a mistake to view it as such. Business is not a charity, but it is possible to combine social goals with economic profit. Keep in mind that the car industry is extremely capital-intensive, as your previous Sergio reference hinted at, and Tesla is building everything from scratch. All the factories, all the supply chain linkages and they are investing in all the new tech at the same time.

    They could slow down and just live off their very fat gross margins, and some have suggested they do so, but that wouldn’t appeal to someone like Musk who wants maximum progress at maximum speed. And the price of that is being a loss-leader for the time being.

    Vertical integration has pros and cons like anything else. Did you know that Ford Motor once produced its own steel?

    Yes, I’m aware of that I am in fact happy you brought up that example. Ford is an excellent case-study of the importance of vertical integration when there is a paradigm shift.

    Over time, as the car industry matured, the ICE legacy car makers offloaded more and more of their production onto their supply chain. Today, what separates a BMW from a Skoda is really the engine. Sure, the interior fit and finish is nicer, but even that is often outsourced.

    ICE companies have specialised in engine construction and this is why many are sweating bullets over EVs. They have huge amount of sunk costs and the shift to EVs will mean a lot of expertise will become obsolete. Some will likely go under. You can bet that the calls for bailouts will only increase by the 2020s, along with softer emission standards and the like.

    Tesla is doing the same thing now, and so is BYD. We all know about Tesla but few know that BYD is pursuing the same strategy. They are also investing in their own battery tech and manufacturing.

    Compare and contrast with GM, which is so uncompetitive that they not only outsourced the battery but even the entire drivetrain(!) to LG. As the EV business matures, vertical integration will be less necessary but the early years will give an advantage to those who pursued it. Like Ford did a century ago or like Tesla or BYD is doing now.

    That said, since the Gigafactory will be the world’s largest single production site, it’s possible that this sets up Tesla as the industry’s lowest-cost producer. This would then allow Tesla to supply other industries, and not just cars.

    Indeed, Tesla is more than just a car company. Their battery production will help with their solar business as well as providing energy storage, both on a large scale (see the recent deal with Australia) as well as to home buyers. The PowerWall 2 is quite competitive and costs are racing down.

    These requirements will make every car sold outside of luxury vehicles (which just pay a gas guzzler tax) 100% homosexual.

    :)

    The most complicated thing about a car has always been the powertrain. That goes right out the window with electrification. They then turn into glorified sheet metal fabricators.

    Yep, I made a reference to this earlier in my comment. Generally, the US automakers are lagging the most here. The Korean and Japanese are ahead, some German ones are doing okay(at best). The Chinese are rapidly innovating.

    The strategy now seems to be to get good profits out of North America with muscle cars and trucks that people love but the government intends to ban since they hate us, and then merge with someone else.

    I can’t claim to read his mind, but I’ll take your word for it. I will say this, though, Sergio and other dynosaurs have claimed that making EVs profitable is “impossible”. But Nissan is making a profit from their Leafs. Tesla could be making a profit if they weren’t extremely ambitious and trying to do everything at once, and preferably yesterday. Their gross margins are extremely good for the auto industry(upwards 20-25%).

    The fact that Sergio can’t make money off EVs doesn’t say much about EVs; it says a lot more about his antiquated leadership and inability to innovate.

    White countries are all generally all lacking in strategic economic planning.

    Norway certainly would be exception to that. They are not only rushing ahead to electrify their car fleet, they are even investing in making boats and planes electrified. And they want Norwegian companies to be at the forefront of that innovation. Sweden has been ridicolously reactionary in this, insisting that somehow biofuels must be used in airplanes, which literally nobody outside of Sweden thinks is a plausible idea.

    That’s what happens you get when you have a ton of forest to tap into but not any real idea how to sell it, as in the case of the Swedes. But I’m fairly confident that they’ll get their act together soon, too. They just have to accept that their huge forests aren’t going to be of much help in this instance.

    P.S.

    If you want to read a little bit about self-driving, and why Tesla is doing it “the hard way”, this article is a good primer:

    https://cleantechnica.com/2017/11/14/teslas-lack-lidar-autopilot-legit-provides-cost-competitive-edge-research-hints/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson

    Keep in mind that the car industry is extremely capital-intensive, as your previous Sergio reference hinted at, and Tesla is building everything from scratch. All the factories, all the supply chain linkages and they are investing in all the new tech at the same time.
     
    This is why I think Tesla's future may be to merge with a traditional automaker. I'm not foolish enough to be a Tesla bear, but the amount of capital they need to raise is extraordinary.

    And truly the most valuable thing about Tesla is the brand, though of course that would not have been possible without the enormous investments and risks.


    I can’t claim to read his mind, but I’ll take your word for it. I will say this, though, Sergio and other dynosaurs have claimed that making EVs profitable is “impossible”. But Nissan is making a profit from their Leafs. Tesla could be making a profit if they weren’t extremely ambitious and trying to do everything at once, and preferably yesterday. Their gross margins are extremely good for the auto industry(upwards 20-25%).

    The fact that Sergio can’t make money off EVs doesn’t say much about EVs; it says a lot more about his antiquated leadership and inability to innovate.
     
    FCA's problem isn't just EVs, it's sedans and small cars in general (in North America). GM and Ford have competitive sedans and small cars globally unlike them.

    Hence they are coming out with large numbers of specialized performance trucks and muscle cars exceeding seven hundred horsepower in order to profit from premium margins.

    Note that I don't think EVs are impossible to make profitable (even in the absence of subsidies), and there's clearly a market for them. Tesla has a notable achievement in that they produced the first ever non-gay electric car. The Nissan Leaf by comparison I would be ashamed to be seen in, and I have contempt for everyone who drives one.

    Norway certainly would be exception to that. They are not only rushing ahead to electrify their car fleet, they are even investing in making boats and planes electrified.
     
    As a net exporter of petroleum with a major current account surplus and vast accumulated reserves this is a completely irrational strategic decision on Norway's part. It would obviously be cheaper to stick with ICE and drop fuel economy limits entirely. Maybe promote EVs in the Oslo area if public health merits it.

    Cack-brained ideas like electrifying boats and aircraft outrage me. Unless there is a revolution in battery chemistry, the energy density of fossil fuels dramatically outweighs that of batteries. Refueling will also remain faster than recharging for a considerable time.

    EVs are a superior option for short haul vehicles of course, which frankly includes most of the passenger auto fleet in typical industrial countries.

    But boats? Planes? That's insane.

    Electrification is also likely inferior to nuclear powered transport, which has been ruled out thanks to atomophobia. It's quite possible that battery electric vehicles would be more competitive than atomic powered cars in most cases, but no way in hell would batteries beat reactors in heavy machinery. In aircraft it would come down to a competition between reactors and kerosene based on airframe size and range requirements.

    In a plutonium economy perhaps the most important role played by batteries would be grid-connected energy storage. This is an interesting space in our timeline as well.

    Note that I did not respond to your other remarks as I don't have anything to add, being largely in agreement. I'll check out your links later.

    If nothing else this has all been a very useful exercise in exactly why you shouldn't hold automaker stocks for the long-term.
    , @RadicalCenter
    Within one more generation, most of Sweden won't be safe enough for any factories without a very expensive security ARMY to protect each facility and the employees traveling to and from the facilities.

    They are heading for a civil war or subjugation by the Muslims and Africans who are settling and reproducing so rapidly there. I'd heavily discount any plans by the Swedes for any manufacturing or assembly of EVs, batteries, etc., in Sweden.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. @Polish Perspective
    The faster US hegemony ends, the better for everyone. That said, the article is a bit too triumphalist.


    “It is more of a game changer for the US. As soon as other nations have a real credible alternative to the US dollar, they can dump dollars and switch to the yuan which can spark a dollar crisis. If that happens, not only will there be inflation from the tariffs, but also from the flood of dollars,” said Lee.
     
    This is a variation on the meme that if China sells US treasuries, then the US dollar will tank, cause massive inflation and an economic and/or currency crisis. But this was never on the cards. The greenback is still far and away the most dominant currency. International usage of yuan has actually declined in the last year or two. It remains at a modest 2-3% of global usage. China is also a nightmare from a rule of law PoV, whereas the US offers very good investor protection.

    That said, the petro-yuan will give the Chinese greater domestic variance in the oil market and that can always be a good thing. I would be cautious about the more propagandistic narratives concerning global implications. There, the progress will likely be more modest in the short-to-medium term.

    I absolutely agree. I’m not one of those nutcases who thinks that the US/Zionist/Reptilian collapse (whatever that means) is imminent or something. Just no unipolarity and I’d honestly rather see China as the number 1 too.

    Hard to define what that number 1 position would require, to be honest and not even that important IMO, just close enough to the US in all aspects.

    Nominal GDP is probably one those economic indicators where China has the most catching up to do? Although there are things like stock market size, “wealth”, overall oil and nuclear energy consumption, etc, but they matter less.

    China also doesn’t need as many foreign military bases as the US and certainly not even similar official (nominal) military spending… It’s also less of an island than the US, somewhat less focus on blue-water navy (but more than the USSR). Even then, the first two island chains or even largely the whole of Western Pacific should be secure by the early 2030s.

    Militarily Taiwan’s location is really quite strategic as well. Taiwan’s demise is of course certainly inevitable at this point, but it’s not clear when that’s going to happen. Possibly sooner than most people realize, however. Not a long time ago I thought it would be really unlikely to happen before atleast 2030-35 or so, but I’m not so sure anymore, depends on Emperor Xi.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. @Polish Perspective

    Jewish knives now openly out for Jeremy Corbyn
     
    Now? Haven't these knives been out ever since he got elected, nay, since he was seriously running for leadership?

    Also as with Red Ken, it’s quite entertaining to see a leftist like Corbyn who has spent his life slinging false smears of “racism”, “homophobia” etc, etc at political rivals and at decent folk alike, basically hoist by his own petard.

     

    Correct, though in the case of Jewish lobbies vs Red Ken/Corbyn, it really is a classic example of "the enemy of my enemy is not always my friend".

    Support for Hezbollah is simply one legitimate position on a dispute between foreigners
     

    Imagine living in a country where your position on a Middle-Eastern political party is not a matter of great political importance and source of much media controversy and debate. But this is what happens when you have organised Jewish groups panicking over perceived loss of influence.

    The problem for the Jewish lobbies is that he is very popular among the grassroots. This is the same problem in which the blairites found themselves in. The UK is interesting from a purely Jewish-political perspective. The Tories won something like 70% of the Jewish vote in the last General Election. This isn't because UK Jews are more "conservative". It's because the Tories are better for Jewish interests.

    The Tories are quite liberal on social matters(they introduced gay marriage), they are good for above-average income groups and they are very pro-Israel. It's a trifecta. In many ways, US dems are quite similar to the Tories. The Dems are not very left-wing. They are pro-Israel, pro-Wall Street and their stance on taxes are quite neoliberal, too. It's just compared to the dumpster fire that is GOP, anyone can look good. I'm referring to the meme that Jews are somehow inherently left-wing, whereas it is more about ethnic interests. It makes more sense to vote for Dems in the US and more sense to vote for Tories in the UK.

    Corbyn in this sense is a break from the past. Blair was of course a neoliberal, too, as well as very pro-Israel. Corbyn is neither neoliberal nor is he very pro-Israel, so he gets almost no Jewish votes. For whites, the actual difference is minimal, because both Blair and Corbyn support the Great Replacement. Jews don't mind that, what they do mind is the unstinting support for Israel that is going down the drain. It is not just about Israel. There's a sense that Corbyn is more pro-muslim than pro-Jewish. Blair (and Obama, Clinton etc) were the opposite. See the previous point about perceived loss of influence.

    We will likely see this in the US, too, over time. It will be the left, not the right, which will go after Jewish interests, such as support for Israel and (serious) tax hikes on the better-off and not the marginal stuff that the centrist/Schumer faction that currently controls the Dems are willing to sign off on.

    Corbyn has shown plenty of spine so far, so it is likely he won't suddenly cave now. That's a good thing. I hope the US left draws inspiration.

    I’m referring to the meme that Jews are somehow inherently left-wing, whereas it is more about ethnic interests.

    As Professor MacDonald has ably demonstrated over the years.

    The Conservatives are Conservatives In Name Only. There are few differences between them and the Liberals or Labourites. They are all pro-globalist, pro-EU and pro-Third World Immigration. The fact that some factions may be less Zionist than most is of little comfort or interest to those of us who are concerned about Britain’s indigenous population.
    Obviously, the first-past-the-post favours the present parties. Any new anti-globalist party has to overcome high barriers to entry to obtain a parliamentary seat, unless they are highly concentrated in support. This applies in the US and Canada for the same reason.
    Real change will not occur until after the coming Economic Depression. I expect all three present parties to be dissolved or reduced to unimportance

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. @ussr andy
    correction.
    >says that if America played by the rules
    he said "playing by the rules", w/o saying America.
    >So how come that no one trusts America but line up to be its allies whereas Russia is alone against many.
    whereas Russia is oh-so-trustworthy but alone.

    Thanks! That’s more context.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @reiner Tor
    Yes, the same stupid policy of supporting an unsuccessful kleptocrat.

    Yanukovich was very much forced on the Kremlin. The alternative was, after all, Poroshenko. It was hardly a choice. The Ukraine was and is a vital part of Russia’s near abroad.
    There are no Russian vital interests in Venezuela. Getting the foreign assets of PDVSA might have been a sharp bit of business, but that’s where it should have stopped. Even viewed as an operation to stir up trouble for the Americans, Venezuela was useless, given its geopolitical irrelevance.
    So maybe you’re right. Putin likes unsuccessful kleptocrats. The proof will be what happens after Maduro’s deposition. If Maduro ends up in Russian exile, I will regard the matter as proven.
    ( Rather like how Britain used to accept numerous West African kleptocrats in the 1970s, 80s and 90s )

    Read More
    • Replies: @Swedish Family

    ( Rather like how Britain used to accept numerous West African kleptocrats in the 1970s, 80s and 90s )
     
    Along with Pinochet, who oversaw some of the grisliest torture policies in the post-war era (female prisoners raped by rats, etc.). Always remember this when Thatcherites speak of "Assad the Butcher."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. @reiner Tor

    These are roughly the questions I also have in mind.

    Here are a several others:

    1. How, and at what point, were the Skripals poisoned? (the following have been offered as explanations: Yulia’s suitcase, car exhaust, car door handle).

    2. It has been reported that the European “allies” were convinced by the evidence provided by the UK. Is there in fact any actual evidence of Russian culpability, other than that “novichok” is a nerve agent “of a type developed by Russia (sic)”, and that there is “no plausible alternative (sic)”?

    3. What news of the doctor who treated them on the park bench for 30 minutes with no apparent ill effect?

    Read More
    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Regarding your second point, yesterday I read an article on Bloomberg which implied to me that the top secret evidence shared by Theresa May last week at the EU summit during dinner (!) was none other than the exact type of the Novichok agent. Something like “this was the AE538F type chemical!” To which the vast majority of EU leaders said “Oh, God! That’s horrible!” And immediately decided for the expulsion of Russian diplomats.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. @for-the-record
    These are roughly the questions I also have in mind.

    Here are a several others:

    1. How, and at what point, were the Skripals poisoned? (the following have been offered as explanations: Yulia's suitcase, car exhaust, car door handle).

    2. It has been reported that the European "allies" were convinced by the evidence provided by the UK. Is there in fact any actual evidence of Russian culpability, other than that "novichok" is a nerve agent "of a type developed by Russia (sic)", and that there is "no plausible alternative (sic)"?

    3. What news of the doctor who treated them on the park bench for 30 minutes with no apparent ill effect?

    Regarding your second point, yesterday I read an article on Bloomberg which implied to me that the top secret evidence shared by Theresa May last week at the EU summit during dinner (!) was none other than the exact type of the Novichok agent. Something like “this was the AE538F type chemical!” To which the vast majority of EU leaders said “Oh, God! That’s horrible!” And immediately decided for the expulsion of Russian diplomats.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    Next you know - Iran is hacking your election and making facebook trolls to support Bernie Sanders.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. @Polish Perspective

    Jewish knives now openly out for Jeremy Corbyn
     
    Now? Haven't these knives been out ever since he got elected, nay, since he was seriously running for leadership?

    Also as with Red Ken, it’s quite entertaining to see a leftist like Corbyn who has spent his life slinging false smears of “racism”, “homophobia” etc, etc at political rivals and at decent folk alike, basically hoist by his own petard.

     

    Correct, though in the case of Jewish lobbies vs Red Ken/Corbyn, it really is a classic example of "the enemy of my enemy is not always my friend".

    Support for Hezbollah is simply one legitimate position on a dispute between foreigners
     

    Imagine living in a country where your position on a Middle-Eastern political party is not a matter of great political importance and source of much media controversy and debate. But this is what happens when you have organised Jewish groups panicking over perceived loss of influence.

    The problem for the Jewish lobbies is that he is very popular among the grassroots. This is the same problem in which the blairites found themselves in. The UK is interesting from a purely Jewish-political perspective. The Tories won something like 70% of the Jewish vote in the last General Election. This isn't because UK Jews are more "conservative". It's because the Tories are better for Jewish interests.

    The Tories are quite liberal on social matters(they introduced gay marriage), they are good for above-average income groups and they are very pro-Israel. It's a trifecta. In many ways, US dems are quite similar to the Tories. The Dems are not very left-wing. They are pro-Israel, pro-Wall Street and their stance on taxes are quite neoliberal, too. It's just compared to the dumpster fire that is GOP, anyone can look good. I'm referring to the meme that Jews are somehow inherently left-wing, whereas it is more about ethnic interests. It makes more sense to vote for Dems in the US and more sense to vote for Tories in the UK.

    Corbyn in this sense is a break from the past. Blair was of course a neoliberal, too, as well as very pro-Israel. Corbyn is neither neoliberal nor is he very pro-Israel, so he gets almost no Jewish votes. For whites, the actual difference is minimal, because both Blair and Corbyn support the Great Replacement. Jews don't mind that, what they do mind is the unstinting support for Israel that is going down the drain. It is not just about Israel. There's a sense that Corbyn is more pro-muslim than pro-Jewish. Blair (and Obama, Clinton etc) were the opposite. See the previous point about perceived loss of influence.

    We will likely see this in the US, too, over time. It will be the left, not the right, which will go after Jewish interests, such as support for Israel and (serious) tax hikes on the better-off and not the marginal stuff that the centrist/Schumer faction that currently controls the Dems are willing to sign off on.

    Corbyn has shown plenty of spine so far, so it is likely he won't suddenly cave now. That's a good thing. I hope the US left draws inspiration.

    Now? Haven’t these knives been out ever since he got elected, nay, since he was seriously running for leadership?

    True, it’s just becoming ever more shrill. And they’ve just taken it to a new level.

    Imagine living in a country where your position on a Middle-Eastern political party is not a matter of great political importance and source of much media controversy and debate. But this is what happens when you have organised Jewish groups panicking over perceived loss of influence.

    Indeed.

    The problem for the Jewish lobbies is that he is very popular among the grassroots.

    Yes, and therefore it’s great to see the jewish lobbies discrediting their own smear term tactic by using it against him with such transparent dishonesty. Every little helps.

    The Tories won something like 70% of the Jewish vote in the last General Election. This isn’t because UK Jews are more “conservative”. It’s because the Tories are better for Jewish interests.

    That’s true, though it’s worth bearing in mind that jewish votes, per se, count for even less in the UK than in the US. They are only about 0.5% of the population here, as opposed to 1.7% there, and even given their demographic concentration the jewish vote could only even theoretically swing a maximum of about 10 seats in Parliament. In practice it’s just a couple.

    Corbyn has shown plenty of spine so far, so it is likely he won’t suddenly cave now. That’s a good thing. I hope the US left draws inspiration.

    Well, I’m not sure I’d really give him that much credit. He still kowtows to the antisemitism smear with the usual abject apologies, but he does stand up to some extent on the substance of policies and personnel. (And as an aside re spine, notice how fast he caved on the Skripal business when the jingoists applied some heat.) The problem is that the control of dissent via hate speech laws is too useful to the wider left for him to oppose the use of it by jewish lobbies, so he won’t take any firm stand that threatens to really discredit the pc smear tactic in general.

    The bottom line, as I suggested above and your comment seems to suggest you agree with, Corbyn is in trouble with the jewish lobbies basically for not being subservient enough.

    Read More
    • Replies: @LondonBob
    The recent, obviously highly orchestrated, smear campaign against Corbyn has been so absurd that my inherent patriotism and sense of fair play is compelling me to actually vote labour in the next election. The current Conservative Party is hardly much different except for their vile servility to the lobby.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Contribute to diplomacy!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  48. @German_reader
    I think it is quite possible, there seems to be a clear increase in antisemitic sentiment online. Unz review is the most "extreme" site I read regularly (ok, I sometimes read American renaissance as well, but I don't read the readers' comments there), but even on more mainstream sites I read it's noticeable. It's definitely around on German sites in relation to the migration crisis (that Barbara Lerner Spectre video is a favorite, now probably joined by Yascha Mounk's statements on German tv). It's not really surprising since it's what tends to happen in many Western societies in times of crisis. And on some level I would actually agree that it's deplorable and irrational behaviour. But on the other hand, if I'm completely honest, given the absolutely despicable behaviour by the representatives of many Jewish organizations, as well as the Israeli state (e.g. the head of the Jewish world congress Ronald Lauder has opined on the situation in Germany...he would like to see AfD banned, and the Israeli ambassador has made similar noises), I'm not really bothered by it on an emotional level. A lot of prominent Jews in Western countries seem to go out of their way to act in ways inimical to the interests of gentile whites. That doesn't mean they're solely or primarily responsible for our current problems (the demographic explosion in Africa can hardly be blamed on Jews, and Islamist violence isn't just a reaction to the existence of Israel), but it does raise the question why one should be overly sympathetic to their concerns.

    You can also over-estimate ethnic/religious ties, between people living in different countries – even when they are trying to pretend to be closer (which is Israel’s tactic) to try to get more donations and immigrants from the American.

    Imagine if Germany tried to get donations from rich American German protestants and tried to get German Americans to immigrate to Germany.

    That’s the kind of picture you would see – pretending to be similar to German American/protestant people like Trump, but with actually a very different mentality, and using various propaganda to try to appeal to what you think is sensibility of the Americans. (For example, Israel is making propaganda showing lots of black people and American style values of rich American Jews like Ronald Lauder).

    American Jews and the richer American Christians are vastly more similar in their mentality with each other, than American Jews are to Israelis (who live in the Middle East – and whose mentality becomes more similar to other people of the region, i.e. Egyptians, Jordanians, Syrians).

    Last month I was staying with my friend and his girlfriend in Israel (they’ve lived there continuously for four years, he is just qualified as a doctor) – and when we mention politics, they have no idea about America.

    They were sure that Jews must vote for the right-wing party in America. And they were certain that Obama was Muslim (Obama is Christian – the Muslim is only his father). And they love Trump, because he is rich and made his own money (actually Trump is not even so successful as a businessman, but people that don’t know English on our level don’t have a clue of this).

    The mentality developed living in Israel are liberal, but not in ‘messianic American way’, but in practical Middle Eastern way (kind of like how Assad was liberal to different religions in his country).

    I am paying for online/Skype Hebrew teacher (I’m preparing to take an intermediate level exam in Hebrew to reach B1-B2 level). My teacher came from a orthodox religious (Arab Jewish) origin, but has become an atheist engineering student. She has better English even than me, and her job in the national service was to teach American Jews Hebrew. She said that she grew up at school, to imagine American Jews as being the same as them. But then now disillusioned that they have different ideas.

    She thinks that American Jewish religion is very different and closer to Christian values, than to Jewish values. Despite being atheist, she is very angry about American initiatives in Israel, like to end the gender-segregation at the Western Wall.

    But Israel will never admit this publicly, as not losing the American Jewish money and support is a strategic objective.

    They have to be careful to hide differences with American culture, because they rely so much on donations from wealthy Americans – for example, if you go to Israel, you can see many donations from Ronald Lauder family to the museums there.

    America is very generous patron for them. But like with most patrons, you have to suck up and appeal to their values. In Israel there is more schizophrenia as well because they also have to appeal to the American Christians. On issues like gun control, rival American factions actually both using Israel to support their arguments.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    Yes, I understand that Israel is in some ways a very Mideastern country and quite alien to many American Jews, your observations are interesting. But that's not what I was getting at. I just don't think it can be denied that Jewish organizations in many Western countries (not just Germany with its particular history) act as fervent advocates of de facto open borders and multiculturalism, on the assumption that this is somehow good for Jews. I think that's both disgustingly selfish (since apparently the interests of white gentiles count for nothing) and insanely short-sighted, given the very real acts of violence, up to and including murder, of Jews by antisemitic Muslim immigrants.
    , @Greasy William

    She thinks that American Jewish religion is very different and closer to Christian values
     
    Yes! Absolutely. And I would be okay with that it was part of some Kevin MacDonald evil plan to advance Jewish interests, but American Jews really believe this stuff. I can't believe that there are people who don't get this.

    Rabbi Kahane once said, "Most American Jews think that Judaism is Thomas Jefferson." Of course today American Jews don't think that because Thomas Jefferson would be seen as too racist, but it was definitely true when Kahane said it back in the 80s.

    What I didn't realize about American Jews until Trump was just how much their liberalism was part of their identities as Jews. Before Trump, I would have just told you that American Jews had a weak to non existent Jewish identity and mainly just saw themselves as liberals.

    What I hadn't realized is that American Jews see being liberal and advocating for open borders and tranny bathrooms as a fundamental part of being Jewish. Tell them that Trump has the support of Israeli Jews and religious American Jews and it is just like, "does not compute".

    Furthermore, now that we are seeing the American Left become ever more anti Israel, American Jews can't process how that could happen. To American Jews, Leftism = Judaism, so of course the Left should support Israel then, right?

    That is seriously how American Jews think.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. @Daniel Chieh

    Next you know – Iran is hacking your election and making facebook trolls to support Bernie Sanders.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. @Polish Perspective

    I tried radar/laser cruise control a few times and didn’t like it.
     
    The technology has improved at a very rapid pace over just the last few years. Unless you tried a system which is not continually improving via an over-the-air update (which is to say, most systems right now) then your reaction is not surprising. Even a two year pause can be night and day. Tesla recently released their latest AP2 update and the difference is quite huge.

    https://electrek.co/2018/03/15/tesla-autopilot-update-autosteer/

    /r/TeslaMotors have been very critical of Tesla over the past year, but they have been ecstatic over the performance improvements. There are a lot of mini-reviews on that subreddit to look through if you want to see the differences. Including many with before/after Youtube videos. And that was just one update. Karpathy, after having been forced to re-write the full codebase is only now starting to accelerate.

    Tesla is also making their own AP hardware suite. They are using a clunky Nvidia setup right now, with a full Titan GPU in the car. Jim Keller, who was behind the Ryzen AMD processor and worked on early Apple CPUs, is in charge. In just a few years we will see what a boutique solution can provide in terms of efficiency and pperformance in a given power envelope.


    No, that is the correct way to view. The purpose of business is to make money. Accelerating “sustainable” transportation is a completely irrelevant goal except to the extent that it helps market the product.
     
    It's not either/or and it is a mistake to view it as such. Business is not a charity, but it is possible to combine social goals with economic profit. Keep in mind that the car industry is extremely capital-intensive, as your previous Sergio reference hinted at, and Tesla is building everything from scratch. All the factories, all the supply chain linkages and they are investing in all the new tech at the same time.

    They could slow down and just live off their very fat gross margins, and some have suggested they do so, but that wouldn't appeal to someone like Musk who wants maximum progress at maximum speed. And the price of that is being a loss-leader for the time being.


    Vertical integration has pros and cons like anything else. Did you know that Ford Motor once produced its own steel?
     
    Yes, I'm aware of that I am in fact happy you brought up that example. Ford is an excellent case-study of the importance of vertical integration when there is a paradigm shift.

    Over time, as the car industry matured, the ICE legacy car makers offloaded more and more of their production onto their supply chain. Today, what separates a BMW from a Skoda is really the engine. Sure, the interior fit and finish is nicer, but even that is often outsourced.

    ICE companies have specialised in engine construction and this is why many are sweating bullets over EVs. They have huge amount of sunk costs and the shift to EVs will mean a lot of expertise will become obsolete. Some will likely go under. You can bet that the calls for bailouts will only increase by the 2020s, along with softer emission standards and the like.

    Tesla is doing the same thing now, and so is BYD. We all know about Tesla but few know that BYD is pursuing the same strategy. They are also investing in their own battery tech and manufacturing.

    Compare and contrast with GM, which is so uncompetitive that they not only outsourced the battery but even the entire drivetrain(!) to LG. As the EV business matures, vertical integration will be less necessary but the early years will give an advantage to those who pursued it. Like Ford did a century ago or like Tesla or BYD is doing now.


    That said, since the Gigafactory will be the world’s largest single production site, it’s possible that this sets up Tesla as the industry’s lowest-cost producer. This would then allow Tesla to supply other industries, and not just cars.
     
    Indeed, Tesla is more than just a car company. Their battery production will help with their solar business as well as providing energy storage, both on a large scale (see the recent deal with Australia) as well as to home buyers. The PowerWall 2 is quite competitive and costs are racing down.

    These requirements will make every car sold outside of luxury vehicles (which just pay a gas guzzler tax) 100% homosexual.
     
    :)

    The most complicated thing about a car has always been the powertrain. That goes right out the window with electrification. They then turn into glorified sheet metal fabricators.
     
    Yep, I made a reference to this earlier in my comment. Generally, the US automakers are lagging the most here. The Korean and Japanese are ahead, some German ones are doing okay(at best). The Chinese are rapidly innovating.

    The strategy now seems to be to get good profits out of North America with muscle cars and trucks that people love but the government intends to ban since they hate us, and then merge with someone else.
     
    I can't claim to read his mind, but I'll take your word for it. I will say this, though, Sergio and other dynosaurs have claimed that making EVs profitable is "impossible". But Nissan is making a profit from their Leafs. Tesla could be making a profit if they weren't extremely ambitious and trying to do everything at once, and preferably yesterday. Their gross margins are extremely good for the auto industry(upwards 20-25%).

    The fact that Sergio can't make money off EVs doesn't say much about EVs; it says a lot more about his antiquated leadership and inability to innovate.


    White countries are all generally all lacking in strategic economic planning.
     
    Norway certainly would be exception to that. They are not only rushing ahead to electrify their car fleet, they are even investing in making boats and planes electrified. And they want Norwegian companies to be at the forefront of that innovation. Sweden has been ridicolously reactionary in this, insisting that somehow biofuels must be used in airplanes, which literally nobody outside of Sweden thinks is a plausible idea.

    That's what happens you get when you have a ton of forest to tap into but not any real idea how to sell it, as in the case of the Swedes. But I'm fairly confident that they'll get their act together soon, too. They just have to accept that their huge forests aren't going to be of much help in this instance.

    P.S.

    If you want to read a little bit about self-driving, and why Tesla is doing it "the hard way", this article is a good primer:

    https://cleantechnica.com/2017/11/14/teslas-lack-lidar-autopilot-legit-provides-cost-competitive-edge-research-hints/

    Keep in mind that the car industry is extremely capital-intensive, as your previous Sergio reference hinted at, and Tesla is building everything from scratch. All the factories, all the supply chain linkages and they are investing in all the new tech at the same time.

    This is why I think Tesla’s future may be to merge with a traditional automaker. I’m not foolish enough to be a Tesla bear, but the amount of capital they need to raise is extraordinary.

    And truly the most valuable thing about Tesla is the brand, though of course that would not have been possible without the enormous investments and risks.

    I can’t claim to read his mind, but I’ll take your word for it. I will say this, though, Sergio and other dynosaurs have claimed that making EVs profitable is “impossible”. But Nissan is making a profit from their Leafs. Tesla could be making a profit if they weren’t extremely ambitious and trying to do everything at once, and preferably yesterday. Their gross margins are extremely good for the auto industry(upwards 20-25%).

    The fact that Sergio can’t make money off EVs doesn’t say much about EVs; it says a lot more about his antiquated leadership and inability to innovate.

    FCA’s problem isn’t just EVs, it’s sedans and small cars in general (in North America). GM and Ford have competitive sedans and small cars globally unlike them.

    Hence they are coming out with large numbers of specialized performance trucks and muscle cars exceeding seven hundred horsepower in order to profit from premium margins.

    Note that I don’t think EVs are impossible to make profitable (even in the absence of subsidies), and there’s clearly a market for them. Tesla has a notable achievement in that they produced the first ever non-gay electric car. The Nissan Leaf by comparison I would be ashamed to be seen in, and I have contempt for everyone who drives one.

    Norway certainly would be exception to that. They are not only rushing ahead to electrify their car fleet, they are even investing in making boats and planes electrified.

    As a net exporter of petroleum with a major current account surplus and vast accumulated reserves this is a completely irrational strategic decision on Norway’s part. It would obviously be cheaper to stick with ICE and drop fuel economy limits entirely. Maybe promote EVs in the Oslo area if public health merits it.

    Cack-brained ideas like electrifying boats and aircraft outrage me. Unless there is a revolution in battery chemistry, the energy density of fossil fuels dramatically outweighs that of batteries. Refueling will also remain faster than recharging for a considerable time.

    EVs are a superior option for short haul vehicles of course, which frankly includes most of the passenger auto fleet in typical industrial countries.

    But boats? Planes? That’s insane.

    Electrification is also likely inferior to nuclear powered transport, which has been ruled out thanks to atomophobia. It’s quite possible that battery electric vehicles would be more competitive than atomic powered cars in most cases, but no way in hell would batteries beat reactors in heavy machinery. In aircraft it would come down to a competition between reactors and kerosene based on airframe size and range requirements.

    In a plutonium economy perhaps the most important role played by batteries would be grid-connected energy storage. This is an interesting space in our timeline as well.

    Note that I did not respond to your other remarks as I don’t have anything to add, being largely in agreement. I’ll check out your links later.

    If nothing else this has all been a very useful exercise in exactly why you shouldn’t hold automaker stocks for the long-term.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    Cack-brained ideas like electrifying boats and aircraft outrage me. Unless there is a revolution in battery chemistry, the energy density of fossil fuels dramatically outweighs that of batteries. Refueling will also remain faster than recharging for a considerable time.

     

    It depends on the journey. The electrified very short-distance ferries and barges are currently far more cost efficient.

    It's a direct result of energy efficiency increase, which I can explain in physics.

    But you can also just see in market that there are some uses to this.

    --------------

    "The Ampere, built by Fjellstrand Shipyar with Siemens and Corvus Energy, decreased emissions by 95% and costs by 80% (compared to standard ferries), as well as noise."



    https://insideevs.com/norways-electric-ferry-impressive-53-ordered/
    , @Dmitry

    Electrification is also likely inferior to nuclear powered transport, which has been ruled out thanks to atomophobia. It’s quite possible that battery electric vehicles would be more competitive than atomic powered cars in most cases, but no way in hell would batteries beat reactors in heavy machinery. In aircraft it would come down to a competition between reactors and kerosene based on airframe size and range requirements.
     
    Atomophobia is indeed irrational, when applied to modern Western nuclear power stations.

    But not if applied to ideas like onboard nuclear-powered aviation, which is not safe or sensible from any perspective, and would be huge 'white elephant' to face engineering challenges to build.

    The way to use nuclear energy in a plane. Is to create simple electric turbo-prop plane (more realistic as battery energy density keeps improving). And charge it up with electricity from the standard nuclear power station.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. @Dmitry
    You can also over-estimate ethnic/religious ties, between people living in different countries - even when they are trying to pretend to be closer (which is Israel's tactic) to try to get more donations and immigrants from the American.

    Imagine if Germany tried to get donations from rich American German protestants and tried to get German Americans to immigrate to Germany.

    That's the kind of picture you would see - pretending to be similar to German American/protestant people like Trump, but with actually a very different mentality, and using various propaganda to try to appeal to what you think is sensibility of the Americans. (For example, Israel is making propaganda showing lots of black people and American style values of rich American Jews like Ronald Lauder).

    American Jews and the richer American Christians are vastly more similar in their mentality with each other, than American Jews are to Israelis (who live in the Middle East - and whose mentality becomes more similar to other people of the region, i.e. Egyptians, Jordanians, Syrians).

    Last month I was staying with my friend and his girlfriend in Israel (they've lived there continuously for four years, he is just qualified as a doctor) - and when we mention politics, they have no idea about America.

    They were sure that Jews must vote for the right-wing party in America. And they were certain that Obama was Muslim (Obama is Christian - the Muslim is only his father). And they love Trump, because he is rich and made his own money (actually Trump is not even so successful as a businessman, but people that don't know English on our level don't have a clue of this).

    The mentality developed living in Israel are liberal, but not in 'messianic American way', but in practical Middle Eastern way (kind of like how Assad was liberal to different religions in his country).

    I am paying for online/Skype Hebrew teacher (I'm preparing to take an intermediate level exam in Hebrew to reach B1-B2 level). My teacher came from a orthodox religious (Arab Jewish) origin, but has become an atheist engineering student. She has better English even than me, and her job in the national service was to teach American Jews Hebrew. She said that she grew up at school, to imagine American Jews as being the same as them. But then now disillusioned that they have different ideas.

    She thinks that American Jewish religion is very different and closer to Christian values, than to Jewish values. Despite being atheist, she is very angry about American initiatives in Israel, like to end the gender-segregation at the Western Wall.

    But Israel will never admit this publicly, as not losing the American Jewish money and support is a strategic objective.

    They have to be careful to hide differences with American culture, because they rely so much on donations from wealthy Americans - for example, if you go to Israel, you can see many donations from Ronald Lauder family to the museums there.

    America is very generous patron for them. But like with most patrons, you have to suck up and appeal to their values. In Israel there is more schizophrenia as well because they also have to appeal to the American Christians. On issues like gun control, rival American factions actually both using Israel to support their arguments.

    Yes, I understand that Israel is in some ways a very Mideastern country and quite alien to many American Jews, your observations are interesting. But that’s not what I was getting at. I just don’t think it can be denied that Jewish organizations in many Western countries (not just Germany with its particular history) act as fervent advocates of de facto open borders and multiculturalism, on the assumption that this is somehow good for Jews. I think that’s both disgustingly selfish (since apparently the interests of white gentiles count for nothing) and insanely short-sighted, given the very real acts of violence, up to and including murder, of Jews by antisemitic Muslim immigrants.

    Read More
    • Replies: @for-the-record
    and insanely short-sighted, given the very real acts of violence, up to and including murder, of Jews by antisemitic Muslim immigrants.

    But, a cynic might add, this keeps anti-Semitism alive.
    , @Swedish Family

    I just don’t think it can be denied that Jewish organizations in many Western countries (not just Germany with its particular history) act as fervent advocates of de facto open borders and multiculturalism, on the assumption that this is somehow good for Jews.
     
    Why assume that these lobby groups have a hidden agenda? Or put differently, why assume that they are not sincere in these beliefs when we know that so many other white Westerners are?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. OT: http://www.bjreview.com.cn/Nation/201712/t20171229_800113368.html

    China is embracing nuclear district heating. As nuclear energy in the West declines into irrelevance owing to hysterical atomophobia, China embraces nuclear heat.

    Unfortunately, even China is not immune to atomophobia.

    Yet despite the economic and environmental benefits, Yanlong’s journey toward widespread marketability does not look set for plain sailing. “Acceptance of nuclear power is the biggest hurdle for Yanlong to be commercialized,” said Ke. Most Chinese feel apprehensive about the use of nuclear energy, especially after the Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011. This public unease extends to all matters nuclear, as seen in August 2016 when the site selection for a planned Sino-French nuclear fuel reprocessing project was halted following protests in Lianyungang, east China’s Jiangsu Province.

    Highly disappointed in CCP leadership here.

    Where was their vaunted dictatorship and police state?

    This was a missed opportunity to fire a whiff of grapeshot against the demented atomophobes.

    Incidentally these Beijing Review pieces now appear on two-page special advertisement spreads in the print edition of Bloomberg BusinessWeek, which is where I first saw this piece.

    Clearly an effort to burnish China’s soft power, though the tone and style are unlikely to appeal to Western frequent flyer class.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  53. . But that’s not what I was getting at. I just don’t think it can be denied that Jewish organizations in many Western countries (not just Germany with its particular history) act as fervent advocates of de facto open borders and multiculturalism, on the assumption that this is somehow good for Jews. I think that’s both disgustingly selfish (since apparently the interests of white gentiles count for nothing) and insanely

    It’s a money-making operation. How do you expect money-making operation to act? In an objective or moral way?

    You have to look at who the donors of the particularly organization, and then consider what kind of actions would appeal to their politics and make them donate.

    One of these is to find different causes, or to exaggerate about rising judeophobia and Islamophobia.

    Often years – will be quiet, with very little judeophobia. As a result, the groups expand outwards their operation to include other races.

    Originally ADL was designed for protecting Jews in the United States.

    But nowadays, Jews are one of the most powerful groups in America, and face almost no discrimination.

    One option for ADL is to dissolve and lose its million dollar jobs. As judeophobia falls, so will its income.

    But it is an industry of its own, with employees and pensions to protect.

    Alternative is to expand outwards to protect ‘lesbians, gays, latins, Muslims’, etc.

    Or to over-exaggerate endlessly about judeophobia , or to find as many fights and causes as possible. To create new goals, new missions – and new ways to get more people to donate to it.

    But I don’t think those organizations have much relation to actual immigration policy, which is decided by politicians, and who try to pick up on overall weltanschauung of the era.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Swedish Family

    It’s a money-making operation. How do you expect money-making operation to act? In an objective or moral way?

    You have to look at who the donors of the particularly organization, and then consider what kind of actions would appeal to their politics and make them donate.

    One of these is to find different causes, or to exaggerate about rising judeophobia and Islamophobia.
     

    You are making the same error as German_reader here in looking for far-fetched explanations when the simple answer -- they truly do believe what they say -- is in front of your nose. Fear of rising anti-semitism has been a staple of Jewish culture every since the Holocaust, and it's still very much alive. I meet these opinions all the time (in Sweden, yes, so they're not altogether baseless).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. @Thorfinnsson

    Keep in mind that the car industry is extremely capital-intensive, as your previous Sergio reference hinted at, and Tesla is building everything from scratch. All the factories, all the supply chain linkages and they are investing in all the new tech at the same time.
     
    This is why I think Tesla's future may be to merge with a traditional automaker. I'm not foolish enough to be a Tesla bear, but the amount of capital they need to raise is extraordinary.

    And truly the most valuable thing about Tesla is the brand, though of course that would not have been possible without the enormous investments and risks.


    I can’t claim to read his mind, but I’ll take your word for it. I will say this, though, Sergio and other dynosaurs have claimed that making EVs profitable is “impossible”. But Nissan is making a profit from their Leafs. Tesla could be making a profit if they weren’t extremely ambitious and trying to do everything at once, and preferably yesterday. Their gross margins are extremely good for the auto industry(upwards 20-25%).

    The fact that Sergio can’t make money off EVs doesn’t say much about EVs; it says a lot more about his antiquated leadership and inability to innovate.
     
    FCA's problem isn't just EVs, it's sedans and small cars in general (in North America). GM and Ford have competitive sedans and small cars globally unlike them.

    Hence they are coming out with large numbers of specialized performance trucks and muscle cars exceeding seven hundred horsepower in order to profit from premium margins.

    Note that I don't think EVs are impossible to make profitable (even in the absence of subsidies), and there's clearly a market for them. Tesla has a notable achievement in that they produced the first ever non-gay electric car. The Nissan Leaf by comparison I would be ashamed to be seen in, and I have contempt for everyone who drives one.

    Norway certainly would be exception to that. They are not only rushing ahead to electrify their car fleet, they are even investing in making boats and planes electrified.
     
    As a net exporter of petroleum with a major current account surplus and vast accumulated reserves this is a completely irrational strategic decision on Norway's part. It would obviously be cheaper to stick with ICE and drop fuel economy limits entirely. Maybe promote EVs in the Oslo area if public health merits it.

    Cack-brained ideas like electrifying boats and aircraft outrage me. Unless there is a revolution in battery chemistry, the energy density of fossil fuels dramatically outweighs that of batteries. Refueling will also remain faster than recharging for a considerable time.

    EVs are a superior option for short haul vehicles of course, which frankly includes most of the passenger auto fleet in typical industrial countries.

    But boats? Planes? That's insane.

    Electrification is also likely inferior to nuclear powered transport, which has been ruled out thanks to atomophobia. It's quite possible that battery electric vehicles would be more competitive than atomic powered cars in most cases, but no way in hell would batteries beat reactors in heavy machinery. In aircraft it would come down to a competition between reactors and kerosene based on airframe size and range requirements.

    In a plutonium economy perhaps the most important role played by batteries would be grid-connected energy storage. This is an interesting space in our timeline as well.

    Note that I did not respond to your other remarks as I don't have anything to add, being largely in agreement. I'll check out your links later.

    If nothing else this has all been a very useful exercise in exactly why you shouldn't hold automaker stocks for the long-term.

    Cack-brained ideas like electrifying boats and aircraft outrage me. Unless there is a revolution in battery chemistry, the energy density of fossil fuels dramatically outweighs that of batteries. Refueling will also remain faster than recharging for a considerable time.

    It depends on the journey. The electrified very short-distance ferries and barges are currently far more cost efficient.

    It’s a direct result of energy efficiency increase, which I can explain in physics.

    But you can also just see in market that there are some uses to this.

    ————–

    “The Ampere, built by Fjellstrand Shipyar with Siemens and Corvus Energy, decreased emissions by 95% and costs by 80% (compared to standard ferries), as well as noise.”

    https://insideevs.com/norways-electric-ferry-impressive-53-ordered/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. @Thorfinnsson

    Keep in mind that the car industry is extremely capital-intensive, as your previous Sergio reference hinted at, and Tesla is building everything from scratch. All the factories, all the supply chain linkages and they are investing in all the new tech at the same time.
     
    This is why I think Tesla's future may be to merge with a traditional automaker. I'm not foolish enough to be a Tesla bear, but the amount of capital they need to raise is extraordinary.

    And truly the most valuable thing about Tesla is the brand, though of course that would not have been possible without the enormous investments and risks.


    I can’t claim to read his mind, but I’ll take your word for it. I will say this, though, Sergio and other dynosaurs have claimed that making EVs profitable is “impossible”. But Nissan is making a profit from their Leafs. Tesla could be making a profit if they weren’t extremely ambitious and trying to do everything at once, and preferably yesterday. Their gross margins are extremely good for the auto industry(upwards 20-25%).

    The fact that Sergio can’t make money off EVs doesn’t say much about EVs; it says a lot more about his antiquated leadership and inability to innovate.
     
    FCA's problem isn't just EVs, it's sedans and small cars in general (in North America). GM and Ford have competitive sedans and small cars globally unlike them.

    Hence they are coming out with large numbers of specialized performance trucks and muscle cars exceeding seven hundred horsepower in order to profit from premium margins.

    Note that I don't think EVs are impossible to make profitable (even in the absence of subsidies), and there's clearly a market for them. Tesla has a notable achievement in that they produced the first ever non-gay electric car. The Nissan Leaf by comparison I would be ashamed to be seen in, and I have contempt for everyone who drives one.

    Norway certainly would be exception to that. They are not only rushing ahead to electrify their car fleet, they are even investing in making boats and planes electrified.
     
    As a net exporter of petroleum with a major current account surplus and vast accumulated reserves this is a completely irrational strategic decision on Norway's part. It would obviously be cheaper to stick with ICE and drop fuel economy limits entirely. Maybe promote EVs in the Oslo area if public health merits it.

    Cack-brained ideas like electrifying boats and aircraft outrage me. Unless there is a revolution in battery chemistry, the energy density of fossil fuels dramatically outweighs that of batteries. Refueling will also remain faster than recharging for a considerable time.

    EVs are a superior option for short haul vehicles of course, which frankly includes most of the passenger auto fleet in typical industrial countries.

    But boats? Planes? That's insane.

    Electrification is also likely inferior to nuclear powered transport, which has been ruled out thanks to atomophobia. It's quite possible that battery electric vehicles would be more competitive than atomic powered cars in most cases, but no way in hell would batteries beat reactors in heavy machinery. In aircraft it would come down to a competition between reactors and kerosene based on airframe size and range requirements.

    In a plutonium economy perhaps the most important role played by batteries would be grid-connected energy storage. This is an interesting space in our timeline as well.

    Note that I did not respond to your other remarks as I don't have anything to add, being largely in agreement. I'll check out your links later.

    If nothing else this has all been a very useful exercise in exactly why you shouldn't hold automaker stocks for the long-term.

    Electrification is also likely inferior to nuclear powered transport, which has been ruled out thanks to atomophobia. It’s quite possible that battery electric vehicles would be more competitive than atomic powered cars in most cases, but no way in hell would batteries beat reactors in heavy machinery. In aircraft it would come down to a competition between reactors and kerosene based on airframe size and range requirements.

    Atomophobia is indeed irrational, when applied to modern Western nuclear power stations.

    But not if applied to ideas like onboard nuclear-powered aviation, which is not safe or sensible from any perspective, and would be huge ‘white elephant’ to face engineering challenges to build.

    The way to use nuclear energy in a plane. Is to create simple electric turbo-prop plane (more realistic as battery energy density keeps improving). And charge it up with electricity from the standard nuclear power station.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    The British just would be harming themselves, to the benefit of competitors like Switzerland.

    The reason people invest in the UK, is because they assume protection of property rights, without being part of some internal British political games.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. @reiner Tor

    The British just would be harming themselves, to the benefit of competitors like Switzerland.

    The reason people invest in the UK, is because they assume protection of property rights, without being part of some internal British political games.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Well, you can read for yourself what the British government intends to do. Perhaps you can explain to them that what they are planning is going to hurt them.
    , @Mitleser

    The British just would be harming themselves, to the benefit of competitors like Switzerland.
     
    Yeah, about that...

    The question which Russian visitors, residents, and hopeful residents are asking is whether the Swiss have decided to abjure the smile and impose an informal sanction on Russians of wealth, and notable Ukrainians as well.

    Sources who have been in social contact with Russians in January at the well-known ski resorts, as well as at elite boarding schools like Le Rosey, say large inter-bank transfers are being delayed or halted abruptly; longstanding bank accounts summarily closed; and applications to open new ones rejected.
     

    The case of Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s Swiss residency is unclear. In March 2014, following Khodorkovsky’s release from Russian imprisonment the previous December, Khodorkovsky decided to apply for Swiss residency at Rapperswil-Jona, in the northeastern canton of St. Gallen. He was granted residency with a tariff and the purchase of a house estimated at 100 million Swiss francs ($110 million).

    But there was local opposition to his remaining, and in October 2015 the local press reported that Khodorkovsky had left. “Personal reasons” were announced. Khodorkovsky moved to London, where he remains today.
     
    http://johnhelmer.net/the-swiss-have-stopped-smiling-at-russian-oligarchs-ukrainians-too/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @Verymuchalive
    Yanukovich was very much forced on the Kremlin. The alternative was, after all, Poroshenko. It was hardly a choice. The Ukraine was and is a vital part of Russia's near abroad.
    There are no Russian vital interests in Venezuela. Getting the foreign assets of PDVSA might have been a sharp bit of business, but that's where it should have stopped. Even viewed as an operation to stir up trouble for the Americans, Venezuela was useless, given its geopolitical irrelevance.
    So maybe you're right. Putin likes unsuccessful kleptocrats. The proof will be what happens after Maduro's deposition. If Maduro ends up in Russian exile, I will regard the matter as proven.
    ( Rather like how Britain used to accept numerous West African kleptocrats in the 1970s, 80s and 90s )

    ( Rather like how Britain used to accept numerous West African kleptocrats in the 1970s, 80s and 90s )

    Along with Pinochet, who oversaw some of the grisliest torture policies in the post-war era (female prisoners raped by rats, etc.). Always remember this when Thatcherites speak of “Assad the Butcher.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
    Like many Swedes and other Westerners, your view of Pinochet has been fundamentally distorted by Marxist propaganda, something Paul Craig Roberts has asserted himself. For a proper discussion of this see Benjamin Villaroel's article posted at VDARE.
    https://www.vdare.com/articles/memo-to-trump-when-you-have-time-deport-moaning-marxist-ariel-dorfman

    Villaroel contrasts the attitude to Pinochet to that of Hollywood's favourite Communist dictator, Fidel Castro.


    During his 17 years as head of state, Pinochet did execute around 5,000 dissidents. But, while estimates for executions in Castro’s Cuba vary widely, one expert in state-sponsored mass killings, R.J. Rummel, noted the median of the estimates was around 73,000 for the period between 1959 and 1987. Given that Castro ruled until 2008, how many tens of thousands more were killed?

     

    [ The Rettig Commission 1991 reckoned about 2,000 were killed ]

    He also gives a very interesting table from Rummel on Communist Democide.
    http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.TAB1.GIF

    By world standards Pinochet was not a particularly bloodthirsty dictator. Why was he singled out for attack ?
    Back in the late 1960s, the Marxist left had already singled out Chile as the next Latin American country to undergo Communist Revolution. This was not only the view of Western Trotskyites but of the Soviet Government too. Even under Eduardo Frei ( the President before Allende ) the Soviets were transporting arms to various left-wing Chilean groups.
    When Allende became President, this view seemed to be vindicated. There was a massive amount of Soviet and Western leftist propaganda whitewashing the numerous illegalities of Allende. After the removal of Allende, the Left felt cheated. Both Soviet and Western Leftist propaganda went into overdrive. Pinochet got the Saddam Hussein treatment - though by comparison with the latter his offences were limited. This was faithfully transmitted to the masses by left-leaning broadcasters in the media, just as today their successors purvey half-truths and propaganda against Putin or Assad or other people the Western Left don't like.
    In many ways, the allegations about the "grisly torture" policies of Pinochet are the lineal ancestors of the allegations about the "grisly chemical warfare" policies of Assad.


    Always remember this when Thatcherites speak of “Assad the Butcher.”


     

    Your knowledge of British politics seems very limited. There are very few Thatcherites left in the British Conservative Party. Nearly all are dead, retired or purged - look what happened to the Monday Club. The people speaking of "Assad the Butcher" are representatives of a pro-globalist, pro-EU, pro-mass immigration, pro-homosexual marriage clique. They are CINO - Conservative In Name Only.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Calling Reiner Tor!

    Hungary expels Russian diplomat

    Reuters|Published: 03.26.18 , 23:43

    BUDAPEST – Hungary’s foreign ministry said on Monday it had decided to expel from the country a Russian diplomat whom it said was involved in spying.

    “Based on what was said at the session of the European Council, Hungary is expelling a Russian diplomat, who also performs espionage activities,” the Foreign Ministry said in a statement to news agency MTI that was later posted on the government’s website.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    As I wrote elsewhere, Orbán knows we are a German colony and won’t do anything against the wishes of Frau Merkel. He never vetoed the sanctions against Russia either. Though initially he made no secret of his opposition to them. Recently he doesn’t even talk much against the sanctions. He was reprimanded back in 2014 and 2015, and now he is in line.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. @Dmitry
    The British just would be harming themselves, to the benefit of competitors like Switzerland.

    The reason people invest in the UK, is because they assume protection of property rights, without being part of some internal British political games.

    Well, you can read for yourself what the British government intends to do. Perhaps you can explain to them that what they are planning is going to hurt them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    Well, you can read for yourself what the British government intends to do. Perhaps you can explain to them that what they are planning is going to hurt them.

     

    Something about making them register property.

    If they would actually take the property, it would be highly irrational - as they would be 'killing the Goose who makes the golden eggs'. In the sense, of losing their status as a 'safe' investment zone.

    That said - Russophobia in Britain does not have entirely rational basis, and we can lead to irrational/impulsive acts, as we might be seeing the beginning.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. @German_reader
    Yes, I understand that Israel is in some ways a very Mideastern country and quite alien to many American Jews, your observations are interesting. But that's not what I was getting at. I just don't think it can be denied that Jewish organizations in many Western countries (not just Germany with its particular history) act as fervent advocates of de facto open borders and multiculturalism, on the assumption that this is somehow good for Jews. I think that's both disgustingly selfish (since apparently the interests of white gentiles count for nothing) and insanely short-sighted, given the very real acts of violence, up to and including murder, of Jews by antisemitic Muslim immigrants.

    and insanely short-sighted, given the very real acts of violence, up to and including murder, of Jews by antisemitic Muslim immigrants.

    But, a cynic might add, this keeps anti-Semitism alive.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. @for-the-record
    Calling Reiner Tor!

    Hungary expels Russian diplomat

    Reuters|Published: 03.26.18 , 23:43

    BUDAPEST - Hungary's foreign ministry said on Monday it had decided to expel from the country a Russian diplomat whom it said was involved in spying.

    "Based on what was said at the session of the European Council, Hungary is expelling a Russian diplomat, who also performs espionage activities," the Foreign Ministry said in a statement to news agency MTI that was later posted on the government's website.
     

    As I wrote elsewhere, Orbán knows we are a German colony and won’t do anything against the wishes of Frau Merkel. He never vetoed the sanctions against Russia either. Though initially he made no secret of his opposition to them. Recently he doesn’t even talk much against the sanctions. He was reprimanded back in 2014 and 2015, and now he is in line.

    Read More
    • Replies: @for-the-record
    Portugal is still resisting (having issued that a declaration that "we take note of the situation") but, now that Spain has fallen, for how much longer?
    , @Mitleser
    Speaking of Orban,...

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DZXVnrSWAAAVSNQ.jpg
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. @German_reader
    Yes, I understand that Israel is in some ways a very Mideastern country and quite alien to many American Jews, your observations are interesting. But that's not what I was getting at. I just don't think it can be denied that Jewish organizations in many Western countries (not just Germany with its particular history) act as fervent advocates of de facto open borders and multiculturalism, on the assumption that this is somehow good for Jews. I think that's both disgustingly selfish (since apparently the interests of white gentiles count for nothing) and insanely short-sighted, given the very real acts of violence, up to and including murder, of Jews by antisemitic Muslim immigrants.

    I just don’t think it can be denied that Jewish organizations in many Western countries (not just Germany with its particular history) act as fervent advocates of de facto open borders and multiculturalism, on the assumption that this is somehow good for Jews.

    Why assume that these lobby groups have a hidden agenda? Or put differently, why assume that they are not sincere in these beliefs when we know that so many other white Westerners are?

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Because they are quite capable of thinking in terms of demographic displacement when it comes to Israel. Also if you listen to intra-Jewish debates, they usually use the argument whether one course of action is good for the Jews or not. (The usual caveats apply. That’s not invariably true of each and every Jew, etc. But I’d go out on a limb here to assert that it’s overwhelmingly true of the leaders of these ethnic activist organizations.)
    , @German_reader

    Why assume that these lobby groups have a hidden agenda?
     
    I didn't write that they have a hidden agenda, I'm not a believer in a conscious conspiracy or something like that. Ethnocentric animosity and a delusional view of present dangers (white gentiles always one step away from going full Nazi, Muslims not that bad by comparison) are enough as explanations. But that doesn't make me more understanding of people like Ronald Lauder when they're acting in ways inimical to my interests.
    , @Dmitry
    It's a combination - they have many 'true believers' (they believe in liberalism).

    And they also sense they need to raise money (they are a money making operation). That's why, like any business, they are expanding outwards, and trying to expand their fundraising to new demographics.

    If you know the salary and pensions of people who operate these groups - it is quite shocking, and even then (from a non-selfish motive), they will feel obligation to their employees to keep the donations flowing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. @Swedish Family

    I just don’t think it can be denied that Jewish organizations in many Western countries (not just Germany with its particular history) act as fervent advocates of de facto open borders and multiculturalism, on the assumption that this is somehow good for Jews.
     
    Why assume that these lobby groups have a hidden agenda? Or put differently, why assume that they are not sincere in these beliefs when we know that so many other white Westerners are?

    Because they are quite capable of thinking in terms of demographic displacement when it comes to Israel. Also if you listen to intra-Jewish debates, they usually use the argument whether one course of action is good for the Jews or not. (The usual caveats apply. That’s not invariably true of each and every Jew, etc. But I’d go out on a limb here to assert that it’s overwhelmingly true of the leaders of these ethnic activist organizations.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    That part is not factually true though.

    They organized vast protest in Tel Aviv, for example, this week against plans to repatriate illegal immigrants.

    (The NGO lawyers also successfully blocked the deportation plan in the Supreme Court).

    All the signs in Hebrew, etc - it's paid for by the NGOs like New Israel Fund (tens of millions of dollars a year from American Jews to make Israel more liberal).

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFHNXKtGgGM
    , @Swedish Family

    Because they are quite capable of thinking in terms of demographic displacement when it comes to Israel. Also if you listen to intra-Jewish debates, they usually use the argument whether one course of action is good for the Jews or not. (The usual caveats apply. That’s not invariably true of each and every Jew, etc. But I’d go out on a limb here to assert that it’s overwhelmingly true of the leaders of these ethnic activist organizations.)
     
    That's a good argument, but my guess is that this is a case of double-think. That is, they are sincere about wanting open borders in Western Europe and equally sincere about not wishing that on Israel. It wouldn't surprise me if this goes for Julia Ioffe too, despite her obvious smarts.
    , @German_reader

    Also if you listen to intra-Jewish debates, they usually use the argument whether one course of action is good for the Jews or not.
     
    It's not even just in intra-Jewish debates, someone like Yasha Mounk openly states that an increasingly multiethnic and multicultural Germany in which Muslims feel at home would also be good for Jews (which is of course nonsense given what many Muslims would like to do to Jews). And as far as I can see this is a very common argument advanced by Jewish organizations and individuals throughout the West. These people openly state that their perceived self-interest (opposed to the interests of majority society) is a primary motivation for them. I don't think it's exactly a crazy conspiracy theory to point that out.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. @reiner Tor
    As I wrote elsewhere, Orbán knows we are a German colony and won’t do anything against the wishes of Frau Merkel. He never vetoed the sanctions against Russia either. Though initially he made no secret of his opposition to them. Recently he doesn’t even talk much against the sanctions. He was reprimanded back in 2014 and 2015, and now he is in line.

    Portugal is still resisting (having issued that a declaration that “we take note of the situation”) but, now that Spain has fallen, for how much longer?

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Interesting. I thought it was decided as an EU policy. I think one diplomat was the absolute minimum, at least unless one wanted to run into problems with the EU leaders.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Digging into it tonight.

    When Anatoly says “jump!”, I ask “how high?”

    Read More
    • LOL: Anatoly Karlin
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  67. @for-the-record
    Portugal is still resisting (having issued that a declaration that "we take note of the situation") but, now that Spain has fallen, for how much longer?

    Interesting. I thought it was decided as an EU policy. I think one diplomat was the absolute minimum, at least unless one wanted to run into problems with the EU leaders.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. @Swedish Family

    I just don’t think it can be denied that Jewish organizations in many Western countries (not just Germany with its particular history) act as fervent advocates of de facto open borders and multiculturalism, on the assumption that this is somehow good for Jews.
     
    Why assume that these lobby groups have a hidden agenda? Or put differently, why assume that they are not sincere in these beliefs when we know that so many other white Westerners are?

    Why assume that these lobby groups have a hidden agenda?

    I didn’t write that they have a hidden agenda, I’m not a believer in a conscious conspiracy or something like that. Ethnocentric animosity and a delusional view of present dangers (white gentiles always one step away from going full Nazi, Muslims not that bad by comparison) are enough as explanations. But that doesn’t make me more understanding of people like Ronald Lauder when they’re acting in ways inimical to my interests.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Swedish Family

    I didn’t write that they have a hidden agenda, I’m not a believer in a conscious conspiracy or something like that. Ethnocentric animosity and a delusional view of present dangers (white gentiles always one step away from going full Nazi, Muslims not that bad by comparison) are enough as explanations.
     
    You don't say it outright, but there is the implicit assumption that they think themselves Jewish first and citizens of their countries second. My argument is that the opposite is true. They do consider themeselves [insert nationality] first, but their idea of what makes a good society is colored by the Jewish experience, which breeds a natural hostility toward homogeneous societies and nationalism.

    The one thing that doesn't fit this pattern is their position on Israel, but that is fully explained by their fears of what an Arab majority would do to the Jews there if handed the power (it sure wouldn't be pretty.)

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @Dmitry

    . But that’s not what I was getting at. I just don’t think it can be denied that Jewish organizations in many Western countries (not just Germany with its particular history) act as fervent advocates of de facto open borders and multiculturalism, on the assumption that this is somehow good for Jews. I think that’s both disgustingly selfish (since apparently the interests of white gentiles count for nothing) and insanely
     
    It's a money-making operation. How do you expect money-making operation to act? In an objective or moral way?

    You have to look at who the donors of the particularly organization, and then consider what kind of actions would appeal to their politics and make them donate.

    One of these is to find different causes, or to exaggerate about rising judeophobia and Islamophobia.

    Often years - will be quiet, with very little judeophobia. As a result, the groups expand outwards their operation to include other races.

    Originally ADL was designed for protecting Jews in the United States.

    But nowadays, Jews are one of the most powerful groups in America, and face almost no discrimination.

    One option for ADL is to dissolve and lose its million dollar jobs. As judeophobia falls, so will its income.

    But it is an industry of its own, with employees and pensions to protect.

    Alternative is to expand outwards to protect 'lesbians, gays, latins, Muslims', etc.

    Or to over-exaggerate endlessly about judeophobia , or to find as many fights and causes as possible. To create new goals, new missions - and new ways to get more people to donate to it.


    But I don't think those organizations have much relation to actual immigration policy, which is decided by politicians, and who try to pick up on overall weltanschauung of the era.

    It’s a money-making operation. How do you expect money-making operation to act? In an objective or moral way?

    You have to look at who the donors of the particularly organization, and then consider what kind of actions would appeal to their politics and make them donate.

    One of these is to find different causes, or to exaggerate about rising judeophobia and Islamophobia.

    You are making the same error as German_reader here in looking for far-fetched explanations when the simple answer — they truly do believe what they say — is in front of your nose. Fear of rising anti-semitism has been a staple of Jewish culture every since the Holocaust, and it’s still very much alive. I meet these opinions all the time (in Sweden, yes, so they’re not altogether baseless).

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    Fear of rising anti-semitism has been a staple of Jewish culture every since the Holocaust, and it’s still very much alive.
     
    I didn't deny that. To some extent it may even be understandable given the Holocaust which is still barely within living memory. But it doesn't really affect my views...unless you're arguing that someone like Ronald Lauder is mentally ill in a clinical sense because of Holocaust trauma, he's still responsible for his actions.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. @reiner Tor
    Because they are quite capable of thinking in terms of demographic displacement when it comes to Israel. Also if you listen to intra-Jewish debates, they usually use the argument whether one course of action is good for the Jews or not. (The usual caveats apply. That’s not invariably true of each and every Jew, etc. But I’d go out on a limb here to assert that it’s overwhelmingly true of the leaders of these ethnic activist organizations.)

    That part is not factually true though.

    They organized vast protest in Tel Aviv, for example, this week against plans to repatriate illegal immigrants.

    (The NGO lawyers also successfully blocked the deportation plan in the Supreme Court).

    All the signs in Hebrew, etc – it’s paid for by the NGOs like New Israel Fund (tens of millions of dollars a year from American Jews to make Israel more liberal).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. I would like to know why the Skripals turned off their phone GPS just hours before they were poisoned.

    I would also like to know how the British investigators came to the conclusion of the mini drone, and why they didn’t think of some other hard science fiction methods.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  72. @Swedish Family

    I just don’t think it can be denied that Jewish organizations in many Western countries (not just Germany with its particular history) act as fervent advocates of de facto open borders and multiculturalism, on the assumption that this is somehow good for Jews.
     
    Why assume that these lobby groups have a hidden agenda? Or put differently, why assume that they are not sincere in these beliefs when we know that so many other white Westerners are?

    It’s a combination – they have many ‘true believers’ (they believe in liberalism).

    And they also sense they need to raise money (they are a money making operation). That’s why, like any business, they are expanding outwards, and trying to expand their fundraising to new demographics.

    If you know the salary and pensions of people who operate these groups – it is quite shocking, and even then (from a non-selfish motive), they will feel obligation to their employees to keep the donations flowing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. @reiner Tor
    Because they are quite capable of thinking in terms of demographic displacement when it comes to Israel. Also if you listen to intra-Jewish debates, they usually use the argument whether one course of action is good for the Jews or not. (The usual caveats apply. That’s not invariably true of each and every Jew, etc. But I’d go out on a limb here to assert that it’s overwhelmingly true of the leaders of these ethnic activist organizations.)

    Because they are quite capable of thinking in terms of demographic displacement when it comes to Israel. Also if you listen to intra-Jewish debates, they usually use the argument whether one course of action is good for the Jews or not. (The usual caveats apply. That’s not invariably true of each and every Jew, etc. But I’d go out on a limb here to assert that it’s overwhelmingly true of the leaders of these ethnic activist organizations.)

    That’s a good argument, but my guess is that this is a case of double-think. That is, they are sincere about wanting open borders in Western Europe and equally sincere about not wishing that on Israel. It wouldn’t surprise me if this goes for Julia Ioffe too, despite her obvious smarts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    That is, they are sincere about wanting open borders in Western Europe and equally sincere about not wishing that on Israel
     
    Well sure, they certainly are sincere about that. But it's obviously a completely hypocritical position and a sign of extremely dubious morality imo. Arguing that white gentiles should give up their nation states (because those somehow equal Nazism, no matter how liberal towards existing minorities), but wanting to preserve an exclusive state for your own group as a potential bolt hole in case things turn ugly, is an obvious double standard. I don't see why one should have much sympathy for that (all the more so since it's been effectively made a taboo to point out this obvious contradiction).
    , @reiner Tor
    And now you’ve arrived at the theory of Kevin B. MacDonald, who wrote that the best deceivers are self-deceived. Probably the Jews engaged in such activities sincerely believe in the idealism for us and the cold hard interests for themselves. They would idealistically sacrifice us, while also selflessly serving their own ethnicity, and in the meantime making a decent living for all their dedicated work and sacrifices, all the while seeing no moral issues with any aspect of this.

    But then, you can also think of the psychopathic murderer to be innocent, because he cannot see the evil of his ways. I mean, he’s a psychopath through no fault of his own.

    If you cannot find people like Abe Foxman or Ronald Lauder responsible for their activism greatly harmful to us, then no one is morally responsible for anything.

    By the way I personally hate the gentile traitors way more passionately than these Jewish activists. A Blair or a Merkel should probably count among the most despicable human beings ever born. Compared to them, Bill Kristol is a morally perfect being. At least he tries to serve his own people.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. @reiner Tor
    Because they are quite capable of thinking in terms of demographic displacement when it comes to Israel. Also if you listen to intra-Jewish debates, they usually use the argument whether one course of action is good for the Jews or not. (The usual caveats apply. That’s not invariably true of each and every Jew, etc. But I’d go out on a limb here to assert that it’s overwhelmingly true of the leaders of these ethnic activist organizations.)

    Also if you listen to intra-Jewish debates, they usually use the argument whether one course of action is good for the Jews or not.

    It’s not even just in intra-Jewish debates, someone like Yasha Mounk openly states that an increasingly multiethnic and multicultural Germany in which Muslims feel at home would also be good for Jews (which is of course nonsense given what many Muslims would like to do to Jews). And as far as I can see this is a very common argument advanced by Jewish organizations and individuals throughout the West. These people openly state that their perceived self-interest (opposed to the interests of majority society) is a primary motivation for them. I don’t think it’s exactly a crazy conspiracy theory to point that out.

    Read More
    • Agree: reiner Tor
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. @Swedish Family

    It’s a money-making operation. How do you expect money-making operation to act? In an objective or moral way?

    You have to look at who the donors of the particularly organization, and then consider what kind of actions would appeal to their politics and make them donate.

    One of these is to find different causes, or to exaggerate about rising judeophobia and Islamophobia.
     

    You are making the same error as German_reader here in looking for far-fetched explanations when the simple answer -- they truly do believe what they say -- is in front of your nose. Fear of rising anti-semitism has been a staple of Jewish culture every since the Holocaust, and it's still very much alive. I meet these opinions all the time (in Sweden, yes, so they're not altogether baseless).

    Fear of rising anti-semitism has been a staple of Jewish culture every since the Holocaust, and it’s still very much alive.

    I didn’t deny that. To some extent it may even be understandable given the Holocaust which is still barely within living memory. But it doesn’t really affect my views…unless you’re arguing that someone like Ronald Lauder is mentally ill in a clinical sense because of Holocaust trauma, he’s still responsible for his actions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    I don't know the details of Ronald Launder. As an American, he is likely a lot less cynical.

    The Russian equivalent - Moshe Kantor - is very rational and cynical in his work on tolerance though.

    He first started as an 'anti-nuclear weapons activist'. When the wind has changed, he is now a 'tolerance' activist'.

    He's trying to make himself indispensable to both Kremlin policy (which he follows to a letter), and also to market himself to both the Western Jewish community and the EU (where he has most of his exports).

    His real name is Viatcheslav - but he started marketing himself as 'Moshe' in the West.

    I can almost imagine trying this game myself, if I was very rich, and I wanted to make myself indispensable. I can re-brand myself with a new name - 'Moshe', a famous Jewish leader, who is fighting against national hatred and nuclear weapons.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. I’m also interested in the sudden Beijing visit of the beloved North Korean Field Marshal.

    And Trump reportedly to scrap the Iran deal in May. Though Greasy will rightly point out that all such previous rumors came to naught. He might plan to do so, but eventually a grown-up talks to him.

    Anyway, interesting times.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  77. @reiner Tor
    Well, you can read for yourself what the British government intends to do. Perhaps you can explain to them that what they are planning is going to hurt them.

    Well, you can read for yourself what the British government intends to do. Perhaps you can explain to them that what they are planning is going to hurt them.

    Something about making them register property.

    If they would actually take the property, it would be highly irrational – as they would be ‘killing the Goose who makes the golden eggs’. In the sense, of losing their status as a ‘safe’ investment zone.

    That said – Russophobia in Britain does not have entirely rational basis, and we can lead to irrational/impulsive acts, as we might be seeing the beginning.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    You know, they actually mentioned confiscation and/or asset freezes. But then again, confiscation always starts with registration. As I wrote, if I were a rich Russian, I’d probably move my assets out of the country.
    , @RadicalCenter
    If the Islamic Kingdom (“UK”) harasses rich Russians too much, some european country with an actual climate and actual cuisine should announce that they’re welcome to resettle. Like Italy and Greece.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @Swedish Family

    Because they are quite capable of thinking in terms of demographic displacement when it comes to Israel. Also if you listen to intra-Jewish debates, they usually use the argument whether one course of action is good for the Jews or not. (The usual caveats apply. That’s not invariably true of each and every Jew, etc. But I’d go out on a limb here to assert that it’s overwhelmingly true of the leaders of these ethnic activist organizations.)
     
    That's a good argument, but my guess is that this is a case of double-think. That is, they are sincere about wanting open borders in Western Europe and equally sincere about not wishing that on Israel. It wouldn't surprise me if this goes for Julia Ioffe too, despite her obvious smarts.

    That is, they are sincere about wanting open borders in Western Europe and equally sincere about not wishing that on Israel

    Well sure, they certainly are sincere about that. But it’s obviously a completely hypocritical position and a sign of extremely dubious morality imo. Arguing that white gentiles should give up their nation states (because those somehow equal Nazism, no matter how liberal towards existing minorities), but wanting to preserve an exclusive state for your own group as a potential bolt hole in case things turn ugly, is an obvious double standard. I don’t see why one should have much sympathy for that (all the more so since it’s been effectively made a taboo to point out this obvious contradiction).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    Well sure, they certainly are sincere about that. But it’s obviously a completely hypocritical position and a sign of extremely dubious morality imo. Arguing that white gentiles should give up their nation states (because those somehow equal Nazism, no matter how liberal towards existing minorities), but wanting to preserve an exclusive state for your own group as a potential bolt hole in case things turn ugly, is an obvious double standard. I don’t see why one should have much sympathy for that (all the more so since it’s been effectively made a taboo to point out this obvious contradiction).
     
    They are perfectly sincere for Israel. And they do it all undercover in Israel, with huge funding, so that the NGO workers are one of the main industries in Tel Aviv.

    Again - who do you think pays for things like free Hebrew lessons for the illegal immigrants there. (They use it very cleverly, to then have an organized media campaign literally publishing dozens of articles in the leading newspapers saying: 'look these people speak Hebrew, unlike the Russians in Israel - how can you want them to leave').


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deZqscIUUJQ
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. @German_reader

    Fear of rising anti-semitism has been a staple of Jewish culture every since the Holocaust, and it’s still very much alive.
     
    I didn't deny that. To some extent it may even be understandable given the Holocaust which is still barely within living memory. But it doesn't really affect my views...unless you're arguing that someone like Ronald Lauder is mentally ill in a clinical sense because of Holocaust trauma, he's still responsible for his actions.

    I don’t know the details of Ronald Launder. As an American, he is likely a lot less cynical.

    The Russian equivalent – Moshe Kantor – is very rational and cynical in his work on tolerance though.

    He first started as an ‘anti-nuclear weapons activist’. When the wind has changed, he is now a ‘tolerance’ activist’.

    He’s trying to make himself indispensable to both Kremlin policy (which he follows to a letter), and also to market himself to both the Western Jewish community and the EU (where he has most of his exports).

    His real name is Viatcheslav – but he started marketing himself as ‘Moshe’ in the West.

    I can almost imagine trying this game myself, if I was very rich, and I wanted to make myself indispensable. I can re-brand myself with a new name – ‘Moshe’, a famous Jewish leader, who is fighting against national hatred and nuclear weapons.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    The Russian equivalent – Moshe Kantor
     
    I've heard of that guy, he's a leading proponent of wideranging anti-hate speech legislation in Europe iirc (forgot the details some EU initiative or some other pan-European institution - council of Europe? - iirc).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. @Swedish Family

    Because they are quite capable of thinking in terms of demographic displacement when it comes to Israel. Also if you listen to intra-Jewish debates, they usually use the argument whether one course of action is good for the Jews or not. (The usual caveats apply. That’s not invariably true of each and every Jew, etc. But I’d go out on a limb here to assert that it’s overwhelmingly true of the leaders of these ethnic activist organizations.)
     
    That's a good argument, but my guess is that this is a case of double-think. That is, they are sincere about wanting open borders in Western Europe and equally sincere about not wishing that on Israel. It wouldn't surprise me if this goes for Julia Ioffe too, despite her obvious smarts.

    And now you’ve arrived at the theory of Kevin B. MacDonald, who wrote that the best deceivers are self-deceived. Probably the Jews engaged in such activities sincerely believe in the idealism for us and the cold hard interests for themselves. They would idealistically sacrifice us, while also selflessly serving their own ethnicity, and in the meantime making a decent living for all their dedicated work and sacrifices, all the while seeing no moral issues with any aspect of this.

    But then, you can also think of the psychopathic murderer to be innocent, because he cannot see the evil of his ways. I mean, he’s a psychopath through no fault of his own.

    If you cannot find people like Abe Foxman or Ronald Lauder responsible for their activism greatly harmful to us, then no one is morally responsible for anything.

    By the way I personally hate the gentile traitors way more passionately than these Jewish activists. A Blair or a Merkel should probably count among the most despicable human beings ever born. Compared to them, Bill Kristol is a morally perfect being. At least he tries to serve his own people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    And now you’ve arrived at the theory of Kevin B. MacDonald, who wrote that the best deceivers are self-deceived. Probably the Jews engaged in such activities sincerely believe in the idealism for us and the cold hard interests for themselves. They would idealistically sacrifice us, while also selflessly serving their own ethnicity, and in the meantime making a decent living for all their dedicated work and sacrifices, all the while seeing no moral issues with any aspect of this.
     
    Then why do they behave in the same way in Israel.

    This - is where the whole conspiracy theory falls apart to me.

    Confirmation bias conspiracies (with lack of acknowledgement when it doesn't match the real world). If you built a bridge like this, I would not trust to walk on it.


    --

    Offtopic:

    Another issue which stops building a rational anti-immigration policy, is that when people labeling anti-immigration supporters as 'racists' - and then the reply of low-intelligence people on the internet is always - 'sure'.

    You can be racist or not (like you can prefer ice-cream or pasta). But that is not needed to have any anti-immigration views. It's a quite separate topic.
    , @dfordoom

    By the way I personally hate the gentile traitors way more passionately than these Jewish activists. A Blair or a Merkel should probably count among the most despicable human beings ever born.
     
    Agreed. So what's the motivation there? Is it purely the lust for power? Do people like Merkel and Blair really believe in nothing at all? Are they aware of the consequences of their actions?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. @German_reader

    That is, they are sincere about wanting open borders in Western Europe and equally sincere about not wishing that on Israel
     
    Well sure, they certainly are sincere about that. But it's obviously a completely hypocritical position and a sign of extremely dubious morality imo. Arguing that white gentiles should give up their nation states (because those somehow equal Nazism, no matter how liberal towards existing minorities), but wanting to preserve an exclusive state for your own group as a potential bolt hole in case things turn ugly, is an obvious double standard. I don't see why one should have much sympathy for that (all the more so since it's been effectively made a taboo to point out this obvious contradiction).

    Well sure, they certainly are sincere about that. But it’s obviously a completely hypocritical position and a sign of extremely dubious morality imo. Arguing that white gentiles should give up their nation states (because those somehow equal Nazism, no matter how liberal towards existing minorities), but wanting to preserve an exclusive state for your own group as a potential bolt hole in case things turn ugly, is an obvious double standard. I don’t see why one should have much sympathy for that (all the more so since it’s been effectively made a taboo to point out this obvious contradiction).

    They are perfectly sincere for Israel. And they do it all undercover in Israel, with huge funding, so that the NGO workers are one of the main industries in Tel Aviv.

    Again – who do you think pays for things like free Hebrew lessons for the illegal immigrants there. (They use it very cleverly, to then have an organized media campaign literally publishing dozens of articles in the leading newspapers saying: ‘look these people speak Hebrew, unlike the Russians in Israel – how can you want them to leave’).

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    Israel shouldn't allow liberal American Jews into the country, these people are obviously subversives.
    Anyway, don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming that all Jews hold views such as I described, I know there are others with more sensible views. But it's definitely a personality type that exists.
    , @reiner Tor
    As far as I know, it’s mostly Soros who pays for the Israeli NGOs. It’s definitely untrue of most western Jewish leaders.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. @Dmitry
    I don't know the details of Ronald Launder. As an American, he is likely a lot less cynical.

    The Russian equivalent - Moshe Kantor - is very rational and cynical in his work on tolerance though.

    He first started as an 'anti-nuclear weapons activist'. When the wind has changed, he is now a 'tolerance' activist'.

    He's trying to make himself indispensable to both Kremlin policy (which he follows to a letter), and also to market himself to both the Western Jewish community and the EU (where he has most of his exports).

    His real name is Viatcheslav - but he started marketing himself as 'Moshe' in the West.

    I can almost imagine trying this game myself, if I was very rich, and I wanted to make myself indispensable. I can re-brand myself with a new name - 'Moshe', a famous Jewish leader, who is fighting against national hatred and nuclear weapons.

    The Russian equivalent – Moshe Kantor

    I’ve heard of that guy, he’s a leading proponent of wideranging anti-hate speech legislation in Europe iirc (forgot the details some EU initiative or some other pan-European institution – council of Europe? – iirc).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    It's an oligarch who wants to protect his wealth, by making himself indispensable to the different elites: Kremlin, EU and Jewish.

    Not to be confused with who he is pretending to be - i.e. someone who actually believes any of it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. @Dmitry

    Well, you can read for yourself what the British government intends to do. Perhaps you can explain to them that what they are planning is going to hurt them.

     

    Something about making them register property.

    If they would actually take the property, it would be highly irrational - as they would be 'killing the Goose who makes the golden eggs'. In the sense, of losing their status as a 'safe' investment zone.

    That said - Russophobia in Britain does not have entirely rational basis, and we can lead to irrational/impulsive acts, as we might be seeing the beginning.

    You know, they actually mentioned confiscation and/or asset freezes. But then again, confiscation always starts with registration. As I wrote, if I were a rich Russian, I’d probably move my assets out of the country.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    Funny anecdote - only person I know who was personally affected by the haircut Cyprus applied to foreign (ie Russian) Bank deposits under EU pressure was... A liberal Russian journalist.

    "Oligarchs" in Russia are far less pro-putin than average, and the ones in London are further selected for oppositionism. Which of course doesn't negate the presence of regime thieves, but still, the Brits would have to be very careful to avoid "friendly fire". Not sure they're capable of that in principle considering the state of Russia studies in the West.

    Another amusing fact is that the position of basically all political forces in Russia that are at least somewhat orthogonal to the Kremlin - communists (obvious reasons), nationalists, liberals (because they fantasize about it undoing Putin) - is, "Go for it."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @Dmitry

    Well sure, they certainly are sincere about that. But it’s obviously a completely hypocritical position and a sign of extremely dubious morality imo. Arguing that white gentiles should give up their nation states (because those somehow equal Nazism, no matter how liberal towards existing minorities), but wanting to preserve an exclusive state for your own group as a potential bolt hole in case things turn ugly, is an obvious double standard. I don’t see why one should have much sympathy for that (all the more so since it’s been effectively made a taboo to point out this obvious contradiction).
     
    They are perfectly sincere for Israel. And they do it all undercover in Israel, with huge funding, so that the NGO workers are one of the main industries in Tel Aviv.

    Again - who do you think pays for things like free Hebrew lessons for the illegal immigrants there. (They use it very cleverly, to then have an organized media campaign literally publishing dozens of articles in the leading newspapers saying: 'look these people speak Hebrew, unlike the Russians in Israel - how can you want them to leave').


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deZqscIUUJQ

    Israel shouldn’t allow liberal American Jews into the country, these people are obviously subversives.
    Anyway, don’t get me wrong, I’m not claiming that all Jews hold views such as I described, I know there are others with more sensible views. But it’s definitely a personality type that exists.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    See what I wrote to Dmitry. It’s mostly Soros paying these despicable Israeli leftists.
    , @Dmitry
    This personality is extremely common amongst wealthy Jews and upper-middle class Jews.

    The issue is that there is no 'double thinking'. They behave in exactly the same way in Israel.

    They believe in their own koolaid. And if you do that - then you would believe that Israel should accept illegal immigrants, which is what they do.

    Despite the reality being a bit more problematic:

    E.g.

    'Can illegal immigrant get legal status by committing rape?'

    Illegal immigrant living in Israel rapes Israeli woman, then demands legal status in Israel as father of child conceived in rape.

    https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/243226
     
    And the South of the city looking like:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MNpmlqUglE
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. @Dmitry

    Well sure, they certainly are sincere about that. But it’s obviously a completely hypocritical position and a sign of extremely dubious morality imo. Arguing that white gentiles should give up their nation states (because those somehow equal Nazism, no matter how liberal towards existing minorities), but wanting to preserve an exclusive state for your own group as a potential bolt hole in case things turn ugly, is an obvious double standard. I don’t see why one should have much sympathy for that (all the more so since it’s been effectively made a taboo to point out this obvious contradiction).
     
    They are perfectly sincere for Israel. And they do it all undercover in Israel, with huge funding, so that the NGO workers are one of the main industries in Tel Aviv.

    Again - who do you think pays for things like free Hebrew lessons for the illegal immigrants there. (They use it very cleverly, to then have an organized media campaign literally publishing dozens of articles in the leading newspapers saying: 'look these people speak Hebrew, unlike the Russians in Israel - how can you want them to leave').


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deZqscIUUJQ

    As far as I know, it’s mostly Soros who pays for the Israeli NGOs. It’s definitely untrue of most western Jewish leaders.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    New Israel Fund is sponsored by the American Jewish - upper-middle class - community.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. @German_reader
    Israel shouldn't allow liberal American Jews into the country, these people are obviously subversives.
    Anyway, don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming that all Jews hold views such as I described, I know there are others with more sensible views. But it's definitely a personality type that exists.

    See what I wrote to Dmitry. It’s mostly Soros paying these despicable Israeli leftists.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    I really wonder what motivates Soros...does he really believe in all that open society stuff he's pushing and thinks he's leaving a positive legacy? Or is he just a malevolent old man who enjoys causing chaos? Very strange in any case.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. @reiner Tor
    And now you’ve arrived at the theory of Kevin B. MacDonald, who wrote that the best deceivers are self-deceived. Probably the Jews engaged in such activities sincerely believe in the idealism for us and the cold hard interests for themselves. They would idealistically sacrifice us, while also selflessly serving their own ethnicity, and in the meantime making a decent living for all their dedicated work and sacrifices, all the while seeing no moral issues with any aspect of this.

    But then, you can also think of the psychopathic murderer to be innocent, because he cannot see the evil of his ways. I mean, he’s a psychopath through no fault of his own.

    If you cannot find people like Abe Foxman or Ronald Lauder responsible for their activism greatly harmful to us, then no one is morally responsible for anything.

    By the way I personally hate the gentile traitors way more passionately than these Jewish activists. A Blair or a Merkel should probably count among the most despicable human beings ever born. Compared to them, Bill Kristol is a morally perfect being. At least he tries to serve his own people.

    And now you’ve arrived at the theory of Kevin B. MacDonald, who wrote that the best deceivers are self-deceived. Probably the Jews engaged in such activities sincerely believe in the idealism for us and the cold hard interests for themselves. They would idealistically sacrifice us, while also selflessly serving their own ethnicity, and in the meantime making a decent living for all their dedicated work and sacrifices, all the while seeing no moral issues with any aspect of this.

    Then why do they behave in the same way in Israel.

    This – is where the whole conspiracy theory falls apart to me.

    Confirmation bias conspiracies (with lack of acknowledgement when it doesn’t match the real world). If you built a bridge like this, I would not trust to walk on it.

    Offtopic:

    Another issue which stops building a rational anti-immigration policy, is that when people labeling anti-immigration supporters as ‘racists’ – and then the reply of low-intelligence people on the internet is always – ‘sure’.

    You can be racist or not (like you can prefer ice-cream or pasta). But that is not needed to have any anti-immigration views. It’s a quite separate topic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    Another issue which stops building a rational anti-immigration policy, is that when people labeling anti-immigration supporters as ‘racists’ – and then the reply of low-intelligence people on the internet is always – ‘sure’.
     
    If you want to restrict immigration, you'll be accused of racism anyway, even if you're merely using economic arguments it will be claimed that's merely a cover for a hidden racist agenda. You can't win by accepting the terms of debate the open borders utopians and "antiracists" set, they'll accept nothing except total surrender.
    In my opinion it's better to come out openly and state honestly that yes, to a large extent it is about ethnicity/culture and collective identities. That Europeans have legitimate group interests must be the basis of any discussion, anything else is useless.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. @German_reader

    The Russian equivalent – Moshe Kantor
     
    I've heard of that guy, he's a leading proponent of wideranging anti-hate speech legislation in Europe iirc (forgot the details some EU initiative or some other pan-European institution - council of Europe? - iirc).

    It’s an oligarch who wants to protect his wealth, by making himself indispensable to the different elites: Kremlin, EU and Jewish.

    Not to be confused with who he is pretending to be – i.e. someone who actually believes any of it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. @German_reader

    Why assume that these lobby groups have a hidden agenda?
     
    I didn't write that they have a hidden agenda, I'm not a believer in a conscious conspiracy or something like that. Ethnocentric animosity and a delusional view of present dangers (white gentiles always one step away from going full Nazi, Muslims not that bad by comparison) are enough as explanations. But that doesn't make me more understanding of people like Ronald Lauder when they're acting in ways inimical to my interests.

    I didn’t write that they have a hidden agenda, I’m not a believer in a conscious conspiracy or something like that. Ethnocentric animosity and a delusional view of present dangers (white gentiles always one step away from going full Nazi, Muslims not that bad by comparison) are enough as explanations.

    You don’t say it outright, but there is the implicit assumption that they think themselves Jewish first and citizens of their countries second. My argument is that the opposite is true. They do consider themeselves [insert nationality] first, but their idea of what makes a good society is colored by the Jewish experience, which breeds a natural hostility toward homogeneous societies and nationalism.

    The one thing that doesn’t fit this pattern is their position on Israel, but that is fully explained by their fears of what an Arab majority would do to the Jews there if handed the power (it sure wouldn’t be pretty.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Greasy William

    You don’t say it outright, but there is the implicit assumption that they think themselves Jewish first and citizens of their countries second. My argument is that the opposite is true.
     
    Pre Trump I would have agreed with you, but such an opinion to me seems untenable based on what we have seen for the last 2 years.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. @reiner Tor
    As far as I know, it’s mostly Soros who pays for the Israeli NGOs. It’s definitely untrue of most western Jewish leaders.

    New Israel Fund is sponsored by the American Jewish – upper-middle class – community.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. Anyone knows anything about the Dear Beloved Field Marshal of North Korea visiting Beijing?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  92. @reiner Tor
    See what I wrote to Dmitry. It’s mostly Soros paying these despicable Israeli leftists.

    I really wonder what motivates Soros…does he really believe in all that open society stuff he’s pushing and thinks he’s leaving a positive legacy? Or is he just a malevolent old man who enjoys causing chaos? Very strange in any case.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    I really wonder what motivates Soros…does he really believe in all that open society stuff he’s pushing and thinks he’s leaving a positive legacy? Or is he just a malevolent old man who enjoys causing chaos? Very strange in any case.

     

    I think the latter is true. He is a malevolent guy who likes to create chaos.

    It's a psychopathic personality disorder, which is also probably how he is in the boardroom.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/victorlipman/2013/04/25/the-disturbing-link-between-psychopathy-and-leadership/#68b92f654104
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. @German_reader
    Israel shouldn't allow liberal American Jews into the country, these people are obviously subversives.
    Anyway, don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming that all Jews hold views such as I described, I know there are others with more sensible views. But it's definitely a personality type that exists.

    This personality is extremely common amongst wealthy Jews and upper-middle class Jews.

    The issue is that there is no ‘double thinking’. They behave in exactly the same way in Israel.

    They believe in their own koolaid. And if you do that – then you would believe that Israel should accept illegal immigrants, which is what they do.

    Despite the reality being a bit more problematic:

    E.g.

    ‘Can illegal immigrant get legal status by committing rape?’

    Illegal immigrant living in Israel rapes Israeli woman, then demands legal status in Israel as father of child conceived in rape.

    https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/243226

    And the South of the city looking like:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @German_reader
    I really wonder what motivates Soros...does he really believe in all that open society stuff he's pushing and thinks he's leaving a positive legacy? Or is he just a malevolent old man who enjoys causing chaos? Very strange in any case.

    I really wonder what motivates Soros…does he really believe in all that open society stuff he’s pushing and thinks he’s leaving a positive legacy? Or is he just a malevolent old man who enjoys causing chaos? Very strange in any case.

    I think the latter is true. He is a malevolent guy who likes to create chaos.

    It’s a psychopathic personality disorder, which is also probably how he is in the boardroom.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/victorlipman/2013/04/25/the-disturbing-link-between-psychopathy-and-leadership/#68b92f654104

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. @Dmitry

    And now you’ve arrived at the theory of Kevin B. MacDonald, who wrote that the best deceivers are self-deceived. Probably the Jews engaged in such activities sincerely believe in the idealism for us and the cold hard interests for themselves. They would idealistically sacrifice us, while also selflessly serving their own ethnicity, and in the meantime making a decent living for all their dedicated work and sacrifices, all the while seeing no moral issues with any aspect of this.
     
    Then why do they behave in the same way in Israel.

    This - is where the whole conspiracy theory falls apart to me.

    Confirmation bias conspiracies (with lack of acknowledgement when it doesn't match the real world). If you built a bridge like this, I would not trust to walk on it.


    --

    Offtopic:

    Another issue which stops building a rational anti-immigration policy, is that when people labeling anti-immigration supporters as 'racists' - and then the reply of low-intelligence people on the internet is always - 'sure'.

    You can be racist or not (like you can prefer ice-cream or pasta). But that is not needed to have any anti-immigration views. It's a quite separate topic.

    Another issue which stops building a rational anti-immigration policy, is that when people labeling anti-immigration supporters as ‘racists’ – and then the reply of low-intelligence people on the internet is always – ‘sure’.

    If you want to restrict immigration, you’ll be accused of racism anyway, even if you’re merely using economic arguments it will be claimed that’s merely a cover for a hidden racist agenda. You can’t win by accepting the terms of debate the open borders utopians and “antiracists” set, they’ll accept nothing except total surrender.
    In my opinion it’s better to come out openly and state honestly that yes, to a large extent it is about ethnicity/culture and collective identities. That Europeans have legitimate group interests must be the basis of any discussion, anything else is useless.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    There was the same issue in the right-wing inside Israel, which can be followed if you can read in Hebrew language media.

    People like Miri Regev (Moroccan woman who is like Israel's Donald Trump) were saying racist things about illegal immigrants being like cancer. This led to huge shock and upset in Israeli media - almost identical to what Donald Trump had when he said Mexicans are rapists. Result is to make it seem like a debate based on irrational racism, and to turn sensible people into supporting illegal immigrants (to think about how ugly racism can be).

    At same time, there was Bukharan (from Uzbekistan) politician called Gideon Sa'ar.

    He is on right-wing in Israel, but he is actually very anti-racist. His view was just to provide a hospital and good manners with the illegal immigrants, while determining if they are economic immigrants or real refugees. They find out very quickly they are economic immigrants - and he started to establish the program of voluntary repatriation (paying them to return to third-countries).

    The plan he established, is still not yet being fulfilled (because of the Supreme Court and NGO hired lawyers). But it became a mainstream position - and one which the public can discuss the positives and negatives in a non-emotional way, and without having to have any negative feelings to illegal immigrants in order to support or oppose.

    He clearly has no prejudice against the illegal immigrants - but is a good problem solver and made the whole situation clearer. Probably this guy could become like a Putin in Israel in the future if he would be in charge.
    , @Daniel Chieh
    I read a Bloomberg article recently about immigration which I think made a pretty effectively case for immigration that requires a few things accepted:

    1) A purely economic case could be made only for a few highly vetted immigrants: therefore immigrants are to be seen only as human resources for exploitation with temporary visas. Permanent stay must therefore only be earned through superlative performance.

    2) Part of this then is understanding that no one deserves a home.

    3) Although it is not "humanistic", this also judges against family reunification or chain migration. Any additional family members must be justified separately, and with no expectation of permanent visa.

    As far as accusations of racism go, its much like dealing with witch-hunters. You'll be a witch no matter what you say or do.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. Any thoughts on the Dear Beloved Field Marshal of North Korea and his sudden secret visit in China?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Haven't heard anything that you wouldn't have. Beijing is keeping it fairly down-low, I don't see any particularly new from newspapers or Mandarin blogs I visit. I guess that there won't be a mysterious train accident with no survivors.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. @German_reader

    Another issue which stops building a rational anti-immigration policy, is that when people labeling anti-immigration supporters as ‘racists’ – and then the reply of low-intelligence people on the internet is always – ‘sure’.
     
    If you want to restrict immigration, you'll be accused of racism anyway, even if you're merely using economic arguments it will be claimed that's merely a cover for a hidden racist agenda. You can't win by accepting the terms of debate the open borders utopians and "antiracists" set, they'll accept nothing except total surrender.
    In my opinion it's better to come out openly and state honestly that yes, to a large extent it is about ethnicity/culture and collective identities. That Europeans have legitimate group interests must be the basis of any discussion, anything else is useless.

    There was the same issue in the right-wing inside Israel, which can be followed if you can read in Hebrew language media.

    People like Miri Regev (Moroccan woman who is like Israel’s Donald Trump) were saying racist things about illegal immigrants being like cancer. This led to huge shock and upset in Israeli media – almost identical to what Donald Trump had when he said Mexicans are rapists. Result is to make it seem like a debate based on irrational racism, and to turn sensible people into supporting illegal immigrants (to think about how ugly racism can be).

    At same time, there was Bukharan (from Uzbekistan) politician called Gideon Sa’ar.

    He is on right-wing in Israel, but he is actually very anti-racist. His view was just to provide a hospital and good manners with the illegal immigrants, while determining if they are economic immigrants or real refugees. They find out very quickly they are economic immigrants – and he started to establish the program of voluntary repatriation (paying them to return to third-countries).

    The plan he established, is still not yet being fulfilled (because of the Supreme Court and NGO hired lawyers). But it became a mainstream position – and one which the public can discuss the positives and negatives in a non-emotional way, and without having to have any negative feelings to illegal immigrants in order to support or oppose.

    He clearly has no prejudice against the illegal immigrants – but is a good problem solver and made the whole situation clearer. Probably this guy could become like a Putin in Israel in the future if he would be in charge.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    He is on right-wing in Israel, but he is actually very anti-racist. His view was just to provide a hospital and good manners with the illegal immigrants, while determining if they are economic immigrants or real refugees.
     
    I reject that distinction, because even if we accepted only "real" refugees (in the sense of "there's a lot of violence in my homecountry, an endemic war going on, no democracy and living conditions are really bad!"), there is absolutely no doubt that Europe would be overwhelmed and destroyed by endless waves of immigration, given the demographical trends in Africa and a few Islamic countries. Life will probably always be nasty in Afghanistan, Somalia, Niger or the Congo, and there's a good chance there will be horrible cases of mass death in those regions. But at some point one has to harden one's heart against all of this, anything else would be suicidal. Something like Germany's asylum system must be completely abolished and replaced by a fortress Europe approach.
    I see your point that inflammatory language like calling people "cancer" can often repel people...but on the other hand there might also be situations where it's appropriate. I don't think one can generalize about that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. @Dmitry
    There was the same issue in the right-wing inside Israel, which can be followed if you can read in Hebrew language media.

    People like Miri Regev (Moroccan woman who is like Israel's Donald Trump) were saying racist things about illegal immigrants being like cancer. This led to huge shock and upset in Israeli media - almost identical to what Donald Trump had when he said Mexicans are rapists. Result is to make it seem like a debate based on irrational racism, and to turn sensible people into supporting illegal immigrants (to think about how ugly racism can be).

    At same time, there was Bukharan (from Uzbekistan) politician called Gideon Sa'ar.

    He is on right-wing in Israel, but he is actually very anti-racist. His view was just to provide a hospital and good manners with the illegal immigrants, while determining if they are economic immigrants or real refugees. They find out very quickly they are economic immigrants - and he started to establish the program of voluntary repatriation (paying them to return to third-countries).

    The plan he established, is still not yet being fulfilled (because of the Supreme Court and NGO hired lawyers). But it became a mainstream position - and one which the public can discuss the positives and negatives in a non-emotional way, and without having to have any negative feelings to illegal immigrants in order to support or oppose.

    He clearly has no prejudice against the illegal immigrants - but is a good problem solver and made the whole situation clearer. Probably this guy could become like a Putin in Israel in the future if he would be in charge.

    He is on right-wing in Israel, but he is actually very anti-racist. His view was just to provide a hospital and good manners with the illegal immigrants, while determining if they are economic immigrants or real refugees.

    I reject that distinction, because even if we accepted only “real” refugees (in the sense of “there’s a lot of violence in my homecountry, an endemic war going on, no democracy and living conditions are really bad!”), there is absolutely no doubt that Europe would be overwhelmed and destroyed by endless waves of immigration, given the demographical trends in Africa and a few Islamic countries. Life will probably always be nasty in Afghanistan, Somalia, Niger or the Congo, and there’s a good chance there will be horrible cases of mass death in those regions. But at some point one has to harden one’s heart against all of this, anything else would be suicidal. Something like Germany’s asylum system must be completely abolished and replaced by a fortress Europe approach.
    I see your point that inflammatory language like calling people “cancer” can often repel people…but on the other hand there might also be situations where it’s appropriate. I don’t think one can generalize about that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    According to agreed on UN Convention on refugees, refugees can apply for shelter in first safe country they reach only.

    All that has to do - is enforce this law, and many countries should receive very few refugees.

    Also the actual refugees (which I believe should have shelter), are only a small minority of immigration. They should be repatriated when their country is safe . i.e. they can have a permit to stay which they have to renew each year, until their country is safe. On the refugee issue, there is no moral obligation to give them citizenship or to permanent status. The morality justification, is just to give them shelter until the political situation is resolved in home country.
    , @Randal

    Life will probably always be nasty in Afghanistan, Somalia, Niger or the Congo, and there’s a good chance there will be horrible cases of mass death in those regions. But at some point one has to harden one’s heart against all of this, anything else would be suicidal. Something like Germany’s asylum system must be completely abolished and replaced by a fortress Europe approach.
     
    Indeed, but the best political argument for it amongst the upper and middle classes will probably be based upon a loud campaign to protect the countries in question from "brain drain" and "theft of human resources", with arguments that these countries will never sort out their problems until evil white countries are prevented from stealing their best and brightest.

    No need to come across as ruthlessly hard-hearted when a judicious use of the leftists' own tactics - self-righteousness, virtue signalling and lying hypocrisy, will get the job done better.

    Something like Germany’s asylum system must be completely abolished
     
    The whole asylum law and treaty system is a dangerous anachronism, based upon theories appropriate in a long vanished time of very limited international travel opportunities. It is no longer fit for purpose, and we need a political campaign to end it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. @German_reader

    He is on right-wing in Israel, but he is actually very anti-racist. His view was just to provide a hospital and good manners with the illegal immigrants, while determining if they are economic immigrants or real refugees.
     
    I reject that distinction, because even if we accepted only "real" refugees (in the sense of "there's a lot of violence in my homecountry, an endemic war going on, no democracy and living conditions are really bad!"), there is absolutely no doubt that Europe would be overwhelmed and destroyed by endless waves of immigration, given the demographical trends in Africa and a few Islamic countries. Life will probably always be nasty in Afghanistan, Somalia, Niger or the Congo, and there's a good chance there will be horrible cases of mass death in those regions. But at some point one has to harden one's heart against all of this, anything else would be suicidal. Something like Germany's asylum system must be completely abolished and replaced by a fortress Europe approach.
    I see your point that inflammatory language like calling people "cancer" can often repel people...but on the other hand there might also be situations where it's appropriate. I don't think one can generalize about that.

    According to agreed on UN Convention on refugees, refugees can apply for shelter in first safe country they reach only.

    All that has to do – is enforce this law, and many countries should receive very few refugees.

    Also the actual refugees (which I believe should have shelter), are only a small minority of immigration. They should be repatriated when their country is safe . i.e. they can have a permit to stay which they have to renew each year, until their country is safe. On the refugee issue, there is no moral obligation to give them citizenship or to permanent status. The morality justification, is just to give them shelter until the political situation is resolved in home country.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    All true, but in reality it hasn't worked like that for decades.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. @German_reader

    He is on right-wing in Israel, but he is actually very anti-racist. His view was just to provide a hospital and good manners with the illegal immigrants, while determining if they are economic immigrants or real refugees.
     
    I reject that distinction, because even if we accepted only "real" refugees (in the sense of "there's a lot of violence in my homecountry, an endemic war going on, no democracy and living conditions are really bad!"), there is absolutely no doubt that Europe would be overwhelmed and destroyed by endless waves of immigration, given the demographical trends in Africa and a few Islamic countries. Life will probably always be nasty in Afghanistan, Somalia, Niger or the Congo, and there's a good chance there will be horrible cases of mass death in those regions. But at some point one has to harden one's heart against all of this, anything else would be suicidal. Something like Germany's asylum system must be completely abolished and replaced by a fortress Europe approach.
    I see your point that inflammatory language like calling people "cancer" can often repel people...but on the other hand there might also be situations where it's appropriate. I don't think one can generalize about that.

    Life will probably always be nasty in Afghanistan, Somalia, Niger or the Congo, and there’s a good chance there will be horrible cases of mass death in those regions. But at some point one has to harden one’s heart against all of this, anything else would be suicidal. Something like Germany’s asylum system must be completely abolished and replaced by a fortress Europe approach.

    Indeed, but the best political argument for it amongst the upper and middle classes will probably be based upon a loud campaign to protect the countries in question from “brain drain” and “theft of human resources”, with arguments that these countries will never sort out their problems until evil white countries are prevented from stealing their best and brightest.

    No need to come across as ruthlessly hard-hearted when a judicious use of the leftists’ own tactics – self-righteousness, virtue signalling and lying hypocrisy, will get the job done better.

    Something like Germany’s asylum system must be completely abolished

    The whole asylum law and treaty system is a dangerous anachronism, based upon theories appropriate in a long vanished time of very limited international travel opportunities. It is no longer fit for purpose, and we need a political campaign to end it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    Indeed, but the best political argument for it amongst the upper and middle classes will probably be based upon a loud campaign to protect the countries in question from “brain drain” and “theft of human resources”, with arguments that these countries will never sort out their problems until evil white countries are prevented from stealing their best and brightest.
     
    That argument makes only sense for professional immigrants, doctors, nurses, IT workers etc. It's a separate issue from asylum and "refugees" where it's supposed to be not about economic considerations, but about protecting vulnerable people fleeing persecution or war. To be brutally frank, quite a few of the "refugees" now infesting Germany are probably scum even in their countries of origin, being often of very low educational background or actually even illiterate, also often of marked criminal tendencies. You can't really pretend that the problem with an illiterate Syrian with two wives and half a dozen children now living in a large house on German welfare payments (real case recently in German media) is that Syria now has to get by without such skilled and talented people...even more so with the many cases of "minors" who have social workers looking after them, but are ultra-criminal (up to and including committing murders). The issue with these people is quite simply that they're parasites and undeserving of solidarity. It may be difficult to say so openly, but one can't dodge this issue imo.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. In her courageous statement on Monday to the House of Commons, Theresa May (seconded by JC himself) repeated the damning evidence against the Evil Empire that had been cited last week by her Foreign Minister.

    She said: “And we have information indicating that within the last decade, Russia has investigated ways of delivering nerve agents, probably for assassination, and as part of this programme has produced and stockpiled small quantities of Novichoks.

    “Clearly, that is in contravention of the chemical weapons convention.”

    *******

    “We actually have evidence, which we’ve collected over the past 10 years, that Russia not only worked on the development of nerve agents for the purpose of committing murder but also created and stored [the substance] “Novichok”, British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said to the BBC.

    This would appear to be the only piece of “evidence”, apart from the “fact” that an exclusively Russian nerve agent was used (sic), that has been presented to the “free nations” of the world.

    Several observations:

    1. at the limit, one could perhaps entertain the (remote) possibility that Russia had built up a secret stock of novichok for military purposes, but the idea that they would have done so for the explicit purpose of a (1-time, for obvious reasons) assassination of a marginal target defies credibility.

    2. The FBI also has evidence/information that Trump peed on a Russian prostitute in a Moscow hotel, but this does not prove anything (although it was apparently the legal basis used to launch the investigation of Trump and his associates). By complete coincidence, of course, that evidence/information comes from a UK source only 1-step removed from Skripal.

    3. It would be very interesting to know the source of this latest information/evidence that seems to have arrived “out of the blue” and just “in the nick of time”, so to speak — it must have been within the last 6 months, since on 11 October 2017 the UK attended a ceremony at the OPCW to mark the completion of the destruction of Russia’s chemical weapons stockpile (3 years ahead of the required deadline) with nary a dissenting voice.

    Read More
    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Your third point was also mentioned in the ZeroHedge article I linked with the thirty questions to ask about the Skripal murder attempt. Either the UK knew about it earlier, in which case they should have informed the OPCW before it certified the destruction of the Russian chemical stockpiles, or they learned about it later, in which case they should have informed the OPCW in the meantime. At the very latest, they should have informed the OPCW over the past few weeks. Have they done so?

    In a way it’s fortunate that Trump just started his tariffs on Chinese goods, at least China will be less likely to play along the western deception on this matter. Though perhaps in exchange for the easing of the tariffs?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. @Randal

    Life will probably always be nasty in Afghanistan, Somalia, Niger or the Congo, and there’s a good chance there will be horrible cases of mass death in those regions. But at some point one has to harden one’s heart against all of this, anything else would be suicidal. Something like Germany’s asylum system must be completely abolished and replaced by a fortress Europe approach.
     
    Indeed, but the best political argument for it amongst the upper and middle classes will probably be based upon a loud campaign to protect the countries in question from "brain drain" and "theft of human resources", with arguments that these countries will never sort out their problems until evil white countries are prevented from stealing their best and brightest.

    No need to come across as ruthlessly hard-hearted when a judicious use of the leftists' own tactics - self-righteousness, virtue signalling and lying hypocrisy, will get the job done better.

    Something like Germany’s asylum system must be completely abolished
     
    The whole asylum law and treaty system is a dangerous anachronism, based upon theories appropriate in a long vanished time of very limited international travel opportunities. It is no longer fit for purpose, and we need a political campaign to end it.

    Indeed, but the best political argument for it amongst the upper and middle classes will probably be based upon a loud campaign to protect the countries in question from “brain drain” and “theft of human resources”, with arguments that these countries will never sort out their problems until evil white countries are prevented from stealing their best and brightest.

    That argument makes only sense for professional immigrants, doctors, nurses, IT workers etc. It’s a separate issue from asylum and “refugees” where it’s supposed to be not about economic considerations, but about protecting vulnerable people fleeing persecution or war. To be brutally frank, quite a few of the “refugees” now infesting Germany are probably scum even in their countries of origin, being often of very low educational background or actually even illiterate, also often of marked criminal tendencies. You can’t really pretend that the problem with an illiterate Syrian with two wives and half a dozen children now living in a large house on German welfare payments (real case recently in German media) is that Syria now has to get by without such skilled and talented people…even more so with the many cases of “minors” who have social workers looking after them, but are ultra-criminal (up to and including committing murders). The issue with these people is quite simply that they’re parasites and undeserving of solidarity. It may be difficult to say so openly, but one can’t dodge this issue imo.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal
    The argument doesn't need to make sense, it only needs to be asserted loudly and sanctimoniously enough with denunciations of the moral degradation of those disagreeing with it. That's how the arguments in favour of immigration worked.

    In any case, while there's no doubt you are correct about the nature of a lot of the "refugees", any large number is going to include plenty of competent and qualified individuals who ought to be back building up their own country. And the more the pro-immigration nutters try to argue that the "refugees" will be an asset to the destination country, the more they support that case.

    It's an argument that has its place. I've certainly used it effectively with middle class do gooders to make them doubt their indoctrination.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. @Dmitry
    According to agreed on UN Convention on refugees, refugees can apply for shelter in first safe country they reach only.

    All that has to do - is enforce this law, and many countries should receive very few refugees.

    Also the actual refugees (which I believe should have shelter), are only a small minority of immigration. They should be repatriated when their country is safe . i.e. they can have a permit to stay which they have to renew each year, until their country is safe. On the refugee issue, there is no moral obligation to give them citizenship or to permanent status. The morality justification, is just to give them shelter until the political situation is resolved in home country.

    All true, but in reality it hasn’t worked like that for decades.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. I’m in Portugal.
    Preliminary observations:
    * Seems pretty functional (based on totally representative sample of Lisbon airport)
    * People are swarthier than I expected
    * The stats don’t lie – very few minorities, so nice after Brussels and London
    * Portuguese is a Romance language spoken in a Russian accent

    Read More
    • Replies: @dried peanuts
    I believe there is an Itchy Feet comic strip on Portuguese as Spanish plus Russian
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. @reiner Tor
    You know, they actually mentioned confiscation and/or asset freezes. But then again, confiscation always starts with registration. As I wrote, if I were a rich Russian, I’d probably move my assets out of the country.

    Funny anecdote – only person I know who was personally affected by the haircut Cyprus applied to foreign (ie Russian) Bank deposits under EU pressure was… A liberal Russian journalist.

    “Oligarchs” in Russia are far less pro-putin than average, and the ones in London are further selected for oppositionism. Which of course doesn’t negate the presence of regime thieves, but still, the Brits would have to be very careful to avoid “friendly fire”. Not sure they’re capable of that in principle considering the state of Russia studies in the West.

    Another amusing fact is that the position of basically all political forces in Russia that are at least somewhat orthogonal to the Kremlin – communists (obvious reasons), nationalists, liberals (because they fantasize about it undoing Putin) – is, “Go for it.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. @German_reader

    Indeed, but the best political argument for it amongst the upper and middle classes will probably be based upon a loud campaign to protect the countries in question from “brain drain” and “theft of human resources”, with arguments that these countries will never sort out their problems until evil white countries are prevented from stealing their best and brightest.
     
    That argument makes only sense for professional immigrants, doctors, nurses, IT workers etc. It's a separate issue from asylum and "refugees" where it's supposed to be not about economic considerations, but about protecting vulnerable people fleeing persecution or war. To be brutally frank, quite a few of the "refugees" now infesting Germany are probably scum even in their countries of origin, being often of very low educational background or actually even illiterate, also often of marked criminal tendencies. You can't really pretend that the problem with an illiterate Syrian with two wives and half a dozen children now living in a large house on German welfare payments (real case recently in German media) is that Syria now has to get by without such skilled and talented people...even more so with the many cases of "minors" who have social workers looking after them, but are ultra-criminal (up to and including committing murders). The issue with these people is quite simply that they're parasites and undeserving of solidarity. It may be difficult to say so openly, but one can't dodge this issue imo.

    The argument doesn’t need to make sense, it only needs to be asserted loudly and sanctimoniously enough with denunciations of the moral degradation of those disagreeing with it. That’s how the arguments in favour of immigration worked.

    In any case, while there’s no doubt you are correct about the nature of a lot of the “refugees”, any large number is going to include plenty of competent and qualified individuals who ought to be back building up their own country. And the more the pro-immigration nutters try to argue that the “refugees” will be an asset to the destination country, the more they support that case.

    It’s an argument that has its place. I’ve certainly used it effectively with middle class do gooders to make them doubt their indoctrination.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    It’s an argument that has its place. I’ve certainly used it effectively with middle class do gooders to make them doubt their indoctrination.
     
    Sure, but the context in Britain is somewhat different, since the mass immigration from 1997 onwards was justified not least in economic terms, and a "brain drain" from non-European countries actually does exist to some extent (e.g. nurses and doctors in the NHS).
    In Germany that "brain drain" argument would make sense regarding Eastern European countries like Romania...regarding "refugees" it's just not very plausible (it's true they were presented as skilled workers with great economic potential in 2015...but you just have to use public transportation or go to a railway station to get a rather different impression...).
    It's also a bit of a double-edged sword as an argument, since truly convinced immigration fanatics might easily come up with counter-arguments (e.g. something like "the remittances migrants send back home are important for many 3rd world countries, more effective than development aid and easily compensate brain drain effects"). But maybe it works on some of the people who just go along with the dominant immigration propaganda out of conformism.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. @Randal
    The argument doesn't need to make sense, it only needs to be asserted loudly and sanctimoniously enough with denunciations of the moral degradation of those disagreeing with it. That's how the arguments in favour of immigration worked.

    In any case, while there's no doubt you are correct about the nature of a lot of the "refugees", any large number is going to include plenty of competent and qualified individuals who ought to be back building up their own country. And the more the pro-immigration nutters try to argue that the "refugees" will be an asset to the destination country, the more they support that case.

    It's an argument that has its place. I've certainly used it effectively with middle class do gooders to make them doubt their indoctrination.

    It’s an argument that has its place. I’ve certainly used it effectively with middle class do gooders to make them doubt their indoctrination.

    Sure, but the context in Britain is somewhat different, since the mass immigration from 1997 onwards was justified not least in economic terms, and a “brain drain” from non-European countries actually does exist to some extent (e.g. nurses and doctors in the NHS).
    In Germany that “brain drain” argument would make sense regarding Eastern European countries like Romania…regarding “refugees” it’s just not very plausible (it’s true they were presented as skilled workers with great economic potential in 2015…but you just have to use public transportation or go to a railway station to get a rather different impression…).
    It’s also a bit of a double-edged sword as an argument, since truly convinced immigration fanatics might easily come up with counter-arguments (e.g. something like “the remittances migrants send back home are important for many 3rd world countries, more effective than development aid and easily compensate brain drain effects”). But maybe it works on some of the people who just go along with the dominant immigration propaganda out of conformism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal
    I've found that with the middle class do-gooder type I'm talking about - who are not fanatical immigrationists, just well meaning conformists - trying to convince them to go all the away to your aforementioned hard reality position is too much for them to swallow. The "building their own country" argument avoids the alienation such ruthlessness generates. (The remittances sent home argument is easily dealt with by waffling about building social capital and structures in the home countries.) As you say, it won't work with ideologically committed immigrationists, but nothing will with them, in the short run -they've just got to grow out of it).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. @German_reader

    Another issue which stops building a rational anti-immigration policy, is that when people labeling anti-immigration supporters as ‘racists’ – and then the reply of low-intelligence people on the internet is always – ‘sure’.
     
    If you want to restrict immigration, you'll be accused of racism anyway, even if you're merely using economic arguments it will be claimed that's merely a cover for a hidden racist agenda. You can't win by accepting the terms of debate the open borders utopians and "antiracists" set, they'll accept nothing except total surrender.
    In my opinion it's better to come out openly and state honestly that yes, to a large extent it is about ethnicity/culture and collective identities. That Europeans have legitimate group interests must be the basis of any discussion, anything else is useless.

    I read a Bloomberg article recently about immigration which I think made a pretty effectively case for immigration that requires a few things accepted:

    1) A purely economic case could be made only for a few highly vetted immigrants: therefore immigrants are to be seen only as human resources for exploitation with temporary visas. Permanent stay must therefore only be earned through superlative performance.

    2) Part of this then is understanding that no one deserves a home.

    3) Although it is not “humanistic”, this also judges against family reunification or chain migration. Any additional family members must be justified separately, and with no expectation of permanent visa.

    As far as accusations of racism go, its much like dealing with witch-hunters. You’ll be a witch no matter what you say or do.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. @Swedish Family

    ( Rather like how Britain used to accept numerous West African kleptocrats in the 1970s, 80s and 90s )
     
    Along with Pinochet, who oversaw some of the grisliest torture policies in the post-war era (female prisoners raped by rats, etc.). Always remember this when Thatcherites speak of "Assad the Butcher."

    Like many Swedes and other Westerners, your view of Pinochet has been fundamentally distorted by Marxist propaganda, something Paul Craig Roberts has asserted himself. For a proper discussion of this see Benjamin Villaroel’s article posted at VDARE.

    https://www.vdare.com/articles/memo-to-trump-when-you-have-time-deport-moaning-marxist-ariel-dorfman

    Villaroel contrasts the attitude to Pinochet to that of Hollywood’s favourite Communist dictator, Fidel Castro.

    During his 17 years as head of state, Pinochet did execute around 5,000 dissidents. But, while estimates for executions in Castro’s Cuba vary widely, one expert in state-sponsored mass killings, R.J. Rummel, noted the median of the estimates was around 73,000 for the period between 1959 and 1987. Given that Castro ruled until 2008, how many tens of thousands more were killed?

    [ The Rettig Commission 1991 reckoned about 2,000 were killed ]

    He also gives a very interesting table from Rummel on Communist Democide.
    By world standards Pinochet was not a particularly bloodthirsty dictator. Why was he singled out for attack ?
    Back in the late 1960s, the Marxist left had already singled out Chile as the next Latin American country to undergo Communist Revolution. This was not only the view of Western Trotskyites but of the Soviet Government too. Even under Eduardo Frei ( the President before Allende ) the Soviets were transporting arms to various left-wing Chilean groups.
    When Allende became President, this view seemed to be vindicated. There was a massive amount of Soviet and Western leftist propaganda whitewashing the numerous illegalities of Allende. After the removal of Allende, the Left felt cheated. Both Soviet and Western Leftist propaganda went into overdrive. Pinochet got the Saddam Hussein treatment – though by comparison with the latter his offences were limited. This was faithfully transmitted to the masses by left-leaning broadcasters in the media, just as today their successors purvey half-truths and propaganda against Putin or Assad or other people the Western Left don’t like.
    In many ways, the allegations about the “grisly torture” policies of Pinochet are the lineal ancestors of the allegations about the “grisly chemical warfare” policies of Assad.

    Always remember this when Thatcherites speak of “Assad the Butcher.”

    Your knowledge of British politics seems very limited. There are very few Thatcherites left in the British Conservative Party. Nearly all are dead, retired or purged – look what happened to the Monday Club. The people speaking of “Assad the Butcher” are representatives of a pro-globalist, pro-EU, pro-mass immigration, pro-homosexual marriage clique. They are CINO – Conservative In Name Only.

    Read More
    • Agree: Randal
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    Pinochet was 'Neo-Liberalist' - which was actually an excellent economic program for Chile, and the main reason Chile is now the richest Latin American country per capita.

    But his neoliberal program requires some intelligence to understand, and has become an ideology that upsets all different kinds of less intellectual groups that cannot understand how it works, and that is likely the real reason he is now more unfashionable than other Latin dictators who killed more people and (unlike Pinochet) ruined their country's economy.

    That doesn't condone Pinochet for murdering opponents. But at least he murdered people and successfully reformed the economy. Which is a lot better than murdering people and not reforming the economy.
    , @Swedish Family

    Like many Swedes and other Westerners, your view of Pinochet has been fundamentally distorted by Marxist propaganda, something Paul Craig Roberts has asserted himself. For a proper discussion of this see Benjamin Villaroel’s article posted at VDARE.
     
    Thanks for the detailed response. I did indeed hear about the torture practices from a socialist -- alt-left blogger Ian Welsh -- but his sources seem solid.

    The Pinochet File is a National Security Archive book written by Peter Kornbluh covering over approximately two decades of declassified documents, from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), White House, and United States Department of State, regarding American covert activities in Chile.
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pinochet_File

    According to Peter Kornbluh in The Pinochet File, "routine sadism was taken to extremes" in the prison camps. The rape of women was common, including sexual torture such as the insertion of rats into genitals and "unnatural acts involving dogs." Detainees were forcibly immersed in vats of urine and excrement, and were occasionally forced to ingest it.[156][157] Beatings with gun butts, fists and chains were routine; one technique known as "the telephone" involved the torturer slamming "his open hands hard and rhythmically against the ears of the victim," leaving the person deaf. At Villa Grimaldi, prisoners were dragged into the parking lot and had the bones in their legs crushed as they were run over with trucks.
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augusto_Pinochet

    Either way, your figure of 5,000 executed people under his watch proves my point equally well -- that people who defend Pinochet's regime have no moral authority to point fingers at Assad.

    Your knowledge of British politics seems very limited.
     
    It is, yes, so do correct me if I'm wrong. I took Thatcherite to mean "supporter of her back in the day," and there are surely many such people still around. Andrew Sullivan springs to mind, and also John O'Sullivan.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. @Verymuchalive
    Like many Swedes and other Westerners, your view of Pinochet has been fundamentally distorted by Marxist propaganda, something Paul Craig Roberts has asserted himself. For a proper discussion of this see Benjamin Villaroel's article posted at VDARE.
    https://www.vdare.com/articles/memo-to-trump-when-you-have-time-deport-moaning-marxist-ariel-dorfman

    Villaroel contrasts the attitude to Pinochet to that of Hollywood's favourite Communist dictator, Fidel Castro.


    During his 17 years as head of state, Pinochet did execute around 5,000 dissidents. But, while estimates for executions in Castro’s Cuba vary widely, one expert in state-sponsored mass killings, R.J. Rummel, noted the median of the estimates was around 73,000 for the period between 1959 and 1987. Given that Castro ruled until 2008, how many tens of thousands more were killed?

     

    [ The Rettig Commission 1991 reckoned about 2,000 were killed ]

    He also gives a very interesting table from Rummel on Communist Democide.
    http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.TAB1.GIF

    By world standards Pinochet was not a particularly bloodthirsty dictator. Why was he singled out for attack ?
    Back in the late 1960s, the Marxist left had already singled out Chile as the next Latin American country to undergo Communist Revolution. This was not only the view of Western Trotskyites but of the Soviet Government too. Even under Eduardo Frei ( the President before Allende ) the Soviets were transporting arms to various left-wing Chilean groups.
    When Allende became President, this view seemed to be vindicated. There was a massive amount of Soviet and Western leftist propaganda whitewashing the numerous illegalities of Allende. After the removal of Allende, the Left felt cheated. Both Soviet and Western Leftist propaganda went into overdrive. Pinochet got the Saddam Hussein treatment - though by comparison with the latter his offences were limited. This was faithfully transmitted to the masses by left-leaning broadcasters in the media, just as today their successors purvey half-truths and propaganda against Putin or Assad or other people the Western Left don't like.
    In many ways, the allegations about the "grisly torture" policies of Pinochet are the lineal ancestors of the allegations about the "grisly chemical warfare" policies of Assad.


    Always remember this when Thatcherites speak of “Assad the Butcher.”


     

    Your knowledge of British politics seems very limited. There are very few Thatcherites left in the British Conservative Party. Nearly all are dead, retired or purged - look what happened to the Monday Club. The people speaking of "Assad the Butcher" are representatives of a pro-globalist, pro-EU, pro-mass immigration, pro-homosexual marriage clique. They are CINO - Conservative In Name Only.

    Pinochet was ‘Neo-Liberalist’ – which was actually an excellent economic program for Chile, and the main reason Chile is now the richest Latin American country per capita.

    But his neoliberal program requires some intelligence to understand, and has become an ideology that upsets all different kinds of less intellectual groups that cannot understand how it works, and that is likely the real reason he is now more unfashionable than other Latin dictators who killed more people and (unlike Pinochet) ruined their country’s economy.

    That doesn’t condone Pinochet for murdering opponents. But at least he murdered people and successfully reformed the economy. Which is a lot better than murdering people and not reforming the economy.

    Read More
    • Agree: AP
    • Replies: @melanf
    "Low" rating to the victims of "Democide" in the USSR - 28 000 000? Very funny. And why spread such garbage?

    The real numbers are well known

    http://polit.ru/article/2007/12/11/repressii/
    “…In fact, the number of prisoners for political reasons (for “counterrevolutionary crimes”) in the USSR in the period from 1921 to 1953, i.e. after 33 years was about 3.8 million people… during this period ( 1921 to 1954 ) has been convicted 3 777 380 people, including to capital punishment – 642 980, to the contents in camps and prisons for a term of 25 years and below – 2 369 220, into exile and expulsion – 765 180 people“.
    , @Verymuchalive
    Esssentially what you say is true.
    Pinochet's government killed far fewer people than other Latin, never mind, world dictatorships. At the same time, it helped Chile to successfully industrialise, in part to counter sanctions. Neoliberalism was used to justify policies, it is true, but was only part of the story.
    The economic transformation of Chile enraged the Western left even more, especially as the Soviet Union fell apart.
    , @AP

    That doesn’t condone Pinochet for murdering opponents. But at least he murdered people and successfully reformed the economy. Which is a lot better than murdering people and not reforming the economy.
     
    He also gave up power voluntarily.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. @reiner Tor
    Any thoughts on the Dear Beloved Field Marshal of North Korea and his sudden secret visit in China?

    Haven’t heard anything that you wouldn’t have. Beijing is keeping it fairly down-low, I don’t see any particularly new from newspapers or Mandarin blogs I visit. I guess that there won’t be a mysterious train accident with no survivors.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Thanks! I actually expected your contribution, based on your knowledge of magic (a.k.a. “Chinese script”), and hoped for some new insight.

    It’s interesting that Dear Beloved Field Marshal finally dared to visit the Chinese.

    It could seem as a confirmation that he is not as independent of China as it seemed only a few months ago. But maybe it doesn’t mean much.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. @Dmitry
    Pinochet was 'Neo-Liberalist' - which was actually an excellent economic program for Chile, and the main reason Chile is now the richest Latin American country per capita.

    But his neoliberal program requires some intelligence to understand, and has become an ideology that upsets all different kinds of less intellectual groups that cannot understand how it works, and that is likely the real reason he is now more unfashionable than other Latin dictators who killed more people and (unlike Pinochet) ruined their country's economy.

    That doesn't condone Pinochet for murdering opponents. But at least he murdered people and successfully reformed the economy. Which is a lot better than murdering people and not reforming the economy.

    “Low” rating to the victims of “Democide” in the USSR – 28 000 000? Very funny. And why spread such garbage?

    The real numbers are well known

    http://polit.ru/article/2007/12/11/repressii/

    “…In fact, the number of prisoners for political reasons (for “counterrevolutionary crimes”) in the USSR in the period from 1921 to 1953, i.e. after 33 years was about 3.8 million people… during this period ( 1921 to 1954 ) has been convicted 3 777 380 people, including to capital punishment – 642 980, to the contents in camps and prisons for a term of 25 years and below – 2 369 220, into exile and expulsion – 765 180 people“.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    “Low” rating to the victims of “Democide” in the USSR – 28 000 000?
     
    This would include victims of artificial famines. 28 million is still at least double the real number.

    “…In fact, the number of prisoners for political reasons (for “counterrevolutionary crimes”) in the USSR in the period from 1921 to 1953, i.e. after 33 years was about 3.8 million people… during this period ( 1921 to 1954 ) has been convicted 3 777 380 people, including to capital punishment – 642 980,
     
    We've discussed this before. The figure of "642 980," for capital punishment does not include people executed in small-scale acts, people who died of treatable conditions in prison, people who died of beatings while in custody, etc. Official stats do not capture every single person killed by the Soviet regime. Actual number killed was around 1 million (and this does not include famines).
    , @Dmitry
    What has that to do with my comment?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. @Anatoly Karlin
    I'm in Portugal.
    Preliminary observations:
    * Seems pretty functional (based on totally representative sample of Lisbon airport)
    * People are swarthier than I expected
    * The stats don't lie - very few minorities, so nice after Brussels and London
    * Portuguese is a Romance language spoken in a Russian accent

    I believe there is an Itchy Feet comic strip on Portuguese as Spanish plus Russian

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. @Daniel Chieh
    Haven't heard anything that you wouldn't have. Beijing is keeping it fairly down-low, I don't see any particularly new from newspapers or Mandarin blogs I visit. I guess that there won't be a mysterious train accident with no survivors.

    Thanks! I actually expected your contribution, based on your knowledge of magic (a.k.a. “Chinese script”), and hoped for some new insight.

    It’s interesting that Dear Beloved Field Marshal finally dared to visit the Chinese.

    It could seem as a confirmation that he is not as independent of China as it seemed only a few months ago. But maybe it doesn’t mean much.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    It could seem as a confirmation that he is not as independent of China as it seemed only a few months ago. But maybe it doesn’t mean much.
     
    My first conclusion is that it's an indicator he's starting to feel more secure in his position - secure enough to leave the country unattended and to trust those he delegates control to while he's away.
    , @Daniel Chieh
    What I'm hearing is that its actually a win for NK - having convinced Trump to meet with him, this allows him to effectively leverage to make Xi meet with him, something that China has been trying to avoid because it grants him larger legitimacy. But now he has that acknowledgment, at least.

    Obviously given by the suggestions on WeChat to mysteriously disappear him, Dear Leader is not that popular in China. But he does seem to have played his cards quite well.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. @for-the-record
    In her courageous statement on Monday to the House of Commons, Theresa May (seconded by JC himself) repeated the damning evidence against the Evil Empire that had been cited last week by her Foreign Minister.

    She said: "And we have information indicating that within the last decade, Russia has investigated ways of delivering nerve agents, probably for assassination, and as part of this programme has produced and stockpiled small quantities of Novichoks.

    "Clearly, that is in contravention of the chemical weapons convention."

    *******

    "We actually have evidence, which we’ve collected over the past 10 years, that Russia not only worked on the development of nerve agents for the purpose of committing murder but also created and stored [the substance] "Novichok", British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said to the BBC.
     
    This would appear to be the only piece of "evidence", apart from the "fact" that an exclusively Russian nerve agent was used (sic), that has been presented to the "free nations" of the world.

    Several observations:

    1. at the limit, one could perhaps entertain the (remote) possibility that Russia had built up a secret stock of novichok for military purposes, but the idea that they would have done so for the explicit purpose of a (1-time, for obvious reasons) assassination of a marginal target defies credibility.

    2. The FBI also has evidence/information that Trump peed on a Russian prostitute in a Moscow hotel, but this does not prove anything (although it was apparently the legal basis used to launch the investigation of Trump and his associates). By complete coincidence, of course, that evidence/information comes from a UK source only 1-step removed from Skripal.

    3. It would be very interesting to know the source of this latest information/evidence that seems to have arrived "out of the blue" and just "in the nick of time", so to speak -- it must have been within the last 6 months, since on 11 October 2017 the UK attended a ceremony at the OPCW to mark the completion of the destruction of Russia's chemical weapons stockpile (3 years ahead of the required deadline) with nary a dissenting voice.

    Your third point was also mentioned in the ZeroHedge article I linked with the thirty questions to ask about the Skripal murder attempt. Either the UK knew about it earlier, in which case they should have informed the OPCW before it certified the destruction of the Russian chemical stockpiles, or they learned about it later, in which case they should have informed the OPCW in the meantime. At the very latest, they should have informed the OPCW over the past few weeks. Have they done so?

    In a way it’s fortunate that Trump just started his tariffs on Chinese goods, at least China will be less likely to play along the western deception on this matter. Though perhaps in exchange for the easing of the tariffs?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. @reiner Tor
    Thanks! I actually expected your contribution, based on your knowledge of magic (a.k.a. “Chinese script”), and hoped for some new insight.

    It’s interesting that Dear Beloved Field Marshal finally dared to visit the Chinese.

    It could seem as a confirmation that he is not as independent of China as it seemed only a few months ago. But maybe it doesn’t mean much.

    It could seem as a confirmation that he is not as independent of China as it seemed only a few months ago. But maybe it doesn’t mean much.

    My first conclusion is that it’s an indicator he’s starting to feel more secure in his position – secure enough to leave the country unattended and to trust those he delegates control to while he’s away.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Oh yes, certainly. Though I already thought that when he offered negotiations to Trump. Unlike Anatoly, I thought he needed the nukes partly for domestic reasons (to show external strength, something allegedly behind the sinking of the South Korean vessel in 2010, an operation which was thought to be under his personal command to make him look fit for power in the eyes of the much older political and military leadership), and so giving them up might decrease his standing (in the eyes of his much older coterie), mortally endangering his life, as well as that of his immediate family. This is why I thought there was a danger of nuclear war: Kim might fear a domestic coup (as a result of appearing weak) more than even a nuclear war (which he might survive if the Chinese came to his aid).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. @German_reader

    It’s an argument that has its place. I’ve certainly used it effectively with middle class do gooders to make them doubt their indoctrination.
     
    Sure, but the context in Britain is somewhat different, since the mass immigration from 1997 onwards was justified not least in economic terms, and a "brain drain" from non-European countries actually does exist to some extent (e.g. nurses and doctors in the NHS).
    In Germany that "brain drain" argument would make sense regarding Eastern European countries like Romania...regarding "refugees" it's just not very plausible (it's true they were presented as skilled workers with great economic potential in 2015...but you just have to use public transportation or go to a railway station to get a rather different impression...).
    It's also a bit of a double-edged sword as an argument, since truly convinced immigration fanatics might easily come up with counter-arguments (e.g. something like "the remittances migrants send back home are important for many 3rd world countries, more effective than development aid and easily compensate brain drain effects"). But maybe it works on some of the people who just go along with the dominant immigration propaganda out of conformism.

    I’ve found that with the middle class do-gooder type I’m talking about – who are not fanatical immigrationists, just well meaning conformists – trying to convince them to go all the away to your aforementioned hard reality position is too much for them to swallow. The “building their own country” argument avoids the alienation such ruthlessness generates. (The remittances sent home argument is easily dealt with by waffling about building social capital and structures in the home countries.) As you say, it won’t work with ideologically committed immigrationists, but nothing will with them, in the short run -they’ve just got to grow out of it).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. @Randal

    It could seem as a confirmation that he is not as independent of China as it seemed only a few months ago. But maybe it doesn’t mean much.
     
    My first conclusion is that it's an indicator he's starting to feel more secure in his position - secure enough to leave the country unattended and to trust those he delegates control to while he's away.

    Oh yes, certainly. Though I already thought that when he offered negotiations to Trump. Unlike Anatoly, I thought he needed the nukes partly for domestic reasons (to show external strength, something allegedly behind the sinking of the South Korean vessel in 2010, an operation which was thought to be under his personal command to make him look fit for power in the eyes of the much older political and military leadership), and so giving them up might decrease his standing (in the eyes of his much older coterie), mortally endangering his life, as well as that of his immediate family. This is why I thought there was a danger of nuclear war: Kim might fear a domestic coup (as a result of appearing weak) more than even a nuclear war (which he might survive if the Chinese came to his aid).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. @German_reader
    Well, at least there were a few black airmen from the West Indies who served in Bomber command during WW2 so that at least is not completely made up (even if obviously exaggerated since the vast majority of RAF airmen were British, from the white dominions, plus some Poles, Czechs etc.).
    There are lots of bizarre examples of this kind though, iirc they recently had some BBC production in which Eleanor of Aquitaine or some other medieval queen was played by an actress of Nigerian origin.
    It also seems to be prominent in some video games now, iirc there's even some shooting game about WW1 in which even German troops fighting in the trenches on the Western front are black.
    I find it rather sinister given Africa's demographic expansion, obviously the intent is to rewrite history to make an ever increasing presence of Africans in Europe seem completely normal.

    > It also seems to be prominent in some video games now, iirc there’s even some shooting game about WW1 in which even German troops fighting in the trenches on the Western front are black.

    Tangentially this reminds me of how the few black Germans (mostly of Namibian origin) were treated during the Nazi regime. The SS had no idea what to do with them. Sub-saharran Africans were officially considered an inferior race, so by law they were suppose to be sent to concentration camps. But because there were so few, there was never any official policy written down to handle blacks specifically. So, most SS agents on the ground kind of just awkwardly ignored them.

    Very German in character… “Yes we hate this group and want to kill all of them. But we couldn’t possibly start until there’s some regulatory guidance on the issue.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    Nazis seemed to have had a soft spot for Africans. Didn't Riefenstahl have her career after World War II in Africa? My impression is that they may have felt them to be non-human enough that they didn't hate them as they hated Slavs or Jews. Nazis were pro-environment.
    , @utu

    Very German in character… “Yes we hate this group and want to kill all of them.
     
    You really made yourself believe that Germans wanted to kill other people, that they thought about it and talked about it? Like most normal people Germans wanted to believe they are good and moral and wanted to be perceived as good and moral. People did not fantasize about killing.I was not part of the Zeitgeist. Killing does not come easy. People have inhibitions about it and usually it is not in the realm of possible thoughts. Only now after reign of Hollywood culture and video games killing is on the tip of your tongue. People lost inhibitions. The only think that keeps people from killing is fear of punishment. But let them kill and they will. It seems there is nothing to it. Germans when they were ordered they did kill. Americans do not have to be ordered. Killing is in their blood. Nobody did as much killing of soldiers wanting to surrender as Americans during WWII. American GI's had to be motivated with ice cream for a dessert to bring live POWs. Their urge to kill was not coming form the top. Germans on the other hand had to be ordered to kill. And when they participate in massacres they had to anesthetize themselves with alcohol and many wept. They were not natural born killers as Americans already were. There was a big civilizational difference of which we forgot because the "barbarians" won the war and turned us all into them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. @Dmitry
    Pinochet was 'Neo-Liberalist' - which was actually an excellent economic program for Chile, and the main reason Chile is now the richest Latin American country per capita.

    But his neoliberal program requires some intelligence to understand, and has become an ideology that upsets all different kinds of less intellectual groups that cannot understand how it works, and that is likely the real reason he is now more unfashionable than other Latin dictators who killed more people and (unlike Pinochet) ruined their country's economy.

    That doesn't condone Pinochet for murdering opponents. But at least he murdered people and successfully reformed the economy. Which is a lot better than murdering people and not reforming the economy.

    Esssentially what you say is true.
    Pinochet’s government killed far fewer people than other Latin, never mind, world dictatorships. At the same time, it helped Chile to successfully industrialise, in part to counter sanctions. Neoliberalism was used to justify policies, it is true, but was only part of the story.
    The economic transformation of Chile enraged the Western left even more, especially as the Soviet Union fell apart.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. I started reading All The Kremlin’s Men by Mikhail Zygar. Don’t be surprised if pretty soon I will know more about Russia (or, at least, of Putin and his regime) then anyone else here. And I will make it known, lecturing you inferior beings on how to interpret events or how much more I know than you do.

    Read More
    • LOL: Mr. Hack
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  122. @reiner Tor
    And now you’ve arrived at the theory of Kevin B. MacDonald, who wrote that the best deceivers are self-deceived. Probably the Jews engaged in such activities sincerely believe in the idealism for us and the cold hard interests for themselves. They would idealistically sacrifice us, while also selflessly serving their own ethnicity, and in the meantime making a decent living for all their dedicated work and sacrifices, all the while seeing no moral issues with any aspect of this.

    But then, you can also think of the psychopathic murderer to be innocent, because he cannot see the evil of his ways. I mean, he’s a psychopath through no fault of his own.

    If you cannot find people like Abe Foxman or Ronald Lauder responsible for their activism greatly harmful to us, then no one is morally responsible for anything.

    By the way I personally hate the gentile traitors way more passionately than these Jewish activists. A Blair or a Merkel should probably count among the most despicable human beings ever born. Compared to them, Bill Kristol is a morally perfect being. At least he tries to serve his own people.

    By the way I personally hate the gentile traitors way more passionately than these Jewish activists. A Blair or a Merkel should probably count among the most despicable human beings ever born.

    Agreed. So what’s the motivation there? Is it purely the lust for power? Do people like Merkel and Blair really believe in nothing at all? Are they aware of the consequences of their actions?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. Regarding what to visit in Lisbon, I’d suggest setting aside a half-day to see Sintra and its Moorish castle and go for a walk in the hills.

    I’d also suggest visiting the Expo ’98 area along the Tagus in east Lisbon. It might not be terribly remarkable and can be a little desolate at times but it’s one of the only modernist areas of Europe that feels well-designed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  124. US Senators Appeal to Poland Over Property Restitution Bill

    In a letter signed by more than half of the Senate and released Monday, the lawmakers expressed concern about a restitution bill under discussion in Poland that, in its current form, would require that claimants be Polish citizens and that would also limit compensation to spouses, children or grandchildren.

    “This draft legislation would adversely affect Holocaust victims and their heirs and is therefore of urgent importance to many of our constituents, millions of Americans, and Holocaust survivors around the world,” the senators wrote in the letter to Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki.

    Always on the look-out for more shekels to take from the goyim. The Germans fell flat on their faces when faced with these pressure tactics. We’ll see if the same is true with us. So far, given the whining and worrying tone of the letter, that is a good sign (for us).

    Without a systematic law there have been individual efforts, some of them successful, to regain properties. But the process has been marred by irregularities and fraud, with rightful heirs sometimes cheated out of their rights and tenants evicted by new owners.

    With ownership of some properties unclear, especially in Warsaw, some buildings are falling into dilapidation while some plots cannot be developed.
    The Polish draft legislation is an attempt to finally settle the matter.

    The law comes as Poland has also seen its ties with the United States and Israel strained over a recently enacted Polish law that would limit some types of Holocaust speech.

    Why would ties with the US be strained because of a Polish-Israeli spat? After all, there is no such thing as the Jewish lobby, it’s all a conspiracy theory, goy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Shouldn't they be friendlier towards Poland right before planning to start WW3? Anyway, this tank deployment in Jordan is worrisome, but I guess just some usual exercises.

    Then there is a detained Polish official on charges of spying for Russia.

    On the other hand, apparently not all EU countries are expelling Russian diplomats. And New Zealand says they couldn't find Russian spies to expel.

    (Sorry, on a ZeroHedge reading binge.)
    , @LatW
    Feel free to push back on that one (as I know you will). There was (still is) a similar saga of property restitution in Latvia, too, but despite the debilitatingly annoying pressure from the State department, things are going very, very slowly and have in fact stalled - they were asking for the restitution of 270 properties and have only received 5 (after about 7 years of trying). And those are all religious related. Of course, this is a mini-case compared to the Polish one (and a letter from Senate is more serious than what we had), but it is important to establish caveats there (like Poland, very correctly, has done - money derived from these properties has to stay in the country). For us it is basically a fight between the government, local Jews (our real Jews who sided with us) and a more internationalized Jewish organization led by a Jewish banker who emigrated from Belarus in the 1980s and the Jewish organizations from the US (they did a loop with some NGO from Israel too, but the Israeli ambassador has actually been pretty decent about this but you know...). At one point, our justice minister stepped down because he refused to do what they wanted (nice allies, huh, destabilizing an "allied" government).

    I completely agree with you that they need to be reminded that this is an issue between Poland and Israel exclusively. Push back, don't worry - they can't do much.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. @Polish Perspective
    US Senators Appeal to Poland Over Property Restitution Bill

    In a letter signed by more than half of the Senate and released Monday, the lawmakers expressed concern about a restitution bill under discussion in Poland that, in its current form, would require that claimants be Polish citizens and that would also limit compensation to spouses, children or grandchildren.

    "This draft legislation would adversely affect Holocaust victims and their heirs and is therefore of urgent importance to many of our constituents, millions of Americans, and Holocaust survivors around the world," the senators wrote in the letter to Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki.
     

    Always on the look-out for more shekels to take from the goyim. The Germans fell flat on their faces when faced with these pressure tactics. We'll see if the same is true with us. So far, given the whining and worrying tone of the letter, that is a good sign (for us).

    Without a systematic law there have been individual efforts, some of them successful, to regain properties. But the process has been marred by irregularities and fraud, with rightful heirs sometimes cheated out of their rights and tenants evicted by new owners.

    With ownership of some properties unclear, especially in Warsaw, some buildings are falling into dilapidation while some plots cannot be developed.
    The Polish draft legislation is an attempt to finally settle the matter.

    The law comes as Poland has also seen its ties with the United States and Israel strained over a recently enacted Polish law that would limit some types of Holocaust speech.

     

    Why would ties with the US be strained because of a Polish-Israeli spat? After all, there is no such thing as the Jewish lobby, it's all a conspiracy theory, goy.

    Shouldn’t they be friendlier towards Poland right before planning to start WW3? Anyway, this tank deployment in Jordan is worrisome, but I guess just some usual exercises.

    Then there is a detained Polish official on charges of spying for Russia.

    On the other hand, apparently not all EU countries are expelling Russian diplomats. And New Zealand says they couldn’t find Russian spies to expel.

    (Sorry, on a ZeroHedge reading binge.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. @Dmitry
    Pinochet was 'Neo-Liberalist' - which was actually an excellent economic program for Chile, and the main reason Chile is now the richest Latin American country per capita.

    But his neoliberal program requires some intelligence to understand, and has become an ideology that upsets all different kinds of less intellectual groups that cannot understand how it works, and that is likely the real reason he is now more unfashionable than other Latin dictators who killed more people and (unlike Pinochet) ruined their country's economy.

    That doesn't condone Pinochet for murdering opponents. But at least he murdered people and successfully reformed the economy. Which is a lot better than murdering people and not reforming the economy.

    That doesn’t condone Pinochet for murdering opponents. But at least he murdered people and successfully reformed the economy. Which is a lot better than murdering people and not reforming the economy.

    He also gave up power voluntarily.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    After some pressure from the US.

    As far as I know, the Chilean economic miracle is not as straightforward as Chicago Boys fans like to state. What is true is that Pinochet didn't destroy the Chilean economy, and he left it in relatively good shape, and well positioned to start an economic boom. But growth accelerated after Pinochet stepped down (mainly because there were two mini-depressions or extremely sharp recessions under his rule in the 1970s and then again in the early 1980s) under the social democratic government.

    I have little doubt Chile would be substantially worse off if Pinochet didn't prevent a leftist regime from emerging, but the Chilean economy didn't grow so fast until the 1980s (or here), and his 15-year period, taken as a whole, is worse in terms of growth than the 15-year period after it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. @Dmitry
    The British just would be harming themselves, to the benefit of competitors like Switzerland.

    The reason people invest in the UK, is because they assume protection of property rights, without being part of some internal British political games.

    The British just would be harming themselves, to the benefit of competitors like Switzerland.

    Yeah, about that…

    The question which Russian visitors, residents, and hopeful residents are asking is whether the Swiss have decided to abjure the smile and impose an informal sanction on Russians of wealth, and notable Ukrainians as well.

    Sources who have been in social contact with Russians in January at the well-known ski resorts, as well as at elite boarding schools like Le Rosey, say large inter-bank transfers are being delayed or halted abruptly; longstanding bank accounts summarily closed; and applications to open new ones rejected.

    The case of Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s Swiss residency is unclear. In March 2014, following Khodorkovsky’s release from Russian imprisonment the previous December, Khodorkovsky decided to apply for Swiss residency at Rapperswil-Jona, in the northeastern canton of St. Gallen. He was granted residency with a tariff and the purchase of a house estimated at 100 million Swiss francs ($110 million).

    But there was local opposition to his remaining, and in October 2015 the local press reported that Khodorkovsky had left. “Personal reasons” were announced. Khodorkovsky moved to London, where he remains today.

    http://johnhelmer.net/the-swiss-have-stopped-smiling-at-russian-oligarchs-ukrainians-too/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. @melanf
    "Low" rating to the victims of "Democide" in the USSR - 28 000 000? Very funny. And why spread such garbage?

    The real numbers are well known

    http://polit.ru/article/2007/12/11/repressii/
    “…In fact, the number of prisoners for political reasons (for “counterrevolutionary crimes”) in the USSR in the period from 1921 to 1953, i.e. after 33 years was about 3.8 million people… during this period ( 1921 to 1954 ) has been convicted 3 777 380 people, including to capital punishment – 642 980, to the contents in camps and prisons for a term of 25 years and below – 2 369 220, into exile and expulsion – 765 180 people“.

    “Low” rating to the victims of “Democide” in the USSR – 28 000 000?

    This would include victims of artificial famines. 28 million is still at least double the real number.

    “…In fact, the number of prisoners for political reasons (for “counterrevolutionary crimes”) in the USSR in the period from 1921 to 1953, i.e. after 33 years was about 3.8 million people… during this period ( 1921 to 1954 ) has been convicted 3 777 380 people, including to capital punishment – 642 980,

    We’ve discussed this before. The figure of “642 980,” for capital punishment does not include people executed in small-scale acts, people who died of treatable conditions in prison, people who died of beatings while in custody, etc. Official stats do not capture every single person killed by the Soviet regime. Actual number killed was around 1 million (and this does not include famines).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. @Doug
    > It also seems to be prominent in some video games now, iirc there’s even some shooting game about WW1 in which even German troops fighting in the trenches on the Western front are black.

    Tangentially this reminds me of how the few black Germans (mostly of Namibian origin) were treated during the Nazi regime. The SS had no idea what to do with them. Sub-saharran Africans were officially considered an inferior race, so by law they were suppose to be sent to concentration camps. But because there were so few, there was never any official policy written down to handle blacks specifically. So, most SS agents on the ground kind of just awkwardly ignored them.

    Very German in character... "Yes we hate this group and want to kill all of them. But we couldn't possibly start until there's some regulatory guidance on the issue."

    Nazis seemed to have had a soft spot for Africans. Didn’t Riefenstahl have her career after World War II in Africa? My impression is that they may have felt them to be non-human enough that they didn’t hate them as they hated Slavs or Jews. Nazis were pro-environment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pavlo
    Hardly:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhineland_Bastard

    If zee Germans exhibited less enthusiasm on this subject, it was only because of the miniscule number of black Africans in their domains.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. @AP

    That doesn’t condone Pinochet for murdering opponents. But at least he murdered people and successfully reformed the economy. Which is a lot better than murdering people and not reforming the economy.
     
    He also gave up power voluntarily.

    After some pressure from the US.

    As far as I know, the Chilean economic miracle is not as straightforward as Chicago Boys fans like to state. What is true is that Pinochet didn’t destroy the Chilean economy, and he left it in relatively good shape, and well positioned to start an economic boom. But growth accelerated after Pinochet stepped down (mainly because there were two mini-depressions or extremely sharp recessions under his rule in the 1970s and then again in the early 1980s) under the social democratic government.

    I have little doubt Chile would be substantially worse off if Pinochet didn’t prevent a leftist regime from emerging, but the Chilean economy didn’t grow so fast until the 1980s (or here), and his 15-year period, taken as a whole, is worse in terms of growth than the 15-year period after it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. @AP
    Nazis seemed to have had a soft spot for Africans. Didn't Riefenstahl have her career after World War II in Africa? My impression is that they may have felt them to be non-human enough that they didn't hate them as they hated Slavs or Jews. Nazis were pro-environment.

    Hardly:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhineland_Bastard

    If zee Germans exhibited less enthusiasm on this subject, it was only because of the miniscule number of black Africans in their domains.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    So they didn't murder them as they did to the Jews, and didn't enslave/murder them as they did to the Slavs, they only tried to keep them out of the German gene pool. Sounds like they didn't mind them too much.

    An article from a tabloid, but not meaningless:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1205901/Forget-Hitler--America-snubbed-black-Olympian-Jesse-Owens.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. @reiner Tor
    Thanks! I actually expected your contribution, based on your knowledge of magic (a.k.a. “Chinese script”), and hoped for some new insight.

    It’s interesting that Dear Beloved Field Marshal finally dared to visit the Chinese.

    It could seem as a confirmation that he is not as independent of China as it seemed only a few months ago. But maybe it doesn’t mean much.

    What I’m hearing is that its actually a win for NK – having convinced Trump to meet with him, this allows him to effectively leverage to make Xi meet with him, something that China has been trying to avoid because it grants him larger legitimacy. But now he has that acknowledgment, at least.

    Obviously given by the suggestions on WeChat to mysteriously disappear him, Dear Leader is not that popular in China. But he does seem to have played his cards quite well.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    I thought the Chinese were mad at him because he didn’t want to travel to Beijing right after he became the Dear Beloved Field Marshal and Supreme Leader.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. @melanf
    "Low" rating to the victims of "Democide" in the USSR - 28 000 000? Very funny. And why spread such garbage?

    The real numbers are well known

    http://polit.ru/article/2007/12/11/repressii/
    “…In fact, the number of prisoners for political reasons (for “counterrevolutionary crimes”) in the USSR in the period from 1921 to 1953, i.e. after 33 years was about 3.8 million people… during this period ( 1921 to 1954 ) has been convicted 3 777 380 people, including to capital punishment – 642 980, to the contents in camps and prisons for a term of 25 years and below – 2 369 220, into exile and expulsion – 765 180 people“.

    What has that to do with my comment?

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf
    My bad It was a response to a message Verymuchalive #109

    I probably mistakenly clicked in the wrong place when I sent the response
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. AP says:
    @Pavlo
    Hardly:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhineland_Bastard

    If zee Germans exhibited less enthusiasm on this subject, it was only because of the miniscule number of black Africans in their domains.

    So they didn’t murder them as they did to the Jews, and didn’t enslave/murder them as they did to the Slavs, they only tried to keep them out of the German gene pool. Sounds like they didn’t mind them too much.

    An article from a tabloid, but not meaningless:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1205901/Forget-Hitler–America-snubbed-black-Olympian-Jesse-Owens.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    Hitler, ironically, despite popularity with people who try to divide the world into white and black skin people (and who ascribe only positive qualities to people with white skin, and deny them to people with black skin) - has killed millions of white people, while leaving the black people in peace.

    In fact, he probably killed more white people than anyone else in human history. And he also did a lot in destroying their cities, architecture and cultural heritage (even Volgograd, for example, was actually a beautiful city, before it was bombed into rubble).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. @Dmitry
    What has that to do with my comment?

    My bad It was a response to a message Verymuchalive #109

    I probably mistakenly clicked in the wrong place when I sent the response

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. Suggestions for Lisbon:

    1. Don’t know if you go for museums, but the Gulbenkian Museum is well worth an afternoon, and has a very interesting story. In effect, it’s a mini-Hermitage/Louvre that was the private collection of Calouste Gulbenkian, “Mr. Five Percent” (for his share of mid-East oil deals which he negotiated) and one of the richest (if not the) people in the world. Gulbenkian was Armenian, born in Constantinople, received an engineering degree from Kings College in London at age 18, and became more English than the English (acquiring UK citizenship). It was his intention to bequest his fortune to the British. But they had the bad sense to declare him an enemy alien during the Second World War, and he wound up giving it all to Portugal. Gulbenkian was also well known for his belief that “vitality” could be preserved by being constantly attended by an 18-year old mistress. So for a period of 50 years or so, he annually changed mistresses, the exes all being sent into “retirement” with a generous pension plan.

    2. the Alfama — the old Arabic/Jewish quarter on the hillside leading up to the castle

    3. the National “Coach” Museum in Belem (Museu Nacional dos Coches); the Jeronimos monastery in Belem is also very impressive, and you can pay your respects to Vasco da Gama.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    Gulbenkian was also well known for his belief that “vitality” could be preserved by being constantly attended by an 18-year old mistress. So for a period of 50 years or so
     
    The original BAP.

    Thanks for the recs.
    , @Aslangeo
    Caiscais is a pleasant place for an afternoon at the end of a suburban rail line near Estoril , I would second Sintra also accessible by rail and Gelbukian Museum, have a good time
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. @AP
    So they didn't murder them as they did to the Jews, and didn't enslave/murder them as they did to the Slavs, they only tried to keep them out of the German gene pool. Sounds like they didn't mind them too much.

    An article from a tabloid, but not meaningless:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1205901/Forget-Hitler--America-snubbed-black-Olympian-Jesse-Owens.html

    Hitler, ironically, despite popularity with people who try to divide the world into white and black skin people (and who ascribe only positive qualities to people with white skin, and deny them to people with black skin) – has killed millions of white people, while leaving the black people in peace.

    In fact, he probably killed more white people than anyone else in human history. And he also did a lot in destroying their cities, architecture and cultural heritage (even Volgograd, for example, was actually a beautiful city, before it was bombed into rubble).

    Read More
    • Replies: @neutral

    In fact, he probably killed more white people than anyone else in human history.
     
    Stalin is still considered by most mainstream historians to be responsible for more deaths than Hitlers. Besides that, Hitler was actually fighting for the white race, the people opposing him were no different to the anti whites of today, they were hell bent on killing other whites to impose their racial equality on this world, they are profoundly more destructive to whites than Hitler.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. @Daniel Chieh
    What I'm hearing is that its actually a win for NK - having convinced Trump to meet with him, this allows him to effectively leverage to make Xi meet with him, something that China has been trying to avoid because it grants him larger legitimacy. But now he has that acknowledgment, at least.

    Obviously given by the suggestions on WeChat to mysteriously disappear him, Dear Leader is not that popular in China. But he does seem to have played his cards quite well.

    I thought the Chinese were mad at him because he didn’t want to travel to Beijing right after he became the Dear Beloved Field Marshal and Supreme Leader.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    That might be a snub, but it had to be his subsequent activities that led to this level of dislike. So what I've gathered so far from some PRC conversations:

    1) NK is even more disliked than I had thought. Chinese military officers were "joking" that in the event of a Western attack on North Korea, they might join the West.

    2) Xi personally dislikes Dear Leader. Probably for being unreliable, and I suppose, being arguably the definition of corruption(lives well at the expense of his people).

    3) Dear Leader wouldn't care about world opinion, but now needs to broker a deal with the US. He had realized that without some sort of assurance that China will come to their aid in the event of a "just kidding, we're killing you anyway under President Chelsea Clinton," he might be lacking leverage.

    4) As such, he has decided to try to rebuild his bridges. Autarky has found its limits.

    5) ???

    6) JUCHE IS LOVE! JUCHE IS LIFE! FIGHT FOR THE JUCHE IDEAL! The propaganda apparatus might be kicking in now in Chinese media to try to improve the opinion of the population toward North Korea.

    Incidentally, I had long since associated NK as a "gangster nation" because back in 2010 or so, their diplomats seemed to be the only ones that seriously threatened violence(against South Korea, usually). Its interesting that non-trivial threats of warfare seem to now be within the Overton window for everyone. This is probably not a good thing.

    Also the most positive thing I heard about NK: "They might live their life in a frog inside a well*, but at least their life is simple. That has to be nice."

    *"The frog in the well sees the sky as small" is a common Chinese fable.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. @for-the-record
    Suggestions for Lisbon:

    1. Don't know if you go for museums, but the Gulbenkian Museum is well worth an afternoon, and has a very interesting story. In effect, it's a mini-Hermitage/Louvre that was the private collection of Calouste Gulbenkian, "Mr. Five Percent" (for his share of mid-East oil deals which he negotiated) and one of the richest (if not the) people in the world. Gulbenkian was Armenian, born in Constantinople, received an engineering degree from Kings College in London at age 18, and became more English than the English (acquiring UK citizenship). It was his intention to bequest his fortune to the British. But they had the bad sense to declare him an enemy alien during the Second World War, and he wound up giving it all to Portugal. Gulbenkian was also well known for his belief that "vitality" could be preserved by being constantly attended by an 18-year old mistress. So for a period of 50 years or so, he annually changed mistresses, the exes all being sent into "retirement" with a generous pension plan.

    2. the Alfama -- the old Arabic/Jewish quarter on the hillside leading up to the castle

    3. the National "Coach" Museum in Belem (Museu Nacional dos Coches); the Jeronimos monastery in Belem is also very impressive, and you can pay your respects to Vasco da Gama.

    Gulbenkian was also well known for his belief that “vitality” could be preserved by being constantly attended by an 18-year old mistress. So for a period of 50 years or so

    The original BAP.

    Thanks for the recs.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. @Verymuchalive
    Like many Swedes and other Westerners, your view of Pinochet has been fundamentally distorted by Marxist propaganda, something Paul Craig Roberts has asserted himself. For a proper discussion of this see Benjamin Villaroel's article posted at VDARE.
    https://www.vdare.com/articles/memo-to-trump-when-you-have-time-deport-moaning-marxist-ariel-dorfman

    Villaroel contrasts the attitude to Pinochet to that of Hollywood's favourite Communist dictator, Fidel Castro.


    During his 17 years as head of state, Pinochet did execute around 5,000 dissidents. But, while estimates for executions in Castro’s Cuba vary widely, one expert in state-sponsored mass killings, R.J. Rummel, noted the median of the estimates was around 73,000 for the period between 1959 and 1987. Given that Castro ruled until 2008, how many tens of thousands more were killed?

     

    [ The Rettig Commission 1991 reckoned about 2,000 were killed ]

    He also gives a very interesting table from Rummel on Communist Democide.
    http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.TAB1.GIF

    By world standards Pinochet was not a particularly bloodthirsty dictator. Why was he singled out for attack ?
    Back in the late 1960s, the Marxist left had already singled out Chile as the next Latin American country to undergo Communist Revolution. This was not only the view of Western Trotskyites but of the Soviet Government too. Even under Eduardo Frei ( the President before Allende ) the Soviets were transporting arms to various left-wing Chilean groups.
    When Allende became President, this view seemed to be vindicated. There was a massive amount of Soviet and Western leftist propaganda whitewashing the numerous illegalities of Allende. After the removal of Allende, the Left felt cheated. Both Soviet and Western Leftist propaganda went into overdrive. Pinochet got the Saddam Hussein treatment - though by comparison with the latter his offences were limited. This was faithfully transmitted to the masses by left-leaning broadcasters in the media, just as today their successors purvey half-truths and propaganda against Putin or Assad or other people the Western Left don't like.
    In many ways, the allegations about the "grisly torture" policies of Pinochet are the lineal ancestors of the allegations about the "grisly chemical warfare" policies of Assad.


    Always remember this when Thatcherites speak of “Assad the Butcher.”


     

    Your knowledge of British politics seems very limited. There are very few Thatcherites left in the British Conservative Party. Nearly all are dead, retired or purged - look what happened to the Monday Club. The people speaking of "Assad the Butcher" are representatives of a pro-globalist, pro-EU, pro-mass immigration, pro-homosexual marriage clique. They are CINO - Conservative In Name Only.

    Like many Swedes and other Westerners, your view of Pinochet has been fundamentally distorted by Marxist propaganda, something Paul Craig Roberts has asserted himself. For a proper discussion of this see Benjamin Villaroel’s article posted at VDARE.

    Thanks for the detailed response. I did indeed hear about the torture practices from a socialist — alt-left blogger Ian Welsh — but his sources seem solid.

    The Pinochet File is a National Security Archive book written by Peter Kornbluh covering over approximately two decades of declassified documents, from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), White House, and United States Department of State, regarding American covert activities in Chile.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pinochet_File

    According to Peter Kornbluh in The Pinochet File, “routine sadism was taken to extremes” in the prison camps. The rape of women was common, including sexual torture such as the insertion of rats into genitals and “unnatural acts involving dogs.” Detainees were forcibly immersed in vats of urine and excrement, and were occasionally forced to ingest it.[156][157] Beatings with gun butts, fists and chains were routine; one technique known as “the telephone” involved the torturer slamming “his open hands hard and rhythmically against the ears of the victim,” leaving the person deaf. At Villa Grimaldi, prisoners were dragged into the parking lot and had the bones in their legs crushed as they were run over with trucks.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augusto_Pinochet

    Either way, your figure of 5,000 executed people under his watch proves my point equally well — that people who defend Pinochet’s regime have no moral authority to point fingers at Assad.

    Your knowledge of British politics seems very limited.

    It is, yes, so do correct me if I’m wrong. I took Thatcherite to mean “supporter of her back in the day,” and there are surely many such people still around. Andrew Sullivan springs to mind, and also John O’Sullivan.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. Anonymous[344] • Disclaimer says:

    Thor is a nutcase.

    Serving your country is something men do. Women serve the men who are victorious over other men.

    I’m sure you could find some women who will fuck for Mother Russia (or whatever other country) out of patriotic duty (or, less nobly, cash), but I suspect a more effective model is pimping.

    Make yourself a woman’s entire world and control her mercilessly–then send her out to seduce important foreigners to please you.

    And pimping in the service of the state eliminates typical problems faced by pimps such as the police, rival pimps, whores running away, etc.

    But with this model, why abuse your own country’s women? You can recruit/kidnap foreigners instead of despoiling your own women.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  142. @Randal

    Now? Haven’t these knives been out ever since he got elected, nay, since he was seriously running for leadership?
     
    True, it's just becoming ever more shrill. And they've just taken it to a new level.

    Imagine living in a country where your position on a Middle-Eastern political party is not a matter of great political importance and source of much media controversy and debate. But this is what happens when you have organised Jewish groups panicking over perceived loss of influence.
     
    Indeed.

    The problem for the Jewish lobbies is that he is very popular among the grassroots.
     
    Yes, and therefore it's great to see the jewish lobbies discrediting their own smear term tactic by using it against him with such transparent dishonesty. Every little helps.


    The Tories won something like 70% of the Jewish vote in the last General Election. This isn’t because UK Jews are more “conservative”. It’s because the Tories are better for Jewish interests.
     
    That's true, though it's worth bearing in mind that jewish votes, per se, count for even less in the UK than in the US. They are only about 0.5% of the population here, as opposed to 1.7% there, and even given their demographic concentration the jewish vote could only even theoretically swing a maximum of about 10 seats in Parliament. In practice it's just a couple.

    Corbyn has shown plenty of spine so far, so it is likely he won’t suddenly cave now. That’s a good thing. I hope the US left draws inspiration.
     
    Well, I'm not sure I'd really give him that much credit. He still kowtows to the antisemitism smear with the usual abject apologies, but he does stand up to some extent on the substance of policies and personnel. (And as an aside re spine, notice how fast he caved on the Skripal business when the jingoists applied some heat.) The problem is that the control of dissent via hate speech laws is too useful to the wider left for him to oppose the use of it by jewish lobbies, so he won't take any firm stand that threatens to really discredit the pc smear tactic in general.

    The bottom line, as I suggested above and your comment seems to suggest you agree with, Corbyn is in trouble with the jewish lobbies basically for not being subservient enough.

    The recent, obviously highly orchestrated, smear campaign against Corbyn has been so absurd that my inherent patriotism and sense of fair play is compelling me to actually vote labour in the next election. The current Conservative Party is hardly much different except for their vile servility to the lobby.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    The recent, obviously highly orchestrated, smear campaign against Corbyn has been so absurd that my inherent patriotism and sense of fair play is compelling me to actually vote labour in the next election.
     
    I can certainly understand that, but I manage to avoid being tempted to go that far by keeping three things in mind;

    1 Corbyn and his ilk were the very inventors of this name-calling smear technique, calling anyone who disagrees with their views on mass immigration "racist", anyone who disagrees with their politics "fascist", anyone who disapproves of pretending homo sex is the same as normal sex a "homophobe", etc. So there is a very real sense in which his treatment and the similar treatment of Livingstone is a matter of poetic justice, and no chance that electing a Labour government would do anything to help against the spread of "hate speech" censorship and speechcrime laws;

    2 Corbyn caves as often as he resists - as he's largely caved on Russia, so he also spends more time apologising to the loathsome creatures slinging the "anti-Semite" smear at him than he does disagreeing with them;

    3 A Labour victory might remove the contemptible "Conservatives" from office, but it brings into office all the Blairites that Labour has so comprehensively failed to scrub out of their Parliamentary party, and also will bring with it a load more real true believers in mass immigration, multiculti nonsense, EU membership, "rubbing the right's nose in diversity", etc, all fired up with triumphalist enthusiasm It feels as though things couldn't be worse than under the "Conservatives", but they really could.

    The current Conservative Party is hardly much different except for their vile servility to the lobby.
     
    Not much would change in that regard under a Labour government, precisely because the charges against Corbyn are absurdly false. A minority of patriotic resisters to the Israel lobbies hobbled by fear of the antisemite smear and consistently outvoted by the cross-party pro-Israel consensus would be replaced by a minority of pro-Palestinian resisters to the Israel lobby hobbled by fear of the antisemite smear and consistently outvoted by the cross-party pro-Israel consensus .
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. @Dmitry
    Hitler, ironically, despite popularity with people who try to divide the world into white and black skin people (and who ascribe only positive qualities to people with white skin, and deny them to people with black skin) - has killed millions of white people, while leaving the black people in peace.

    In fact, he probably killed more white people than anyone else in human history. And he also did a lot in destroying their cities, architecture and cultural heritage (even Volgograd, for example, was actually a beautiful city, before it was bombed into rubble).

    In fact, he probably killed more white people than anyone else in human history.

    Stalin is still considered by most mainstream historians to be responsible for more deaths than Hitlers. Besides that, Hitler was actually fighting for the white race, the people opposing him were no different to the anti whites of today, they were hell bent on killing other whites to impose their racial equality on this world, they are profoundly more destructive to whites than Hitler.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Swedish Family

    Stalin is still considered by most mainstream historians to be responsible for more deaths than Hitlers.
     
    Only if one makes the absurd claim that Stalin was responsible for the Soviets killed in World War 2. This is what our friends on liberal campuses refer to as "victim blaming."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. @LondonBob
    The recent, obviously highly orchestrated, smear campaign against Corbyn has been so absurd that my inherent patriotism and sense of fair play is compelling me to actually vote labour in the next election. The current Conservative Party is hardly much different except for their vile servility to the lobby.

    The recent, obviously highly orchestrated, smear campaign against Corbyn has been so absurd that my inherent patriotism and sense of fair play is compelling me to actually vote labour in the next election.

    I can certainly understand that, but I manage to avoid being tempted to go that far by keeping three things in mind;

    1 Corbyn and his ilk were the very inventors of this name-calling smear technique, calling anyone who disagrees with their views on mass immigration “racist”, anyone who disagrees with their politics “fascist”, anyone who disapproves of pretending homo sex is the same as normal sex a “homophobe”, etc. So there is a very real sense in which his treatment and the similar treatment of Livingstone is a matter of poetic justice, and no chance that electing a Labour government would do anything to help against the spread of “hate speech” censorship and speechcrime laws;

    2 Corbyn caves as often as he resists – as he’s largely caved on Russia, so he also spends more time apologising to the loathsome creatures slinging the “anti-Semite” smear at him than he does disagreeing with them;

    3 A Labour victory might remove the contemptible “Conservatives” from office, but it brings into office all the Blairites that Labour has so comprehensively failed to scrub out of their Parliamentary party, and also will bring with it a load more real true believers in mass immigration, multiculti nonsense, EU membership, “rubbing the right’s nose in diversity”, etc, all fired up with triumphalist enthusiasm It feels as though things couldn’t be worse than under the “Conservatives”, but they really could.

    The current Conservative Party is hardly much different except for their vile servility to the lobby.

    Not much would change in that regard under a Labour government, precisely because the charges against Corbyn are absurdly false. A minority of patriotic resisters to the Israel lobbies hobbled by fear of the antisemite smear and consistently outvoted by the cross-party pro-Israel consensus would be replaced by a minority of pro-Palestinian resisters to the Israel lobby hobbled by fear of the antisemite smear and consistently outvoted by the cross-party pro-Israel consensus .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. @for-the-record
    Suggestions for Lisbon:

    1. Don't know if you go for museums, but the Gulbenkian Museum is well worth an afternoon, and has a very interesting story. In effect, it's a mini-Hermitage/Louvre that was the private collection of Calouste Gulbenkian, "Mr. Five Percent" (for his share of mid-East oil deals which he negotiated) and one of the richest (if not the) people in the world. Gulbenkian was Armenian, born in Constantinople, received an engineering degree from Kings College in London at age 18, and became more English than the English (acquiring UK citizenship). It was his intention to bequest his fortune to the British. But they had the bad sense to declare him an enemy alien during the Second World War, and he wound up giving it all to Portugal. Gulbenkian was also well known for his belief that "vitality" could be preserved by being constantly attended by an 18-year old mistress. So for a period of 50 years or so, he annually changed mistresses, the exes all being sent into "retirement" with a generous pension plan.

    2. the Alfama -- the old Arabic/Jewish quarter on the hillside leading up to the castle

    3. the National "Coach" Museum in Belem (Museu Nacional dos Coches); the Jeronimos monastery in Belem is also very impressive, and you can pay your respects to Vasco da Gama.

    Caiscais is a pleasant place for an afternoon at the end of a suburban rail line near Estoril , I would second Sintra also accessible by rail and Gelbukian Museum, have a good time

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. @neutral

    In fact, he probably killed more white people than anyone else in human history.
     
    Stalin is still considered by most mainstream historians to be responsible for more deaths than Hitlers. Besides that, Hitler was actually fighting for the white race, the people opposing him were no different to the anti whites of today, they were hell bent on killing other whites to impose their racial equality on this world, they are profoundly more destructive to whites than Hitler.

    Stalin is still considered by most mainstream historians to be responsible for more deaths than Hitlers.

    Only if one makes the absurd claim that Stalin was responsible for the Soviets killed in World War 2. This is what our friends on liberal campuses refer to as “victim blaming.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    In the whole Soviet Union, between 1921-1954 - 642,980 people were executed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. @Swedish Family

    Stalin is still considered by most mainstream historians to be responsible for more deaths than Hitlers.
     
    Only if one makes the absurd claim that Stalin was responsible for the Soviets killed in World War 2. This is what our friends on liberal campuses refer to as "victim blaming."

    In the whole Soviet Union, between 1921-1954 – 642,980 people were executed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    In the whole Soviet Union, between 1921-1954 – 642,980 people were executed.
     
    That can't be true, about that number (or somewhat more) was executed just in 1937/38 during the Great Terror.
    , @AP
    There exist 642,980 recorded orders of executions that were carried out. This number does not include people who died from beatings while in custody, people shot on the side of the road or hanged from a convenient lamppost, etc. Actual number of people killed was around a million. And this doesn't include those millions starved to death, those killed while in transport, gulag deaths.

    And, of course, by starting in 1921 you ignore the Red Terror during the Civil War. For example:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Terror

    In the Crimea, Béla Kun and Rosalia Zemlyachka, with Vladimir Lenin's approval,[17] had 50,000 White prisoners of war and civilians summarily executed via shooting or hanging after the defeat of general Pyotr Nikolayevich Wrangel at the end of 1920. They had been promised amnesty if they would surrender
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. @Dmitry
    In the whole Soviet Union, between 1921-1954 - 642,980 people were executed.

    In the whole Soviet Union, between 1921-1954 – 642,980 people were executed.

    That can’t be true, about that number (or somewhat more) was executed just in 1937/38 during the Great Terror.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    That's the figure of the memorandum passed to Khrushchev.

    There's indeed various controversies or discrepancies.


    "In 1956, the Pospelov Commission named the figure of 688.503 executed during this same time period.

    In 1963, the Shvernik commission, gave a still larger figure- 748,146 killed during the period 1935-1953, of which 681,692 - in 1937-38. (including 631,897 on the decision of extrajudicial bodies.)

    In 1988, in a KGB document submitted to Gorbachev, 786,098 people were shot between 1930-55."
    , @melanf

    That can’t be true, about that number (or somewhat more) was executed just in 1937/38 during the Great Terror.
     
    If you want a summary of the canadian historian Paul Robinson
    "figure now generally accepted by historians of about 800,000 executed between 1921 and 1953 (of whom 700,000 were killed in 1937-38)."
    https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2016/08/29/stalinism-again/
    Most likely the differences are caused by different assessment of the number of criminals among those executed.
    In any case, the given figures of "Communist democide" (a low estimate of 28 million, a high estimate of 150 million) are absolute nonsense.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. @Dmitry
    In the whole Soviet Union, between 1921-1954 - 642,980 people were executed.

    There exist 642,980 recorded orders of executions that were carried out. This number does not include people who died from beatings while in custody, people shot on the side of the road or hanged from a convenient lamppost, etc. Actual number of people killed was around a million. And this doesn’t include those millions starved to death, those killed while in transport, gulag deaths.

    And, of course, by starting in 1921 you ignore the Red Terror during the Civil War. For example:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Terror

    In the Crimea, Béla Kun and Rosalia Zemlyachka, with Vladimir Lenin’s approval,[17] had 50,000 White prisoners of war and civilians summarily executed via shooting or hanging after the defeat of general Pyotr Nikolayevich Wrangel at the end of 1920. They had been promised amnesty if they would surrender

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. @Polish Perspective
    US Senators Appeal to Poland Over Property Restitution Bill

    In a letter signed by more than half of the Senate and released Monday, the lawmakers expressed concern about a restitution bill under discussion in Poland that, in its current form, would require that claimants be Polish citizens and that would also limit compensation to spouses, children or grandchildren.

    "This draft legislation would adversely affect Holocaust victims and their heirs and is therefore of urgent importance to many of our constituents, millions of Americans, and Holocaust survivors around the world," the senators wrote in the letter to Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki.
     

    Always on the look-out for more shekels to take from the goyim. The Germans fell flat on their faces when faced with these pressure tactics. We'll see if the same is true with us. So far, given the whining and worrying tone of the letter, that is a good sign (for us).

    Without a systematic law there have been individual efforts, some of them successful, to regain properties. But the process has been marred by irregularities and fraud, with rightful heirs sometimes cheated out of their rights and tenants evicted by new owners.

    With ownership of some properties unclear, especially in Warsaw, some buildings are falling into dilapidation while some plots cannot be developed.
    The Polish draft legislation is an attempt to finally settle the matter.

    The law comes as Poland has also seen its ties with the United States and Israel strained over a recently enacted Polish law that would limit some types of Holocaust speech.

     

    Why would ties with the US be strained because of a Polish-Israeli spat? After all, there is no such thing as the Jewish lobby, it's all a conspiracy theory, goy.

    Feel free to push back on that one (as I know you will). There was (still is) a similar saga of property restitution in Latvia, too, but despite the debilitatingly annoying pressure from the State department, things are going very, very slowly and have in fact stalled – they were asking for the restitution of 270 properties and have only received 5 (after about 7 years of trying). And those are all religious related. Of course, this is a mini-case compared to the Polish one (and a letter from Senate is more serious than what we had), but it is important to establish caveats there (like Poland, very correctly, has done – money derived from these properties has to stay in the country). For us it is basically a fight between the government, local Jews (our real Jews who sided with us) and a more internationalized Jewish organization led by a Jewish banker who emigrated from Belarus in the 1980s and the Jewish organizations from the US (they did a loop with some NGO from Israel too, but the Israeli ambassador has actually been pretty decent about this but you know…). At one point, our justice minister stepped down because he refused to do what they wanted (nice allies, huh, destabilizing an “allied” government).

    I completely agree with you that they need to be reminded that this is an issue between Poland and Israel exclusively. Push back, don’t worry – they can’t do much.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. Btw, for the Russian readers here – my deepest condolences about Kemerovo. Especially to the grandmother who lost all her grandchildren (and daughter and daughter-in-law), I couldn’t even finish reading about it. There are simply no words…

    But there was also a tidbit in the news where the head of the supermarket said that older boys of “various nationalities” used to come in and harass the children, and they had to ask them to leave repeatedly. And the fire started in the children’s play room. How is that possible…. what nationalities were they… are they going to talk about that…?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  152. @German_reader

    In the whole Soviet Union, between 1921-1954 – 642,980 people were executed.
     
    That can't be true, about that number (or somewhat more) was executed just in 1937/38 during the Great Terror.

    That’s the figure of the memorandum passed to Khrushchev.

    There’s indeed various controversies or discrepancies.

    “In 1956, the Pospelov Commission named the figure of 688.503 executed during this same time period.

    In 1963, the Shvernik commission, gave a still larger figure- 748,146 killed during the period 1935-1953, of which 681,692 – in 1937-38. (including 631,897 on the decision of extrajudicial bodies.)

    In 1988, in a KGB document submitted to Gorbachev, 786,098 people were shot between 1930-55.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. @Doug
    > It also seems to be prominent in some video games now, iirc there’s even some shooting game about WW1 in which even German troops fighting in the trenches on the Western front are black.

    Tangentially this reminds me of how the few black Germans (mostly of Namibian origin) were treated during the Nazi regime. The SS had no idea what to do with them. Sub-saharran Africans were officially considered an inferior race, so by law they were suppose to be sent to concentration camps. But because there were so few, there was never any official policy written down to handle blacks specifically. So, most SS agents on the ground kind of just awkwardly ignored them.

    Very German in character... "Yes we hate this group and want to kill all of them. But we couldn't possibly start until there's some regulatory guidance on the issue."

    Very German in character… “Yes we hate this group and want to kill all of them.

    You really made yourself believe that Germans wanted to kill other people, that they thought about it and talked about it? Like most normal people Germans wanted to believe they are good and moral and wanted to be perceived as good and moral. People did not fantasize about killing.I was not part of the Zeitgeist. Killing does not come easy. People have inhibitions about it and usually it is not in the realm of possible thoughts. Only now after reign of Hollywood culture and video games killing is on the tip of your tongue. People lost inhibitions. The only think that keeps people from killing is fear of punishment. But let them kill and they will. It seems there is nothing to it. Germans when they were ordered they did kill. Americans do not have to be ordered. Killing is in their blood. Nobody did as much killing of soldiers wanting to surrender as Americans during WWII. American GI’s had to be motivated with ice cream for a dessert to bring live POWs. Their urge to kill was not coming form the top. Germans on the other hand had to be ordered to kill. And when they participate in massacres they had to anesthetize themselves with alcohol and many wept. They were not natural born killers as Americans already were. There was a big civilizational difference of which we forgot because the “barbarians” won the war and turned us all into them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Did they also weep as they practiced human sacrifice?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Teutoburg_Forest


    Roman casualties have been estimated at 15,000–20,000 dead, and many of the officers were said to have taken their own lives by falling on their swords in the approved manner.[30] Tacitus wrote that many officers were sacrificed by the Germanic forces as part of their indigenous religious ceremonies, cooked in pots and their bones used for rituals.[36] Others were ransomed, and some common soldiers appear to have been enslaved.
     
    , @inertial
    You have little idea of what the weeping German soldiers were doing in the Eastern front.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. @German_reader

    In the whole Soviet Union, between 1921-1954 – 642,980 people were executed.
     
    That can't be true, about that number (or somewhat more) was executed just in 1937/38 during the Great Terror.

    That can’t be true, about that number (or somewhat more) was executed just in 1937/38 during the Great Terror.

    If you want a summary of the canadian historian Paul Robinson
    figure now generally accepted by historians of about 800,000 executed between 1921 and 1953 (of whom 700,000 were killed in 1937-38).

    https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2016/08/29/stalinism-again/

    Most likely the differences are caused by different assessment of the number of criminals among those executed.
    In any case, the given figures of “Communist democide” (a low estimate of 28 million, a high estimate of 150 million) are absolute nonsense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    But you also wrote that the peasant scum deserved to die, so starving them to death was no biggie.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. @melanf

    That can’t be true, about that number (or somewhat more) was executed just in 1937/38 during the Great Terror.
     
    If you want a summary of the canadian historian Paul Robinson
    "figure now generally accepted by historians of about 800,000 executed between 1921 and 1953 (of whom 700,000 were killed in 1937-38)."
    https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2016/08/29/stalinism-again/
    Most likely the differences are caused by different assessment of the number of criminals among those executed.
    In any case, the given figures of "Communist democide" (a low estimate of 28 million, a high estimate of 150 million) are absolute nonsense.

    But you also wrote that the peasant scum deserved to die, so starving them to death was no biggie.

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf

    But you also wrote that the peasant scum deserved to die, so starving them to death was no biggie.
     
    Correction: I argued that peasant scum who took part in the revolutions of 1905-1907 and 1917-18 deserved to die. Yes, starving to death this scum - right thing (Unlike 10 million starving to death under Yeltsin (with the direct participation of the US and the EU) )

    But along with peasant scum, along with the victims of the red terror of 1918-1920, anyway "28 million victims of the red democide" is complete nonsense

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. @reiner Tor
    But you also wrote that the peasant scum deserved to die, so starving them to death was no biggie.

    But you also wrote that the peasant scum deserved to die, so starving them to death was no biggie.

    Correction: I argued that peasant scum who took part in the revolutions of 1905-1907 and 1917-18 deserved to die. Yes, starving to death this scum – right thing (Unlike 10 million starving to death under Yeltsin (with the direct participation of the US and the EU) )

    But along with peasant scum, along with the victims of the red terror of 1918-1920, anyway “28 million victims of the red democide” is complete nonsense

    Read More
    • Replies: @for-the-record
    peasant scum who took part in the revolutions of 1905-1907 and 1917-18 deserved to die.

    Which peasant scum was this? Were they all peasants? If not, how was the "scum" identified?
    , @reiner Tor
    Look, I don’t like the Yeltsin system or especially its western cheerleaders, but under Yeltsin no one forcibly prevented anyone from obtaining food. Taking the food from the peasants and then forcibly preventing them from visiting their relatives in the city and obtaining food from them was a bit different than making a large portion of the population very poor.
    , @Jaakko Raipala
    Previously we talked about the Civil War in Finland. There was a rebellion by Slavic and Finnic peasant scum who were punished by patriotic, pro-Romanov White Germanic aristocrats and counter-revolutionary Finnish landowners, aided by some Cossacks and Swedish right-wing volunteers. But strangely you were offended by these mass executions even though almost every ethnic Russian that was executed by Whites in Finland "deserved to die" according to your own words...

    Maybe you are just taking the inflated death toll numbers spread by Western propagandists a bit too personally and it has led you to develop some really strange defensive ideas like Stalin being some sort of a counter-revolutionary avenger.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. @melanf

    But you also wrote that the peasant scum deserved to die, so starving them to death was no biggie.
     
    Correction: I argued that peasant scum who took part in the revolutions of 1905-1907 and 1917-18 deserved to die. Yes, starving to death this scum - right thing (Unlike 10 million starving to death under Yeltsin (with the direct participation of the US and the EU) )

    But along with peasant scum, along with the victims of the red terror of 1918-1920, anyway "28 million victims of the red democide" is complete nonsense

    peasant scum who took part in the revolutions of 1905-1907 and 1917-18 deserved to die.

    Which peasant scum was this? Were they all peasants? If not, how was the “scum” identified?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. @melanf

    But you also wrote that the peasant scum deserved to die, so starving them to death was no biggie.
     
    Correction: I argued that peasant scum who took part in the revolutions of 1905-1907 and 1917-18 deserved to die. Yes, starving to death this scum - right thing (Unlike 10 million starving to death under Yeltsin (with the direct participation of the US and the EU) )

    But along with peasant scum, along with the victims of the red terror of 1918-1920, anyway "28 million victims of the red democide" is complete nonsense

    Look, I don’t like the Yeltsin system or especially its western cheerleaders, but under Yeltsin no one forcibly prevented anyone from obtaining food. Taking the food from the peasants and then forcibly preventing them from visiting their relatives in the city and obtaining food from them was a bit different than making a large portion of the population very poor.

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf

    but under Yeltsin no one forcibly prevented anyone from obtaining food
     
    Under Yeltsin, the people (at least in some cases) definitely died of starvation. Applying the methodology of calculating the "victims of communism "(that is, all the increase in mortality due to the deterioration of living conditions should be considered the result of death from hunger - this is how Stalin's" victims " are calculated), we get that as a result of the organised by US/EU genocide at least 10 million people died of hunger in Russia in the 90s.

    But all this is off topic . The bottom line is that even with all the dead as a result of deteriorating living conditions, the figure of "28 million victims of the red democide in the USSR" is still absolute nonsense.
    , @inertial
    Yes, hyperinflating old people's savings to zero and then not paying them pensions is totally different. No one was forcibly prevented from anything!

    But the point is not that 10 million really starved under Yeltsin. It's that applying demographic methods to the number of victims can produce weird results. There is a trollish paper by a Russian scientist named Boris Borisov where he applies these methods to the Depression era America and "discovers" that FDR is responsible for 7 million deaths.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. @reiner Tor
    Look, I don’t like the Yeltsin system or especially its western cheerleaders, but under Yeltsin no one forcibly prevented anyone from obtaining food. Taking the food from the peasants and then forcibly preventing them from visiting their relatives in the city and obtaining food from them was a bit different than making a large portion of the population very poor.

    but under Yeltsin no one forcibly prevented anyone from obtaining food

    Under Yeltsin, the people (at least in some cases) definitely died of starvation. Applying the methodology of calculating the “victims of communism “(that is, all the increase in mortality due to the deterioration of living conditions should be considered the result of death from hunger – this is how Stalin’s” victims ” are calculated), we get that as a result of the organised by US/EU genocide at least 10 million people died of hunger in Russia in the 90s.

    But all this is off topic . The bottom line is that even with all the dead as a result of deteriorating living conditions, the figure of “28 million victims of the red democide in the USSR” is still absolute nonsense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @neutral

    28 million victims of the red democide in the USSR” is still absolute nonsense
     
    No, what is absolute nonsense is your belief that 10 million people died of starvation in the 90s, if this really did happen one would think that somebody would have recorded this on camera and it would have made the news. The (((Bolsheviks))) starving millions however has plenty of evidence.
    , @utu
    The scum is you. You are unhinged and deranged.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. @German_reader

    Gerald of Rivia vs. Henry of Skalitz
     
    Henry of Skalitz is the protagonist in that new game that was criticized for not featuring blacks in 15th century Bohemia, isn't he?
    Any chance you're doing a review of this one? Not that I want to encourage you to waste time on gaming...but at least it would be somewhat more interesting than Doom since the developers claimed to care about historical accuracy, and there was this controversy about it, so it does have some minor cultural relevance.

    Henry of Skalitz is the protagonist in that new game that was criticized for not featuring blacks in 15th century Bohemia, isn’t he?

    Some colored blogger complained about it ( http://medievalpoc.tumblr.com/post/75252294049/hi-ive-been-looking-at-a-kickstarter-for-a ) and authors of the game were happy for such publicity, since the game was over budget and over time. Czech newspapers had a field day whenever this flared up in Western media.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. @melanf

    but under Yeltsin no one forcibly prevented anyone from obtaining food
     
    Under Yeltsin, the people (at least in some cases) definitely died of starvation. Applying the methodology of calculating the "victims of communism "(that is, all the increase in mortality due to the deterioration of living conditions should be considered the result of death from hunger - this is how Stalin's" victims " are calculated), we get that as a result of the organised by US/EU genocide at least 10 million people died of hunger in Russia in the 90s.

    But all this is off topic . The bottom line is that even with all the dead as a result of deteriorating living conditions, the figure of "28 million victims of the red democide in the USSR" is still absolute nonsense.

    28 million victims of the red democide in the USSR” is still absolute nonsense

    No, what is absolute nonsense is your belief that 10 million people died of starvation in the 90s, if this really did happen one would think that somebody would have recorded this on camera and it would have made the news. The (((Bolsheviks))) starving millions however has plenty of evidence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf


    28 million victims of the red democide in the USSR” is still absolute nonsense
     
    No, what is absolute nonsense is your belief that 10 million people died of starvation in the 90s,
     
    Try to re-read my message and understand the meaning of what is written.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. @Mitleser

    And I’m noticing a certain racialization of discourse (Youtube comments), too – Palis increasingly hate Israelis not qua Jews, but qua Europeans.
     
    That makes more sense.
    Israel was founded by European Jews as a settler colony.

    But the majority of Jews in Israel are primarily Sephardic (middle eastern), not Ashkenazi. I wonder what the proportions were back in 1949 or 1969.

    I guess that a lot of the Jewish Israelis being visibly whiter than the Arabs, makes them a useful target on the basis of “white colonialism.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser
    Ashkenazi are the Jews of the Jews.
    They do not need a majority to be very influential and dominate politics.
    , @Dmitry
    In Israel, all the different groups are a bit racist to each other.

    Mizrahi Jews (Middle Eastern Jews) are in the majority of the Jewish population in Israel. Many are darker than local Arabs.

    But even Mizrahim are not a unified group and are racist between each other (between different nationalities of Mizrahi Jews).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. @Hyperborean
    Because it is nice to be able to walk outside without needing to wear a mask and see the clear sky.

    I agree that we need to transition away from fossil fuels. But it needs to be done gradually to minimize the shock to the economy.

    I’d be fine with a slow but large increase in the gas excise tax, but balanced by a generous long-term income tax credit for the purchase of all-electric and (for now) plug-in hybrid vehicles.

    We generally should be shifting more of the tax burden onto polluting activities, taking some tax burden off of income from work, savings, and investment. Very gradually.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. @utu

    Very German in character… “Yes we hate this group and want to kill all of them.
     
    You really made yourself believe that Germans wanted to kill other people, that they thought about it and talked about it? Like most normal people Germans wanted to believe they are good and moral and wanted to be perceived as good and moral. People did not fantasize about killing.I was not part of the Zeitgeist. Killing does not come easy. People have inhibitions about it and usually it is not in the realm of possible thoughts. Only now after reign of Hollywood culture and video games killing is on the tip of your tongue. People lost inhibitions. The only think that keeps people from killing is fear of punishment. But let them kill and they will. It seems there is nothing to it. Germans when they were ordered they did kill. Americans do not have to be ordered. Killing is in their blood. Nobody did as much killing of soldiers wanting to surrender as Americans during WWII. American GI's had to be motivated with ice cream for a dessert to bring live POWs. Their urge to kill was not coming form the top. Germans on the other hand had to be ordered to kill. And when they participate in massacres they had to anesthetize themselves with alcohol and many wept. They were not natural born killers as Americans already were. There was a big civilizational difference of which we forgot because the "barbarians" won the war and turned us all into them.

    Did they also weep as they practiced human sacrifice?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Teutoburg_Forest

    Roman casualties have been estimated at 15,000–20,000 dead, and many of the officers were said to have taken their own lives by falling on their swords in the approved manner.[30] Tacitus wrote that many officers were sacrificed by the Germanic forces as part of their indigenous religious ceremonies, cooked in pots and their bones used for rituals.[36] Others were ransomed, and some common soldiers appear to have been enslaved.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    It was kind of long time ago. Germans did not benefit yet form Latin Civilization of which they later became a part. If for example China had benefits of Christianity it would have abandoned the practice of cannibalism much sooner. Cannibalism was practiced in China still in 19 century and even during Cultural Revolution cannibalism for ideological reason (not because of hunger) was practiced.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_cannibalism
     
    "For the first time in our long history Chinese ate people, not because there was a famine and they were starving to death, but for political reasons. I think thousands participated in the cannibalism and at least many hundreds were eaten. The Party knows all about it,"
     
    , @German_reader
    You needn't go back that far, after all German soldiers did commit a significant number of atrocities during WW2. More narrowly, the view of mass killings of Jews (and others) as some clinical process focused just on efficient killing is probably wrong...there was lots of gratuitous sadism involved (like humiliating orthodox Jews by shaving their beards or even setting them on fire, forcing them to crawl naked on the ground, also rapes of Jewish women etc.).
    Utu's reference to WW2 GIs killing prisoners (or not taking any) is of course correct only for the Pacific war (such cases were much rarer in North Africa and Europe). I guess there were elements of a race war in that conflict (same was true in Burma during the British campaign in 1944/1945...in his youth my father knew a guy who had been there as a British airman, and openly admitted, without regret, that after the sinking of Japanese ships Hawker Hurricanes would often strafe shipwrecked Japanese). But of course that wasn't a one-way affair, since the Japanese with their brutal and racist conduct had greatly contributed to such a character of the conflict.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. @utu

    Very German in character… “Yes we hate this group and want to kill all of them.
     
    You really made yourself believe that Germans wanted to kill other people, that they thought about it and talked about it? Like most normal people Germans wanted to believe they are good and moral and wanted to be perceived as good and moral. People did not fantasize about killing.I was not part of the Zeitgeist. Killing does not come easy. People have inhibitions about it and usually it is not in the realm of possible thoughts. Only now after reign of Hollywood culture and video games killing is on the tip of your tongue. People lost inhibitions. The only think that keeps people from killing is fear of punishment. But let them kill and they will. It seems there is nothing to it. Germans when they were ordered they did kill. Americans do not have to be ordered. Killing is in their blood. Nobody did as much killing of soldiers wanting to surrender as Americans during WWII. American GI's had to be motivated with ice cream for a dessert to bring live POWs. Their urge to kill was not coming form the top. Germans on the other hand had to be ordered to kill. And when they participate in massacres they had to anesthetize themselves with alcohol and many wept. They were not natural born killers as Americans already were. There was a big civilizational difference of which we forgot because the "barbarians" won the war and turned us all into them.

    You have little idea of what the weeping German soldiers were doing in the Eastern front.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. @Daniel Chieh
    Did they also weep as they practiced human sacrifice?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Teutoburg_Forest


    Roman casualties have been estimated at 15,000–20,000 dead, and many of the officers were said to have taken their own lives by falling on their swords in the approved manner.[30] Tacitus wrote that many officers were sacrificed by the Germanic forces as part of their indigenous religious ceremonies, cooked in pots and their bones used for rituals.[36] Others were ransomed, and some common soldiers appear to have been enslaved.
     

    It was kind of long time ago. Germans did not benefit yet form Latin Civilization of which they later became a part. If for example China had benefits of Christianity it would have abandoned the practice of cannibalism much sooner. Cannibalism was practiced in China still in 19 century and even during Cultural Revolution cannibalism for ideological reason (not because of hunger) was practiced.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_cannibalism

    “For the first time in our long history Chinese ate people, not because there was a famine and they were starving to death, but for political reasons. I think thousands participated in the cannibalism and at least many hundreds were eaten. The Party knows all about it,”

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous coward

    If for example China had benefits of Christianity it would have abandoned the practice of cannibalism much sooner. Cannibalism was practiced in China still in 19 century and even during Cultural Revolution cannibalism for ideological reason (not because of hunger) was practiced.
     
    Not really. China was (and still is) a monotheistic culture, like the ancient Jews. (Though unlike the Jews they never had a covenant; this is the crucial difference.)

    Because of this, the Chinese view cannibalism as a particularly horrific spiritual crime, unlike in the West, where cannibalism is viewed as serious mental sickness but doesn't particularly carry any spiritual significance.

    (Ironically, this probably means that cannibalism is more widespread in China. No doubt many Chinese practiced it just for shocking and transgressive purposes.)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. @Daniel Chieh
    Did they also weep as they practiced human sacrifice?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Teutoburg_Forest


    Roman casualties have been estimated at 15,000–20,000 dead, and many of the officers were said to have taken their own lives by falling on their swords in the approved manner.[30] Tacitus wrote that many officers were sacrificed by the Germanic forces as part of their indigenous religious ceremonies, cooked in pots and their bones used for rituals.[36] Others were ransomed, and some common soldiers appear to have been enslaved.
     

    You needn’t go back that far, after all German soldiers did commit a significant number of atrocities during WW2. More narrowly, the view of mass killings of Jews (and others) as some clinical process focused just on efficient killing is probably wrong…there was lots of gratuitous sadism involved (like humiliating orthodox Jews by shaving their beards or even setting them on fire, forcing them to crawl naked on the ground, also rapes of Jewish women etc.).
    Utu’s reference to WW2 GIs killing prisoners (or not taking any) is of course correct only for the Pacific war (such cases were much rarer in North Africa and Europe). I guess there were elements of a race war in that conflict (same was true in Burma during the British campaign in 1944/1945…in his youth my father knew a guy who had been there as a British airman, and openly admitted, without regret, that after the sinking of Japanese ships Hawker Hurricanes would often strafe shipwrecked Japanese). But of course that wasn’t a one-way affair, since the Japanese with their brutal and racist conduct had greatly contributed to such a character of the conflict.

    Read More
    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @Greasy William

    like humiliating orthodox Jews by shaving their beards or even setting them on fire, forcing them to crawl naked on the ground, also rapes of Jewish women etc.
     
    German soldiers did no such thing. It was strictly prohibited. German collaborators were the ones who did that stuff.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. @melanf

    but under Yeltsin no one forcibly prevented anyone from obtaining food
     
    Under Yeltsin, the people (at least in some cases) definitely died of starvation. Applying the methodology of calculating the "victims of communism "(that is, all the increase in mortality due to the deterioration of living conditions should be considered the result of death from hunger - this is how Stalin's" victims " are calculated), we get that as a result of the organised by US/EU genocide at least 10 million people died of hunger in Russia in the 90s.

    But all this is off topic . The bottom line is that even with all the dead as a result of deteriorating living conditions, the figure of "28 million victims of the red democide in the USSR" is still absolute nonsense.

    The scum is you. You are unhinged and deranged.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. @reiner Tor
    As I wrote elsewhere, Orbán knows we are a German colony and won’t do anything against the wishes of Frau Merkel. He never vetoed the sanctions against Russia either. Though initially he made no secret of his opposition to them. Recently he doesn’t even talk much against the sanctions. He was reprimanded back in 2014 and 2015, and now he is in line.

    Speaking of Orban,…

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    I wrote about it at length in the other thread. Jobbik is no longer far-right, they might be to the left of Fidesz, or at least not to the right. Orbán will probably win, but there is now a chance of him losing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. @reiner Tor
    Look, I don’t like the Yeltsin system or especially its western cheerleaders, but under Yeltsin no one forcibly prevented anyone from obtaining food. Taking the food from the peasants and then forcibly preventing them from visiting their relatives in the city and obtaining food from them was a bit different than making a large portion of the population very poor.

    Yes, hyperinflating old people’s savings to zero and then not paying them pensions is totally different. No one was forcibly prevented from anything!

    But the point is not that 10 million really starved under Yeltsin. It’s that applying demographic methods to the number of victims can produce weird results. There is a trollish paper by a Russian scientist named Boris Borisov where he applies these methods to the Depression era America and “discovers” that FDR is responsible for 7 million deaths.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    Yes, hyperinflating old people’s savings to zero and then not paying them pensions is totally different. No one was forcibly prevented from anything!
     
    As far as I know, something was paid to them. To be the equivalent of what the communists did in 1932-33, they would have needed to cut off all pensions, and then prevent them from getting some other livelihood, like selling their possessions or asking from their working age relatives etc.

    applying demographic methods to the number of victims can produce weird results
     
    The methods have limitations. You can apply them to famines or other types of mass deaths, but they are not good methods to establish whether a famine really did occur.

    For example we know for sure what the increase in mortality in the 1990s was coming from. (Mostly, alcoholism.) We also know exactly how many children were born (vastly fewer than in the 1980s), so no need to guess how many died within a couple years.

    In the 1930s, we have huge documentary evidence that a famine did occur, that the communist leadership explicitly desired mass deaths to politically break the backbone of the peasantry, we have many descriptions (even photos) of starving people (including both Party and NKVD reports), and finally we have funny looking statistics. The latter is used to estimate the number of deaths.

    You guys pretend as if it was only the funny looking statistics.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. @RadicalCenter
    But the majority of Jews in Israel are primarily Sephardic (middle eastern), not Ashkenazi. I wonder what the proportions were back in 1949 or 1969.

    I guess that a lot of the Jewish Israelis being visibly whiter than the Arabs, makes them a useful target on the basis of “white colonialism.”

    Ashkenazi are the Jews of the Jews.
    They do not need a majority to be very influential and dominate politics.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. @Mitleser
    Speaking of Orban,...

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DZXVnrSWAAAVSNQ.jpg

    I wrote about it at length in the other thread. Jobbik is no longer far-right, they might be to the left of Fidesz, or at least not to the right. Orbán will probably win, but there is now a chance of him losing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. @RadicalCenter
    But the majority of Jews in Israel are primarily Sephardic (middle eastern), not Ashkenazi. I wonder what the proportions were back in 1949 or 1969.

    I guess that a lot of the Jewish Israelis being visibly whiter than the Arabs, makes them a useful target on the basis of “white colonialism.”

    In Israel, all the different groups are a bit racist to each other.

    Mizrahi Jews (Middle Eastern Jews) are in the majority of the Jewish population in Israel. Many are darker than local Arabs.

    But even Mizrahim are not a unified group and are racist between each other (between different nationalities of Mizrahi Jews).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    Some offtopic.


    But for example, the Arab Jews in are historically very racist towards the Kurdish Jews.

    The Arab Jews in Israel use 'Kurdi' (what they call Kurdish Jew), as a synonym for 'stupid' and 'ugly'.
    -


    Mizrahi Jews of low class were always very racist to Ashkenizim (they have some slang like 'Ashkenut'). And I (learning Hebrew) can read racist comments written on social media posts, from them saying things like - 'I don't like your white Ashkenazi face', etc.

    -

    Similarly, the Polish Jews in Israel were historically very racist to German Jews. The German Jews - called 'Yekkes' (Yekkim).

    -

    Russian-speaking Jews are the bottom of the list, and receive the most racism. Often getting beaten up or being the subject jokes.

    In the Soviet Union itself though, Ashkenazi Jews were very racist to Mountain Jews - and usually refuse to let their children marry them, even when they were all marrying non-Jews (Russians, Ukrainians, etc).


    -

    Also the new phenomena in Israel, when some racist Ukrainians are attacking people they think are 'Russian'

    https://lenta.ru/news/2017/09/15/israel/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. @Dmitry
    In Israel, all the different groups are a bit racist to each other.

    Mizrahi Jews (Middle Eastern Jews) are in the majority of the Jewish population in Israel. Many are darker than local Arabs.

    But even Mizrahim are not a unified group and are racist between each other (between different nationalities of Mizrahi Jews).

    Some offtopic.

    But for example, the Arab Jews in are historically very racist towards the Kurdish Jews.

    The Arab Jews in Israel use ‘Kurdi’ (what they call Kurdish Jew), as a synonym for ‘stupid’ and ‘ugly’.
    -

    Mizrahi Jews of low class were always very racist to Ashkenizim (they have some slang like ‘Ashkenut’). And I (learning Hebrew) can read racist comments written on social media posts, from them saying things like – ‘I don’t like your white Ashkenazi face’, etc.

    -

    Similarly, the Polish Jews in Israel were historically very racist to German Jews. The German Jews – called ‘Yekkes’ (Yekkim).

    -

    Russian-speaking Jews are the bottom of the list, and receive the most racism. Often getting beaten up or being the subject jokes.

    In the Soviet Union itself though, Ashkenazi Jews were very racist to Mountain Jews – and usually refuse to let their children marry them, even when they were all marrying non-Jews (Russians, Ukrainians, etc).

    -

    Also the new phenomena in Israel, when some racist Ukrainians are attacking people they think are ‘Russian’

    https://lenta.ru/news/2017/09/15/israel/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. @neutral

    28 million victims of the red democide in the USSR” is still absolute nonsense
     
    No, what is absolute nonsense is your belief that 10 million people died of starvation in the 90s, if this really did happen one would think that somebody would have recorded this on camera and it would have made the news. The (((Bolsheviks))) starving millions however has plenty of evidence.

    28 million victims of the red democide in the USSR” is still absolute nonsense

    No, what is absolute nonsense is your belief that 10 million people died of starvation in the 90s,

    Try to re-read my message and understand the meaning of what is written.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. @inertial
    Yes, hyperinflating old people's savings to zero and then not paying them pensions is totally different. No one was forcibly prevented from anything!

    But the point is not that 10 million really starved under Yeltsin. It's that applying demographic methods to the number of victims can produce weird results. There is a trollish paper by a Russian scientist named Boris Borisov where he applies these methods to the Depression era America and "discovers" that FDR is responsible for 7 million deaths.

    Yes, hyperinflating old people’s savings to zero and then not paying them pensions is totally different. No one was forcibly prevented from anything!

    As far as I know, something was paid to them. To be the equivalent of what the communists did in 1932-33, they would have needed to cut off all pensions, and then prevent them from getting some other livelihood, like selling their possessions or asking from their working age relatives etc.

    applying demographic methods to the number of victims can produce weird results

    The methods have limitations. You can apply them to famines or other types of mass deaths, but they are not good methods to establish whether a famine really did occur.

    For example we know for sure what the increase in mortality in the 1990s was coming from. (Mostly, alcoholism.) We also know exactly how many children were born (vastly fewer than in the 1980s), so no need to guess how many died within a couple years.

    In the 1930s, we have huge documentary evidence that a famine did occur, that the communist leadership explicitly desired mass deaths to politically break the backbone of the peasantry, we have many descriptions (even photos) of starving people (including both Party and NKVD reports), and finally we have funny looking statistics. The latter is used to estimate the number of deaths.

    You guys pretend as if it was only the funny looking statistics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @inertial
    Famine(s) definitely occured but I'd be skeptical about any particular horror story (including photos) and super skeptical about numerical estimates based on demographic data. What are good numerical estimates? Beats me; but I would start with internal NKVD reports; they had no reason to lie in their internal reports and the numbers in them check out in other cases. But I don't know.

    Unfortunately, the estimates of of the famine victims is being used as a political tool, so dispassionate discussion is currently impossible. Hopefully, the topic will eventually pass out of the political arena; then the real historical inquiry can begin.

    In any case, 28 million as the "low" estimate of the victims of the Soviet Communist is utter nonsense. Here is an article by Timothy Snyder, a major Russophobe but a real historian. He is straining just to get to 6 million. Which tells us that this is probably the true high estimate.
    , @melanf

    communist leadership explicitly desired mass deaths to politically break the backbone of the peasantry
     
    This statement is obvious wrong. I gave you a link to Tauger's article.

    we have many descriptions (even photos) of starving people
     
    we have descriptions of starving people in 90s. People died of hunger or committed suicide to avoid death from hunger - it really was in the 90s.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. The navigation museum is of course unique to Portugal. I can’t think of the exact name.

    Read More
    • Replies: @for-the-record
    The navigation museum is of course unique to Portugal. I can’t think of the exact name.

    Museu de Marinha?

    http://www.aviewoncities.com/lisbon/museudemarinha.htm
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. Melanf is right in the sense of reductio ad absurdum argument.

    The ‘many multiple millions killed’ claims are based on demographic projections, and include events like famines, and you can play the same game with 1990s. According to this kind of game, any very severe economic or natural event resulting in lowered demographics, would become a genocide.

    It’s not the real sense of genocide.

    The fact that we know for fact at least 642,980 (and possibly with figures of over 800,000+) people were executed is bad enough, and I don’t think we need to make any excuses for Stalin and in fact much of Soviet machinery – as a tyranny – knowing that they oversaw many hundreds of thousands of innocent people executed – not to mention how many imprisoned in this tyranny.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  179. @reiner Tor

    Yes, hyperinflating old people’s savings to zero and then not paying them pensions is totally different. No one was forcibly prevented from anything!
     
    As far as I know, something was paid to them. To be the equivalent of what the communists did in 1932-33, they would have needed to cut off all pensions, and then prevent them from getting some other livelihood, like selling their possessions or asking from their working age relatives etc.

    applying demographic methods to the number of victims can produce weird results
     
    The methods have limitations. You can apply them to famines or other types of mass deaths, but they are not good methods to establish whether a famine really did occur.

    For example we know for sure what the increase in mortality in the 1990s was coming from. (Mostly, alcoholism.) We also know exactly how many children were born (vastly fewer than in the 1980s), so no need to guess how many died within a couple years.

    In the 1930s, we have huge documentary evidence that a famine did occur, that the communist leadership explicitly desired mass deaths to politically break the backbone of the peasantry, we have many descriptions (even photos) of starving people (including both Party and NKVD reports), and finally we have funny looking statistics. The latter is used to estimate the number of deaths.

    You guys pretend as if it was only the funny looking statistics.

    Famine(s) definitely occured but I’d be skeptical about any particular horror story (including photos) and super skeptical about numerical estimates based on demographic data. What are good numerical estimates? Beats me; but I would start with internal NKVD reports; they had no reason to lie in their internal reports and the numbers in them check out in other cases. But I don’t know.

    Unfortunately, the estimates of of the famine victims is being used as a political tool, so dispassionate discussion is currently impossible. Hopefully, the topic will eventually pass out of the political arena; then the real historical inquiry can begin.

    In any case, 28 million as the “low” estimate of the victims of the Soviet Communist is utter nonsense. Here is an article by Timothy Snyder, a major Russophobe but a real historian. He is straining just to get to 6 million. Which tells us that this is probably the true high estimate.

    Read More
    • Agree: melanf
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    He is straining just to get to 6 million.
     
    Is he? He excluded a large portion of the famine victims (almost 2 million, just for comparison, the number of those killed by the last Czarist famine was roughly 500 thousand), and he never even mentioned anyone killed before 1924, even though since 1919 Stalin was probably the second highest ranking official* after Lenin (and Lenin was seriously ill after 1922). Even if he personally didn't participate in any atrocities (far from true), he was a powerful official of the regime. Had Hitler died in spring 1942, but his successor Göring continued exactly the same policies to the bitter end - would we then consider Hitler a much smaller monster? What if Himmler or Heydrich was the successor? Wouldn't it make more sense to add together the two, and just calculate the victims of Nazism? Similarly, the victims of Soviet communism?

    Snyder also seems to gloss over some mass deportations under Stalin's rule, especially the wartime mass deportations. It is alleged that a third of all Chechens and a similarly high portion of Crimean Tatars died. That'd be a few hundreds of thousands added to his number. Maybe it's untrue, but he doesn't even mention them (unlike other categories which proved to be less murderous than previously thought).

    *The other contender for the "second after Lenin" positions was Trotsky, but his power base was the army, so mass murder during that time period was probably more related to Stalin than to Trotsky. The other contenders, like Zinoviev or Kamenev never held such a powerful administrative position. In fact, only after 1924 did it become apparent how powerful the position of general secretary was. Malenkov didn't even understand it in 1953...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. @reiner Tor

    Yes, hyperinflating old people’s savings to zero and then not paying them pensions is totally different. No one was forcibly prevented from anything!
     
    As far as I know, something was paid to them. To be the equivalent of what the communists did in 1932-33, they would have needed to cut off all pensions, and then prevent them from getting some other livelihood, like selling their possessions or asking from their working age relatives etc.

    applying demographic methods to the number of victims can produce weird results
     
    The methods have limitations. You can apply them to famines or other types of mass deaths, but they are not good methods to establish whether a famine really did occur.

    For example we know for sure what the increase in mortality in the 1990s was coming from. (Mostly, alcoholism.) We also know exactly how many children were born (vastly fewer than in the 1980s), so no need to guess how many died within a couple years.

    In the 1930s, we have huge documentary evidence that a famine did occur, that the communist leadership explicitly desired mass deaths to politically break the backbone of the peasantry, we have many descriptions (even photos) of starving people (including both Party and NKVD reports), and finally we have funny looking statistics. The latter is used to estimate the number of deaths.

    You guys pretend as if it was only the funny looking statistics.

    communist leadership explicitly desired mass deaths to politically break the backbone of the peasantry

    This statement is obvious wrong. I gave you a link to Tauger’s article.

    we have many descriptions (even photos) of starving people

    we have descriptions of starving people in 90s. People died of hunger or committed suicide to avoid death from hunger – it really was in the 90s.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. @Philip Owen
    The navigation museum is of course unique to Portugal. I can't think of the exact name.

    The navigation museum is of course unique to Portugal. I can’t think of the exact name.

    Museu de Marinha?

    http://www.aviewoncities.com/lisbon/museudemarinha.htm

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. @inertial
    Famine(s) definitely occured but I'd be skeptical about any particular horror story (including photos) and super skeptical about numerical estimates based on demographic data. What are good numerical estimates? Beats me; but I would start with internal NKVD reports; they had no reason to lie in their internal reports and the numbers in them check out in other cases. But I don't know.

    Unfortunately, the estimates of of the famine victims is being used as a political tool, so dispassionate discussion is currently impossible. Hopefully, the topic will eventually pass out of the political arena; then the real historical inquiry can begin.

    In any case, 28 million as the "low" estimate of the victims of the Soviet Communist is utter nonsense. Here is an article by Timothy Snyder, a major Russophobe but a real historian. He is straining just to get to 6 million. Which tells us that this is probably the true high estimate.

    He is straining just to get to 6 million.

    Is he? He excluded a large portion of the famine victims (almost 2 million, just for comparison, the number of those killed by the last Czarist famine was roughly 500 thousand), and he never even mentioned anyone killed before 1924, even though since 1919 Stalin was probably the second highest ranking official* after Lenin (and Lenin was seriously ill after 1922). Even if he personally didn’t participate in any atrocities (far from true), he was a powerful official of the regime. Had Hitler died in spring 1942, but his successor Göring continued exactly the same policies to the bitter end – would we then consider Hitler a much smaller monster? What if Himmler or Heydrich was the successor? Wouldn’t it make more sense to add together the two, and just calculate the victims of Nazism? Similarly, the victims of Soviet communism?

    Snyder also seems to gloss over some mass deportations under Stalin’s rule, especially the wartime mass deportations. It is alleged that a third of all Chechens and a similarly high portion of Crimean Tatars died. That’d be a few hundreds of thousands added to his number. Maybe it’s untrue, but he doesn’t even mention them (unlike other categories which proved to be less murderous than previously thought).

    *The other contender for the “second after Lenin” positions was Trotsky, but his power base was the army, so mass murder during that time period was probably more related to Stalin than to Trotsky. The other contenders, like Zinoviev or Kamenev never held such a powerful administrative position. In fact, only after 1924 did it become apparent how powerful the position of general secretary was. Malenkov didn’t even understand it in 1953…

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf

    the number of those killed by the last Czarist famine was roughly 500 thousand
     
    It was (in the main part) the victims of the cholera epidemic, not starvation. The tsarist government fed parasites to peasants in famine conditions (despite the fact that even in famine peasants spent money to buy vodka) - it is well known haw it ended for the tsarist government.
    It would be better if the tsarist government spent resources on industrialization.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. @Polish Perspective

    I tried radar/laser cruise control a few times and didn’t like it.
     
    The technology has improved at a very rapid pace over just the last few years. Unless you tried a system which is not continually improving via an over-the-air update (which is to say, most systems right now) then your reaction is not surprising. Even a two year pause can be night and day. Tesla recently released their latest AP2 update and the difference is quite huge.

    https://electrek.co/2018/03/15/tesla-autopilot-update-autosteer/

    /r/TeslaMotors have been very critical of Tesla over the past year, but they have been ecstatic over the performance improvements. There are a lot of mini-reviews on that subreddit to look through if you want to see the differences. Including many with before/after Youtube videos. And that was just one update. Karpathy, after having been forced to re-write the full codebase is only now starting to accelerate.

    Tesla is also making their own AP hardware suite. They are using a clunky Nvidia setup right now, with a full Titan GPU in the car. Jim Keller, who was behind the Ryzen AMD processor and worked on early Apple CPUs, is in charge. In just a few years we will see what a boutique solution can provide in terms of efficiency and pperformance in a given power envelope.


    No, that is the correct way to view. The purpose of business is to make money. Accelerating “sustainable” transportation is a completely irrelevant goal except to the extent that it helps market the product.
     
    It's not either/or and it is a mistake to view it as such. Business is not a charity, but it is possible to combine social goals with economic profit. Keep in mind that the car industry is extremely capital-intensive, as your previous Sergio reference hinted at, and Tesla is building everything from scratch. All the factories, all the supply chain linkages and they are investing in all the new tech at the same time.

    They could slow down and just live off their very fat gross margins, and some have suggested they do so, but that wouldn't appeal to someone like Musk who wants maximum progress at maximum speed. And the price of that is being a loss-leader for the time being.


    Vertical integration has pros and cons like anything else. Did you know that Ford Motor once produced its own steel?
     
    Yes, I'm aware of that I am in fact happy you brought up that example. Ford is an excellent case-study of the importance of vertical integration when there is a paradigm shift.

    Over time, as the car industry matured, the ICE legacy car makers offloaded more and more of their production onto their supply chain. Today, what separates a BMW from a Skoda is really the engine. Sure, the interior fit and finish is nicer, but even that is often outsourced.

    ICE companies have specialised in engine construction and this is why many are sweating bullets over EVs. They have huge amount of sunk costs and the shift to EVs will mean a lot of expertise will become obsolete. Some will likely go under. You can bet that the calls for bailouts will only increase by the 2020s, along with softer emission standards and the like.

    Tesla is doing the same thing now, and so is BYD. We all know about Tesla but few know that BYD is pursuing the same strategy. They are also investing in their own battery tech and manufacturing.

    Compare and contrast with GM, which is so uncompetitive that they not only outsourced the battery but even the entire drivetrain(!) to LG. As the EV business matures, vertical integration will be less necessary but the early years will give an advantage to those who pursued it. Like Ford did a century ago or like Tesla or BYD is doing now.


    That said, since the Gigafactory will be the world’s largest single production site, it’s possible that this sets up Tesla as the industry’s lowest-cost producer. This would then allow Tesla to supply other industries, and not just cars.
     
    Indeed, Tesla is more than just a car company. Their battery production will help with their solar business as well as providing energy storage, both on a large scale (see the recent deal with Australia) as well as to home buyers. The PowerWall 2 is quite competitive and costs are racing down.

    These requirements will make every car sold outside of luxury vehicles (which just pay a gas guzzler tax) 100% homosexual.
     
    :)

    The most complicated thing about a car has always been the powertrain. That goes right out the window with electrification. They then turn into glorified sheet metal fabricators.
     
    Yep, I made a reference to this earlier in my comment. Generally, the US automakers are lagging the most here. The Korean and Japanese are ahead, some German ones are doing okay(at best). The Chinese are rapidly innovating.

    The strategy now seems to be to get good profits out of North America with muscle cars and trucks that people love but the government intends to ban since they hate us, and then merge with someone else.
     
    I can't claim to read his mind, but I'll take your word for it. I will say this, though, Sergio and other dynosaurs have claimed that making EVs profitable is "impossible". But Nissan is making a profit from their Leafs. Tesla could be making a profit if they weren't extremely ambitious and trying to do everything at once, and preferably yesterday. Their gross margins are extremely good for the auto industry(upwards 20-25%).

    The fact that Sergio can't make money off EVs doesn't say much about EVs; it says a lot more about his antiquated leadership and inability to innovate.


    White countries are all generally all lacking in strategic economic planning.
     
    Norway certainly would be exception to that. They are not only rushing ahead to electrify their car fleet, they are even investing in making boats and planes electrified. And they want Norwegian companies to be at the forefront of that innovation. Sweden has been ridicolously reactionary in this, insisting that somehow biofuels must be used in airplanes, which literally nobody outside of Sweden thinks is a plausible idea.

    That's what happens you get when you have a ton of forest to tap into but not any real idea how to sell it, as in the case of the Swedes. But I'm fairly confident that they'll get their act together soon, too. They just have to accept that their huge forests aren't going to be of much help in this instance.

    P.S.

    If you want to read a little bit about self-driving, and why Tesla is doing it "the hard way", this article is a good primer:

    https://cleantechnica.com/2017/11/14/teslas-lack-lidar-autopilot-legit-provides-cost-competitive-edge-research-hints/

    Within one more generation, most of Sweden won’t be safe enough for any factories without a very expensive security ARMY to protect each facility and the employees traveling to and from the facilities.

    They are heading for a civil war or subjugation by the Muslims and Africans who are settling and reproducing so rapidly there. I’d heavily discount any plans by the Swedes for any manufacturing or assembly of EVs, batteries, etc., in Sweden.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. @Randal
    Jewish knives now openly out for Jeremy Corbyn, basically for not being subservient enough:

    Jewish groups attack Jeremy Corbyn over anti-Semitism

    As with "Red Ken" Livingstone, the idea that someone like Jeremy Corbyn is actually "anti-Semitic" in any honest sense of the term is literally absurd. Outside of their own supporters, the target's cynical political enemies and rivals, and the saddest of propaganda victims, jewish groups slinging of the "anti-Semite" smear term mostly discredits only themselves and helps to bring the smear term itself further into disrepute.

    Also as with Red Ken, it's quite entertaining to see a leftist like Corbyn who has spent his life slinging false smears of "racism", "homophobia" etc, etc at political rivals and at decent folk alike, basically hoist by his own petard.

    The organisations refer to Mr Corbyn's apparently supportive message to the creator of an allegedly anti-Semitic mural in 2012 and his attendance at "pro-Hezbollah rallies".
     
    Neither of these, of course, have anything to do with "anti-Semitism" in the sense of disliking jews. Support for Hezbollah is simply one legitimate position on a dispute between foreigners (and indeed any honest, neutral observer would have to conclude that Hezbollah has the superior moral position in the dispute, having been formed to resist military aggression and occupation by Israel).

    As for the mural, it's perfectly clear that Corbyn's expression of support for the mural was a thoughtless approval of "free speech", before he realised that the piece of art in question was not the kind of free speech leftist hypocrites like him actually allow.

    Neither of these, of course, have anything to do with “anti-Semitism” in the sense of disliking jews.

    Anti Israel = Anti Semitism. I can’t tell if you are intellectually dishonest or just obtuse.

    Corbyn is unquestionably an anti Semite and Livingstone and Galloway were as well.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    Anti Israel = Anti Semitism. I can’t tell if you are intellectually dishonest or just obtuse.
     
    Neither, at least on this occasion. You are just advancing an untenable position.
    , @for-the-record
    Anti Israel = Anti Semitism

    By this definition the large majority of Jews in the US before WWII, who were not pro-Zionist, were anti-Semitic. But not Eichmann (“If I Were a Jew, I’d Be a Fanatical Zionist”).

    You're the one who is being obtuse or intellectually dishonest. Jewishness is a religion, Israel is a state.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. @German_reader
    You needn't go back that far, after all German soldiers did commit a significant number of atrocities during WW2. More narrowly, the view of mass killings of Jews (and others) as some clinical process focused just on efficient killing is probably wrong...there was lots of gratuitous sadism involved (like humiliating orthodox Jews by shaving their beards or even setting them on fire, forcing them to crawl naked on the ground, also rapes of Jewish women etc.).
    Utu's reference to WW2 GIs killing prisoners (or not taking any) is of course correct only for the Pacific war (such cases were much rarer in North Africa and Europe). I guess there were elements of a race war in that conflict (same was true in Burma during the British campaign in 1944/1945...in his youth my father knew a guy who had been there as a British airman, and openly admitted, without regret, that after the sinking of Japanese ships Hawker Hurricanes would often strafe shipwrecked Japanese). But of course that wasn't a one-way affair, since the Japanese with their brutal and racist conduct had greatly contributed to such a character of the conflict.

    like humiliating orthodox Jews by shaving their beards or even setting them on fire, forcing them to crawl naked on the ground, also rapes of Jewish women etc.

    German soldiers did no such thing. It was strictly prohibited. German collaborators were the ones who did that stuff.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments