The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewIlana Mercer Archive
'Shithole Countries': What Makes a Country? the Place or the People?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_262892921

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

President Trump’s questioning of immigration into the United States from what he crudely called “shithole” countries masks a more vexing question:

What makes a country, the place or the people? Does “the country” create the man or does the man make the country?

To listen to the deformed logic of the president’s detractors, it’s the former: the “country” makes the person. No sooner does an African or Haitian immigrant wash up on American shores—courtesy of random quotas, lotteries and other government grants of privilege and protection—than the process of cultural and philosophical osmosis begins. American probity and productivity soon become his own.

As an African libertarian—an ex-South African, to be precise—I took the liberty of addressing the matter in the book “Into The Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa,” in which a Cameroonian scholar, Daniel Etounga-Manguelle, among others, is extensively cited.

Easily one of the most controversial thinkers on the causes of underdevelopment in Africa, Etounga-Manguelle, a former adviser to the World Bank, contends that “What Africans are doing to one another defies credulity. Genocide, bloody civil wars, and rampant violent crime suggest African societies at all social levels are to some extent cannibalistic.” Why? In part, because of the inveterate values held by so many Africans.

Etounga-Manguelle and scholars like him, cited in “Into The Cannibal’s Pot,” are responding to an “explanatory vacuum” that has opened up among honest academics.

All have been willing to admit that constructs like racism, discrimination, and colonialism no longer serve as credible causal factors in divining underdevelopment and delinquency.

None has been called upon to enlighten the greater public.

In such intellectually candid circles, the intellectual “vacuum” is being filled with reference to culture, namely the “values, attitudes, beliefs, orientations, and underlying assumptions prevalent among people in a society.”

The idea that culture is benign and harmonious if not disrupted is a delusion, argues anthropologist Robert B. Edgerton, who also believes that in Africa, “traditional cultural values are at the root of poverty, authoritarianism, and injustice.”

By taking account of culture, posits David Landes, a Harvard economic historian, and author of The Wealth and Poverty of Nations, one could have foreseen the postwar economic success of Japan and Germany. The same is true of South Korea (versus Turkey), and Indonesia (versus Nigeria).

Voodoo for Values

Before the end of free speech on American campuses, Etounga-Manguelle, aforementioned, attended a symposium on “Cultural Values and Human Progress” at Harvard, circa 1999. He had come to bury and not praise the cultures of the Continent.

In a paper titled Does Africa Need a Cultural Adjustment Program?, Etounga-Manguelle quipped controversially that “The African works to live but does not live to work.”

Another of his off-the-cuff remarks: “African societies are like a football team in which, as a result of personal rivalries and a lack of team spirit, one player will not pass the ball to another out of fear that the latter might score a goal.”

Etounga-Manguelle was referring to what he perceives to be the culture of envy—the kind of all-consuming envy that, in the Rwanda of 1994, caused certain Africans (Hutus) to attempt to kill off other, frequently more industrious, better-looking brethren (Tutsis). The culture of envy makes it hard for Africa as a whole to rejoice in the success of its exceptional sons and daughters.

In this context, the systematic “expulsion and slaughter of productive minorities,” at the behest of the people, not necessarily their leaders, deserves scrutiny, too. This has been a factor in Zimbabwe’s demise and in South Africa’s increasing economic insecurity. In both countries, life for the productive European minority is perilous.

Will this reality magically dissipate once the same people are invited to be fruitful and multiply in America?

Not according to Etounga-Manguelle’s lifelong observations: In Africa, “divination and witchcraft” are integral parts of all aspects of state and civil society among all segments of society. Africans do not believe control over uncertainty is achievable through planning for the future and mastering nature; through reason, the rule of law, or technology. Rather, being by and large fatalistic and superstitious, they all too often resort to magical thinking to cope.

The plight of “witch children” across Africa—amplified in Nigeria, a country touted by the anti-Trump media as fertile recruiting grounds for future Americans—comports with Etounga-Manguelle’s paradigm. In Nigeria, this designated class of kids is blamed for every pestilence to plague the community.

Likewise do the Zimbabwean tribal chiefs saddle angry ancestors in need of appeasement for everything from famine to inflation. Their solution to the first “supernatural force” is to brutalize the bewitchers, the “witch children.” To resolve the second, beer is brewed, drums are beaten and beasts slaughtered. (Not that the American Left cares, but the importation of certain “shithole” values heralds incredible cruelty to animals.)

Time Preference

Not for nothing did Alexis de Tocqueville conclude “that what made the American political system work was a culture congenial to democracy.” A lesser luminary, Lawrence E. Harrison, has isolated some salient factors that distinguish development-prone from development-resistant cultures.

Western cultures emphasize the future; view work as a blessing rather than as a burden; promote individuals based on their merit; value education and frugality, are philanthropic, identify with universal causes, and have higher ethics.

In static cultures, individuals tend to be fatalistic rather than future-oriented; live for the present or past; work only because they need to; diminish or dismiss the value of education, frugality, and philanthropy; are often mired in nepotism and corruption; and promote individuals based on clan and connections, rather than capabilities.

“I am because we are” is how one wag encapsulated the cog-like role of the individual in African culture. In advanced cultures, on the other hand, the individual, and not the collective, is paramount.

The paucity of planning and future preparation in African life, Etounga-Manguelle puts down to a suspended sense of time.

The reverence for the “strongman of the moment” he roots in the sincerely held belief that these men harbor magical powers.

Magic wins out over reason; community over individual; communal ownership over private property; force and coercion over rights and responsibilities; wealth distribution over its accumulation.

ORDER IT NOW

Africans inhabit stratified societies in which “strength prevails over law,” and where “the best way to change a social system is to overthrow those who hold power.” African totalitarianism was not born with independence, warns Etounga-Manguelle, who counsels the need for a mind-freeing, “cultural adjustment program” for Africa.

Such a cultural adjustment program, of course, lacks the Compassion Chic that marks the present system of subsidies to dictatorial kleptomaniacs.

Human Action is Individual Action

Be it Africa or Arabia, the Left labors under the romantic delusion that the effects of millennia of development-resistant, self-defeating, fatalistic, atavistic, superstition-infused, unfathomably cruel cultures can be cured by an infusion of foreign aid, by the removal of tyrants such as Robert Mugabe or Jacob Zuma, or by bringing the underdeveloped world to America. (Left-libertarian Katherine Mangu-Ward actually told Tucker Carlson that, “If we had a billion people in America, America would be unstoppable. That would be amazing.”)

Alas, bad leaders are not what shackle backward peoples. Not exclusively, at least. And Africa’s plight is most certainly not the West’s fault. Rather, Africa is a culmination of the failure of the people to develop the attitudes and institutions favorable to peace and progress.

Human behavior is, indubitably, mediated by values. Nevertheless, we’d be intellectually remiss to deny that the cultural argument affords a circular, rather than a causal, elegance: people do the things they do because they are who they are and have a history of being that way.

What precisely, then, accounts for the unequal “civilizing potential,” as James Burnham called it, that groups display? Why have some people produced Confucian and Anglo-Protestant ethics—with their mutual emphasis on graft and delayed gratification—while others have midwifed Islamic and animistic values, emphasizing conformity, consensus, and control?

Why have certain patterns of thought and action come to typify certain people in the first place?

Such an investigation, however, is verboten—a state-of-affairs Harvard sociologist Orlando Patterson blamed on “a prevailing rigid orthodoxy,” which is the preferred academic phrase for political correctness:

“Culture is a symbolic system to be interpreted, understood, discussed, delineated, respected, and celebrated as the distinct product of a particular group of people, of equal worth with all other such products. But it should never be used to explain anything about the people who produced it.”

This much can be said: The West is what it is due to human capital—people of superior ideas and abilities, capable of innovation, exploration, science, philosophy.

Overall, American society remains superior to assorted African and Caribbean societies because the tipping point has not yet been reached here. A preponderance of a certain kind of individual still makes civil society possible.

Human action is the ultimate adjudicator of a human being’s worth.

The aggregate action of many human beings acting in concert makes or breaks a society.

The question posed at the onset is thus no chicken-or-egg quagmire. The individual creates the collective, not the other way round. The Man makes the country what it is.

Ilana Mercer has been writing a paleolibertarian column since 1999, and is the author of The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed (June, 2016) & Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa (2011). Follow her on Twitter, Facebook,Gab & YouTube.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Africa, Africans, Immigration, Political Correctness 
Hide 243 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. No sooner does an African or Haitian immigrant wash up on American shores—courtesy of random quotas, lotteries and other government grants of privilege and protection—than the process of cultural and philosophical osmosis begins. American probity and productivity soon become his own.

    Well this is the liberal “magic dirt” theory, isn’t it. I remember questioning whether New Yorkers should be surprised that so many cab drivers from Pakistan, Bangladesh and West Africa end up plowing into pedestrians. How dare you, came the response from other posters. They’re no different from native born drivers. One person even suggested they were better drivers because in lawless Pakistan a “flow” develops that creates a more alert and sophisticated driver. Liberals are funny.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jim jones
    Driving an ambulance in India:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-pC8w0skGADriving an ambulance in India:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-pC8w0skGA
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Haitiholes can be naturally occurring or just the backwards evolution of a society. They can happen anywhere – all you need is an appropriate number of people with a suitably primitive mindset. Check out Detroit.

    Read MoreHaitiholes can be naturally occurring or just the backwards evolution of a society. They can happen anywhere - all you need is an appropriate number of people with a suitably primitive mindset. Check out Detroit.
    • Replies: @Realist
    ....and of course low IQ....and of course low IQ
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. anon • Disclaimer says:

    Correct, Ilana.
    Very good piece.

    Read MoreCorrect, Ilana. Very good piece.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. anon • Disclaimer says:

    If Haiti was populated by Japanese people or Scandinavians, instead of black Africans, it would be a very different place indeed.

    Read MoreIf Haiti was populated by Japanese people or Scandinavians, instead of black Africans, it would be a very different place indeed.
    • Replies: @proud_Srbin
    It would be enlightening to find out the punishment Haitians paid for being the FIRST blacks to rise up against slavery.
    It wasn't "God" who committed genocide.
    Dominicans willingness to submit and serve self-appointed masters saved them.It would be enlightening to find out the punishment Haitians paid for being the FIRST blacks to rise up against slavery.
    It wasn't "God" who committed genocide.
    Dominicans willingness to submit and serve self-appointed masters saved them.
    , @tjm
    And who put blacks there??????????

    The zionists have been spreading the seeds of our destruction for centuries.And who put blacks there??????????

    The zionists have been spreading the seeds of our destruction for centuries.
    , @Oh_Really
    Ha Scandinavians in Haiti! Which do you mean? The old St Nick version or the new new-go-zone version?Ha Scandinavians in Haiti! Which do you mean? The old St Nick version or the new new-go-zone version?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Biff says:

    During the 1980’s Iraq was a nice place.
    Prior to 2011 Tripoli was the nicest city in all of Africa.
    Prior to 1978 Westerners could freely travel about in Afghanistan(though no country to brag about, but I wouldn’t dare to transverse it today)
    Prior to 1492 the island where Haiti resides was a paradise.

    For better or for worse Men do make the country.

    Read MoreDuring the 1980’s Iraq was a nice place. Prior to 2011 Tripoli was the nicest city in all of Africa. Prior to 1978 Westerners could freely travel about in Afghanistan(though no country to brag about, but I wouldn’t dare to transverse it today) Prior to 1492 the island where Haiti resides was a paradise. For better or for worse Men do make the country.
    • Replies: @Malla

    During the 1980’s Iraq was a nice place.

     

    Was it really?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRATeUEBWJQ

    Yeah it was better than what we got after the U.S. invasion, no doubt about that.
    , @Ilyana_Rozumova
    Bullshit!!!! It are the women who tell the men to get off their lazy ass!Bullshit!!!! It are the women who tell the men to get off their lazy ass!
    , @Andrei Martyanov

    Prior to 2011 Tripoli was the nicest city in all of Africa.
     
    It was nice. Some good memories of Tripoli nights and of Sabratha came back. Well, that Tripoli is gone now.
    , @Wally
    Agreed, men who are the inhabitants of a country do make it what it is.
    Hence Haiti & Africa today.

    Of course, as Mercer referenced:

    "By taking account of culture ..... one could have foreseen the postwar economic success of Japan and Germany."

    IOW, western countries which have been devastated by war and the immediate aftermath of war have invariably gotten up and rebuilt a very orderly, safe, productive society.

    The 3rd world is such because of it's incompetent, low IQ inhabitants. Nothing could be more obvious.

    Sorry Biff, but you are hopelessly lost in Marxist groupthink

    , @Grandpa Charlie

    "Prior to 1978 Westerners could freely travel about in Afghanistan" -- Biff
     
    I met a young woman from Minnesota back in the 1960s who had been on a trip around the world. She told me, and I believed her, that when she flew into Afghanistan, she and other Americans were met at the airport by a representative of the U.S. State Department who gave each of the Americans a map that marked off an area around the airport -- less than one square mile -- and told to stay within that area because outside of that area, the USA could not guarantee anyone's safety. In particular they told the female Americans that they would certainly, if not accompanied by a man, be kidnapped and probably never seen or heard from again.

    For better or for worse, men do make the country, but women? Not so much ... at least not in many parts of the world.

    BTW, Biff, all the evils of the world cannot rationally be blamed on the USA or on Europeans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. jim jones says:
    @Bragadocious
    No sooner does an African or Haitian immigrant wash up on American shores—courtesy of random quotas, lotteries and other government grants of privilege and protection—than the process of cultural and philosophical osmosis begins. American probity and productivity soon become his own.

    Well this is the liberal "magic dirt" theory, isn't it. I remember questioning whether New Yorkers should be surprised that so many cab drivers from Pakistan, Bangladesh and West Africa end up plowing into pedestrians. How dare you, came the response from other posters. They're no different from native born drivers. One person even suggested they were better drivers because in lawless Pakistan a "flow" develops that creates a more alert and sophisticated driver. Liberals are funny.

    Driving an ambulance in India:

    Read MoreDriving an ambulance in India: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-pC8w0skGA
    • Replies: @Malla
    And that is Bangalore, which is really one of the best cities to live in India far more orderly than the nightmares of Bombay, Calcutta or Delhi.

    Here this is a more comprehensive one, how people in various countries respond to ambulances

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nqkhC8zn8Y

    India sucks as usual. Guess what, New York is first world city with a third world heart. Behind all that glitter it is a shithole. The winner goes to the evul Nazi Germans and the Poles come second.
    So it is Germany which deserves enrichment? That is what the elites say. Germany, where people really care about human life, where there is a strong social sense. Really?
    If there would be sense in the world, India would have been enriched by Germans and Poles not the other way round. This world is crazy.
    So much for Hollywood propaganda about evil Germans.And that is Bangalore, which is really one of the best cities to live in India far more orderly than the nightmares of Bombay, Calcutta or Delhi.

    Here this is a more comprehensive one, how people in various countries respond to ambulances

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nqkhC8zn8Y

    India sucks as usual. Guess what, New York is first world city with a third world heart. Behind all that glitter it is a shithole. The winner goes to the evul Nazi Germans and the Poles come second.
    So it is Germany which deserves enrichment? That is what the elites say. Germany, where people really care about human life, where there is a strong social sense. Really?
    If there would be sense in the world, India would have been enriched by Germans and Poles not the other way round. This world is crazy.
    So much for Hollywood propaganda about evil Germans.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. “In static cultures, individuals tend to be fatalistic rather than future-oriented; live for the present or past; ”

    This is an apt description of a majority of the Africans brought to America two centuries ago as slaves. It was a horrible mistake to bring them here and we are still paying the price today.

    Read More"In static cultures, individuals tend to be fatalistic rather than future-oriented; live for the present or past; " This is an apt description of a majority of the Africans brought to America two centuries ago as slaves. It was a horrible mistake to bring them here and we are still paying the price today.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. ” This much can be said: The West is what it is due to human capital—people of superior ideas and abilities, capable of innovation, exploration, science, philosophy. ”

    A sobering book is
    Felipe Fernández-Armesto, ‘Civilisations’, London, 2000
    Western superior civilisation reduced to the direction in which the earth turns, the unique North Sea, and the grass highway from Mongolia to the Belgian coast.
    Population pressure.

    It reminds me of
    William H. Calvin, ‘De opkomst van het intellect, Een reis naar de ijstijd’, Amsterdam 1994 (The Ascent of Mind. Ice Climates and the Evolution of Intelligence’, 1990).
    Necessity, in order to survive.

    And why and how was it possible that this superior west stood still, scientifically, for some 1600 years, from the year 1 to 1600 ?
    The question what makes a country reminds me of ‘did history make Napoleon, or did Napoleon make history ?’.
    Historians still debate the last question.

    Read More" This much can be said: The West is what it is due to human capital—people of superior ideas and abilities, capable of innovation, exploration, science, philosophy. " A sobering book is Felipe Fernández-Armesto, ‘Civilisations’, London, 2000 Western superior civilisation reduced to the direction in which the earth turns, the unique North Sea, and the grass highway from Mongolia to the Belgian coast. Population pressure. It reminds me of William H. Calvin, 'De opkomst van het intellect, Een reis naar de ijstijd', Amsterdam 1994 (The Ascent of Mind. Ice Climates and the Evolution of Intelligence', 1990). Necessity, in order to survive. And why and how was it possible that this superior west stood still, scientifically, for some 1600 years, from the year 1 to 1600 ? The question what makes a country reminds me of 'did history make Napoleon, or did Napoleon make history ?'. Historians still debate the last question.
    • Replies: @Charles

    And why and how was it possible that this superior west stood still, scientifically, for some 1600 years, from the year 1 to 1600 ?
     
    Basically, Islam.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_Qpy0mXg8Y
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Da Wei says:

    Thank you, Ilana Mercer, for yet another example of your intelligent writing.

    We are what we do and what we make of ourselves. To say we are what society has done to us denies our freedom and is the whimpering cry of the victim society. We make our own world.

    By the way, why DO we have to take people from shithole countries, and not nice clean places like Norway? I think that’s a sensible question. And I think President Trump asked it in a closed meeting, where confidences should be respected. People who don’t respect confidences like that are dishonorable tattle tale weasels and have no place in government.

    Read MoreThank you, Ilana Mercer, for yet another example of your intelligent writing. We are what we do and what we make of ourselves. To say we are what society has done to us denies our freedom and is the whimpering cry of the victim society. We make our own world. By the way, why DO we have to take people from shithole countries, and not nice clean places like Norway? I think that's a sensible question. And I think President Trump asked it in a closed meeting, where confidences should be respected. People who don't respect confidences like that are dishonorable tattle tale weasels and have no place in government.
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "By the way, why DO we have to take people from shithole countries, and not nice clean places like Norway?"

    Enlighten yourself.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V35Vw29tay0"By the way, why DO we have to take people from shithole countries, and not nice clean places like Norway?"

    Enlighten yourself.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V35Vw29tay0
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Every civilisation is based on a religion. The civilisation of sub-Saharan Africa, whatever we think of it, is based on a darker version of paganism. African traditional religions embrace human sacrifices, ritual cannibalism, black magic (and paranoidal fear of it) and some other unsavoury things. And it influences both the everyday life of ordinary people and the historical course of their civilisation. Of course, African societies are not 100% per cent horrible, they have their positive aspects, otherwise they would not have survived at all, but the burden of infernal superstitions on them is too heavy.

    Civilisations rooted in other religions are also conditioned by them. You cannot understand India without Hindooism, Japan without Buddhism, Shintoism and Confucianism, the Arab world without Islam.

    The European civilisation is based on Christianity (though it did learn a few tricks from ancient Greeks and Romans). It became great and global thanks to its Christian faith. But as it has discarded its faith (in a long, gradual and, at first, imperceptible process), it has slowly but surely entered into decadence. It began with religious scepticism which developed into an all-out materialism, continued with moral and cultural scepticism which, by now, has reached the stage of final degradation and finally lost the will to live. As people in post-Christian societies no longer believe that anything is more important than their personal pleasure and convenience, they no longer want to have children, and post-Christian nations begin to die out. They no longer want to fight for their countries or for their civilisation as a whole. They lost respect for their ancestors. They have turned into a sort of senile children, superficial, short-sighted, avid for sweets and bright-coloured toys, ready to believe any stupid idea if it flatters them and are totally indifferent to the really serious things.

    Therefore, the post-Christian civilisation has become weaker than other civilisations, more cruel and primitive, but still believing in something transcendental. People of non-Christian civilisations still have something to die for. Post-Christians have nothing to die for and only a bit of frivolous entertainment to live for. They are doomed.

    Read MoreEvery civilisation is based on a religion. The civilisation of sub-Saharan Africa, whatever we think of it, is based on a darker version of paganism. African traditional religions embrace human sacrifices, ritual cannibalism, black magic (and paranoidal fear of it) and some other unsavoury things. And it influences both the everyday life of ordinary people and the historical course of their civilisation. Of course, African societies are not 100% per cent horrible, they have their positive aspects, otherwise they would not have survived at all, but the burden of infernal superstitions on them is too heavy. Civilisations rooted in other religions are also conditioned by them. You cannot understand India without Hindooism, Japan without Buddhism, Shintoism and Confucianism, the Arab world without Islam. The European civilisation is based on Christianity (though it did learn a few tricks from ancient Greeks and Romans). It became great and global thanks to its Christian faith. But as it has discarded its faith (in a long, gradual and, at first, imperceptible process), it has slowly but surely entered into decadence. It began with religious scepticism which developed into an all-out materialism, continued with moral and cultural scepticism which, by now, has reached the stage of final degradation and finally lost the will to live. As people in post-Christian societies no longer believe that anything is more important than their personal pleasure and convenience, they no longer want to have children, and post-Christian nations begin to die out. They no longer want to fight for their countries or for their civilisation as a whole. They lost respect for their ancestors. They have turned into a sort of senile children, superficial, short-sighted, avid for sweets and bright-coloured toys, ready to believe any stupid idea if it flatters them and are totally indifferent to the really serious things. Therefore, the post-Christian civilisation has become weaker than other civilisations, more cruel and primitive, but still believing in something transcendental. People of non-Christian civilisations still have something to die for. Post-Christians have nothing to die for and only a bit of frivolous entertainment to live for. They are doomed.
    • Replies: @sturbain
    Wow. All of this in just 300 words. Bravo! I don't know who you are, but Unz should consider giving you column space here.

    You are absolutely correct. Politics is downstream of culture, which is downstream of religion. The west has lost its religion, and that religion was what made western democratic man. The west is adrift, and is doomed. It was nice while it lasted.Wow. All of this in just 300 words. Bravo! I don't know who you are, but Unz should consider giving you column space here.

    You are absolutely correct. Politics is downstream of culture, which is downstream of religion. The west has lost its religion, and that religion was what made western democratic man. The west is adrift, and is doomed. It was nice while it lasted.
    , @stephenf
    Happen to be an ax I've been grinding lately. We'll take just one example: Scandinavia, where a swath of really nice nations was built on the values inherited from Christianity (the rest of Europe could be said to have had the same advantage, at one time or another and to one degree or another). You can do all kinds of nice things, even universal healthcare, when you have a strong cultural ethic of responsibility to the community, personal productivity, one's own physical health, an ethic of lagom (roughly, "sufficiency" or "enough") and deferred gratification, etc. I suppose some conservatives reading this will object because of the "liberalism" of these countries, but it was not always so, and what "liberalism" was there -- and to some extent what is still there -- is different in some important respects from, say, the American or British left. More of a community ethic that made sense because the community was culturally homogenous, and that culture was a good one.

    But now, as those nations move farther and farther away from their roots and more and more into post-Christianity, and as more migrant and refugee cultures "diversify" them, you're seeing cracks in the social structure and the viability of governments. If present trends continue, they'll be destroyed as far as retaining the essential qualities that made them good places to live.

    Anyway...the idea that post-Christian nations and cultures replace God with an idea of the transcendental state-and-mass-culture entity is squarely on target. One need only look at the nature and locations of the opposition to Trump and the almost universal contempt in mass culture for his supporters.
    , @attilathehen
    Some good points, but you miss the big picture: IQ. Caucasians are first, Asians second, blacks last.

    Today's Indian Hindus (average IQ 82) are not related to the original Aryan Indians who created Hinduism to try and understand the world. Today's Asiatic Indians are just mimicking what the original Aryan Indians created. Low IQ correlates to conformity. Islam, a Christian heresy, destroyed the high IQ Caucasian North African populations by introducing black slavery, polygamy and concubinage. Today's black/Asian Muslims (more than 95% of Muslims are non-white) have low IQs and enforce conformity to their degraded belief system by killing anyone who tries to leave Islam. Japan is the only intelligent Asian country which is preserving itself. Being an island is a big help. Not allowing foreigners to settle is another plus. Their average IQ of 100 keeps them intact. Sub-Saharan African beliefs are the most primitive because they have the lowest IQs. Also, when you state that these people have something to die for, it is usual the result of their criminal mentality. They don't die for anything worthwhile. Blacks/Asians because of their low IQs are predestined to criminality, i.e., sinning.

    In the West, among the Caucasian/European peoples, the post Vatican II world is what is causing the crisis. Before Vatican II, the world was large, difficult place to travel. You could not have the mass invasions that we have today. Christianity is a universal religion and this is now coming into conflict with biology. Loving and accepting all races as equal is gone. Caucasian-European high IQs created the modern world. The chasm between the first and second and third worlds cannot be bridged by religion. I left the RCC because I do not accept black/Asian priests-popes. The mystery, transcendence of religious belief is lost when coming into contact with blacks/Asians. The RCC and cuck pope Frannie are the biggest problems in the Western world. The ancient Egyptians (Caucasians) were destroyed by mixing with blacks. The ancient Aryan Indians were destroyed by mixing with Asians. This is the crux of the problem. Universal beliefs are coming in conflict with biology. A new religion for the West must be created.Some good points, but you miss the big picture: IQ. Caucasians are first, Asians second, blacks last.

    Today's Indian Hindus (average IQ 82) are not related to the original Aryan Indians who created Hinduism to try and understand the world. Today's Asiatic Indians are just mimicking what the original Aryan Indians created. Low IQ correlates to conformity. Islam, a Christian heresy, destroyed the high IQ Caucasian North African populations by introducing black slavery, polygamy and concubinage. Today's black/Asian Muslims (more than 95% of Muslims are non-white) have low IQs and enforce conformity to their degraded belief system by killing anyone who tries to leave Islam. Japan is the only intelligent Asian country which is preserving itself. Being an island is a big help. Not allowing foreigners to settle is another plus. Their average IQ of 100 keeps them intact. Sub-Saharan African beliefs are the most primitive because they have the lowest IQs. Also, when you state that these people have something to die for, it is usual the result of their criminal mentality. They don't die for anything worthwhile. Blacks/Asians because of their low IQs are predestined to criminality, i.e., sinning.

    In the West, among the Caucasian/European peoples, the post Vatican II world is what is causing the crisis. Before Vatican II, the world was large, difficult place to travel. You could not have the mass invasions that we have today. Christianity is a universal religion and this is now coming into conflict with biology. Loving and accepting all races as equal is gone. Caucasian-European high IQs created the modern world. The chasm between the first and second and third worlds cannot be bridged by religion. I left the RCC because I do not accept black/Asian priests-popes. The mystery, transcendence of religious belief is lost when coming into contact with blacks/Asians. The RCC and cuck pope Frannie are the biggest problems in the Western world. The ancient Egyptians (Caucasians) were destroyed by mixing with blacks. The ancient Aryan Indians were destroyed by mixing with Asians. This is the crux of the problem. Universal beliefs are coming in conflict with biology. A new religion for the West must be created.
    , @EnrriqueCardovaaa
    Every civilisation is based on a religion. The civilisation of sub-Saharan Africa, whatever we think of it, is based on a darker version of paganism. African traditional religions embrace human sacrifices, ritual cannibalism, black magic (and paranoidal fear of it) and some other unsavoury things.

    Laughable nonsense by another clueless "deep" thinker. And European religions, traditional and "enlightened" has a lot of unsavory things embedded, including fulsome human sacrifice, cannibalism, clerical child abuse, and gasp, even killing alleged "witches." See European cannibalism below.

    https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/europes-hypocritical-history-of-cannibalism-42642371/


    And it influences both the everyday life of ordinary people and the historical course of their civilisation.

    Why of course. I agree. Various European churches owned slave plantations, blessed mass genocide of non-Europeans and a lot of other things. And for once you are right for such things certainly: " influences both the everyday life of ordinary people and the historical course of their civilisation."


    Civilisations rooted in other religions are also conditioned by them. You cannot understand India without Hindooism, Japan without Buddhism, Shintoism and Confucianism, the Arab world without Islam.

    No sheeee.. this is a really "deep" insight..


    The European civilisation is based on Christianity (though it did learn a few tricks from ancient Greeks and Romans). It became great and global thanks to its Christian faith.

    Get a clue. A lot of things contributed to the global advance, including successful borrowing, copying and adapting to knowledge and technologies (gunpowder, printing, compass, etc, are only a few examples) of non-Europeans.
    .

    But as it has discarded its faith (in a long, gradual and, at first, imperceptible process), it has slowly but surely entered into decadence. It began with religious scepticism which developed into an all-out materialism, continued with moral and cultural scepticism which, by now, has reached the stage of final degradation and finally lost the will to live.

    More clueless claims. Europe was in trouble long BEFORE the significant influence of skepticism materialism or "the liberals." Just the period of the Black Death, or the upheavals pre Middle Ages, or the massive series of religious wars ravaging the continent demonstrate this.


    As people in post-Christian societies no longer believe that anything is more important than their personal pleasure and convenience, they no longer want to have children, and post-Christian nations begin to die out. They no longer want to fight for their countries or for their civilisation as a whole. They lost respect for their ancestors. They have turned into a sort of senile children, superficial, short-sighted, avid for sweets and bright-coloured toys, ready to believe any stupid idea if it flatters them and are totally indifferent to the really serious things.

    Really? Wow- sounds like the end of Western civ is at hand. So Europeans no longer want to have children? Really? That would explain high abortion rates as in white Russia where 2 out of every 3 white kids are aborted per several studies, but that still leaves an awful lot of Europeans that WANT to have kids. And your description of Europeans sounds like the many descriptions of childlike African "natives."


    Therefore, the post-Christian civilisation has become weaker than other civilisations, more cruel and primitive, but still believing in something transcendental. People of non-Christian civilisations still have something to die for. Post-Christians have nothing to die for and only a bit of frivolous entertainment to live for. They are doomed.

    Cue ominous musiks.. But what is a "conscious" guy like yourself doing to stave off this decline in European civ as Corvinus often asks? Are you producing more white kids to make up the shortfall? Have you gone to the churches and by fiery exhortation turned the white wicked from the error of their ways? And aside from the fact that there was plenty of cruelty and primitivism in Europe BEFORE Christianity, what are you doing to stem the tide of "doom"? Have you gone out to the football pitches and preached robustly to draw the cruel and primitive white hooligans back from the brink for instance?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Your theory is wonderful but as usual NOTHING is as it appears.
    Have you heard of Omar Khadr who was BORN in Canada just as Conrad Black and Brenda Martin were?
    Omar’s problem was that he was just a technical Canadian instead of Old Stock or Pure Laine, which was enough for regime of original invaders not to lift a finger in order to help him.
    Today’s NA has very little in common with NA before the fall of USSR, it actually FEELS much worse and way less free than USSR ever did.

    Read MoreYour theory is wonderful but as usual NOTHING is as it appears. Have you heard of Omar Khadr who was BORN in Canada just as Conrad Black and Brenda Martin were? Omar's problem was that he was just a technical Canadian instead of Old Stock or Pure Laine, which was enough for regime of original invaders not to lift a finger in order to help him. Today's NA has very little in common with NA before the fall of USSR, it actually FEELS much worse and way less free than USSR ever did.
    • Replies: @Grandpa Charlie

    "Today’s NA has very little in common with NA before the fall of USSR, it actually FEELS much worse and way less free than USSR ever did." -- proud_Srbin
     
    It's hard for me to credit generalizations about all of NA (North America), including Mexico(?), and I think that the connection with the fall of the USSR is coincidental. What made, and continues to make, all the difference as to how it "FEELS" less free in USA is the USA PATRIOT Act and the associated national consciousness ... and various changes brought about during the Bush-Cheney administration.
    , @anon
    Those original settlers, - not 'invaders' - built a great country that the Khadr's of the third world have been inviting themselves to for decades now. Btw, Khadr walked away with a cool 10 million bucks.Those original settlers, - not 'invaders' - built a great country that the Khadr's of the third world have been inviting themselves to for decades now. Btw, Khadr walked away with a cool 10 million bucks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Realist says:
    @Drapetomaniac
    Haitiholes can be naturally occurring or just the backwards evolution of a society. They can happen anywhere - all you need is an appropriate number of people with a suitably primitive mindset. Check out Detroit.Haitiholes can be naturally occurring or just the backwards evolution of a society. They can happen anywhere - all you need is an appropriate number of people with a suitably primitive mindset. Check out Detroit.

    ….and of course low IQ

    Read More....and of course low IQ
    • Replies: @SMK
    Reading this article, somewhat abstruse and obscurantist, it appears that Ilana agrees with the left and "cucks" and neocons that culture is everything, at least in regard to race as opposed to sex; that blacks and whites are exactly the same apart from skin color and other superficial characteristics; that race "beneath the skin" is a "artificial social construct." No mention of IQ and other genetic racial group differences.

    Biology preceded culture. Culture is what humans, of all races, make of their biology. Biology created and informs culture. The immutably distinct biology and average IQ of Negros created and informs and sustains the cultures of Haiti and Sub-Saharan Africa, with obvious cultural variations, and in the U.S., the cultures of Detroit, St. Louis, Baltimore, Memphis, New Orleans, Birmingham, etc.Reading this article, somewhat abstruse and obscurantist, it appears that Ilana agrees with the left and "cucks" and neocons that culture is everything, at least in regard to race as opposed to sex; that blacks and whites are exactly the same apart from skin color and other superficial characteristics; that race "beneath the skin" is a "artificial social construct." No mention of IQ and other genetic racial group differences.

    Biology preceded culture. Culture is what humans, of all races, make of their biology. Biology created and informs culture. The immutably distinct biology and average IQ of Negros created and informs and sustains the cultures of Haiti and Sub-Saharan Africa, with obvious cultural variations, and in the U.S., the cultures of Detroit, St. Louis, Baltimore, Memphis, New Orleans, Birmingham, etc.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. I attended one of the larger South African universities in the 90s. I was always struck by how the black students always studied in groups, whilst the white students didn’t. This probably makes sense if you are studying the soft sciences. In my experience, no amount of group effort will help you figure out the finer points of a Fourier transform. In the hard sciences you tend to sink or swim on your own merits.

    The black students lobbied for writing the exams in a group setting. After all, they studied together and colloborated on the course work, so logically they should be allowed to do the exam together. The collectivist nature of this thinking is not conducive to high-functioning individual contributions to society.

    I have taken a couple of part-time college courses too, which frequently involve group assignments. Even at a postgraduate level (where you might expect people to be a little maturer) these assignments are a blessing for the lazy and a scourge for the diligent. Invariably one person does nothing, a few people do an average amount and one person breaks their back. Pretty much society in a nutshell.

    Read MoreI attended one of the larger South African universities in the 90s. I was always struck by how the black students always studied in groups, whilst the white students didn't. This probably makes sense if you are studying the soft sciences. In my experience, no amount of group effort will help you figure out the finer points of a Fourier transform. In the hard sciences you tend to sink or swim on your own merits. The black students lobbied for writing the exams in a group setting. After all, they studied together and colloborated on the course work, so logically they should be allowed to do the exam together. The collectivist nature of this thinking is not conducive to high-functioning individual contributions to society. I have taken a couple of part-time college courses too, which frequently involve group assignments. Even at a postgraduate level (where you might expect people to be a little maturer) these assignments are a blessing for the lazy and a scourge for the diligent. Invariably one person does nothing, a few people do an average amount and one person breaks their back. Pretty much society in a nutshell.
    • Replies: @Grandpa Charlie

    "The black students lobbied for writing the exams in a group setting. After all, they studied together and colloborated on the course work, so logically they should be allowed to do the exam together." -- The King is A Fink
     
    Not at all limited to South Africa or to Africa or to Africans or to Blacks, this idea goes back to Soviet pedagogy-- in particular to Vygotsky and to Makarenko. It's mainly a pedagogic theory but in some respects it seems almost to rise (or fall) to a metaphysical theory when it postulates that not only all learning but all knowledge is social. Anyway, here in USA, it's very common, and probably not always pernicious, known as the practice of "group learning." IMHO, it's one of those things where the "Devil is in the details" -- how it's done and the intelligence and good sense of teachers responsible.

    Anyway, you can always get a feisty argument going among educators on this topic.

    It is astounding that this would be pushed to the extreme of examinations (and why not grades?) in universities. Anything is possible these days.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. What does a Sarf Efrican libtard do when immutable Chosenite racial destructiveness shitholes yet another sanctuary country, in this case the United States of America?

    High-tail it for New Zealand, of course.

    Read MoreWhat does a Sarf Efrican libtard do when immutable Chosenite racial destructiveness shitholes yet another sanctuary country, in this case the United States of America? High-tail it for New Zealand, of course.
    • Agree: druid
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  15. “Does “the country” create the man or does the man make the country?”

    Clearly, the answer is both, the relationship is a dialectical one.

    Read More"Does “the country” create the man or does the man make the country?" Clearly, the answer is both, the relationship is a dialectical one.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  16. @anon
    If Haiti was populated by Japanese people or Scandinavians, instead of black Africans, it would be a very different place indeed.If Haiti was populated by Japanese people or Scandinavians, instead of black Africans, it would be a very different place indeed.

    It would be enlightening to find out the punishment Haitians paid for being the FIRST blacks to rise up against slavery.
    It wasn’t “God” who committed genocide.
    Dominicans willingness to submit and serve self-appointed masters saved them.

    Read MoreIt would be enlightening to find out the punishment Haitians paid for being the FIRST blacks to rise up against slavery. It wasn't "God" who committed genocide. Dominicans willingness to submit and serve self-appointed masters saved them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Renoman says:

    There’s something very wrong with people who don’t pick up garbage.

    Read MoreThere's something very wrong with people who don't pick up garbage.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    a factor in Zimbabwe’s demise

    Black smallhold farmers have been able to grow as much tobacco as the white landowners.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  19. Greg Bacon says: • Website

    During Christmas week, Trump pardoned five megabanks for rampant fraud and corruption, which most haven’t heard about.
    Yet the Net blows up over some sh*tty comment. That’s how the bankers—along with their MSM sheep herders–keep people enslaved, through stupidity, ignorance and petty distractions that us GOYIM have been trained to get upset about, and which really don’t mean doodly-squat.

    http://thefreethoughtproject.com/trump-pardoned-megabanks-owes-millions-rampant-fraud-corruption/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    America is a country that has a beggar on every street corner, I still think Trump was being honest. Freudian slip.America is a country that has a beggar on every street corner, I still think Trump was being honest. Freudian slip.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. ‘Shithole Countries’: What Makes a Country? the Place or the People?

    Either or both.

    A picture speaks a thousand words. In this case it sez it all.

    Hardly a black face in the bunch and you can call it a Zio-shithole.

    Read More
    • Agree: Carroll Price
    • Replies: @Da Wei
    jacques sheete,

    As Chester A. Riley would say: "What a revoltin' development this is!"

    I found the Douglas Reed site. Engrossing. Thank you.jacques sheete,

    As Chester A. Riley would say: "What a revoltin' development this is!"

    I found the Douglas Reed site. Engrossing. Thank you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. tjm says:

    Trump makes these statements to just distract US. Trump is about to grant amnesty and destroy our social security and our nation.

    They say “only Nixon could go to China”, in that Nixon, a “hawk”, could be trusted, in the same way, The Zionist media and political system, as worked very hard to paint Trump as a “racist”, xenophobe, he is anything but.

    The powers that be painted Chump as an “white supremacist”, to give him cover to pass amnesty.

    Trumps owners, the Zionist Jews want amnesty for illegal Latinos, almost as much as they want war with Iran.

    The Zionist own washington, but they can’t act unilaterally, less they show the American people who is truly in control. So, the zionist use manipulation, divide and conquer to distract us, and put up false narratives, to give them cover, as they destroy America.

    Read MoreTrump makes these statements to just distract US. Trump is about to grant amnesty and destroy our social security and our nation. They say "only Nixon could go to China", in that Nixon, a "hawk", could be trusted, in the same way, The Zionist media and political system, as worked very hard to paint Trump as a "racist", xenophobe, he is anything but. The powers that be painted Chump as an "white supremacist", to give him cover to pass amnesty. Trumps owners, the Zionist Jews want amnesty for illegal Latinos, almost as much as they want war with Iran. The Zionist own washington, but they can't act unilaterally, less they show the American people who is truly in control. So, the zionist use manipulation, divide and conquer to distract us, and put up false narratives, to give them cover, as they destroy America.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  22. tjm says:
    @anon
    If Haiti was populated by Japanese people or Scandinavians, instead of black Africans, it would be a very different place indeed.If Haiti was populated by Japanese people or Scandinavians, instead of black Africans, it would be a very different place indeed.

    And who put blacks there??????????

    The zionists have been spreading the seeds of our destruction for centuries.

    Read MoreAnd who put blacks there?????????? The zionists have been spreading the seeds of our destruction for centuries.
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    "Centuries"???? When do you think Zionism became more than a dream?"Centuries"???? When do you think Zionism became more than a dream?
    , @Wally
    here we go:

    "African chiefs urged to apologise for slave trade
    Nigerian civil rights group says tribal leaders' ancestors sold people to slavers and should say sorry""
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/nov/18/africans-apologise-slave-trade
    "African chiefs were the ones waging war on each other and capturing their own people and selling them. If anyone should apologise it should be the African chiefs. We still have those traitors here even today."

    Black researcher, Dr. Tony Martin, let's us know who the prime sellers & owners of slaves really were, Jews.
    Dr. Tony Martin - The Jewish Role in the African Slave Trade

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ut7I75Q_-zA

    www.codoh.comhere we go:

    "African chiefs urged to apologise for slave trade
    Nigerian civil rights group says tribal leaders' ancestors sold people to slavers and should say sorry""
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/nov/18/africans-apologise-slave-trade
    "African chiefs were the ones waging war on each other and capturing their own people and selling them. If anyone should apologise it should be the African chiefs. We still have those traitors here even today."

    Black researcher, Dr. Tony Martin, let's us know who the prime sellers & owners of slaves really were, Jews.
    Dr. Tony Martin - The Jewish Role in the African Slave Trade

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ut7I75Q_-zA

    www.codoh.com
    , @jacques sheete

    The zionists have been spreading the seeds of our destruction for centuries.
     
    For about 25 of them, in fact, although they weren't always called Zionists or Communists. Both are modern names given to a hostile, radical, extremist, bunch of emotional infants who've been pissed at the world and are bent on destruction via lies, theft, terror and murder.


    Zios and Commies are but the two horns on a modern day moloch. But never mind, these cats are "Chosen" and besides, they're all "high IQ."

    We're just envious, is all! ;)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Jake says:

    The answer to the question in the title used to be obvious. But today, after so much Leftist brain-washing – most people would answer either incorrectly or ambiguously.

    Take every single person who is at least one quarter black out of Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, Cuba, and Jamaica, and send them all to the US, to be replaced in the Caribbean by the same number of people, all US citizens: three-quraters of them non-rich white Gentiles and one quarter full Mexican of the church-going type. What would be the end result?

    America’s decline would accelerate, and the Caribbean would blossom.

    Read MoreThe answer to the question in the title used to be obvious. But today, after so much Leftist brain-washing - most people would answer either incorrectly or ambiguously. Take every single person who is at least one quarter black out of Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, Cuba, and Jamaica, and send them all to the US, to be replaced in the Caribbean by the same number of people, all US citizens: three-quraters of them non-rich white Gentiles and one quarter full Mexican of the church-going type. What would be the end result? America's decline would accelerate, and the Caribbean would blossom.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  24. bjondo says:

    [If a commenter totally ignores proper capitalization, punctuation, grammar, and spelling, his comments may not be published.]

    sh*tholes are created and maintained
    by the brits (bringers of misery), french, spanish,
    and amurderkens.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bjondo
    "Amurderkans" not "amurderkens".
    Thank you.
    I will send my Haitian secretary to school or back to Haiti."Amurderkans" not "amurderkens".
    Thank you.
    I will send my Haitian secretary to school or back to Haiti.
    , @bjondo

    If a commenter totally ignores proper capitalization, punctuation, grammar, and spelling, his comments may not be published.]

     

    Question: is this comment by the article author or site administrator?
    , @Malla

    sh*tholes are created and maintained by the brits (bringers of misery), french,
     
    Yes that explains HongKong.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Greg Bacon
    During Christmas week, Trump pardoned five megabanks for rampant fraud and corruption, which most haven't heard about.
    Yet the Net blows up over some sh*tty comment. That's how the bankers---along with their MSM sheep herders--keep people enslaved, through stupidity, ignorance and petty distractions that us GOYIM have been trained to get upset about, and which really don't mean doodly-squat.

    http://thefreethoughtproject.com/trump-pardoned-megabanks-owes-millions-rampant-fraud-corruption/

    America is a country that has a beggar on every street corner, I still think Trump was being honest. Freudian slip.

    Read MoreAmerica is a country that has a beggar on every street corner, I still think Trump was being honest. Freudian slip.
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    America is a country that has a beggar on every street corner...
     
    And in every position of power.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. wayfarer says:

    Reputation is what men and women think of us. Character is what God and angels know of us. – Thomas Paine

    Many urban streets in this world are hallowed by anonymous angels and divine providence.

    “Rihanna Stay” cover by Allie Sherlock.

    “Dusk Till Dawn” cover by Allie Sherlock.

    …..

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla
    More of them angels

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TW5DIDlr2FYMore of them angels

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TW5DIDlr2FY
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. @tjm
    And who put blacks there??????????

    The zionists have been spreading the seeds of our destruction for centuries.And who put blacks there??????????

    The zionists have been spreading the seeds of our destruction for centuries.

    “Centuries”???? When do you think Zionism became more than a dream?

    Read More"Centuries"???? When do you think Zionism became more than a dream?
    • Replies: @tjm
    From their inception, even the Bible is likely filled with Zionist lies.

    You do get Israel is named in the Bible, and is the basis for Zionism, don't you...

    Or can you add more to the discussion than idiotic condescension, moronFrom their inception, even the Bible is likely filled with Zionist lies.

    You do get Israel is named in the Bible, and is the basis for Zionism, don't you...

    Or can you add more to the discussion than idiotic condescension, moron
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. TG says:

    “The aggregate action of many human beings acting in concert makes or breaks a society.”

    Agreed. And the primary aggregate action is if people have more children than they can support, or not.

    Japan industrialized faster than any other major nation in history. Outside of the fantasy neoliberal economic texts, this is the best that flesh and blood human beings have ever done. But with the Japanese government pushing for sustained high fertility rates, it wasn’t fast enough. At the eve of WWII Japan was desperately poor, wracked by violence, with many Japanese desperate to emigrate. Japan was a shithole country. Then, in the wreckage of WWII, amidst dire poverty, the Japanese fertility rate fell, and this time the government didn’t interfere. Then, and only then, did the Japanese develop prosperity. Even after nearly 20 years of gross financial mismanagement, Japan remains one of the most peaceful and prosperous societies ever. Very much not a shithole country.

    What changed was not the fundamental nature of the Japanese people, but the demographics. When there are too many people too quickly, you get poverty, and violence and corruption and zero-sum thinking etc. When population growth is more moderate, even modest efforts can in time compound to great wealth, and nothing creates social harmony more than abundant steady high paying work for the average person.

    But we can’t talk about this, because the rich like low wages, and one person’t shithole is another’s profitable supply of ‘affordable labor costs.’ So we turn a blind eye to the real causes of shithole countries. And as third-world immigration boosts our population ever higher, it can happen here.

    Read More"The aggregate action of many human beings acting in concert makes or breaks a society." Agreed. And the primary aggregate action is if people have more children than they can support, or not. Japan industrialized faster than any other major nation in history. Outside of the fantasy neoliberal economic texts, this is the best that flesh and blood human beings have ever done. But with the Japanese government pushing for sustained high fertility rates, it wasn't fast enough. At the eve of WWII Japan was desperately poor, wracked by violence, with many Japanese desperate to emigrate. Japan was a shithole country. Then, in the wreckage of WWII, amidst dire poverty, the Japanese fertility rate fell, and this time the government didn't interfere. Then, and only then, did the Japanese develop prosperity. Even after nearly 20 years of gross financial mismanagement, Japan remains one of the most peaceful and prosperous societies ever. Very much not a shithole country. What changed was not the fundamental nature of the Japanese people, but the demographics. When there are too many people too quickly, you get poverty, and violence and corruption and zero-sum thinking etc. When population growth is more moderate, even modest efforts can in time compound to great wealth, and nothing creates social harmony more than abundant steady high paying work for the average person. But we can't talk about this, because the rich like low wages, and one person't shithole is another's profitable supply of 'affordable labor costs.' So we turn a blind eye to the real causes of shithole countries. And as third-world immigration boosts our population ever higher, it can happen here.
    • Replies: @Grandpa Charlie

    "But we can’t talk about this [excessive and unsustainable fertility rates], because the rich like low wages, and one person’s shithole is another’s profitable supply of ‘affordable labor costs.’ So we turn a blind eye to the real causes of shithole countries. And as third-world immigration boosts our population ever higher, it can happen here." -- TG
     
    But why can't we talk about it here at Unz Review? Well, we can and do (sometimes). Yet even here at UR, there are some who just can't deal with the reality of over-population and, in denial, promote "pro-life" views and sentiments, with totally religious fervor.

    Thank you, TG, for an excellent comment and an excellent argument on a subject that should receive much more attention than it doea.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. bjondo says:
    @bjondo
    [If a commenter totally ignores proper capitalization, punctuation, grammar, and spelling, his comments may not be published.]

    sh*tholes are created and maintained
    by the brits (bringers of misery), french, spanish,
    and amurderkens.

    “Amurderkans” not “amurderkens”.
    Thank you.
    I will send my Haitian secretary to school or back to Haiti.

    Read More"Amurderkans" not "amurderkens". Thank you. I will send my Haitian secretary to school or back to Haiti.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. von Braun says:

    “What makes a country: the place or the people?” It’s an interesting question to ponder, and one I personally believe has already been answered by genetics. I don’t want to muck in the mud of scientific studies, but I have pondered the question of outward projections of mental inheritance; does IQ and natural subservience lead to stable civilizations? I’ve heard quite a bit of talk in MSM circles that these shithole countries are oppressed and held back due to “corruption”, and “white colonization.” I think it’s time to bring a few facts to light, in order to address what I see as more mental gymnastics.

    The MSM has just about fallen over itself to provide examples of “great people” that happen to have come from Haiti, El Salvador, or any of these other detestable societies. Yet, if we take a look, the average IQs of these places are 67 and 80, respectfully. This means that some people are incredibly stupid, and others are ‘genius level’ (note, their genius is the average IQ of a European liberal arts student). On to my point, is a poor economy, poor planning, and corrupt leaders really at fault for the embarrassing and atrocious state of many of these places? If anyone is to look at China, the USSR, Rome, Greece, or even the U.S., they can find a rich history of corruption and poor choices. Caesar, Putin, and probably many U.S. presidents have used bribery, forced coercion, and intimidation to achieve results. For a concrete example, take a look at the 2008 election of Obama; the Democratic party and the New Black Panther part were intimidating blacks and Latinos into voting the “correct” way. Yet, out of the examples I have listed, not many in their right mind could possibly question the immense contribution to scientific progress that these respective societies have made. Greece heavily contributed to western thought and mathematics, China to science and religion, the U.S. to computer technology, and the USSR was the first nation to get a man into space. Even a fully communist society, the USSR, was able to get a man into space, and create working, perilous nuclear technology. What excuse does Venezuela, Haiti, African countries, Samoa, or any other non-white country have?

    What becomes clear through reflection, is that if eliminating corruption is the barrier to a progressive, rich society, then no society in the history of the world should have ever become progressive. It seems as if the people themselves, and not the government, create society; the projection of IQ, subservience, philosophical understanding, and consequence understanding is what creates a working, functioning society. Rome may have been corrupt, maybe even detestable to live in, yet it still conquered land, provided for the people, and adapted to the changing world. The absolute truth of the matter is that non-white non-asian people are dumb, and lack the foresight to grasp future consequences. Their own leaders are similar, fools who can speak well, but cannot actually lead or adapt. It is not that these people are held back, it is that they themselves cannot move forward, and cannot better themselves. To allow these people into white societies is suicide; the advancements in technology are such that low-skilled labor is becoming obsolete. Science, technology, and computer programming, as well as business, are the future. And those who cannot get it right, even when handed the book on running a society (Haiti), or those that have more criminals that civilians (Mexico), will be a burden, a white man’s burden.

    Read More"What makes a country: the place or the people?" It's an interesting question to ponder, and one I personally believe has already been answered by genetics. I don't want to muck in the mud of scientific studies, but I have pondered the question of outward projections of mental inheritance; does IQ and natural subservience lead to stable civilizations? I've heard quite a bit of talk in MSM circles that these shithole countries are oppressed and held back due to "corruption", and "white colonization." I think it's time to bring a few facts to light, in order to address what I see as more mental gymnastics. The MSM has just about fallen over itself to provide examples of "great people" that happen to have come from Haiti, El Salvador, or any of these other detestable societies. Yet, if we take a look, the average IQs of these places are 67 and 80, respectfully. This means that some people are incredibly stupid, and others are 'genius level' (note, their genius is the average IQ of a European liberal arts student). On to my point, is a poor economy, poor planning, and corrupt leaders really at fault for the embarrassing and atrocious state of many of these places? If anyone is to look at China, the USSR, Rome, Greece, or even the U.S., they can find a rich history of corruption and poor choices. Caesar, Putin, and probably many U.S. presidents have used bribery, forced coercion, and intimidation to achieve results. For a concrete example, take a look at the 2008 election of Obama; the Democratic party and the New Black Panther part were intimidating blacks and Latinos into voting the "correct" way. Yet, out of the examples I have listed, not many in their right mind could possibly question the immense contribution to scientific progress that these respective societies have made. Greece heavily contributed to western thought and mathematics, China to science and religion, the U.S. to computer technology, and the USSR was the first nation to get a man into space. Even a fully communist society, the USSR, was able to get a man into space, and create working, perilous nuclear technology. What excuse does Venezuela, Haiti, African countries, Samoa, or any other non-white country have? What becomes clear through reflection, is that if eliminating corruption is the barrier to a progressive, rich society, then no society in the history of the world should have ever become progressive. It seems as if the people themselves, and not the government, create society; the projection of IQ, subservience, philosophical understanding, and consequence understanding is what creates a working, functioning society. Rome may have been corrupt, maybe even detestable to live in, yet it still conquered land, provided for the people, and adapted to the changing world. The absolute truth of the matter is that non-white non-asian people are dumb, and lack the foresight to grasp future consequences. Their own leaders are similar, fools who can speak well, but cannot actually lead or adapt. It is not that these people are held back, it is that they themselves cannot move forward, and cannot better themselves. To allow these people into white societies is suicide; the advancements in technology are such that low-skilled labor is becoming obsolete. Science, technology, and computer programming, as well as business, are the future. And those who cannot get it right, even when handed the book on running a society (Haiti), or those that have more criminals that civilians (Mexico), will be a burden, a white man's burden.
    • Agree: SMK
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  31. bjondo says:
    @bjondo
    [If a commenter totally ignores proper capitalization, punctuation, grammar, and spelling, his comments may not be published.]

    sh*tholes are created and maintained
    by the brits (bringers of misery), french, spanish,
    and amurderkens.

    If a commenter totally ignores proper capitalization, punctuation, grammar, and spelling, his comments may not be published.]

    Question: is this comment by the article author or site administrator?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Does it matter who the gate keeper is? It’s someone else’s sandbox, you’re only allowed to play if you follow the rules.

    Peace.Does it matter who the gate keeper is? It’s someone else’s sandbox, you’re only allowed to play if you follow the rules.

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. Charles says:
    @jilles dykstra
    " This much can be said: The West is what it is due to human capital—people of superior ideas and abilities, capable of innovation, exploration, science, philosophy. "

    A sobering book is
    Felipe Fernández-Armesto, ‘Civilisations’, London, 2000
    Western superior civilisation reduced to the direction in which the earth turns, the unique North Sea, and the grass highway from Mongolia to the Belgian coast.
    Population pressure.

    It reminds me of
    William H. Calvin, 'De opkomst van het intellect, Een reis naar de ijstijd', Amsterdam 1994 (The Ascent of Mind. Ice Climates and the Evolution of Intelligence', 1990).
    Necessity, in order to survive.

    And why and how was it possible that this superior west stood still, scientifically, for some 1600 years, from the year 1 to 1600 ?
    The question what makes a country reminds me of 'did history make Napoleon, or did Napoleon make history ?'.
    Historians still debate the last question." This much can be said: The West is what it is due to human capital—people of superior ideas and abilities, capable of innovation, exploration, science, philosophy. "

    A sobering book is
    Felipe Fernández-Armesto, ‘Civilisations’, London, 2000
    Western superior civilisation reduced to the direction in which the earth turns, the unique North Sea, and the grass highway from Mongolia to the Belgian coast.
    Population pressure.

    It reminds me of
    William H. Calvin, 'De opkomst van het intellect, Een reis naar de ijstijd', Amsterdam 1994 (The Ascent of Mind. Ice Climates and the Evolution of Intelligence', 1990).
    Necessity, in order to survive.

    And why and how was it possible that this superior west stood still, scientifically, for some 1600 years, from the year 1 to 1600 ?
    The question what makes a country reminds me of 'did history make Napoleon, or did Napoleon make history ?'.
    Historians still debate the last question.

    And why and how was it possible that this superior west stood still, scientifically, for some 1600 years, from the year 1 to 1600 ?

    Basically, Islam.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bjondo
    He's a fool.He's a fool.
    , @jilles dykstra
    Even around 1870 the pope stated that science without church guidance was not allowedEven around 1870 the pope stated that science without church guidance was not allowed
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Gordo says:

    If the race is good, the place is good.

    Ralph Waldo Emerson

    Read MoreIf the race is good, the place is good. Ralph Waldo Emerson
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  34. SMK says: • Website
    @Realist
    ....and of course low IQ....and of course low IQ

    Reading this article, somewhat abstruse and obscurantist, it appears that Ilana agrees with the left and “cucks” and neocons that culture is everything, at least in regard to race as opposed to sex; that blacks and whites are exactly the same apart from skin color and other superficial characteristics; that race “beneath the skin” is a “artificial social construct.” No mention of IQ and other genetic racial group differences.

    Biology preceded culture. Culture is what humans, of all races, make of their biology. Biology created and informs culture. The immutably distinct biology and average IQ of Negros created and informs and sustains the cultures of Haiti and Sub-Saharan Africa, with obvious cultural variations, and in the U.S., the cultures of Detroit, St. Louis, Baltimore, Memphis, New Orleans, Birmingham, etc.

    Read MoreReading this article, somewhat abstruse and obscurantist, it appears that Ilana agrees with the left and "cucks" and neocons that culture is everything, at least in regard to race as opposed to sex; that blacks and whites are exactly the same apart from skin color and other superficial characteristics; that race "beneath the skin" is a "artificial social construct." No mention of IQ and other genetic racial group differences. Biology preceded culture. Culture is what humans, of all races, make of their biology. Biology created and informs culture. The immutably distinct biology and average IQ of Negros created and informs and sustains the cultures of Haiti and Sub-Saharan Africa, with obvious cultural variations, and in the U.S., the cultures of Detroit, St. Louis, Baltimore, Memphis, New Orleans, Birmingham, etc.
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

    Reading this article, somewhat abstruse and obscurantist, it appears that Ilana agrees with the left and “cucks” and neocons that culture is everything, at least in regard to race as opposed to sex; that blacks and whites are exactly the same apart from skin color and other superficial characteristics; that race “beneath the skin” is a “artificial social construct.” No mention of IQ and other genetic racial group differences.
     
    No, that's not her opinion. She was, I think, just too cautious to dot all i's & cross all t's.
    https://whitelocust.wordpress.com/morality-and-abstract-thinking-how-africans-may-differ-from-westerners/
    .....................
    Time is another abstract concept with which Africans seem to have difficulties. I began to wonder about this in 1998. Several Africans drove up in a car and parked right in front of mine, blocking it. “Hey,” I said, “you can’t park here.” “Oh, are you about to leave?” they asked in a perfectly polite and friendly way. “No,” I said, “but I might later. Park over there”—and they did.

    While the possibility that I might want to leave later was obvious to me, their thinking seemed to encompass only the here and now: “If you’re leaving right now we understand, but otherwise, what’s the problem?” I had other such encounters and the key question always seemed to be, “Are you leaving now?” The future, after all, does not exist. It will exist, but doesn’t exist now. People who have difficulty thinking of things that do not exist will ipso facto have difficulty thinking about the future.

    https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2015/07/01/dangerous-science-clues-that-empathic-ability-varies-by-race/
    ..........
    Mic dropped. 50% of white Canadians have an empathy-boosting genetic variant which only 10% of black Rwandans possess.
    , @Twodees Partain
    I read the same article that you did, and didn't arrive at the same conclusion. Ms. Mercer was quoting a few other people in order to illustrate her points, which were not the same as those you claim she was making.

    I'm aware that her view doesn't support your theory, but she doesn't say that race is an artificial construct. Being from South Africa, if she held the view you ascribe to her, she would have stayed on there and we probably would have never heard of her.

    I think that on Amazon's listing page for her book, "Into the Cannibals' Pot" there's an option to read some of the text as a sample. If you'll do that, you might get a better understanding of her views.

    http://amzn.to/2d2mhu1I read the same article that you did, and didn't arrive at the same conclusion. Ms. Mercer was quoting a few other people in order to illustrate her points, which were not the same as those you claim she was making.

    I'm aware that her view doesn't support your theory, but she doesn't say that race is an artificial construct. Being from South Africa, if she held the view you ascribe to her, she would have stayed on there and we probably would have never heard of her.

    I think that on Amazon's listing page for her book, "Into the Cannibals' Pot" there's an option to read some of the text as a sample. If you'll do that, you might get a better understanding of her views.

    http://amzn.to/2d2mhu1
    , @Realist
    That is true, but it was implied from her comments.That is true, but it was implied from her comments.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Malla says:
    @Biff
    During the 1980’s Iraq was a nice place.
    Prior to 2011 Tripoli was the nicest city in all of Africa.
    Prior to 1978 Westerners could freely travel about in Afghanistan(though no country to brag about, but I wouldn’t dare to transverse it today)
    Prior to 1492 the island where Haiti resides was a paradise.


    For better or for worse Men do make the country.During the 1980’s Iraq was a nice place.
    Prior to 2011 Tripoli was the nicest city in all of Africa.
    Prior to 1978 Westerners could freely travel about in Afghanistan(though no country to brag about, but I wouldn’t dare to transverse it today)
    Prior to 1492 the island where Haiti resides was a paradise.


    For better or for worse Men do make the country.

    During the 1980’s Iraq was a nice place.

    Was it really?

    Yeah it was better than what we got after the U.S. invasion, no doubt about that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla
    In the beginning part of the video, he says the truth about the Third World. In the third world IQ/ intelligence is based on ripping others off. If you ripp others off you are smart, you are praised. Issac Newton would be considered an idiot in the streets of the third world (when in reality they are the idiots).In the beginning part of the video, he says the truth about the Third World. In the third world IQ/ intelligence is based on ripping others off. If you ripp others off you are smart, you are praised. Issac Newton would be considered an idiot in the streets of the third world (when in reality they are the idiots).
    , @Biff
    Wow! Nice vid, thanks for sharing.
    One thing that caught my ear was the idea of Iraqi’s not wanting to fix anything, and I have two theory’s that are probably both crap, but here goes:
    Environmental conditions - I now live in South East Asia, coming from the North American Rockies - here I have noticed some of my best stainless steel tools gum up and become corroded in the coastal/tropical environment I live. I can’t imagine what kind effect the Middle East environment has on machinery.

    Or

    Some people just suck at fixing things so they dont even try - my brother comes to mind.Wow! Nice vid, thanks for sharing.
    One thing that caught my ear was the idea of Iraqi’s not wanting to fix anything, and I have two theory’s that are probably both crap, but here goes:
    Environmental conditions - I now live in South East Asia, coming from the North American Rockies - here I have noticed some of my best stainless steel tools gum up and become corroded in the coastal/tropical environment I live. I can’t imagine what kind effect the Middle East environment has on machinery.

    Or

    Some people just suck at fixing things so they dont even try - my brother comes to mind.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. I know it (s_ithole) when I see it and it usually has a MLK boulevard sign in it somewhere.

    Read MoreI know it (s_ithole) when I see it and it usually has a MLK boulevard sign in it somewhere.
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    I know it (s_ithole) when I see it and it usually has a MLK boulevard sign in it somewhere.
     
    When will we have streets named for the Federal Reserve?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @SMK
    Reading this article, somewhat abstruse and obscurantist, it appears that Ilana agrees with the left and "cucks" and neocons that culture is everything, at least in regard to race as opposed to sex; that blacks and whites are exactly the same apart from skin color and other superficial characteristics; that race "beneath the skin" is a "artificial social construct." No mention of IQ and other genetic racial group differences.

    Biology preceded culture. Culture is what humans, of all races, make of their biology. Biology created and informs culture. The immutably distinct biology and average IQ of Negros created and informs and sustains the cultures of Haiti and Sub-Saharan Africa, with obvious cultural variations, and in the U.S., the cultures of Detroit, St. Louis, Baltimore, Memphis, New Orleans, Birmingham, etc.Reading this article, somewhat abstruse and obscurantist, it appears that Ilana agrees with the left and "cucks" and neocons that culture is everything, at least in regard to race as opposed to sex; that blacks and whites are exactly the same apart from skin color and other superficial characteristics; that race "beneath the skin" is a "artificial social construct." No mention of IQ and other genetic racial group differences.

    Biology preceded culture. Culture is what humans, of all races, make of their biology. Biology created and informs culture. The immutably distinct biology and average IQ of Negros created and informs and sustains the cultures of Haiti and Sub-Saharan Africa, with obvious cultural variations, and in the U.S., the cultures of Detroit, St. Louis, Baltimore, Memphis, New Orleans, Birmingham, etc.

    Reading this article, somewhat abstruse and obscurantist, it appears that Ilana agrees with the left and “cucks” and neocons that culture is everything, at least in regard to race as opposed to sex; that blacks and whites are exactly the same apart from skin color and other superficial characteristics; that race “beneath the skin” is a “artificial social construct.” No mention of IQ and other genetic racial group differences.

    No, that’s not her opinion. She was, I think, just too cautious to dot all i’s & cross all t’s.

    https://whitelocust.wordpress.com/morality-and-abstract-thinking-how-africans-may-differ-from-westerners/

    …………………
    Time is another abstract concept with which Africans seem to have difficulties. I began to wonder about this in 1998. Several Africans drove up in a car and parked right in front of mine, blocking it. “Hey,” I said, “you can’t park here.” “Oh, are you about to leave?” they asked in a perfectly polite and friendly way. “No,” I said, “but I might later. Park over there”—and they did.

    While the possibility that I might want to leave later was obvious to me, their thinking seemed to encompass only the here and now: “If you’re leaving right now we understand, but otherwise, what’s the problem?” I had other such encounters and the key question always seemed to be, “Are you leaving now?” The future, after all, does not exist. It will exist, but doesn’t exist now. People who have difficulty thinking of things that do not exist will ipso facto have difficulty thinking about the future.

    https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2015/07/01/dangerous-science-clues-that-empathic-ability-varies-by-race/

    ……….
    Mic dropped. 50% of white Canadians have an empathy-boosting genetic variant which only 10% of black Rwandans possess.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EnriqqueCardovaa
    Time is another abstract concept with which Africans seem to have difficulties. I began to wonder about this in 1998. Several Africans drove up in a car and parked right in front of mine, blocking it. “Hey,” I said, “you can’t park here.” “Oh, are you about to leave?” they asked in a perfectly polite and friendly way. “No,” I said, “but I might later. Park over there”—and they did.

    LOL. Interestingly, conservative author Thomas Sowell has long shown that "time perspective differences" are no monopoly of Africans. The northern European white Irish, as well as the northern European denizens of British "cracker culture" that settled large parts of the south and piedmont zone, are notorious for "time perspective differences" historically. And among the values these white "role models" have bequeathed are aversion to work, proneness to violence, sexual promiscuity, lack of entrepreneurship, reckless search for excitement, and lively music and dance. (Sowell 2005- Black Rednecks, White Liberals)


    Empathy? So white people are supposed to have all this nice, virtuous empathy?
    https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2015/07/01/dangerous-science-clues-that-empathic-ability-varies-byrace


    Really? Perhaps this is why white people have the highest abortion rates in the world (2 out of 3 white babies are killed by white "role models" in Russia (Loveless and Holman 2007), and why rates of infanticide in Europe and much higher than those in Africa, which historically has the lowest rates (Milner 2000, Hardness of heart). Northern European "empathy" also shines forth in their treatment of other white people. Consider the nice things done for this white population:

    "He called the method of mass killing he invented Sardinenpackung. As Meier describes, it involved forcing victims to lie together face down and side and side and killing them with Genickschussen, then forcing the next group of victims who preceded them to form another layer, ignoring the victims; terror and horror in the interest of efficiently filling up the killing pit. Jeckeln's despicably cruel execution protocols destroys SS claims, during and after the warm that its executions were 'correct' military-style executions of partisans. Himmler's goal was mass murder.. By the end of August 1941, commanding the Kommandostab SS First Brigade in the western Ukraine, Jeckeln had personally supervised the murder of more than 44,000 human beings, the largest total of Jews murdered by any of Himmler's virulent legions that month."
    -- Richard Rhodes. Masters of Death: The Ss-Einsatzgruppen .. 2002
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Malla says:
    @jim jones
    Driving an ambulance in India:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-pC8w0skGADriving an ambulance in India:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-pC8w0skGA

    And that is Bangalore, which is really one of the best cities to live in India far more orderly than the nightmares of Bombay, Calcutta or Delhi.

    Here this is a more comprehensive one, how people in various countries respond to ambulances

    India sucks as usual. Guess what, New York is first world city with a third world heart. Behind all that glitter it is a shithole. The winner goes to the evul Nazi Germans and the Poles come second.
    So it is Germany which deserves enrichment? That is what the elites say. Germany, where people really care about human life, where there is a strong social sense. Really?
    If there would be sense in the world, India would have been enriched by Germans and Poles not the other way round. This world is crazy.
    So much for Hollywood propaganda about evil Germans.

    Read MoreAnd that is Bangalore, which is really one of the best cities to live in India far more orderly than the nightmares of Bombay, Calcutta or Delhi. Here this is a more comprehensive one, how people in various countries respond to ambulances https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nqkhC8zn8Y India sucks as usual. Guess what, New York is first world city with a third world heart. Behind all that glitter it is a shithole. The winner goes to the evul Nazi Germans and the Poles come second. So it is Germany which deserves enrichment? That is what the elites say. Germany, where people really care about human life, where there is a strong social sense. Really? If there would be sense in the world, India would have been enriched by Germans and Poles not the other way round. This world is crazy. So much for Hollywood propaganda about evil Germans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. @Biff
    During the 1980’s Iraq was a nice place.
    Prior to 2011 Tripoli was the nicest city in all of Africa.
    Prior to 1978 Westerners could freely travel about in Afghanistan(though no country to brag about, but I wouldn’t dare to transverse it today)
    Prior to 1492 the island where Haiti resides was a paradise.


    For better or for worse Men do make the country.During the 1980’s Iraq was a nice place.
    Prior to 2011 Tripoli was the nicest city in all of Africa.
    Prior to 1978 Westerners could freely travel about in Afghanistan(though no country to brag about, but I wouldn’t dare to transverse it today)
    Prior to 1492 the island where Haiti resides was a paradise.


    For better or for worse Men do make the country.

    Bullshit!!!! It are the women who tell the men to get off their lazy ass!

    Read MoreBullshit!!!! It are the women who tell the men to get off their lazy ass!
    • Replies: @Talha
    Lotta truth to this...
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=juTeHsKPWhY

    Peace.Lotta truth to this...
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=juTeHsKPWhY

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. @Biff
    During the 1980’s Iraq was a nice place.
    Prior to 2011 Tripoli was the nicest city in all of Africa.
    Prior to 1978 Westerners could freely travel about in Afghanistan(though no country to brag about, but I wouldn’t dare to transverse it today)
    Prior to 1492 the island where Haiti resides was a paradise.


    For better or for worse Men do make the country.During the 1980’s Iraq was a nice place.
    Prior to 2011 Tripoli was the nicest city in all of Africa.
    Prior to 1978 Westerners could freely travel about in Afghanistan(though no country to brag about, but I wouldn’t dare to transverse it today)
    Prior to 1492 the island where Haiti resides was a paradise.


    For better or for worse Men do make the country.

    Prior to 2011 Tripoli was the nicest city in all of Africa.

    It was nice. Some good memories of Tripoli nights and of Sabratha came back. Well, that Tripoli is gone now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Malla says:
    @Malla

    During the 1980’s Iraq was a nice place.

     

    Was it really?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRATeUEBWJQ

    Yeah it was better than what we got after the U.S. invasion, no doubt about that.

    In the beginning part of the video, he says the truth about the Third World. In the third world IQ/ intelligence is based on ripping others off. If you ripp others off you are smart, you are praised. Issac Newton would be considered an idiot in the streets of the third world (when in reality they are the idiots).

    Read MoreIn the beginning part of the video, he says the truth about the Third World. In the third world IQ/ intelligence is based on ripping others off. If you ripp others off you are smart, you are praised. Issac Newton would be considered an idiot in the streets of the third world (when in reality they are the idiots).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. sturbain says:
    @Philosophical Donkey
    Every civilisation is based on a religion. The civilisation of sub-Saharan Africa, whatever we think of it, is based on a darker version of paganism. African traditional religions embrace human sacrifices, ritual cannibalism, black magic (and paranoidal fear of it) and some other unsavoury things. And it influences both the everyday life of ordinary people and the historical course of their civilisation. Of course, African societies are not 100% per cent horrible, they have their positive aspects, otherwise they would not have survived at all, but the burden of infernal superstitions on them is too heavy.

    Civilisations rooted in other religions are also conditioned by them. You cannot understand India without Hindooism, Japan without Buddhism, Shintoism and Confucianism, the Arab world without Islam.

    The European civilisation is based on Christianity (though it did learn a few tricks from ancient Greeks and Romans). It became great and global thanks to its Christian faith. But as it has discarded its faith (in a long, gradual and, at first, imperceptible process), it has slowly but surely entered into decadence. It began with religious scepticism which developed into an all-out materialism, continued with moral and cultural scepticism which, by now, has reached the stage of final degradation and finally lost the will to live. As people in post-Christian societies no longer believe that anything is more important than their personal pleasure and convenience, they no longer want to have children, and post-Christian nations begin to die out. They no longer want to fight for their countries or for their civilisation as a whole. They lost respect for their ancestors. They have turned into a sort of senile children, superficial, short-sighted, avid for sweets and bright-coloured toys, ready to believe any stupid idea if it flatters them and are totally indifferent to the really serious things.

    Therefore, the post-Christian civilisation has become weaker than other civilisations, more cruel and primitive, but still believing in something transcendental. People of non-Christian civilisations still have something to die for. Post-Christians have nothing to die for and only a bit of frivolous entertainment to live for. They are doomed.Every civilisation is based on a religion. The civilisation of sub-Saharan Africa, whatever we think of it, is based on a darker version of paganism. African traditional religions embrace human sacrifices, ritual cannibalism, black magic (and paranoidal fear of it) and some other unsavoury things. And it influences both the everyday life of ordinary people and the historical course of their civilisation. Of course, African societies are not 100% per cent horrible, they have their positive aspects, otherwise they would not have survived at all, but the burden of infernal superstitions on them is too heavy.

    Civilisations rooted in other religions are also conditioned by them. You cannot understand India without Hindooism, Japan without Buddhism, Shintoism and Confucianism, the Arab world without Islam.

    The European civilisation is based on Christianity (though it did learn a few tricks from ancient Greeks and Romans). It became great and global thanks to its Christian faith. But as it has discarded its faith (in a long, gradual and, at first, imperceptible process), it has slowly but surely entered into decadence. It began with religious scepticism which developed into an all-out materialism, continued with moral and cultural scepticism which, by now, has reached the stage of final degradation and finally lost the will to live. As people in post-Christian societies no longer believe that anything is more important than their personal pleasure and convenience, they no longer want to have children, and post-Christian nations begin to die out. They no longer want to fight for their countries or for their civilisation as a whole. They lost respect for their ancestors. They have turned into a sort of senile children, superficial, short-sighted, avid for sweets and bright-coloured toys, ready to believe any stupid idea if it flatters them and are totally indifferent to the really serious things.

    Therefore, the post-Christian civilisation has become weaker than other civilisations, more cruel and primitive, but still believing in something transcendental. People of non-Christian civilisations still have something to die for. Post-Christians have nothing to die for and only a bit of frivolous entertainment to live for. They are doomed.

    Wow. All of this in just 300 words. Bravo! I don’t know who you are, but Unz should consider giving you column space here.

    You are absolutely correct. Politics is downstream of culture, which is downstream of religion. The west has lost its religion, and that religion was what made western democratic man. The west is adrift, and is doomed. It was nice while it lasted.

    Read MoreWow. All of this in just 300 words. Bravo! I don't know who you are, but Unz should consider giving you column space here. You are absolutely correct. Politics is downstream of culture, which is downstream of religion. The west has lost its religion, and that religion was what made western democratic man. The west is adrift, and is doomed. It was nice while it lasted.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Oh_Really says:
    @anon
    If Haiti was populated by Japanese people or Scandinavians, instead of black Africans, it would be a very different place indeed.If Haiti was populated by Japanese people or Scandinavians, instead of black Africans, it would be a very different place indeed.

    Ha Scandinavians in Haiti! Which do you mean? The old St Nick version or the new new-go-zone version?

    Read MoreHa Scandinavians in Haiti! Which do you mean? The old St Nick version or the new new-go-zone version?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. I like to look at this the other way up, that it is amazing and miraculous that northwestern Europeans should have shucked off the culture of envy and tribalism to create The Great Enrichment (Google it).

    Envy and tribalism make complete sense in the world of War Before Civilization by Lawrence H. Keeley. Serfdom/slavery make complete sense in the agricultural world.

    But in the new world you encourage and venerate the innovator, you trust the stranger that has a 5-star trust rating. And this is an utter transformation.

    No wonder we have a reactionary cultural movement that pushes the neo-tribalism of identity politics and the neo-feudalism of the welfare state. Lots of people, even in the West, long for the good old days.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Drapetomaniac
    You can take man out of the animal world but you can't take the animal world out of man.

    Default setting.You can take man out of the animal world but you can't take the animal world out of man.

    Default setting.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Wally says: • Website
    @Biff
    During the 1980’s Iraq was a nice place.
    Prior to 2011 Tripoli was the nicest city in all of Africa.
    Prior to 1978 Westerners could freely travel about in Afghanistan(though no country to brag about, but I wouldn’t dare to transverse it today)
    Prior to 1492 the island where Haiti resides was a paradise.


    For better or for worse Men do make the country.During the 1980’s Iraq was a nice place.
    Prior to 2011 Tripoli was the nicest city in all of Africa.
    Prior to 1978 Westerners could freely travel about in Afghanistan(though no country to brag about, but I wouldn’t dare to transverse it today)
    Prior to 1492 the island where Haiti resides was a paradise.


    For better or for worse Men do make the country.

    Agreed, men who are the inhabitants of a country do make it what it is.
    Hence Haiti & Africa today.

    Of course, as Mercer referenced:

    “By taking account of culture ….. one could have foreseen the postwar economic success of Japan and Germany.”

    IOW, western countries which have been devastated by war and the immediate aftermath of war have invariably gotten up and rebuilt a very orderly, safe, productive society.

    The 3rd world is such because of it’s incompetent, low IQ inhabitants. Nothing could be more obvious.

    Sorry Biff, but you are hopelessly lost in Marxist groupthink

    Read More
    • Replies: @Biff
    My point is shithole countries do not always become that way from with in. Outside influences are sometimes a factor.
    How’s that for Marxist thinking?My point is shithole countries do not always become that way from with in. Outside influences are sometimes a factor.
    How’s that for Marxist thinking?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Malla says:

    Ryan Faulk has some interesting things to say about First Worldism. Definitely worth a listen.

    First Worldism with Ryan Faulk

    Ryan Faulk – In Defense of First World Policies & Genetics

    Read MoreRyan Faulk has some interesting things to say about First Worldism. Definitely worth a listen. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKQkSGBAd7c First Worldism with Ryan Faulk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY5QjAjgemM Ryan Faulk - In Defense of First World Policies & Genetics
    • Replies: @Third world nationalist
    Varg and Ryan faulk are both interesting people but they have totally different solutions. Faulk wants to maintain hi tech civillisation but Varg realises that to save the people you need to destroy civillisation. i'm more of a Varg guy.Varg and Ryan faulk are both interesting people but they have totally different solutions. Faulk wants to maintain hi tech civillisation but Varg realises that to save the people you need to destroy civillisation. i'm more of a Varg guy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Wally says:
    @tjm
    And who put blacks there??????????

    The zionists have been spreading the seeds of our destruction for centuries.And who put blacks there??????????

    The zionists have been spreading the seeds of our destruction for centuries.

    here we go:

    “African chiefs urged to apologise for slave trade
    Nigerian civil rights group says tribal leaders’ ancestors sold people to slavers and should say sorry””

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/nov/18/africans-apologise-slave-trade

    “African chiefs were the ones waging war on each other and capturing their own people and selling them. If anyone should apologise it should be the African chiefs. We still have those traitors here even today.”

    Black researcher, Dr. Tony Martin, let’s us know who the prime sellers & owners of slaves really were, Jews.
    Dr. Tony Martin – The Jewish Role in the African Slave Trade

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read Morehere we go: "African chiefs urged to apologise for slave trade Nigerian civil rights group says tribal leaders' ancestors sold people to slavers and should say sorry"" https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/nov/18/africans-apologise-slave-trade "African chiefs were the ones waging war on each other and capturing their own people and selling them. If anyone should apologise it should be the African chiefs. We still have those traitors here even today." Black researcher, Dr. Tony Martin, let's us know who the prime sellers & owners of slaves really were, Jews. Dr. Tony Martin - The Jewish Role in the African Slave Trade https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ut7I75Q_-zA www.codoh.com
    • Replies: @tjm
    Exactly!

    The ONE TRUTH, is that if the Zionist Jews point at you for doing a crime, they have done it, and worse.

    They use their media to demonize our desire to secure our border, yet use OUR money to build walls in Israel!Exactly!

    The ONE TRUTH, is that if the Zionist Jews point at you for doing a crime, they have done it, and worse.

    They use their media to demonize our desire to secure our border, yet use OUR money to build walls in Israel!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Talha says:

    “The African works to live but does not live to work.”

    Why is this controversial? This is basically ancient wisdom; take what you need of this world and commit the rest of your time to spiritual and intellectual pursuits. You get one shot at life; why make a job your primary goal, so you can build up a bunch of stuff you can’t take with you which your inheritors will fight over.

    “I am because we are” is how one wag encapsulated the cog-like role of the individual in African culture.

    Or corporate materialist culture – take your pick.

    Islamic and animistic values

    LOOOOL!!!

    Human action is the ultimate adjudicator of a human being’s worth

    Agreed- more ancient wisdom.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    For all but the last hundred years or so there was a real danger of starvation in winter in Europe and America/Canada.
    The philosophy of getting while the getting is good has gone from survival strategy ( Thanks to the White guys who invented freezers, canning, sterilization of food etc- not to mention railroads, trucks and other methods of moving supplies faster than a Prairie Schooner ) To a breeding strategy- look at what I've got, you'll be OK with me, I'm a winner.

    My sense is this is currently changing from men's perception at least.For all but the last hundred years or so there was a real danger of starvation in winter in Europe and America/Canada.
    The philosophy of getting while the getting is good has gone from survival strategy ( Thanks to the White guys who invented freezers, canning, sterilization of food etc- not to mention railroads, trucks and other methods of moving supplies faster than a Prairie Schooner ) To a breeding strategy- look at what I've got, you'll be OK with me, I'm a winner.

    My sense is this is currently changing from men's perception at least.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Malla says:
    @wayfarer

    Reputation is what men and women think of us. Character is what God and angels know of us. – Thomas Paine
     
    Many urban streets in this world are hallowed by anonymous angels and divine providence.

    “Rihanna Stay” cover by Allie Sherlock.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfUmfWBvh3Y

    “Dusk Till Dawn” cover by Allie Sherlock.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh9tGDGfDrA

    .....

    More of them angels

    Read MoreMore of them angels https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TW5DIDlr2FY
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. Just finished reading IMPOSSIBLE ODDS by Jessica Buchanon an American aid worker; about her capture by Somali kidnappers and her experience being held over 90 days under terrible conditions along with a Danish aid worker.
    These two individuals had come to Somalia to help the people of that impoverished paradise (I wouldn’t say S**thole). They were abused physically and emotionally, denied proper food and water or medical care while outrageous demands for ransom were made. They were finally rescued by SEAL Team 6.
    Be sure to watch the movie CAPTAIN PHILLIPS, then ask yourself if you’d like to take your next vacation in Somalia…
    Do were really need more people like the Somali pirates and kidnappers here?

    Read MoreJust finished reading IMPOSSIBLE ODDS by Jessica Buchanon an American aid worker; about her capture by Somali kidnappers and her experience being held over 90 days under terrible conditions along with a Danish aid worker. These two individuals had come to Somalia to help the people of that impoverished paradise (I wouldn't say S**thole). They were abused physically and emotionally, denied proper food and water or medical care while outrageous demands for ransom were made. They were finally rescued by SEAL Team 6. Be sure to watch the movie CAPTAIN PHILLIPS, then ask yourself if you'd like to take your next vacation in Somalia... Do were really need more people like the Somali pirates and kidnappers here?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  51. bjondo says:
    @Charles

    And why and how was it possible that this superior west stood still, scientifically, for some 1600 years, from the year 1 to 1600 ?
     
    Basically, Islam.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_Qpy0mXg8Y

    He’s a fool.

    Read MoreHe's a fool.
    • Agree: Talha
    • Troll: Twodees Partain
    • Replies: @Malla
    No he is not. He is quite correct about India at least.No he is not. He is quite correct about India at least.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. druid says:

    Israel is the biggest SHITHOLE country. America is fast becoming one! Along with many African countries, etc

    Read MoreIsrael is the biggest SHITHOLE country. America is fast becoming one! Along with many African countries, etc
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  53. @Talha

    “The African works to live but does not live to work.”
     
    Why is this controversial? This is basically ancient wisdom; take what you need of this world and commit the rest of your time to spiritual and intellectual pursuits. You get one shot at life; why make a job your primary goal, so you can build up a bunch of stuff you can’t take with you which your inheritors will fight over.

    “I am because we are” is how one wag encapsulated the cog-like role of the individual in African culture.
     
    Or corporate materialist culture - take your pick.

    Islamic and animistic values
     
    LOOOOL!!!

    Human action is the ultimate adjudicator of a human being’s worth
     
    Agreed- more ancient wisdom.

    Peace.

    For all but the last hundred years or so there was a real danger of starvation in winter in Europe and America/Canada.
    The philosophy of getting while the getting is good has gone from survival strategy ( Thanks to the White guys who invented freezers, canning, sterilization of food etc- not to mention railroads, trucks and other methods of moving supplies faster than a Prairie Schooner ) To a breeding strategy- look at what I’ve got, you’ll be OK with me, I’m a winner.

    My sense is this is currently changing from men’s perception at least.

    Read MoreFor all but the last hundred years or so there was a real danger of starvation in winter in Europe and America/Canada. The philosophy of getting while the getting is good has gone from survival strategy ( Thanks to the White guys who invented freezers, canning, sterilization of food etc- not to mention railroads, trucks and other methods of moving supplies faster than a Prairie Schooner ) To a breeding strategy- look at what I've got, you'll be OK with me, I'm a winner. My sense is this is currently changing from men's perception at least.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Moi says:

    Aren’t people from India (particularly the Hindus) smarter than us Americans? And couldn’t the same be said of the Chinese?

    Read MoreAren't people from India (particularly the Hindus) smarter than us Americans? And couldn't the same be said of the Chinese?
    • Replies: @druid
    Actually, no! We can some of the smarter and more driven ones!Actually, no! We can some of the smarter and more driven ones!
    , @Orwellian State

    Aren’t people from India (particularly the Hindus) smarter than us Americans? And couldn’t the same be said of the Chinese?
     
    Indians have an average IQ of 81, not much higher than their African kin. Indians are also incredibly dishonest.Maybe 0.01% of them are trustworthy, no more.

    Chinese have higher IQ, but also dishonest. Maybe 1% of them are trustworthy, no more.

    That's why both China and India are still shithole countries. The vast majority of people from 3rd world countries are dishonest, the honest ones get ripped off and laughed at as idiots, that's why these countries are such shitholes. It's also why we shouldn't take people from 3rd world countries. Let them work out their dishonest ways and become first world on their own, however long that takes, then and only then can they immigrate to other first world countries.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. druid says:
    @Moi
    Aren't people from India (particularly the Hindus) smarter than us Americans? And couldn't the same be said of the Chinese?Aren't people from India (particularly the Hindus) smarter than us Americans? And couldn't the same be said of the Chinese?

    Actually, no! We can some of the smarter and more driven ones!

    Read MoreActually, no! We can some of the smarter and more driven ones!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. @tjm
    And who put blacks there??????????

    The zionists have been spreading the seeds of our destruction for centuries.And who put blacks there??????????

    The zionists have been spreading the seeds of our destruction for centuries.

    The zionists have been spreading the seeds of our destruction for centuries.

    For about 25 of them, in fact, although they weren’t always called Zionists or Communists. Both are modern names given to a hostile, radical, extremist, bunch of emotional infants who’ve been pissed at the world and are bent on destruction via lies, theft, terror and murder.

    Zios and Commies are but the two horns on a modern day moloch. But never mind, these cats are “Chosen” and besides, they’re all “high IQ.”

    We’re just envious, is all! ;)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. @Biff
    During the 1980’s Iraq was a nice place.
    Prior to 2011 Tripoli was the nicest city in all of Africa.
    Prior to 1978 Westerners could freely travel about in Afghanistan(though no country to brag about, but I wouldn’t dare to transverse it today)
    Prior to 1492 the island where Haiti resides was a paradise.


    For better or for worse Men do make the country.During the 1980’s Iraq was a nice place.
    Prior to 2011 Tripoli was the nicest city in all of Africa.
    Prior to 1978 Westerners could freely travel about in Afghanistan(though no country to brag about, but I wouldn’t dare to transverse it today)
    Prior to 1492 the island where Haiti resides was a paradise.


    For better or for worse Men do make the country.

    “Prior to 1978 Westerners could freely travel about in Afghanistan” — Biff

    I met a young woman from Minnesota back in the 1960s who had been on a trip around the world. She told me, and I believed her, that when she flew into Afghanistan, she and other Americans were met at the airport by a representative of the U.S. State Department who gave each of the Americans a map that marked off an area around the airport — less than one square mile — and told to stay within that area because outside of that area, the USA could not guarantee anyone’s safety. In particular they told the female Americans that they would certainly, if not accompanied by a man, be kidnapped and probably never seen or heard from again.

    For better or for worse, men do make the country, but women? Not so much … at least not in many parts of the world.

    BTW, Biff, all the evils of the world cannot rationally be blamed on the USA or on Europeans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla
    But during the days of those huge colonial empires, things were much better. I knew a British guy, whose parents had gone by land to British India from Europe and obviously via Afghanistan. There is also this case of a Jewish guy and his wife making a jeep journey from Thailand to Israel just after WW2. Even if Afghanistan was not directly ruled by any European power then, Afghanistan & the world was much safer during the days of the European Empires.But during the days of those huge colonial empires, things were much better. I knew a British guy, whose parents had gone by land to British India from Europe and obviously via Afghanistan. There is also this case of a Jewish guy and his wife making a jeep journey from Thailand to Israel just after WW2. Even if Afghanistan was not directly ruled by any European power then, Afghanistan & the world was much safer during the days of the European Empires.
    , @Biff
    Suddenly women in Minnesota are a credible source on Afghanistan. Oh well, I just know my brother in 72, and another Friend in 75 traveled in and around Afghanistan without any problems other than the food.Suddenly women in Minnesota are a credible source on Afghanistan. Oh well, I just know my brother in 72, and another Friend in 75 traveled in and around Afghanistan without any problems other than the food.
    , @jilles dykstra
    Peter Levi, ‘The light garden of the angel king, journeys in Afghanistan’, 1972, 1984, HarmondsworthPeter Levi, ‘The light garden of the angel king, journeys in Afghanistan’, 1972, 1984, Harmondsworth
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @Anonymous
    America is a country that has a beggar on every street corner, I still think Trump was being honest. Freudian slip.America is a country that has a beggar on every street corner, I still think Trump was being honest. Freudian slip.

    America is a country that has a beggar on every street corner…

    And in every position of power.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. @Nick Granite
    I know it (s_ithole) when I see it and it usually has a MLK boulevard sign in it somewhere.I know it (s_ithole) when I see it and it usually has a MLK boulevard sign in it somewhere.

    I know it (s_ithole) when I see it and it usually has a MLK boulevard sign in it somewhere.

    When will we have streets named for the Federal Reserve?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. By taking account of culture, posits David Landes, a Harvard economic historian, and author of The Wealth and Poverty of Nations, one could have foreseen the postwar economic success of Japan and Germany. The same is true of South Korea (versus Turkey), and Indonesia (versus Nigeria).

    The last sentence should read: The same is true of South Korea (vs. Indonesia), and Turkey (vs. Nigeria).

    Indonesia is no “success story”. It is just another overpopulated, backward (Muslim) shithole like the Philippines, India, Bangladesh, Cambodia, not that far above Nigeria.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla
    TrueTrue
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. tjm says:
    @Wizard of Oz
    "Centuries"???? When do you think Zionism became more than a dream?"Centuries"???? When do you think Zionism became more than a dream?

    From their inception, even the Bible is likely filled with Zionist lies.

    You do get Israel is named in the Bible, and is the basis for Zionism, don’t you…

    Or can you add more to the discussion than idiotic condescension, moron

    Read MoreFrom their inception, even the Bible is likely filled with Zionist lies. You do get Israel is named in the Bible, and is the basis for Zionism, don't you... Or can you add more to the discussion than idiotic condescension, moron
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Aha! I know the style. Wordy and emulating the chutzpah that only smart Jews are entitled to, not ones who earn condescencion by tossing in "moron" as if to earn the accurate description "doofus" of to your Yiddisher brethren "shlemiel" or "shnook". No, I admit it takes genius to excuse your ignorance that Zionism is not "centuries" old by saying "I dunno: it might be thousands of years, but don't be hard on me I am just an emoting anti-Semite who isn't interested in evidence".Aha! I know the style. Wordy and emulating the chutzpah that only smart Jews are entitled to, not ones who earn condescencion by tossing in "moron" as if to earn the accurate description "doofus" of to your Yiddisher brethren "shlemiel" or "shnook". No, I admit it takes genius to excuse your ignorance that Zionism is not "centuries" old by saying "I dunno: it might be thousands of years, but don't be hard on me I am just an emoting anti-Semite who isn't interested in evidence".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. tjm says:
    @Wally
    here we go:

    "African chiefs urged to apologise for slave trade
    Nigerian civil rights group says tribal leaders' ancestors sold people to slavers and should say sorry""
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/nov/18/africans-apologise-slave-trade
    "African chiefs were the ones waging war on each other and capturing their own people and selling them. If anyone should apologise it should be the African chiefs. We still have those traitors here even today."

    Black researcher, Dr. Tony Martin, let's us know who the prime sellers & owners of slaves really were, Jews.
    Dr. Tony Martin - The Jewish Role in the African Slave Trade

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ut7I75Q_-zA

    www.codoh.comhere we go:

    "African chiefs urged to apologise for slave trade
    Nigerian civil rights group says tribal leaders' ancestors sold people to slavers and should say sorry""
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/nov/18/africans-apologise-slave-trade
    "African chiefs were the ones waging war on each other and capturing their own people and selling them. If anyone should apologise it should be the African chiefs. We still have those traitors here even today."

    Black researcher, Dr. Tony Martin, let's us know who the prime sellers & owners of slaves really were, Jews.
    Dr. Tony Martin - The Jewish Role in the African Slave Trade

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ut7I75Q_-zA

    www.codoh.com

    Exactly!

    The ONE TRUTH, is that if the Zionist Jews point at you for doing a crime, they have done it, and worse.

    They use their media to demonize our desire to secure our border, yet use OUR money to build walls in Israel!

    Read MoreExactly! The ONE TRUTH, is that if the Zionist Jews point at you for doing a crime, they have done it, and worse. They use their media to demonize our desire to secure our border, yet use OUR money to build walls in Israel!
    • Agree: jacques sheete
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. @proud_Srbin
    Your theory is wonderful but as usual NOTHING is as it appears.
    Have you heard of Omar Khadr who was BORN in Canada just as Conrad Black and Brenda Martin were?
    Omar's problem was that he was just a technical Canadian instead of Old Stock or Pure Laine, which was enough for regime of original invaders not to lift a finger in order to help him.
    Today's NA has very little in common with NA before the fall of USSR, it actually FEELS much worse and way less free than USSR ever did.Your theory is wonderful but as usual NOTHING is as it appears.
    Have you heard of Omar Khadr who was BORN in Canada just as Conrad Black and Brenda Martin were?
    Omar's problem was that he was just a technical Canadian instead of Old Stock or Pure Laine, which was enough for regime of original invaders not to lift a finger in order to help him.
    Today's NA has very little in common with NA before the fall of USSR, it actually FEELS much worse and way less free than USSR ever did.

    “Today’s NA has very little in common with NA before the fall of USSR, it actually FEELS much worse and way less free than USSR ever did.” — proud_Srbin

    It’s hard for me to credit generalizations about all of NA (North America), including Mexico(?), and I think that the connection with the fall of the USSR is coincidental. What made, and continues to make, all the difference as to how it “FEELS” less free in USA is the USA PATRIOT Act and the associated national consciousness … and various changes brought about during the Bush-Cheney administration.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    Grandpa, I'm glad you responded. I though he was talking about Narcotics Anonymous. ;-)Grandpa, I'm glad you responded. I though he was talking about Narcotics Anonymous. ;-)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Talha says:
    @Ilyana_Rozumova
    Bullshit!!!! It are the women who tell the men to get off their lazy ass!Bullshit!!!! It are the women who tell the men to get off their lazy ass!

    Lotta truth to this…

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=juTeHsKPWhY

    Peace.

    Read MoreLotta truth to this... https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=juTeHsKPWhY Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. Africa’s plight is most certainly not the West’s fault.

    I must beg to differ here. The West plays a key role in Africa’s plight. African peoples are not made for the modern world. They simply do not have the aptitude and ability to live like modern humans, learn like modern humans, and work like modern humans. The West never should’ve entered Africa. Left to their own devices, these people would have continued to live like Bushmen, instead of the materialistic life that they co-opted from the whites but have no means of sustaining.

    The West dragged Africans kicking and screaming into the modern world, first through slavery, then through colonialism and lastly through philanthropy, each did its own major damage. Slavery took away the most able men in Africa and ravaged their societies. Colonialism introduced modern clothing, materialism, weapons and lifestyles to Africans which they are entirely unsuited for, and turned them into primitive people with guns once the colonialists left. Philanthropy meanwhile, created a toxic cycle of dependency and a population boom thanks to free gifting of modern medicine.

    One does not need what one does not know exist. Africans should’ve been left to their own dark continent from the get go, like the Amazonians. Survival of the fittest would’ve allowed for natural population control. The West’s unceasing meddling due to greed(slavery and natural resources) and later, guilt (philanthropy) completely fucked up Africa. I would say the West bears a huge responsibility on where Africa is today.

    The question is what to do about it? Is allowing mass number of Africans into the west the answer? The way I see it we have 2 choices: 1) cut off Africa completely, end all out-migration and leave them to their own devices. Since this would cause lots of screaming from the left, 2) send all the black loving white libtards there to govern and lead them to the promised land, not through outmigration, but through whatever the libtards claim will work – education, agriculture, development and whatever else.

    Read More
    • Agree: Grandpa Charlie
    • Replies: @Malla
    Europeans did indeed develop Africa a lot during colonialism.

    https://archive.org/download/TheSiegeOfSouthernAfrica/siege.pdf

    https://archive.org/stream/TheSiegeOfSouthernAfrica/siege_djvu.txtEuropeans did indeed develop Africa a lot during colonialism.

    https://archive.org/download/TheSiegeOfSouthernAfrica/siege.pdf

    https://archive.org/stream/TheSiegeOfSouthernAfrica/siege_djvu.txt
    , @Buzz Mohawk
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9VCHSv0poUhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9VCHSv0poU
    , @Biff

    send all the black loving white libtards there to govern and lead them to the promised land, not through outmigration, but through whatever the libtards claim will work – education, agriculture, development and whatever else.
     
    And get Bono to pay for it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Malla says:
    @Orwellian State

    By taking account of culture, posits David Landes, a Harvard economic historian, and author of The Wealth and Poverty of Nations, one could have foreseen the postwar economic success of Japan and Germany. The same is true of South Korea (versus Turkey), and Indonesia (versus Nigeria).
     
    The last sentence should read: The same is true of South Korea (vs. Indonesia), and Turkey (vs. Nigeria).

    Indonesia is no "success story". It is just another overpopulated, backward (Muslim) shithole like the Philippines, India, Bangladesh, Cambodia, not that far above Nigeria.

    True

    Read MoreTrue
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Talha says:
    @bjondo

    If a commenter totally ignores proper capitalization, punctuation, grammar, and spelling, his comments may not be published.]

     

    Question: is this comment by the article author or site administrator?

    Does it matter who the gate keeper is? It’s someone else’s sandbox, you’re only allowed to play if you follow the rules.

    Peace.

    Read MoreDoes it matter who the gate keeper is? It’s someone else’s sandbox, you’re only allowed to play if you follow the rules. Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. Malla says:
    @Grandpa Charlie

    "Prior to 1978 Westerners could freely travel about in Afghanistan" -- Biff
     
    I met a young woman from Minnesota back in the 1960s who had been on a trip around the world. She told me, and I believed her, that when she flew into Afghanistan, she and other Americans were met at the airport by a representative of the U.S. State Department who gave each of the Americans a map that marked off an area around the airport -- less than one square mile -- and told to stay within that area because outside of that area, the USA could not guarantee anyone's safety. In particular they told the female Americans that they would certainly, if not accompanied by a man, be kidnapped and probably never seen or heard from again.

    For better or for worse, men do make the country, but women? Not so much ... at least not in many parts of the world.

    BTW, Biff, all the evils of the world cannot rationally be blamed on the USA or on Europeans.

    But during the days of those huge colonial empires, things were much better. I knew a British guy, whose parents had gone by land to British India from Europe and obviously via Afghanistan. There is also this case of a Jewish guy and his wife making a jeep journey from Thailand to Israel just after WW2. Even if Afghanistan was not directly ruled by any European power then, Afghanistan & the world was much safer during the days of the European Empires.

    Read MoreBut during the days of those huge colonial empires, things were much better. I knew a British guy, whose parents had gone by land to British India from Europe and obviously via Afghanistan. There is also this case of a Jewish guy and his wife making a jeep journey from Thailand to Israel just after WW2. Even if Afghanistan was not directly ruled by any European power then, Afghanistan & the world was much safer during the days of the European Empires.
    • Replies: @Grandpa Charlie

    "during the days of those huge colonial empires, things were much better [respecting security of foreigners passing through places like Afghanistan]" -- Malla
     
    I agree, for sure. I have seen a documentary film privately made of the transfer of power from Sierra Leone as a crown colony to Sierra Leone as an independent nation. The native soldiers formed up for the flag changing ceremony went barefoot and their rifles were only for drill and could not be fired -- and that system was so much better than what has followed! It is all the fault of white men -- because they or some of them allowed African natives to get their hands on modern rifles! As General Sir David Ormsby-Gore reportedly said after putting down the Mau-Mau rebellion in Kenya, effectively employing napalm, "God knows we tried."

    Back in the days of the great European empires and in any event during the days of the British Empire, things were much better for everyone than they have become since then. But the empires were unsustainable after World War II and barely sustainable before. Maybe if Britain had taken up Hitler on his offer to leave the colonial world as it was -- or even to assist Britain where needed -- while letting Germany "take" Russia ... oh well, that's just a pipe dream considering that Hitler after militarily taking Czechoslovakia (beyond just the Sudentenland, which had been allowed by Chamberlain) ... Hitler had proven himself and his government to be completely untrustworthy ... and there is to be found the flea in the ointment of any and all of those theories as to how Hitler really did not bring on World War II when he ordered the invasion of Poland. IMHO, the real problem with Nazism was Hitler's insistence that the Slavs consisted of a lesser race, especially when you consider that the Slavs are actually linguistically and probably genetically closer to the Aryan roots than any of the "races" of Western Europe, including the mutts of the "German or Teutonic race." Well, you can only expect so much of any opportunistic politician!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. Malla says:
    @bjondo
    He's a fool.He's a fool.

    No he is not. He is quite correct about India at least.

    Read MoreNo he is not. He is quite correct about India at least.
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Malla,

    Prove it - please bring credible sources to the discussion. I’d like to see you defend his position.

    Peace.Hey Malla,

    Prove it - please bring credible sources to the discussion. I’d like to see you defend his position.

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. @SMK
    Reading this article, somewhat abstruse and obscurantist, it appears that Ilana agrees with the left and "cucks" and neocons that culture is everything, at least in regard to race as opposed to sex; that blacks and whites are exactly the same apart from skin color and other superficial characteristics; that race "beneath the skin" is a "artificial social construct." No mention of IQ and other genetic racial group differences.

    Biology preceded culture. Culture is what humans, of all races, make of their biology. Biology created and informs culture. The immutably distinct biology and average IQ of Negros created and informs and sustains the cultures of Haiti and Sub-Saharan Africa, with obvious cultural variations, and in the U.S., the cultures of Detroit, St. Louis, Baltimore, Memphis, New Orleans, Birmingham, etc.Reading this article, somewhat abstruse and obscurantist, it appears that Ilana agrees with the left and "cucks" and neocons that culture is everything, at least in regard to race as opposed to sex; that blacks and whites are exactly the same apart from skin color and other superficial characteristics; that race "beneath the skin" is a "artificial social construct." No mention of IQ and other genetic racial group differences.

    Biology preceded culture. Culture is what humans, of all races, make of their biology. Biology created and informs culture. The immutably distinct biology and average IQ of Negros created and informs and sustains the cultures of Haiti and Sub-Saharan Africa, with obvious cultural variations, and in the U.S., the cultures of Detroit, St. Louis, Baltimore, Memphis, New Orleans, Birmingham, etc.

    I read the same article that you did, and didn’t arrive at the same conclusion. Ms. Mercer was quoting a few other people in order to illustrate her points, which were not the same as those you claim she was making.

    I’m aware that her view doesn’t support your theory, but she doesn’t say that race is an artificial construct. Being from South Africa, if she held the view you ascribe to her, she would have stayed on there and we probably would have never heard of her.

    I think that on Amazon’s listing page for her book, “Into the Cannibals’ Pot” there’s an option to read some of the text as a sample. If you’ll do that, you might get a better understanding of her views.

    http://amzn.to/2d2mhu1

    Read MoreI read the same article that you did, and didn't arrive at the same conclusion. Ms. Mercer was quoting a few other people in order to illustrate her points, which were not the same as those you claim she was making. I'm aware that her view doesn't support your theory, but she doesn't say that race is an artificial construct. Being from South Africa, if she held the view you ascribe to her, she would have stayed on there and we probably would have never heard of her. I think that on Amazon's listing page for her book, "Into the Cannibals' Pot" there's an option to read some of the text as a sample. If you'll do that, you might get a better understanding of her views. http://amzn.to/2d2mhu1
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. @The King is A Fink
    I attended one of the larger South African universities in the 90s. I was always struck by how the black students always studied in groups, whilst the white students didn't. This probably makes sense if you are studying the soft sciences. In my experience, no amount of group effort will help you figure out the finer points of a Fourier transform. In the hard sciences you tend to sink or swim on your own merits.

    The black students lobbied for writing the exams in a group setting. After all, they studied together and colloborated on the course work, so logically they should be allowed to do the exam together. The collectivist nature of this thinking is not conducive to high-functioning individual contributions to society.

    I have taken a couple of part-time college courses too, which frequently involve group assignments. Even at a postgraduate level (where you might expect people to be a little maturer) these assignments are a blessing for the lazy and a scourge for the diligent. Invariably one person does nothing, a few people do an average amount and one person breaks their back. Pretty much society in a nutshell.I attended one of the larger South African universities in the 90s. I was always struck by how the black students always studied in groups, whilst the white students didn't. This probably makes sense if you are studying the soft sciences. In my experience, no amount of group effort will help you figure out the finer points of a Fourier transform. In the hard sciences you tend to sink or swim on your own merits.

    The black students lobbied for writing the exams in a group setting. After all, they studied together and colloborated on the course work, so logically they should be allowed to do the exam together. The collectivist nature of this thinking is not conducive to high-functioning individual contributions to society.

    I have taken a couple of part-time college courses too, which frequently involve group assignments. Even at a postgraduate level (where you might expect people to be a little maturer) these assignments are a blessing for the lazy and a scourge for the diligent. Invariably one person does nothing, a few people do an average amount and one person breaks their back. Pretty much society in a nutshell.

    “The black students lobbied for writing the exams in a group setting. After all, they studied together and colloborated on the course work, so logically they should be allowed to do the exam together.” — The King is A Fink

    Not at all limited to South Africa or to Africa or to Africans or to Blacks, this idea goes back to Soviet pedagogy– in particular to Vygotsky and to Makarenko. It’s mainly a pedagogic theory but in some respects it seems almost to rise (or fall) to a metaphysical theory when it postulates that not only all learning but all knowledge is social. Anyway, here in USA, it’s very common, and probably not always pernicious, known as the practice of “group learning.” IMHO, it’s one of those things where the “Devil is in the details” — how it’s done and the intelligence and good sense of teachers responsible.

    Anyway, you can always get a feisty argument going among educators on this topic.

    It is astounding that this would be pushed to the extreme of examinations (and why not grades?) in universities. Anything is possible these days.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. @Grandpa Charlie

    "Today’s NA has very little in common with NA before the fall of USSR, it actually FEELS much worse and way less free than USSR ever did." -- proud_Srbin
     
    It's hard for me to credit generalizations about all of NA (North America), including Mexico(?), and I think that the connection with the fall of the USSR is coincidental. What made, and continues to make, all the difference as to how it "FEELS" less free in USA is the USA PATRIOT Act and the associated national consciousness ... and various changes brought about during the Bush-Cheney administration.

    Grandpa, I’m glad you responded. I though he was talking about Narcotics Anonymous. ;-)

    Read MoreGrandpa, I'm glad you responded. I though he was talking about Narcotics Anonymous. ;-)
    • LOL: Grandpa Charlie
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Talha says:
    @Malla
    No he is not. He is quite correct about India at least.No he is not. He is quite correct about India at least.

    Hey Malla,

    Prove it – please bring credible sources to the discussion. I’d like to see you defend his position.

    Peace.

    Read MoreHey Malla, Prove it - please bring credible sources to the discussion. I’d like to see you defend his position. Peace.
    • Replies: @Malla
    http://voiceofdharma.org/books/tpmsi/ch01.htm

    Two points in the destruction of Debal need be taken note of. First, the carnage there lasted for three days. The conquering Muslim army is generally allowed three days of pillage. This three day pattern is repeated in many Muslim massacres, e.g., Timur's massacre in Delhi (1399) or Sultan Muhammad's in Constantinople (1453). The lust for slaughter used to assuage in this period and it sufficed the soldiers to gather captives and precious objects.


    Mahmud Ghaznavi was very successful in the usual fields of Islamic expansionism - conversions of Hindus to Islam, destruction of temples and acquisition of wealth. The sack of Somnath in particular came to be considered a specially pious exploit because of its analogy with the destruction of the idol of al-Manat in Arabia by the Prophet. This "explains the idolization of Mahmud by Nizam-ul-Mulk Tusi,34 and the ideal treatment he has received from early sufi poets like Sanai and Attar, not to mention such collectors of anecdotes as Awfi."35 It is indeed noticeable that after the Somnath expedition (417H/1026 CE), "a deed which had fired the imagination of the Islamic world", Caliph al-Qadir Billah himself celebrated the victory with great éclat. It is also significant that Mahmud now issued his coins for the first time from Lahore.

    Alberuni writes that "Mahmud utterly ruined the prosperity of the country… by which the Hindus became like atoms of dust scattered in all directions… Their scattered remains cherish.. the most inveterate aversion towards all Muslims… Hindu sciences have retired far away from those parts of the country conquered by us, and have fled to places which our hand cannot yet reach (italics ours), to Kashmir, Benaras and other places."36 Later chroniclers write with a tinge of pride that fourteen Ghaznavids ruled at Lahore and its environs for nearly two hundred years. But there was progressive deterioration in their administration. However, the importance of occupation of most part of the Punjab lies in the fact that Muslims had come to stay in India. And these Muslims helped in the third wave of Muslim onrush which swept northern India under Muhammad Ghauri.

    As the Dictionary of Islam says, Muslim writers are "unanimous in asserting that in the time of the Prophet... the only choice given to the idolaters of Arabia was death or reception of Islam". Breaking of temples and forcible conversions at the point of sword were achievements of all Muslim invaders and most Muslim rulers. Their Jihad spread Islam in the infidel land of Hindustan and filled the coffers of Muslim conquerors with immense wealth. However, some modern Muslim apologists express a view contrary to what has been said by contemporary chroniclers of the medieval period. Probably they are shocked at the barbarous conduct of their medieval brethren and want to salvage the reputation of Islam, although whatever was done was done in accordance with the canons of their creed. Muslim historians of the medieval period honestly state that non-Muslims were converted to Islam through force; modern Muslim apologists claim that conversions were effected through peaceful means. Medieval chroniclers take pride in the iconoclastic zeal and achievements of their heroes; modern apologists plead otherwise. Medieval historians credit Muslim invaders with fighting jihad for spreading Islam; modern Muslim writers say that their motive was economic - that the invaders were interested in loot and plunder and had little to do with religion. It needs to be emphasized that the truth here does not lie midway. It lies on the side of the medieval chroniclers. Still, the apologists complicate matters by contradicting the versions of their own co-religionists who were closer to and more intimately associated with events about which they wrote than our modern apologists. The idea of a secular Muslim state is an innovation of a few modem "progressive" writers who wish to bracket Muslim civilization with tolerant civilizations. They should remember that there is a difference between the spread of Islam and, say, spread of Buddhism and no amount of jugglery of words and "interpretations" can prove that the spread of Islam was peaceful. All Hadis, and all chroniclers discriminate between Muslims and non-Muslims, and Islam spread in India through the exertions of Muslim heroes like Mahmud of Ghazni and through jihad as recommended by Islamic scriptures.

    As Dr. Ali Issa Othman, for some years adviser to UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency) on education said: "The spread of Islam was military. There is a tendency to apologize for this and we should not. It is one of the injunctions of the Koran that you must fight for the spreading of Islam."37 The successes achieved in this fight for spreading of Islam is also the main story of the medieval Muslim chronicles. The importance of 'force' in Islam should be acknowledged rather than minimized. The denial of force as a means of spreading Islam by a few modem apologists, like Aziz Ahmad and Muhammad Mujeeb38 cannot alter the basic truth about the history and philosophy of Islam, nor the spirit behind words like Kafir, Jihad, Jiziyah, etc.http://voiceofdharma.org/books/tpmsi/ch01.htm

    Two points in the destruction of Debal need be taken note of. First, the carnage there lasted for three days. The conquering Muslim army is generally allowed three days of pillage. This three day pattern is repeated in many Muslim massacres, e.g., Timur's massacre in Delhi (1399) or Sultan Muhammad's in Constantinople (1453). The lust for slaughter used to assuage in this period and it sufficed the soldiers to gather captives and precious objects.


    Mahmud Ghaznavi was very successful in the usual fields of Islamic expansionism - conversions of Hindus to Islam, destruction of temples and acquisition of wealth. The sack of Somnath in particular came to be considered a specially pious exploit because of its analogy with the destruction of the idol of al-Manat in Arabia by the Prophet. This "explains the idolization of Mahmud by Nizam-ul-Mulk Tusi,34 and the ideal treatment he has received from early sufi poets like Sanai and Attar, not to mention such collectors of anecdotes as Awfi."35 It is indeed noticeable that after the Somnath expedition (417H/1026 CE), "a deed which had fired the imagination of the Islamic world", Caliph al-Qadir Billah himself celebrated the victory with great éclat. It is also significant that Mahmud now issued his coins for the first time from Lahore.

    Alberuni writes that "Mahmud utterly ruined the prosperity of the country… by which the Hindus became like atoms of dust scattered in all directions… Their scattered remains cherish.. the most inveterate aversion towards all Muslims… Hindu sciences have retired far away from those parts of the country conquered by us, and have fled to places which our hand cannot yet reach (italics ours), to Kashmir, Benaras and other places."36 Later chroniclers write with a tinge of pride that fourteen Ghaznavids ruled at Lahore and its environs for nearly two hundred years. But there was progressive deterioration in their administration. However, the importance of occupation of most part of the Punjab lies in the fact that Muslims had come to stay in India. And these Muslims helped in the third wave of Muslim onrush which swept northern India under Muhammad Ghauri.

    As the Dictionary of Islam says, Muslim writers are "unanimous in asserting that in the time of the Prophet... the only choice given to the idolaters of Arabia was death or reception of Islam". Breaking of temples and forcible conversions at the point of sword were achievements of all Muslim invaders and most Muslim rulers. Their Jihad spread Islam in the infidel land of Hindustan and filled the coffers of Muslim conquerors with immense wealth. However, some modern Muslim apologists express a view contrary to what has been said by contemporary chroniclers of the medieval period. Probably they are shocked at the barbarous conduct of their medieval brethren and want to salvage the reputation of Islam, although whatever was done was done in accordance with the canons of their creed. Muslim historians of the medieval period honestly state that non-Muslims were converted to Islam through force; modern Muslim apologists claim that conversions were effected through peaceful means. Medieval chroniclers take pride in the iconoclastic zeal and achievements of their heroes; modern apologists plead otherwise. Medieval historians credit Muslim invaders with fighting jihad for spreading Islam; modern Muslim writers say that their motive was economic - that the invaders were interested in loot and plunder and had little to do with religion. It needs to be emphasized that the truth here does not lie midway. It lies on the side of the medieval chroniclers. Still, the apologists complicate matters by contradicting the versions of their own co-religionists who were closer to and more intimately associated with events about which they wrote than our modern apologists. The idea of a secular Muslim state is an innovation of a few modem "progressive" writers who wish to bracket Muslim civilization with tolerant civilizations. They should remember that there is a difference between the spread of Islam and, say, spread of Buddhism and no amount of jugglery of words and "interpretations" can prove that the spread of Islam was peaceful. All Hadis, and all chroniclers discriminate between Muslims and non-Muslims, and Islam spread in India through the exertions of Muslim heroes like Mahmud of Ghazni and through jihad as recommended by Islamic scriptures.

    As Dr. Ali Issa Othman, for some years adviser to UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency) on education said: "The spread of Islam was military. There is a tendency to apologize for this and we should not. It is one of the injunctions of the Koran that you must fight for the spreading of Islam."37 The successes achieved in this fight for spreading of Islam is also the main story of the medieval Muslim chronicles. The importance of 'force' in Islam should be acknowledged rather than minimized. The denial of force as a means of spreading Islam by a few modem apologists, like Aziz Ahmad and Muhammad Mujeeb38 cannot alter the basic truth about the history and philosophy of Islam, nor the spirit behind words like Kafir, Jihad, Jiziyah, etc.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Malla says:
    @Orwellian State

    Africa’s plight is most certainly not the West’s fault.
     
    I must beg to differ here. The West plays a key role in Africa's plight. African peoples are not made for the modern world. They simply do not have the aptitude and ability to live like modern humans, learn like modern humans, and work like modern humans. The West never should've entered Africa. Left to their own devices, these people would have continued to live like Bushmen, instead of the materialistic life that they co-opted from the whites but have no means of sustaining.

    The West dragged Africans kicking and screaming into the modern world, first through slavery, then through colonialism and lastly through philanthropy, each did its own major damage. Slavery took away the most able men in Africa and ravaged their societies. Colonialism introduced modern clothing, materialism, weapons and lifestyles to Africans which they are entirely unsuited for, and turned them into primitive people with guns once the colonialists left. Philanthropy meanwhile, created a toxic cycle of dependency and a population boom thanks to free gifting of modern medicine.

    One does not need what one does not know exist. Africans should've been left to their own dark continent from the get go, like the Amazonians. Survival of the fittest would've allowed for natural population control. The West's unceasing meddling due to greed(slavery and natural resources) and later, guilt (philanthropy) completely fucked up Africa. I would say the West bears a huge responsibility on where Africa is today.

    The question is what to do about it? Is allowing mass number of Africans into the west the answer? The way I see it we have 2 choices: 1) cut off Africa completely, end all out-migration and leave them to their own devices. Since this would cause lots of screaming from the left, 2) send all the black loving white libtards there to govern and lead them to the promised land, not through outmigration, but through whatever the libtards claim will work - education, agriculture, development and whatever else.

    Read MoreEuropeans did indeed develop Africa a lot during colonialism. https://archive.org/download/TheSiegeOfSouthernAfrica/siege.pdf https://archive.org/stream/TheSiegeOfSouthernAfrica/siege_djvu.txt
    • Replies: @Orwellian State
    That is part of the problem, just like they "developed" India. It is all superficial. They never managed to change the primitive/tribal culture in these countries, or improve their IQ. The natives may have co-opted the modern trappings from architecture to clothing to cars, but they have no means of sustaining that lifestyle. That's why all the infrastructure in these countries, from Central America to India to Africa, were built by colonials 100+ years ago, and falling apart. The vast majority in these countries lack the IQ to adapt to a modern world.

    These countries would've been better off left in their primitive state, with the Malthusian effect continue to serve as natural population control.That is part of the problem, just like they "developed" India. It is all superficial. They never managed to change the primitive/tribal culture in these countries, or improve their IQ. The natives may have co-opted the modern trappings from architecture to clothing to cars, but they have no means of sustaining that lifestyle. That's why all the infrastructure in these countries, from Central America to India to Africa, were built by colonials 100+ years ago, and falling apart. The vast majority in these countries lack the IQ to adapt to a modern world.

    These countries would've been better off left in their primitive state, with the Malthusian effect continue to serve as natural population control.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. Malla says:
    @Talha
    Hey Malla,

    Prove it - please bring credible sources to the discussion. I’d like to see you defend his position.

    Peace.Hey Malla,

    Prove it - please bring credible sources to the discussion. I’d like to see you defend his position.

    Peace.

    http://voiceofdharma.org/books/tpmsi/ch01.htm

    Two points in the destruction of Debal need be taken note of. First, the carnage there lasted for three days. The conquering Muslim army is generally allowed three days of pillage. This three day pattern is repeated in many Muslim massacres, e.g., Timur’s massacre in Delhi (1399) or Sultan Muhammad’s in Constantinople (1453). The lust for slaughter used to assuage in this period and it sufficed the soldiers to gather captives and precious objects.

    Mahmud Ghaznavi was very successful in the usual fields of Islamic expansionism – conversions of Hindus to Islam, destruction of temples and acquisition of wealth. The sack of Somnath in particular came to be considered a specially pious exploit because of its analogy with the destruction of the idol of al-Manat in Arabia by the Prophet. This “explains the idolization of Mahmud by Nizam-ul-Mulk Tusi,34 and the ideal treatment he has received from early sufi poets like Sanai and Attar, not to mention such collectors of anecdotes as Awfi.”35 It is indeed noticeable that after the Somnath expedition (417H/1026 CE), “a deed which had fired the imagination of the Islamic world”, Caliph al-Qadir Billah himself celebrated the victory with great éclat. It is also significant that Mahmud now issued his coins for the first time from Lahore.

    Alberuni writes that “Mahmud utterly ruined the prosperity of the country… by which the Hindus became like atoms of dust scattered in all directions… Their scattered remains cherish.. the most inveterate aversion towards all Muslims… Hindu sciences have retired far away from those parts of the country conquered by us, and have fled to places which our hand cannot yet reach (italics ours), to Kashmir, Benaras and other places.”36 Later chroniclers write with a tinge of pride that fourteen Ghaznavids ruled at Lahore and its environs for nearly two hundred years. But there was progressive deterioration in their administration. However, the importance of occupation of most part of the Punjab lies in the fact that Muslims had come to stay in India. And these Muslims helped in the third wave of Muslim onrush which swept northern India under Muhammad Ghauri.

    As the Dictionary of Islam says, Muslim writers are “unanimous in asserting that in the time of the Prophet… the only choice given to the idolaters of Arabia was death or reception of Islam”. Breaking of temples and forcible conversions at the point of sword were achievements of all Muslim invaders and most Muslim rulers. Their Jihad spread Islam in the infidel land of Hindustan and filled the coffers of Muslim conquerors with immense wealth. However, some modern Muslim apologists express a view contrary to what has been said by contemporary chroniclers of the medieval period. Probably they are shocked at the barbarous conduct of their medieval brethren and want to salvage the reputation of Islam, although whatever was done was done in accordance with the canons of their creed. Muslim historians of the medieval period honestly state that non-Muslims were converted to Islam through force; modern Muslim apologists claim that conversions were effected through peaceful means. Medieval chroniclers take pride in the iconoclastic zeal and achievements of their heroes; modern apologists plead otherwise. Medieval historians credit Muslim invaders with fighting jihad for spreading Islam; modern Muslim writers say that their motive was economic – that the invaders were interested in loot and plunder and had little to do with religion. It needs to be emphasized that the truth here does not lie midway. It lies on the side of the medieval chroniclers. Still, the apologists complicate matters by contradicting the versions of their own co-religionists who were closer to and more intimately associated with events about which they wrote than our modern apologists. The idea of a secular Muslim state is an innovation of a few modem “progressive” writers who wish to bracket Muslim civilization with tolerant civilizations. They should remember that there is a difference between the spread of Islam and, say, spread of Buddhism and no amount of jugglery of words and “interpretations” can prove that the spread of Islam was peaceful. All Hadis, and all chroniclers discriminate between Muslims and non-Muslims, and Islam spread in India through the exertions of Muslim heroes like Mahmud of Ghazni and through jihad as recommended by Islamic scriptures.

    As Dr. Ali Issa Othman, for some years adviser to UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency) on education said: “The spread of Islam was military. There is a tendency to apologize for this and we should not. It is one of the injunctions of the Koran that you must fight for the spreading of Islam.”37 The successes achieved in this fight for spreading of Islam is also the main story of the medieval Muslim chronicles. The importance of ‘force’ in Islam should be acknowledged rather than minimized. The denial of force as a means of spreading Islam by a few modem apologists, like Aziz Ahmad and Muhammad Mujeeb38 cannot alter the basic truth about the history and philosophy of Islam, nor the spirit behind words like Kafir, Jihad, Jiziyah, etc.

    Read Morehttp://voiceofdharma.org/books/tpmsi/ch01.htm Two points in the destruction of Debal need be taken note of. First, the carnage there lasted for three days. The conquering Muslim army is generally allowed three days of pillage. This three day pattern is repeated in many Muslim massacres, e.g., Timur's massacre in Delhi (1399) or Sultan Muhammad's in Constantinople (1453). The lust for slaughter used to assuage in this period and it sufficed the soldiers to gather captives and precious objects. Mahmud Ghaznavi was very successful in the usual fields of Islamic expansionism - conversions of Hindus to Islam, destruction of temples and acquisition of wealth. The sack of Somnath in particular came to be considered a specially pious exploit because of its analogy with the destruction of the idol of al-Manat in Arabia by the Prophet. This "explains the idolization of Mahmud by Nizam-ul-Mulk Tusi,34 and the ideal treatment he has received from early sufi poets like Sanai and Attar, not to mention such collectors of anecdotes as Awfi."35 It is indeed noticeable that after the Somnath expedition (417H/1026 CE), "a deed which had fired the imagination of the Islamic world", Caliph al-Qadir Billah himself celebrated the victory with great éclat. It is also significant that Mahmud now issued his coins for the first time from Lahore. Alberuni writes that "Mahmud utterly ruined the prosperity of the country… by which the Hindus became like atoms of dust scattered in all directions… Their scattered remains cherish.. the most inveterate aversion towards all Muslims… Hindu sciences have retired far away from those parts of the country conquered by us, and have fled to places which our hand cannot yet reach (italics ours), to Kashmir, Benaras and other places."36 Later chroniclers write with a tinge of pride that fourteen Ghaznavids ruled at Lahore and its environs for nearly two hundred years. But there was progressive deterioration in their administration. However, the importance of occupation of most part of the Punjab lies in the fact that Muslims had come to stay in India. And these Muslims helped in the third wave of Muslim onrush which swept northern India under Muhammad Ghauri. As the Dictionary of Islam says, Muslim writers are "unanimous in asserting that in the time of the Prophet... the only choice given to the idolaters of Arabia was death or reception of Islam". Breaking of temples and forcible conversions at the point of sword were achievements of all Muslim invaders and most Muslim rulers. Their Jihad spread Islam in the infidel land of Hindustan and filled the coffers of Muslim conquerors with immense wealth. However, some modern Muslim apologists express a view contrary to what has been said by contemporary chroniclers of the medieval period. Probably they are shocked at the barbarous conduct of their medieval brethren and want to salvage the reputation of Islam, although whatever was done was done in accordance with the canons of their creed. Muslim historians of the medieval period honestly state that non-Muslims were converted to Islam through force; modern Muslim apologists claim that conversions were effected through peaceful means. Medieval chroniclers take pride in the iconoclastic zeal and achievements of their heroes; modern apologists plead otherwise. Medieval historians credit Muslim invaders with fighting jihad for spreading Islam; modern Muslim writers say that their motive was economic - that the invaders were interested in loot and plunder and had little to do with religion. It needs to be emphasized that the truth here does not lie midway. It lies on the side of the medieval chroniclers. Still, the apologists complicate matters by contradicting the versions of their own co-religionists who were closer to and more intimately associated with events about which they wrote than our modern apologists. The idea of a secular Muslim state is an innovation of a few modem "progressive" writers who wish to bracket Muslim civilization with tolerant civilizations. They should remember that there is a difference between the spread of Islam and, say, spread of Buddhism and no amount of jugglery of words and "interpretations" can prove that the spread of Islam was peaceful. All Hadis, and all chroniclers discriminate between Muslims and non-Muslims, and Islam spread in India through the exertions of Muslim heroes like Mahmud of Ghazni and through jihad as recommended by Islamic scriptures. As Dr. Ali Issa Othman, for some years adviser to UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency) on education said: "The spread of Islam was military. There is a tendency to apologize for this and we should not. It is one of the injunctions of the Koran that you must fight for the spreading of Islam."37 The successes achieved in this fight for spreading of Islam is also the main story of the medieval Muslim chronicles. The importance of 'force' in Islam should be acknowledged rather than minimized. The denial of force as a means of spreading Islam by a few modem apologists, like Aziz Ahmad and Muhammad Mujeeb38 cannot alter the basic truth about the history and philosophy of Islam, nor the spirit behind words like Kafir, Jihad, Jiziyah, etc.
    • Replies: @Malla
    http://voiceofdharma.org/books/tpmsi/ch03.htm

    Jihad under Turks

    The chroniclers of the early Turkish rulers of India take pride in affirming that Qutbuddin Aibak was a killer of lakhs of infidels. Leave aside enthusiastic killers like Alauddin Khalji and Muhammad bin Tughlaq, even the "kind-hearted" Firoz Tughlaq killed more than a lakh Bengalis when he invaded their country. Timur Lang or Tamerlane says he killed a hundred thousand infidel prisoners of war in Delhi.34 He built victory pillars from severed heads at many places. These were acts of sultans. The nobles were not lagging behind. One Shaikh Daud Kambu is said to have killed 20,000 with his dagger.35 The Bahmani sultans of Gulbarga and Bidar considered it meritorious to kill a hundred thousand Hindu men, women and children every year.36 These wars were fought in the true spirit of Jihad - the total annihilation or conversion of the non-Muslims. It was in this spirit that some ulema requested Sultan Iltutmish (1210-1236) to confront the Hindus with a choice between Islam and death. He advised them patience as dictated by the compulsions of the situation. Iltutmish fought against Nasiruddin Qubacha and Tajuddin Yaldoz. But his wars against them are not called Jihad. Jihad was against non-Muslims. Hence the insistence of the ulema on this religious duty. In a hundred years time Muslim ambition paved the way for confident optimism. During the reigns of Nasiruddin Mahmud and Ghiyasuddin Balban (1246-86) extensive campaigns in southern Uttar Pradesh, Bundelkhand and Baghelkhand as well as Gwalior, Narwar, Chanderi and Malwa were undertaken. In Katehar and Mewat there were systematic massacres of Rajputs and Mewatis in the true spirit of Jihad. While the numbers of the enslaved boosted Muslim demography, massacres were ordered on selective basis - only of Hindus.37 Similar scenes were witnessed during Alauddin Khalji's invasion of Gujarat in 1299, where massacres by his generals in Anhilwara, Cambay, Asavalli, Vanmanthali and Somnath earned him, according to Rasmala, the sobriquet of Khuni. Also in Chittor, where Alauddin ordered a massacre of 30,000 Hindus. The comment of Amir Khusrau on this genocide (keeping in mind the population of the period) is significant. "Praise be to God"!, writes he in his Khazain-ul-Futuh (completed in 1311 CE) "that he (the sultan) so ordered the massacre of all the chiefs of Hindustan out of the pale of Islam, by his infidel-smiting sword, that if in this time it should by chance happen that a schismatic should claim his right, the pure Sunnis would swear in the name of this Khalifa of God, that heterodoxy has no right."38 Shorn of its verbosity his comment on the horrible massacre only points to the fact that except for Sunni Muslims no other people could be permitted to live in India. Four years later he wrote in his Ashiqa - "Happy Hindustan, the splendour of Religion, where the Law finds perfect honour and security. The whole country, by means of the sword of our holy warriors, has become like a forest denuded of its thorns by fire... Islam is triumphant, idolatry is subdued. Had not the Shariat Law granted exemption from death by the payment of poll-tax, the very name of Hind, root and branch, would have been extinguished."39 Ziyauddin Barani, a contemporary of Amir Khusrau, writes in a similar spirit. He quoted the disposition of Qazi Mughisuddin before Alauddin that the Hindus were the greatest among the enemies of God and the religion of the Prophet40 and so needed to be eliminated. It is in a similar vein that he advocates an all-out Jihad against the Hindus in his Fatawa-i-Jahandari.41 So whether it was a sufi of the stature of Amir Khusrau about whose liberal credentials every secularist swears, or it was an orthodox Maulana like Ziyauddin Barani, the position of the Hindu idolaters in the Islamic law was given by them fairly correctly.42 They deserved to be exterminated through Jihad. If the sultans conceded to the Hindus the status of Zimmis, it was because of the compulsion of the Indian situation.

    That is how wars against Hindus were no ordinary wars, casualties no common casualties, and massacres were massacres of extermination. This thirst for extermination was also whetted by the resistance of "the enemies of God" with their determination for survival. The rite of Jauhar killed the women, the tradition of not deserting the field of battle made Rajputs and others die fighting in large numbers. When Malwa was attacked (1305), its Raja is said to have possessed 40,000 horse and 100,000 foot.43 After the battle, "so far as human eye could see, the ground was muddy with blood". Many cities of Malwa like Mandu, Ujjain, Dharanagri and Chanderi were captured after great resistance. The capitulation of Sevana and Jalor in Rajasthan (1308, 1311) were accompanied by massacres after years of prolonged warfare. In Alauddin's wars in the South, similar killings took place, especially in Dwarsamudra and Tamil Nadu.44 His successor Mubarak Khalji once again sacked Gujarat and Devagiri.

    Under Muhammad Tughlaq, wars and rebellions knew no end. His expeditions to Bengal, Sindh and the Deccan, as well as ruthless suppression of twenty-two rebellions, meant only depopulation in the thirteenth and first half of the fourteenth century.45 For one thing, in spite of constant efforts no addition of territory could be made by Turkish rulers from 1210 to 1296; for another the Turkish rulers were more ruthless in war and less merciful in peace. Hence the extirpating massacres of Balban, and the repeated attacks by others on regions already devastated but not completely subdued. Bengal was attacked by Bakhtiyar, by Balban, by Alauddin, and by all the three Tughlaqs - Ghiyas, Muhammad and Firoz. Malwa and Gujarat were repeatedly attacked and sacked. Almost every Muslim ruler invaded Rantambhor until it was subjugated by Alauddin Khalji (1301, again temporarily). Gwalior, Katehar and Avadh regions were also repeatedly attacked. Rajputana, Sindh and Punjab (also because of the Mongol invasions), knew no peace. in the first decade of the fourteenth century Turkish invaders penetrated into the South, carrying death and destruction. Later on Bahmani and Vijayanagar kingdoms also came to grips with each other. Mulla Daud of Bidar vividly describes the war between Muhammad Shah Bahmani and the Vijayanagar King in 1366 in which "Farishtah computes the victims on the Hindu side alone as numbering no less than half a million."46 Muhammad also devastated the Karnatak region with vengeance.47

    Jihad under Mughals

    The Mughals came with new weapons and new strategy of war, but their religious ideology of Jihad and zeal remained as of old. This is borne out by the difference in Babur's attitude and actions in his two wars, one against the Muslim Ibrahim Lodi and the other against the Hindu Rana Sanga. Babur's war against Ibrahim Lodi was only a war, against Rana Sangram Singh it was Jihad. After the defeat of the Lodi Sultan in the First Battle of Panipat in April 1526, according to Ahmad Yadgar, Babur praised the slain King, and his corpse was given a decent burial at the command of the victor.48 On the other hand, the story of the Battle of Khanwa against Rana Sanga in March 1527 has been described in the royal memoirs in an entirely different idiom. In it Rana Sanga is repeatedly called a pagan (Kafir) with studied contempt. His nobles and soldiers are similarly abused repeatedly. On account of Sanga's large army and reputation for bravery, Babur renounced wine as a measure of seeking God's grace. And how? - cups and flagons were "dashed in pieces, as God willing! soon will be dashed the gods of the idolaters."49 The whole narrative of Babur as well as Shaikh Zain's Fateh Nama is laced with quotations from the Quran for wishing victory against the infidels, for "adequate thanks cannot be rendered for a benefit than which none is greater in the world and nothing is more blessed in the world to come, to wit, victory over most powerful infidels and dominion over wealthiest heretics, 'these are the unbelievers, the wicked'." All the Hindu chiefs killed in battle "trod the road to Hell from this house of clay to the pit of perdition". When they were engaged in battle, they were "made to descend into Hell, the house of perdition. They shall be thrown to burn therein, and an unhappy dwelling shall it be."50 In Babur's memoirs his narrative of Jihad is laced with quotations from the Quran in dozens which shows that he was, like Mahmud Ghaznavi, a scholar of Quran and Hadis and no simple secular warrior.

    After the victory over Rana Sanga, Babur took the title of Ghazi or victor in holy war. As trophy of victory "an order was given to set up a pillar of pagan heads."51 Similar tower of pagan heads was piled up after the success at Chanderi against Medini Rai. "We made general massacre of pagans in it. A pillar of pagan heads was ordered set up on a hill northwest of Chanderi (and) converted what for many years had been a mansion of hostility, into a mansion of Islam."52 Such language is used, such towers of heads of the slain are piled up, only in the case of Hindus. Similar ideas and actions are not found in Babur's description of wars against the Muslims in India. The language betrays the psychology developed by the ideology of Jihad contained in Islamic scriptures. The ideology is not of universal brotherhood. Its brotherhood is confined to Muslims only.

    Even in emperor Akbar's 'secular' reign the religious spirit of Jihad was not lost. Abdul Qadir Badaoni who was then one of Akbar's court chaplains or imams, states that he sought an interview with the emperor when the royal troops were marching against Rana Pratap in 1576, begging leave of absence for "the privilege of joining the campaign to soak his Islamic beard in Hindu infidel blood". Akbar was so pleased at the expression of allegiance to his person and to the Islamic idea of Jihad that he bestowed a handful of gold coins on Badaoni as a token of his pleasure.53 It may be recalled that as an adolescent, Akbar had earned the title of Ghazi by beheading the defenseless infidel Himu. Under Akbar and Jahangir "five or six hundred thousand human beings were killed," says emperor Jahangir.54 The figures given by these killers and their chroniclers may be a few thousand less or a few thousand more, but what bred this ambition of cutting down human beings without compunction was the Muslim theory, practice and spirit of Jihad, as spelled out in Muslim scriptures and rules of administration. Under Aurangzeb every chronicler avers that wars against infidels were fought in the spirit of Jihad. In short, Jihad was never given up in India from the time of Muhammad bin Qasim to that of Aurangzeb and beyond, so long as Muslim rule lasted.

    We may close this discussion on the theory and practice of Jihad by pointing out that the prophet of Islam was a very practical man. He advocated Jihad or aggressive wars against non-Muslims till eternity because he did not visualize a world without Kafirs and people of other faiths. But he could not be sure of success always. Muhammad himself sometimes got Muslim prisoners of war released by giving in exchange beautiful slave girls to the strong adversary at Medina.55 Therefore, in many ahadis he recommended that if infidels harass the Muslims, and offer them peace in return for property the Imam must not accede thereto as far as possible, as this would be a degradation of the Muslim honour. But if destruction is apprehended, purchasing peace with property is lawful, because it is a duty to repel destruction in every possible way.56 Muslims also repelled destruction in this wise in Hindustan from the time of Iltutmish to that of Aurangzeb. Aurangzeb, ever keen on Jihad as stressed in his Fatawa-i-Alamgiri, used to surrender forts to the Marathas when destruction stared him in the face, Rajputs too used to recover their forts and properties from Muslim rulers throughout the medieval period. But Jihad was a religious duty for Muslims till eternity for the annihilation of non-Muslims. It was carried out in India to the best of the competence and strength of Muslim invaders and rulers throughout the medieval period.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Malla says:
    @Malla
    http://voiceofdharma.org/books/tpmsi/ch01.htm

    Two points in the destruction of Debal need be taken note of. First, the carnage there lasted for three days. The conquering Muslim army is generally allowed three days of pillage. This three day pattern is repeated in many Muslim massacres, e.g., Timur's massacre in Delhi (1399) or Sultan Muhammad's in Constantinople (1453). The lust for slaughter used to assuage in this period and it sufficed the soldiers to gather captives and precious objects.


    Mahmud Ghaznavi was very successful in the usual fields of Islamic expansionism - conversions of Hindus to Islam, destruction of temples and acquisition of wealth. The sack of Somnath in particular came to be considered a specially pious exploit because of its analogy with the destruction of the idol of al-Manat in Arabia by the Prophet. This "explains the idolization of Mahmud by Nizam-ul-Mulk Tusi,34 and the ideal treatment he has received from early sufi poets like Sanai and Attar, not to mention such collectors of anecdotes as Awfi."35 It is indeed noticeable that after the Somnath expedition (417H/1026 CE), "a deed which had fired the imagination of the Islamic world", Caliph al-Qadir Billah himself celebrated the victory with great éclat. It is also significant that Mahmud now issued his coins for the first time from Lahore.

    Alberuni writes that "Mahmud utterly ruined the prosperity of the country… by which the Hindus became like atoms of dust scattered in all directions… Their scattered remains cherish.. the most inveterate aversion towards all Muslims… Hindu sciences have retired far away from those parts of the country conquered by us, and have fled to places which our hand cannot yet reach (italics ours), to Kashmir, Benaras and other places."36 Later chroniclers write with a tinge of pride that fourteen Ghaznavids ruled at Lahore and its environs for nearly two hundred years. But there was progressive deterioration in their administration. However, the importance of occupation of most part of the Punjab lies in the fact that Muslims had come to stay in India. And these Muslims helped in the third wave of Muslim onrush which swept northern India under Muhammad Ghauri.

    As the Dictionary of Islam says, Muslim writers are "unanimous in asserting that in the time of the Prophet... the only choice given to the idolaters of Arabia was death or reception of Islam". Breaking of temples and forcible conversions at the point of sword were achievements of all Muslim invaders and most Muslim rulers. Their Jihad spread Islam in the infidel land of Hindustan and filled the coffers of Muslim conquerors with immense wealth. However, some modern Muslim apologists express a view contrary to what has been said by contemporary chroniclers of the medieval period. Probably they are shocked at the barbarous conduct of their medieval brethren and want to salvage the reputation of Islam, although whatever was done was done in accordance with the canons of their creed. Muslim historians of the medieval period honestly state that non-Muslims were converted to Islam through force; modern Muslim apologists claim that conversions were effected through peaceful means. Medieval chroniclers take pride in the iconoclastic zeal and achievements of their heroes; modern apologists plead otherwise. Medieval historians credit Muslim invaders with fighting jihad for spreading Islam; modern Muslim writers say that their motive was economic - that the invaders were interested in loot and plunder and had little to do with religion. It needs to be emphasized that the truth here does not lie midway. It lies on the side of the medieval chroniclers. Still, the apologists complicate matters by contradicting the versions of their own co-religionists who were closer to and more intimately associated with events about which they wrote than our modern apologists. The idea of a secular Muslim state is an innovation of a few modem "progressive" writers who wish to bracket Muslim civilization with tolerant civilizations. They should remember that there is a difference between the spread of Islam and, say, spread of Buddhism and no amount of jugglery of words and "interpretations" can prove that the spread of Islam was peaceful. All Hadis, and all chroniclers discriminate between Muslims and non-Muslims, and Islam spread in India through the exertions of Muslim heroes like Mahmud of Ghazni and through jihad as recommended by Islamic scriptures.

    As Dr. Ali Issa Othman, for some years adviser to UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency) on education said: "The spread of Islam was military. There is a tendency to apologize for this and we should not. It is one of the injunctions of the Koran that you must fight for the spreading of Islam."37 The successes achieved in this fight for spreading of Islam is also the main story of the medieval Muslim chronicles. The importance of 'force' in Islam should be acknowledged rather than minimized. The denial of force as a means of spreading Islam by a few modem apologists, like Aziz Ahmad and Muhammad Mujeeb38 cannot alter the basic truth about the history and philosophy of Islam, nor the spirit behind words like Kafir, Jihad, Jiziyah, etc.http://voiceofdharma.org/books/tpmsi/ch01.htm

    Two points in the destruction of Debal need be taken note of. First, the carnage there lasted for three days. The conquering Muslim army is generally allowed three days of pillage. This three day pattern is repeated in many Muslim massacres, e.g., Timur's massacre in Delhi (1399) or Sultan Muhammad's in Constantinople (1453). The lust for slaughter used to assuage in this period and it sufficed the soldiers to gather captives and precious objects.


    Mahmud Ghaznavi was very successful in the usual fields of Islamic expansionism - conversions of Hindus to Islam, destruction of temples and acquisition of wealth. The sack of Somnath in particular came to be considered a specially pious exploit because of its analogy with the destruction of the idol of al-Manat in Arabia by the Prophet. This "explains the idolization of Mahmud by Nizam-ul-Mulk Tusi,34 and the ideal treatment he has received from early sufi poets like Sanai and Attar, not to mention such collectors of anecdotes as Awfi."35 It is indeed noticeable that after the Somnath expedition (417H/1026 CE), "a deed which had fired the imagination of the Islamic world", Caliph al-Qadir Billah himself celebrated the victory with great éclat. It is also significant that Mahmud now issued his coins for the first time from Lahore.

    Alberuni writes that "Mahmud utterly ruined the prosperity of the country… by which the Hindus became like atoms of dust scattered in all directions… Their scattered remains cherish.. the most inveterate aversion towards all Muslims… Hindu sciences have retired far away from those parts of the country conquered by us, and have fled to places which our hand cannot yet reach (italics ours), to Kashmir, Benaras and other places."36 Later chroniclers write with a tinge of pride that fourteen Ghaznavids ruled at Lahore and its environs for nearly two hundred years. But there was progressive deterioration in their administration. However, the importance of occupation of most part of the Punjab lies in the fact that Muslims had come to stay in India. And these Muslims helped in the third wave of Muslim onrush which swept northern India under Muhammad Ghauri.

    As the Dictionary of Islam says, Muslim writers are "unanimous in asserting that in the time of the Prophet... the only choice given to the idolaters of Arabia was death or reception of Islam". Breaking of temples and forcible conversions at the point of sword were achievements of all Muslim invaders and most Muslim rulers. Their Jihad spread Islam in the infidel land of Hindustan and filled the coffers of Muslim conquerors with immense wealth. However, some modern Muslim apologists express a view contrary to what has been said by contemporary chroniclers of the medieval period. Probably they are shocked at the barbarous conduct of their medieval brethren and want to salvage the reputation of Islam, although whatever was done was done in accordance with the canons of their creed. Muslim historians of the medieval period honestly state that non-Muslims were converted to Islam through force; modern Muslim apologists claim that conversions were effected through peaceful means. Medieval chroniclers take pride in the iconoclastic zeal and achievements of their heroes; modern apologists plead otherwise. Medieval historians credit Muslim invaders with fighting jihad for spreading Islam; modern Muslim writers say that their motive was economic - that the invaders were interested in loot and plunder and had little to do with religion. It needs to be emphasized that the truth here does not lie midway. It lies on the side of the medieval chroniclers. Still, the apologists complicate matters by contradicting the versions of their own co-religionists who were closer to and more intimately associated with events about which they wrote than our modern apologists. The idea of a secular Muslim state is an innovation of a few modem "progressive" writers who wish to bracket Muslim civilization with tolerant civilizations. They should remember that there is a difference between the spread of Islam and, say, spread of Buddhism and no amount of jugglery of words and "interpretations" can prove that the spread of Islam was peaceful. All Hadis, and all chroniclers discriminate between Muslims and non-Muslims, and Islam spread in India through the exertions of Muslim heroes like Mahmud of Ghazni and through jihad as recommended by Islamic scriptures.

    As Dr. Ali Issa Othman, for some years adviser to UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency) on education said: "The spread of Islam was military. There is a tendency to apologize for this and we should not. It is one of the injunctions of the Koran that you must fight for the spreading of Islam."37 The successes achieved in this fight for spreading of Islam is also the main story of the medieval Muslim chronicles. The importance of 'force' in Islam should be acknowledged rather than minimized. The denial of force as a means of spreading Islam by a few modem apologists, like Aziz Ahmad and Muhammad Mujeeb38 cannot alter the basic truth about the history and philosophy of Islam, nor the spirit behind words like Kafir, Jihad, Jiziyah, etc.

    http://voiceofdharma.org/books/tpmsi/ch03.htm

    Jihad under Turks

    [MORE]

    The chroniclers of the early Turkish rulers of India take pride in affirming that Qutbuddin Aibak was a killer of lakhs of infidels. Leave aside enthusiastic killers like Alauddin Khalji and Muhammad bin Tughlaq, even the “kind-hearted” Firoz Tughlaq killed more than a lakh Bengalis when he invaded their country. Timur Lang or Tamerlane says he killed a hundred thousand infidel prisoners of war in Delhi.34 He built victory pillars from severed heads at many places. These were acts of sultans. The nobles were not lagging behind. One Shaikh Daud Kambu is said to have killed 20,000 with his dagger.35 The Bahmani sultans of Gulbarga and Bidar considered it meritorious to kill a hundred thousand Hindu men, women and children every year.36 These wars were fought in the true spirit of Jihad – the total annihilation or conversion of the non-Muslims. It was in this spirit that some ulema requested Sultan Iltutmish (1210-1236) to confront the Hindus with a choice between Islam and death. He advised them patience as dictated by the compulsions of the situation. Iltutmish fought against Nasiruddin Qubacha and Tajuddin Yaldoz. But his wars against them are not called Jihad. Jihad was against non-Muslims. Hence the insistence of the ulema on this religious duty. In a hundred years time Muslim ambition paved the way for confident optimism. During the reigns of Nasiruddin Mahmud and Ghiyasuddin Balban (1246-86) extensive campaigns in southern Uttar Pradesh, Bundelkhand and Baghelkhand as well as Gwalior, Narwar, Chanderi and Malwa were undertaken. In Katehar and Mewat there were systematic massacres of Rajputs and Mewatis in the true spirit of Jihad. While the numbers of the enslaved boosted Muslim demography, massacres were ordered on selective basis – only of Hindus.37 Similar scenes were witnessed during Alauddin Khalji’s invasion of Gujarat in 1299, where massacres by his generals in Anhilwara, Cambay, Asavalli, Vanmanthali and Somnath earned him, according to Rasmala, the sobriquet of Khuni. Also in Chittor, where Alauddin ordered a massacre of 30,000 Hindus. The comment of Amir Khusrau on this genocide (keeping in mind the population of the period) is significant. “Praise be to God”!, writes he in his Khazain-ul-Futuh (completed in 1311 CE) “that he (the sultan) so ordered the massacre of all the chiefs of Hindustan out of the pale of Islam, by his infidel-smiting sword, that if in this time it should by chance happen that a schismatic should claim his right, the pure Sunnis would swear in the name of this Khalifa of God, that heterodoxy has no right.”38 Shorn of its verbosity his comment on the horrible massacre only points to the fact that except for Sunni Muslims no other people could be permitted to live in India. Four years later he wrote in his Ashiqa – “Happy Hindustan, the splendour of Religion, where the Law finds perfect honour and security. The whole country, by means of the sword of our holy warriors, has become like a forest denuded of its thorns by fire… Islam is triumphant, idolatry is subdued. Had not the Shariat Law granted exemption from death by the payment of poll-tax, the very name of Hind, root and branch, would have been extinguished.”39 Ziyauddin Barani, a contemporary of Amir Khusrau, writes in a similar spirit. He quoted the disposition of Qazi Mughisuddin before Alauddin that the Hindus were the greatest among the enemies of God and the religion of the Prophet40 and so needed to be eliminated. It is in a similar vein that he advocates an all-out Jihad against the Hindus in his Fatawa-i-Jahandari.41 So whether it was a sufi of the stature of Amir Khusrau about whose liberal credentials every secularist swears, or it was an orthodox Maulana like Ziyauddin Barani, the position of the Hindu idolaters in the Islamic law was given by them fairly correctly.42 They deserved to be exterminated through Jihad. If the sultans conceded to the Hindus the status of Zimmis, it was because of the compulsion of the Indian situation.

    That is how wars against Hindus were no ordinary wars, casualties no common casualties, and massacres were massacres of extermination. This thirst for extermination was also whetted by the resistance of “the enemies of God” with their determination for survival. The rite of Jauhar killed the women, the tradition of not deserting the field of battle made Rajputs and others die fighting in large numbers. When Malwa was attacked (1305), its Raja is said to have possessed 40,000 horse and 100,000 foot.43 After the battle, “so far as human eye could see, the ground was muddy with blood”. Many cities of Malwa like Mandu, Ujjain, Dharanagri and Chanderi were captured after great resistance. The capitulation of Sevana and Jalor in Rajasthan (1308, 1311) were accompanied by massacres after years of prolonged warfare. In Alauddin’s wars in the South, similar killings took place, especially in Dwarsamudra and Tamil Nadu.44 His successor Mubarak Khalji once again sacked Gujarat and Devagiri.

    Under Muhammad Tughlaq, wars and rebellions knew no end. His expeditions to Bengal, Sindh and the Deccan, as well as ruthless suppression of twenty-two rebellions, meant only depopulation in the thirteenth and first half of the fourteenth century.45 For one thing, in spite of constant efforts no addition of territory could be made by Turkish rulers from 1210 to 1296; for another the Turkish rulers were more ruthless in war and less merciful in peace. Hence the extirpating massacres of Balban, and the repeated attacks by others on regions already devastated but not completely subdued. Bengal was attacked by Bakhtiyar, by Balban, by Alauddin, and by all the three Tughlaqs – Ghiyas, Muhammad and Firoz. Malwa and Gujarat were repeatedly attacked and sacked. Almost every Muslim ruler invaded Rantambhor until it was subjugated by Alauddin Khalji (1301, again temporarily). Gwalior, Katehar and Avadh regions were also repeatedly attacked. Rajputana, Sindh and Punjab (also because of the Mongol invasions), knew no peace. in the first decade of the fourteenth century Turkish invaders penetrated into the South, carrying death and destruction. Later on Bahmani and Vijayanagar kingdoms also came to grips with each other. Mulla Daud of Bidar vividly describes the war between Muhammad Shah Bahmani and the Vijayanagar King in 1366 in which “Farishtah computes the victims on the Hindu side alone as numbering no less than half a million.”46 Muhammad also devastated the Karnatak region with vengeance.47

    Jihad under Mughals

    The Mughals came with new weapons and new strategy of war, but their religious ideology of Jihad and zeal remained as of old. This is borne out by the difference in Babur’s attitude and actions in his two wars, one against the Muslim Ibrahim Lodi and the other against the Hindu Rana Sanga. Babur’s war against Ibrahim Lodi was only a war, against Rana Sangram Singh it was Jihad. After the defeat of the Lodi Sultan in the First Battle of Panipat in April 1526, according to Ahmad Yadgar, Babur praised the slain King, and his corpse was given a decent burial at the command of the victor.48 On the other hand, the story of the Battle of Khanwa against Rana Sanga in March 1527 has been described in the royal memoirs in an entirely different idiom. In it Rana Sanga is repeatedly called a pagan (Kafir) with studied contempt. His nobles and soldiers are similarly abused repeatedly. On account of Sanga’s large army and reputation for bravery, Babur renounced wine as a measure of seeking God’s grace. And how? – cups and flagons were “dashed in pieces, as God willing! soon will be dashed the gods of the idolaters.”49 The whole narrative of Babur as well as Shaikh Zain’s Fateh Nama is laced with quotations from the Quran for wishing victory against the infidels, for “adequate thanks cannot be rendered for a benefit than which none is greater in the world and nothing is more blessed in the world to come, to wit, victory over most powerful infidels and dominion over wealthiest heretics, ‘these are the unbelievers, the wicked’.” All the Hindu chiefs killed in battle “trod the road to Hell from this house of clay to the pit of perdition”. When they were engaged in battle, they were “made to descend into Hell, the house of perdition. They shall be thrown to burn therein, and an unhappy dwelling shall it be.”50 In Babur’s memoirs his narrative of Jihad is laced with quotations from the Quran in dozens which shows that he was, like Mahmud Ghaznavi, a scholar of Quran and Hadis and no simple secular warrior.

    After the victory over Rana Sanga, Babur took the title of Ghazi or victor in holy war. As trophy of victory “an order was given to set up a pillar of pagan heads.”51 Similar tower of pagan heads was piled up after the success at Chanderi against Medini Rai. “We made general massacre of pagans in it. A pillar of pagan heads was ordered set up on a hill northwest of Chanderi (and) converted what for many years had been a mansion of hostility, into a mansion of Islam.”52 Such language is used, such towers of heads of the slain are piled up, only in the case of Hindus. Similar ideas and actions are not found in Babur’s description of wars against the Muslims in India. The language betrays the psychology developed by the ideology of Jihad contained in Islamic scriptures. The ideology is not of universal brotherhood. Its brotherhood is confined to Muslims only.

    Even in emperor Akbar’s ‘secular’ reign the religious spirit of Jihad was not lost. Abdul Qadir Badaoni who was then one of Akbar’s court chaplains or imams, states that he sought an interview with the emperor when the royal troops were marching against Rana Pratap in 1576, begging leave of absence for “the privilege of joining the campaign to soak his Islamic beard in Hindu infidel blood”. Akbar was so pleased at the expression of allegiance to his person and to the Islamic idea of Jihad that he bestowed a handful of gold coins on Badaoni as a token of his pleasure.53 It may be recalled that as an adolescent, Akbar had earned the title of Ghazi by beheading the defenseless infidel Himu. Under Akbar and Jahangir “five or six hundred thousand human beings were killed,” says emperor Jahangir.54 The figures given by these killers and their chroniclers may be a few thousand less or a few thousand more, but what bred this ambition of cutting down human beings without compunction was the Muslim theory, practice and spirit of Jihad, as spelled out in Muslim scriptures and rules of administration. Under Aurangzeb every chronicler avers that wars against infidels were fought in the spirit of Jihad. In short, Jihad was never given up in India from the time of Muhammad bin Qasim to that of Aurangzeb and beyond, so long as Muslim rule lasted.

    We may close this discussion on the theory and practice of Jihad by pointing out that the prophet of Islam was a very practical man. He advocated Jihad or aggressive wars against non-Muslims till eternity because he did not visualize a world without Kafirs and people of other faiths. But he could not be sure of success always. Muhammad himself sometimes got Muslim prisoners of war released by giving in exchange beautiful slave girls to the strong adversary at Medina.55 Therefore, in many ahadis he recommended that if infidels harass the Muslims, and offer them peace in return for property the Imam must not accede thereto as far as possible, as this would be a degradation of the Muslim honour. But if destruction is apprehended, purchasing peace with property is lawful, because it is a duty to repel destruction in every possible way.56 Muslims also repelled destruction in this wise in Hindustan from the time of Iltutmish to that of Aurangzeb. Aurangzeb, ever keen on Jihad as stressed in his Fatawa-i-Alamgiri, used to surrender forts to the Marathas when destruction stared him in the face, Rajputs too used to recover their forts and properties from Muslim rulers throughout the medieval period. But Jihad was a religious duty for Muslims till eternity for the annihilation of non-Muslims. It was carried out in India to the best of the competence and strength of Muslim invaders and rulers throughout the medieval period.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Malla,

    Thanks for referencing an academic source. I actually don't disagree with the general outline of history regarding the bloody conquests of India from many of the Turkic Muslims (like Ghaznavids, Tamerlane [that dude was in a sanguinary class alone], etc.). I had initially thought Mr. Warner was going to mention the way-overboard number of 80 million killed that he has cited in other places, but it didn't look like he did that in this video. He says some really weird things though - like; sati was started as a way for Hundu noblewomen to escape becoming part of a Muslim harem...you buy that?

    I (well, actually other academics since I'm not a historian) do critique or contradict Prof. Lal on certain aspects of his narrative, namely:
    1) The specific religious nature of the invasions - sure jihad was a motivation (no doubt about that), but men like Mahmud Ghazni were after wealth, dominion and definitely used a facade of religion:
    “He extended the empire from western Persia to the Ganges valley, financing his army and sophisticated bearacracy by campaigns against wealthy Hindu religious centers and excessive taxation of Khurasan and Afghanistan. The religious impetus of Mahmud’s Indian forays was minimal; he fought equally tenaciously against rival Muslim rulers and established permanent dominion in India only up to Lahore.”
    Medieval Islamic Civilization: An Encyclopedia

    Furthermore, men like him and his successors had plenty of Hindus in positions of power who wanted to gain from the conquests - so the idea that this was solely Muslims vs kaafirs is not accurate:
    “The position of Hindu generals, soldiers, and scholars at the Ghaznavid court is also significant. Even Mahmud, the iconoclast, had a contingent of Hindu officers and soldiers. He richly rewarded at least one Sanskrit poet, and had Hindu pandits at his court. He also issued coins with Sanskrit inscriptions. The Hindu position seems to have improved greatly in the days of his successor, Masud. Only fifty days after the death of Mahmud, his son despatched Sewand Rai, a Hindu chief, with a large body of Hindu cavalry in pursuit of the nobles who had espoused the cause of his brother. Sewand Rai died in the ensuing battle, but his selection for this important assignment indicates his position of trust and eminence…contemporary evidence suggests that the Hindu position under the Ghaznavids was very much better than it was to be in the early days of the Delhi Sultanate.”
    http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00islamlinks/ikram/part1_02.html

    When Prof. Lal calls Mahmud Ghazni a "scholar of Qur'an and hadis" because he quotes verses from it at times is a stretch. I mean - my kid can quote verses and I can quote certain lines from Shakespeare; doesn't make me a scholar. It's those kind of statements that make one question his credibility and judgement. His polemical stance certainly does not help.

    2) I think Prof. Lal looks at numbers in medieval sources uncritically the late Prof. Simon Digby called him out on this.

    3) His conclusions that there was some kind of a forced conversion program doesn't stand up to historical scrutiny. There were instances for sure, these are recorded by Muslims themselves - and the Afghans were especially known for this when they invaded. But, as Prof. Richard Eaton pointed out, the place where most conversions happened were the places out of Muslim political control:
    “If Islamization had ever been a function of military or political force, one would expect that those areas exposed most intensively and over the longest period to rule by Muslim dynasties—that is, those that were most fully exposed to the ‘sword’—would today contain the greatest number of Muslims. Yet the opposite is the case, as those regions where the most dramatic Islamization occurred, such as eastern Bengal or western Punjab, lay on the fringes of Indo-Muslim rule, where the ‘sword’ was weakest, and where brute force could have exerted the least influence. In such regions the first accurate census reports put the Muslim population at between 70 and 90 percent of the total, whereas in the heartland of Muslim rule in the upper Gangetic Plain—the domain of the Delhi Fort and the Taj Mahal, where Muslim regimes had ruled the most intensively and for the longest period of time—the Muslim population ranged from only 10 to 15 percent. In other words, in the subcontinent as a whole there is an inverse relationship between the degree of Muslim political penetration and the degree of Islamization. Even within Bengal this principle holds true.”
    The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, 1204-1760

    People tend to be averse to religion if it's being forced down their throats.

    You see this too in the state of Kerala which never came under Mughal rule and has almost a 1/3 Muslim population that follow the Shafi'i school of the Muslim traders that brought them Islam (not the official Mughal endorsed, Hanafi school).

    4) This idea of smashing Hindu temples simply out of Hindu hate is also not accurate:
    "Hindu and Jain temples dotted the landscape of Aurangzeb’s kingdom. These religious institutions were entitled to Mughal state protection, and Aurangzeb generally endeavoured to ensure their well-being. By the same token, from a Mughal perspective, that goodwill could be revoked when specific temples or their associates acted against imperial interests. Accordingly, emperor Aurangzeb authorised targeted temple destructions and desecrations throughout his rule....Most glaringly, Aurangzeb counted thousands of Hindu temples within his domains and yet destroyed, at most, a few dozen. This incongruity makes little sense if we cling to a vision of Aurangzeb as a cartoon bigot driven by a single-minded agenda of ridding India of Hindu places of worship."
    https://qz.com/918425/mughal-emperor-aurangzeb-protected-hindu-temples-more-often-than-he-demolished-them/

    Though it could be argued that Mahmud Ghazni did engage in it from a religious standpoint since the Ghaznavids switched schools after he died (again, from my earlier source):
    “In jurispriudence, the early Ghaznavids were Shafi’i, but Hanafism gained ascendancy by Mas’ud’s time.”

    So yeah - I agree there was quite a bit of blood spilled over the centuries by invading Muslim armies. And those quotes from Medieval Muslims looking to spill pagan blood is fairly understandable given the context when they are heading to fight a Hindu army on the battlefield. Making a total wipe out of an army was never seen as anything immoral and Muslim chroniclers have been praising the ability of a Muslim army to utterly decimate a non-Muslim one from the earliest times - especially when under-armed and under-manned. That's what armies are paid to do; they fight and die. I plan on teaching my boys about how Persia had her back broken at Qadisiyyah. But those that spilled the blood of innocent men, women and children will be held to account on the Day of Judgement (whether Muslim or not); that is completely out of the pale and absolutely unacceptable. I think the most accurate count for the number of deaths is in the ballpark of between 10-15 million.

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. @Malla
    But during the days of those huge colonial empires, things were much better. I knew a British guy, whose parents had gone by land to British India from Europe and obviously via Afghanistan. There is also this case of a Jewish guy and his wife making a jeep journey from Thailand to Israel just after WW2. Even if Afghanistan was not directly ruled by any European power then, Afghanistan & the world was much safer during the days of the European Empires.But during the days of those huge colonial empires, things were much better. I knew a British guy, whose parents had gone by land to British India from Europe and obviously via Afghanistan. There is also this case of a Jewish guy and his wife making a jeep journey from Thailand to Israel just after WW2. Even if Afghanistan was not directly ruled by any European power then, Afghanistan & the world was much safer during the days of the European Empires.

    “during the days of those huge colonial empires, things were much better [respecting security of foreigners passing through places like Afghanistan]” — Malla

    I agree, for sure. I have seen a documentary film privately made of the transfer of power from Sierra Leone as a crown colony to Sierra Leone as an independent nation. The native soldiers formed up for the flag changing ceremony went barefoot and their rifles were only for drill and could not be fired — and that system was so much better than what has followed! It is all the fault of white men — because they or some of them allowed African natives to get their hands on modern rifles! As General Sir David Ormsby-Gore reportedly said after putting down the Mau-Mau rebellion in Kenya, effectively employing napalm, “God knows we tried.”

    Back in the days of the great European empires and in any event during the days of the British Empire, things were much better for everyone than they have become since then. But the empires were unsustainable after World War II and barely sustainable before. Maybe if Britain had taken up Hitler on his offer to leave the colonial world as it was — or even to assist Britain where needed — while letting Germany “take” Russia … oh well, that’s just a pipe dream considering that Hitler after militarily taking Czechoslovakia (beyond just the Sudentenland, which had been allowed by Chamberlain) … Hitler had proven himself and his government to be completely untrustworthy … and there is to be found the flea in the ointment of any and all of those theories as to how Hitler really did not bring on World War II when he ordered the invasion of Poland. IMHO, the real problem with Nazism was Hitler’s insistence that the Slavs consisted of a lesser race, especially when you consider that the Slavs are actually linguistically and probably genetically closer to the Aryan roots than any of the “races” of Western Europe, including the mutts of the “German or Teutonic race.” Well, you can only expect so much of any opportunistic politician!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla
    Well the empires collapsed because of communist intrigues funded by wall street money. Nesta Webster wrote how the British establishment was very pro communist, the labour party was nearly slaves of the communists or hidden communists themselves and the Conservatives gave the leftoids a free pass everytime. There was definitely banking money involved. Even Douglass Reed writes about this in his books on Rhodesia and Southern Africa in general. One of the main aim of the globalists was to destroy the British Empire before all the other empires.
    So maybe Hitler had a point. He was not against the British empire at the beginning (he became anti-British empire much later in the war), he was primarily an anti communist. I would even say he was more anti Communist than anti-Jewish. As far as him being anti-Slavic, I dunno. I do not doubt the fact that anti Slavism did exist among the German NS top ranks, but I believe it has been blown out of proportion. There were Russians in the SS Wafen.
    Communism is after all creating a slave society by using a target population to come to power by creating anger over some out group in the said population and also making fake promises to the said target population for an Utopian future, the targets might be working classes used against the middle classes, blacks/immigrants against Whites etc... The target population is useful only as a vehicle to come to power and to stabilize the power. Thats it, after that the target population themselves become slaves. At the end of the day, Communism is a globalist banker funded ideology of total control.
    Hitler believed that democracy could never fight communism as communism would infiltrate democratic countries with ease (which is exactly what has happened today) and class warfare or even ethnic/racial rivalries give the communists the chance to infiltrate societies. I guess National Socialism was designed to reduce inter class rivalries as well as to create an airtight social economic system to render it impossible for communist infiltration.Well the empires collapsed because of communist intrigues funded by wall street money. Nesta Webster wrote how the British establishment was very pro communist, the labour party was nearly slaves of the communists or hidden communists themselves and the Conservatives gave the leftoids a free pass everytime. There was definitely banking money involved. Even Douglass Reed writes about this in his books on Rhodesia and Southern Africa in general. One of the main aim of the globalists was to destroy the British Empire before all the other empires.
    So maybe Hitler had a point. He was not against the British empire at the beginning (he became anti-British empire much later in the war), he was primarily an anti communist. I would even say he was more anti Communist than anti-Jewish. As far as him being anti-Slavic, I dunno. I do not doubt the fact that anti Slavism did exist among the German NS top ranks, but I believe it has been blown out of proportion. There were Russians in the SS Wafen.
    Communism is after all creating a slave society by using a target population to come to power by creating anger over some out group in the said population and also making fake promises to the said target population for an Utopian future, the targets might be working classes used against the middle classes, blacks/immigrants against Whites etc... The target population is useful only as a vehicle to come to power and to stabilize the power. Thats it, after that the target population themselves become slaves. At the end of the day, Communism is a globalist banker funded ideology of total control.
    Hitler believed that democracy could never fight communism as communism would infiltrate democratic countries with ease (which is exactly what has happened today) and class warfare or even ethnic/racial rivalries give the communists the chance to infiltrate societies. I guess National Socialism was designed to reduce inter class rivalries as well as to create an airtight social economic system to render it impossible for communist infiltration.
    , @jacques sheete

    Hitler had proven himself and his government to be completely untrustworthy … and there is to be found the flea in the ointment of any and all of those theories as to how Hitler really did not bring on World War II when he ordered the invasion of Poland. IMHO...
     
    GC, you seem like a fine fellow, but you may want to revisit some of your thoughts.Hitler was less untrustworthy than Wilson, Churchill and FDR to name just three, all of whom flip-flopped seriously and repeatedly for the benefit of their handlers.

    Here's a good start if you can stomach it.

    -Douglas Reed, “the Controversy of Zion,”

    https://archive.org/stream/TheControversyOfZion/TheControversyOfZion_djvu.txt
     

    Spoiler: The US was sold down the river a century ago and all the presidents since at least Wilson were traitors to American interests. They were all enslaved by the twin evils of Communism and Zionism.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. The answer to the question posited: What makes a country, the people or the place, is obvious. Just like there is no such thing as a “bad school”, only “bad students (and teachers)”, shithole countries are shitholes because majority of the people who live in them are shit. You can blame it on culture all you want, but at the end of the day, culture is created by people, and high IQ people create high culture, while low IQ people create low culture.

    From Indonesia to India, El Salvador to Africa, there is not a single black or brown country in the world that is half way livable. These people create shit cultures that ruined their environments. Every single one of these countries, if never populated, likely would’ve been pristine, beautiful places. And if populated by WASPs, would’ve been an improvement, more Western Europes and North Americas, Australias, New Zealands. Countries that the rest of the world want to flock to.

    At the end of the day, the two most salient qualities of a high culture are honesty and self-restraint. These are qualities the WASPs have in spade thanks to Protestantism(but now brought low by the dishonest and unrestraint Jewish culture). The Northeast Asians have self-restraint but lack honesty(except for the Japanese), that’s why China is still struggling with corruption despite all the semblance of a modern country in its cities. The vast majority in black and brown countries lack both, that’s why they are shithole countries.

    The question is, will these people adopt high culture when they move to a country dominated by high culture? Only the top 0.01 to 0.1% will have the IQ to do so (maybe top 25% from Northeast Asian countries). Beyond that, no. They’ll just drag down the new country.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla

    At the end of the day, the two most salient qualities of a high culture are honesty and self-restraint. These are qualities the WASPs have in spade thanks to Protestantism
     
    I think it is combination of Protestantism and cold climate genetic factors as well as Hanjal line history. I mean there are a lot of Protestant blacks too, Nigeria has loads of them for example but you do not see these qualities among most of them. I have come across a few blacks (very few) with those qualities, for some reason mostly from the nation of Ghana. But they are really rare. Same with Protestant Asian Indians. However Protestant Indians in India tend to be more honest then Hindus, Muslims and Jains but by only a margin of say 10 to 20% in my experience. Thus there is definitely a genetic factor along with a religious/ cultural one.
    , @Malla

    These are qualities the WASPs have in spade thanks to Protestantism(but now brought low by the dishonest and unrestraint Jewish culture). The Northeast Asians have self-restraint but lack honesty(except for the Japanese),
     
    There is one more country where people are quite honest and trustworthy nearly as much as WASPs and Japanese. The people of Bhutan.
    Unfortunately they are too close to India and India runs that country like a pseudo colonial power. I feel bad for their unfortunate location and situation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. @Orwellian State

    Africa’s plight is most certainly not the West’s fault.
     
    I must beg to differ here. The West plays a key role in Africa's plight. African peoples are not made for the modern world. They simply do not have the aptitude and ability to live like modern humans, learn like modern humans, and work like modern humans. The West never should've entered Africa. Left to their own devices, these people would have continued to live like Bushmen, instead of the materialistic life that they co-opted from the whites but have no means of sustaining.

    The West dragged Africans kicking and screaming into the modern world, first through slavery, then through colonialism and lastly through philanthropy, each did its own major damage. Slavery took away the most able men in Africa and ravaged their societies. Colonialism introduced modern clothing, materialism, weapons and lifestyles to Africans which they are entirely unsuited for, and turned them into primitive people with guns once the colonialists left. Philanthropy meanwhile, created a toxic cycle of dependency and a population boom thanks to free gifting of modern medicine.

    One does not need what one does not know exist. Africans should've been left to their own dark continent from the get go, like the Amazonians. Survival of the fittest would've allowed for natural population control. The West's unceasing meddling due to greed(slavery and natural resources) and later, guilt (philanthropy) completely fucked up Africa. I would say the West bears a huge responsibility on where Africa is today.

    The question is what to do about it? Is allowing mass number of Africans into the west the answer? The way I see it we have 2 choices: 1) cut off Africa completely, end all out-migration and leave them to their own devices. Since this would cause lots of screaming from the left, 2) send all the black loving white libtards there to govern and lead them to the promised land, not through outmigration, but through whatever the libtards claim will work - education, agriculture, development and whatever else.

    Read Morehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9VCHSv0poU
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. @Malla
    Europeans did indeed develop Africa a lot during colonialism.

    https://archive.org/download/TheSiegeOfSouthernAfrica/siege.pdf

    https://archive.org/stream/TheSiegeOfSouthernAfrica/siege_djvu.txtEuropeans did indeed develop Africa a lot during colonialism.

    https://archive.org/download/TheSiegeOfSouthernAfrica/siege.pdf

    https://archive.org/stream/TheSiegeOfSouthernAfrica/siege_djvu.txt

    That is part of the problem, just like they “developed” India. It is all superficial. They never managed to change the primitive/tribal culture in these countries, or improve their IQ. The natives may have co-opted the modern trappings from architecture to clothing to cars, but they have no means of sustaining that lifestyle. That’s why all the infrastructure in these countries, from Central America to India to Africa, were built by colonials 100+ years ago, and falling apart. The vast majority in these countries lack the IQ to adapt to a modern world.

    These countries would’ve been better off left in their primitive state, with the Malthusian effect continue to serve as natural population control.

    Read MoreThat is part of the problem, just like they "developed" India. It is all superficial. They never managed to change the primitive/tribal culture in these countries, or improve their IQ. The natives may have co-opted the modern trappings from architecture to clothing to cars, but they have no means of sustaining that lifestyle. That's why all the infrastructure in these countries, from Central America to India to Africa, were built by colonials 100+ years ago, and falling apart. The vast majority in these countries lack the IQ to adapt to a modern world. These countries would've been better off left in their primitive state, with the Malthusian effect continue to serve as natural population control.
    • Replies: @Malla
    Yes that is true, if White people can be blamed for anything is introducing modern systems and technologies to the brown, red, black world. This has created a disaster for planet Earth as well as a threat for the White race via migration and race mixing. East Asians, well they have the IQ and other traits but that is exactly the reason why they are THE biggest threats to Whites, so from a selfish self preservation point of view, introducing modern technology to East Asians was a mistake too. Very soon you had the rise of the Yellow peril first from Japan and now from China. Nobody talked in the same sense of magnitude and type of threat, about a brown peril or black peril LOL.
    But at least unlike brown blacks, North East Asians have the ability to build and maintain places like Japan, S.Korea, Taiwan, HongKong/Macau, Singapore etc... so in a way it was worth it.

    I agree with you, it would have been best if the Whites would have developed Europe (incl Russia)/West and just went and got resources from the brown black lands by bribing the local corrupt Rajah, Emir or chief who would have never understood the significance of those resources anyways. Maybe the East Asians could have done the same. Think of all the money/resources saved, which have been and are, wasted on brown blacks right now. Those resources if well used could have got us cities on Mars (and a penal colony on Pluto) by now.Yes that is true, if White people can be blamed for anything is introducing modern systems and technologies to the brown, red, black world. This has created a disaster for planet Earth as well as a threat for the White race via migration and race mixing. East Asians, well they have the IQ and other traits but that is exactly the reason why they are THE biggest threats to Whites, so from a selfish self preservation point of view, introducing modern technology to East Asians was a mistake too. Very soon you had the rise of the Yellow peril first from Japan and now from China. Nobody talked in the same sense of magnitude and type of threat, about a brown peril or black peril LOL.
    But at least unlike brown blacks, North East Asians have the ability to build and maintain places like Japan, S.Korea, Taiwan, HongKong/Macau, Singapore etc... so in a way it was worth it.

    I agree with you, it would have been best if the Whites would have developed Europe (incl Russia)/West and just went and got resources from the brown black lands by bribing the local corrupt Rajah, Emir or chief who would have never understood the significance of those resources anyways. Maybe the East Asians could have done the same. Think of all the money/resources saved, which have been and are, wasted on brown blacks right now. Those resources if well used could have got us cities on Mars (and a penal colony on Pluto) by now.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. @TG
    "The aggregate action of many human beings acting in concert makes or breaks a society."

    Agreed. And the primary aggregate action is if people have more children than they can support, or not.

    Japan industrialized faster than any other major nation in history. Outside of the fantasy neoliberal economic texts, this is the best that flesh and blood human beings have ever done. But with the Japanese government pushing for sustained high fertility rates, it wasn't fast enough. At the eve of WWII Japan was desperately poor, wracked by violence, with many Japanese desperate to emigrate. Japan was a shithole country. Then, in the wreckage of WWII, amidst dire poverty, the Japanese fertility rate fell, and this time the government didn't interfere. Then, and only then, did the Japanese develop prosperity. Even after nearly 20 years of gross financial mismanagement, Japan remains one of the most peaceful and prosperous societies ever. Very much not a shithole country.

    What changed was not the fundamental nature of the Japanese people, but the demographics. When there are too many people too quickly, you get poverty, and violence and corruption and zero-sum thinking etc. When population growth is more moderate, even modest efforts can in time compound to great wealth, and nothing creates social harmony more than abundant steady high paying work for the average person.

    But we can't talk about this, because the rich like low wages, and one person't shithole is another's profitable supply of 'affordable labor costs.' So we turn a blind eye to the real causes of shithole countries. And as third-world immigration boosts our population ever higher, it can happen here."The aggregate action of many human beings acting in concert makes or breaks a society."

    Agreed. And the primary aggregate action is if people have more children than they can support, or not.

    Japan industrialized faster than any other major nation in history. Outside of the fantasy neoliberal economic texts, this is the best that flesh and blood human beings have ever done. But with the Japanese government pushing for sustained high fertility rates, it wasn't fast enough. At the eve of WWII Japan was desperately poor, wracked by violence, with many Japanese desperate to emigrate. Japan was a shithole country. Then, in the wreckage of WWII, amidst dire poverty, the Japanese fertility rate fell, and this time the government didn't interfere. Then, and only then, did the Japanese develop prosperity. Even after nearly 20 years of gross financial mismanagement, Japan remains one of the most peaceful and prosperous societies ever. Very much not a shithole country.

    What changed was not the fundamental nature of the Japanese people, but the demographics. When there are too many people too quickly, you get poverty, and violence and corruption and zero-sum thinking etc. When population growth is more moderate, even modest efforts can in time compound to great wealth, and nothing creates social harmony more than abundant steady high paying work for the average person.

    But we can't talk about this, because the rich like low wages, and one person't shithole is another's profitable supply of 'affordable labor costs.' So we turn a blind eye to the real causes of shithole countries. And as third-world immigration boosts our population ever higher, it can happen here.

    “But we can’t talk about this [excessive and unsustainable fertility rates], because the rich like low wages, and one person’s shithole is another’s profitable supply of ‘affordable labor costs.’ So we turn a blind eye to the real causes of shithole countries. And as third-world immigration boosts our population ever higher, it can happen here.” — TG

    But why can’t we talk about it here at Unz Review? Well, we can and do (sometimes). Yet even here at UR, there are some who just can’t deal with the reality of over-population and, in denial, promote “pro-life” views and sentiments, with totally religious fervor.

    Thank you, TG, for an excellent comment and an excellent argument on a subject that should receive much more attention than it doea.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. Malla says:
    @Orwellian State
    The answer to the question posited: What makes a country, the people or the place, is obvious. Just like there is no such thing as a "bad school", only "bad students (and teachers)", shithole countries are shitholes because majority of the people who live in them are shit. You can blame it on culture all you want, but at the end of the day, culture is created by people, and high IQ people create high culture, while low IQ people create low culture.

    From Indonesia to India, El Salvador to Africa, there is not a single black or brown country in the world that is half way livable. These people create shit cultures that ruined their environments. Every single one of these countries, if never populated, likely would've been pristine, beautiful places. And if populated by WASPs, would've been an improvement, more Western Europes and North Americas, Australias, New Zealands. Countries that the rest of the world want to flock to.

    At the end of the day, the two most salient qualities of a high culture are honesty and self-restraint. These are qualities the WASPs have in spade thanks to Protestantism(but now brought low by the dishonest and unrestraint Jewish culture). The Northeast Asians have self-restraint but lack honesty(except for the Japanese), that's why China is still struggling with corruption despite all the semblance of a modern country in its cities. The vast majority in black and brown countries lack both, that's why they are shithole countries.

    The question is, will these people adopt high culture when they move to a country dominated by high culture? Only the top 0.01 to 0.1% will have the IQ to do so (maybe top 25% from Northeast Asian countries). Beyond that, no. They'll just drag down the new country.

    At the end of the day, the two most salient qualities of a high culture are honesty and self-restraint. These are qualities the WASPs have in spade thanks to Protestantism

    I think it is combination of Protestantism and cold climate genetic factors as well as Hanjal line history. I mean there are a lot of Protestant blacks too, Nigeria has loads of them for example but you do not see these qualities among most of them. I have come across a few blacks (very few) with those qualities, for some reason mostly from the nation of Ghana. But they are really rare. Same with Protestant Asian Indians. However Protestant Indians in India tend to be more honest then Hindus, Muslims and Jains but by only a margin of say 10 to 20% in my experience. Thus there is definitely a genetic factor along with a religious/ cultural one.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. Malla says:
    @Grandpa Charlie

    "during the days of those huge colonial empires, things were much better [respecting security of foreigners passing through places like Afghanistan]" -- Malla
     
    I agree, for sure. I have seen a documentary film privately made of the transfer of power from Sierra Leone as a crown colony to Sierra Leone as an independent nation. The native soldiers formed up for the flag changing ceremony went barefoot and their rifles were only for drill and could not be fired -- and that system was so much better than what has followed! It is all the fault of white men -- because they or some of them allowed African natives to get their hands on modern rifles! As General Sir David Ormsby-Gore reportedly said after putting down the Mau-Mau rebellion in Kenya, effectively employing napalm, "God knows we tried."

    Back in the days of the great European empires and in any event during the days of the British Empire, things were much better for everyone than they have become since then. But the empires were unsustainable after World War II and barely sustainable before. Maybe if Britain had taken up Hitler on his offer to leave the colonial world as it was -- or even to assist Britain where needed -- while letting Germany "take" Russia ... oh well, that's just a pipe dream considering that Hitler after militarily taking Czechoslovakia (beyond just the Sudentenland, which had been allowed by Chamberlain) ... Hitler had proven himself and his government to be completely untrustworthy ... and there is to be found the flea in the ointment of any and all of those theories as to how Hitler really did not bring on World War II when he ordered the invasion of Poland. IMHO, the real problem with Nazism was Hitler's insistence that the Slavs consisted of a lesser race, especially when you consider that the Slavs are actually linguistically and probably genetically closer to the Aryan roots than any of the "races" of Western Europe, including the mutts of the "German or Teutonic race." Well, you can only expect so much of any opportunistic politician!

    Well the empires collapsed because of communist intrigues funded by wall street money. Nesta Webster wrote how the British establishment was very pro communist, the labour party was nearly slaves of the communists or hidden communists themselves and the Conservatives gave the leftoids a free pass everytime. There was definitely banking money involved. Even Douglass Reed writes about this in his books on Rhodesia and Southern Africa in general. One of the main aim of the globalists was to destroy the British Empire before all the other empires.
    So maybe Hitler had a point. He was not against the British empire at the beginning (he became anti-British empire much later in the war), he was primarily an anti communist. I would even say he was more anti Communist than anti-Jewish. As far as him being anti-Slavic, I dunno. I do not doubt the fact that anti Slavism did exist among the German NS top ranks, but I believe it has been blown out of proportion. There were Russians in the SS Wafen.
    Communism is after all creating a slave society by using a target population to come to power by creating anger over some out group in the said population and also making fake promises to the said target population for an Utopian future, the targets might be working classes used against the middle classes, blacks/immigrants against Whites etc… The target population is useful only as a vehicle to come to power and to stabilize the power. Thats it, after that the target population themselves become slaves. At the end of the day, Communism is a globalist banker funded ideology of total control.
    Hitler believed that democracy could never fight communism as communism would infiltrate democratic countries with ease (which is exactly what has happened today) and class warfare or even ethnic/racial rivalries give the communists the chance to infiltrate societies. I guess National Socialism was designed to reduce inter class rivalries as well as to create an airtight social economic system to render it impossible for communist infiltration.

    Read MoreWell the empires collapsed because of communist intrigues funded by wall street money. Nesta Webster wrote how the British establishment was very pro communist, the labour party was nearly slaves of the communists or hidden communists themselves and the Conservatives gave the leftoids a free pass everytime. There was definitely banking money involved. Even Douglass Reed writes about this in his books on Rhodesia and Southern Africa in general. One of the main aim of the globalists was to destroy the British Empire before all the other empires. So maybe Hitler had a point. He was not against the British empire at the beginning (he became anti-British empire much later in the war), he was primarily an anti communist. I would even say he was more anti Communist than anti-Jewish. As far as him being anti-Slavic, I dunno. I do not doubt the fact that anti Slavism did exist among the German NS top ranks, but I believe it has been blown out of proportion. There were Russians in the SS Wafen. Communism is after all creating a slave society by using a target population to come to power by creating anger over some out group in the said population and also making fake promises to the said target population for an Utopian future, the targets might be working classes used against the middle classes, blacks/immigrants against Whites etc... The target population is useful only as a vehicle to come to power and to stabilize the power. Thats it, after that the target population themselves become slaves. At the end of the day, Communism is a globalist banker funded ideology of total control. Hitler believed that democracy could never fight communism as communism would infiltrate democratic countries with ease (which is exactly what has happened today) and class warfare or even ethnic/racial rivalries give the communists the chance to infiltrate societies. I guess National Socialism was designed to reduce inter class rivalries as well as to create an airtight social economic system to render it impossible for communist infiltration.
    • Replies: @Grandpa Charlie
    Tying this in with the comments in this thread about the importance of self-restraint and honest dealing as fundamental to civilization, it becomes obvious why I say that Hitler was wrong and stupid to order the military conquest of Czechoslovakia after being given the Sudetenland in order to unite the German people without firing a shot. Hitler valued deceit over any virtue and demonstrated that when he ordered the attack on Poland. It probably never even occurred to him that Britain fully meant to keep their word and risk everything to back up their commitment to Poland.

    Hitler was a great admirer of Islam and said that he wished he could have had Muslims for soldiers, because he admired their ruthlessness.. Hitler failed to understand self-restraint as a principle and had no comprehension of the importance placed on honest dealing by the British peoples. As for the sincerity of his preaching the racial inferiority of the Slavic peoples, without understanding that, you have no understanding of World War II. Go back and read your copy of Mein Kampf. As for Hitler being such a great anti-Communist, recall the Molotov-Ribbentrop Treaty. Hitler saw anti-Communism as just another ploy to exploit in his political opportunism.

    Hitler was an arrogant fool. Post-war apologists for Hitler are the same. The pity is that Hitler actually was given a chance -- a chance to prosecute anti-Communism and to preserve Western civilization -- but he blew that chance because he was really nothing but a piddling political opportunist who arrogantly imagined himself to have a great mind.

    Self-restraint. Honest dealing. Important qualities basic to diplomacy and statecraft, just as deceit and deception are basic in war.Tying this in with the comments in this thread about the importance of self-restraint and honest dealing as fundamental to civilization, it becomes obvious why I say that Hitler was wrong and stupid to order the military conquest of Czechoslovakia after being given the Sudetenland in order to unite the German people without firing a shot. Hitler valued deceit over any virtue and demonstrated that when he ordered the attack on Poland. It probably never even occurred to him that Britain fully meant to keep their word and risk everything to back up their commitment to Poland.

    Hitler was a great admirer of Islam and said that he wished he could have had Muslims for soldiers, because he admired their ruthlessness.. Hitler failed to understand self-restraint as a principle and had no comprehension of the importance placed on honest dealing by the British peoples. As for the sincerity of his preaching the racial inferiority of the Slavic peoples, without understanding that, you have no understanding of World War II. Go back and read your copy of Mein Kampf. As for Hitler being such a great anti-Communist, recall the Molotov-Ribbentrop Treaty. Hitler saw anti-Communism as just another ploy to exploit in his political opportunism.

    Hitler was an arrogant fool. Post-war apologists for Hitler are the same. The pity is that Hitler actually was given a chance -- a chance to prosecute anti-Communism and to preserve Western civilization -- but he blew that chance because he was really nothing but a piddling political opportunist who arrogantly imagined himself to have a great mind.

    Self-restraint. Honest dealing. Important qualities basic to diplomacy and statecraft, just as deceit and deception are basic in war.

    , @jacques sheete
    That is a helluva good comment!That is a helluva good comment!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. Malla says:
    @Orwellian State
    That is part of the problem, just like they "developed" India. It is all superficial. They never managed to change the primitive/tribal culture in these countries, or improve their IQ. The natives may have co-opted the modern trappings from architecture to clothing to cars, but they have no means of sustaining that lifestyle. That's why all the infrastructure in these countries, from Central America to India to Africa, were built by colonials 100+ years ago, and falling apart. The vast majority in these countries lack the IQ to adapt to a modern world.

    These countries would've been better off left in their primitive state, with the Malthusian effect continue to serve as natural population control.That is part of the problem, just like they "developed" India. It is all superficial. They never managed to change the primitive/tribal culture in these countries, or improve their IQ. The natives may have co-opted the modern trappings from architecture to clothing to cars, but they have no means of sustaining that lifestyle. That's why all the infrastructure in these countries, from Central America to India to Africa, were built by colonials 100+ years ago, and falling apart. The vast majority in these countries lack the IQ to adapt to a modern world.

    These countries would've been better off left in their primitive state, with the Malthusian effect continue to serve as natural population control.

    Yes that is true, if White people can be blamed for anything is introducing modern systems and technologies to the brown, red, black world. This has created a disaster for planet Earth as well as a threat for the White race via migration and race mixing. East Asians, well they have the IQ and other traits but that is exactly the reason why they are THE biggest threats to Whites, so from a selfish self preservation point of view, introducing modern technology to East Asians was a mistake too. Very soon you had the rise of the Yellow peril first from Japan and now from China. Nobody talked in the same sense of magnitude and type of threat, about a brown peril or black peril LOL.
    But at least unlike brown blacks, North East Asians have the ability to build and maintain places like Japan, S.Korea, Taiwan, HongKong/Macau, Singapore etc… so in a way it was worth it.

    I agree with you, it would have been best if the Whites would have developed Europe (incl Russia)/West and just went and got resources from the brown black lands by bribing the local corrupt Rajah, Emir or chief who would have never understood the significance of those resources anyways. Maybe the East Asians could have done the same. Think of all the money/resources saved, which have been and are, wasted on brown blacks right now. Those resources if well used could have got us cities on Mars (and a penal colony on Pluto) by now.

    Read MoreYes that is true, if White people can be blamed for anything is introducing modern systems and technologies to the brown, red, black world. This has created a disaster for planet Earth as well as a threat for the White race via migration and race mixing. East Asians, well they have the IQ and other traits but that is exactly the reason why they are THE biggest threats to Whites, so from a selfish self preservation point of view, introducing modern technology to East Asians was a mistake too. Very soon you had the rise of the Yellow peril first from Japan and now from China. Nobody talked in the same sense of magnitude and type of threat, about a brown peril or black peril LOL. But at least unlike brown blacks, North East Asians have the ability to build and maintain places like Japan, S.Korea, Taiwan, HongKong/Macau, Singapore etc... so in a way it was worth it. I agree with you, it would have been best if the Whites would have developed Europe (incl Russia)/West and just went and got resources from the brown black lands by bribing the local corrupt Rajah, Emir or chief who would have never understood the significance of those resources anyways. Maybe the East Asians could have done the same. Think of all the money/resources saved, which have been and are, wasted on brown blacks right now. Those resources if well used could have got us cities on Mars (and a penal colony on Pluto) by now.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. @Moi
    Aren't people from India (particularly the Hindus) smarter than us Americans? And couldn't the same be said of the Chinese?Aren't people from India (particularly the Hindus) smarter than us Americans? And couldn't the same be said of the Chinese?

    Aren’t people from India (particularly the Hindus) smarter than us Americans? And couldn’t the same be said of the Chinese?

    Indians have an average IQ of 81, not much higher than their African kin. Indians are also incredibly dishonest.Maybe 0.01% of them are trustworthy, no more.

    Chinese have higher IQ, but also dishonest. Maybe 1% of them are trustworthy, no more.

    That’s why both China and India are still shithole countries. The vast majority of people from 3rd world countries are dishonest, the honest ones get ripped off and laughed at as idiots, that’s why these countries are such shitholes. It’s also why we shouldn’t take people from 3rd world countries. Let them work out their dishonest ways and become first world on their own, however long that takes, then and only then can they immigrate to other first world countries.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Okechukwu

    Indians have an average IQ of 81, not much higher than their African kin. Indians are also incredibly dishonest.Maybe 0.01% of them are trustworthy, no more.
     
    Only a moron would quote IQ data while making no attempt to verify its veracity.

    These are the questions an intelligent person asks:

    Who was tested?

    Who conducted the test?

    When?

    How?

    Sample size?

    Education level of testees?

    Income level or wealth of testees?

    Whether urban or rural?

    Cultural references?

    As you have asked none of these questions one would have to conclude that it is your own IQ that is lacking.

    It's funny that a "low IQ" African has to school you on how to properly analyse and authenticate information.

    , @Malla

    The vast majority of people from 3rd world countries are dishonest, the honest ones get ripped off and laughed at as idiots, that’s why these countries are such shitholes.
     
    Very true. There were so many cases of Indian servants ripping off British sahibs even during the British Raj period. The British were the rulers but that made no difference to the desi looters.

    One more thing about the empires. before the European empires, punishment were offen harsh throughout the brown, red , black world. The Whites went and with time made them lenient and humane. but I think those harsh punishments given to the populations by the chiefs and kings of the third world were suited to those populations.
    , @Malla

    the honest ones get ripped off and laughed at as idiots,
     
    This is true of Jews as well. Honest Jews are destroyed by evil Jews around them just like honest Indians are destroyed by evul Indians around them.
    You MUST read this book.
    Samuel Roth was a honest decent man who was Jewish. And his life was destroyed by ....not evul WASPs, not any evul goyum but other Jews.

    https://archive.org/stream/JewsMustLive/JML_djvu.txt
    https://archive.org/download/JewsMustLive/JML.pdf

    This is exactly how Indians behave. Decent honest Indian people are ripped apart by other Indians like sharks at a feeding frenzy. I have seen thousands of such cases in front of my eyes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. Okechukwu says:

    Remember, Europeans invented the shithole concept. They were still dumping human feces, urine and other filth out of windows and onto streets well into the 19th century, thereby creating literal shitholes.

    Of course Europeans never bathed. As a matter of fact, their “science” held that germs in water would permeate the skin and kill them. So they eschewed bathing, often for their entire lives. Added to which, they lived in the sort of filth and squalor that is beyond imagination.

    Read MoreRemember, Europeans invented the shithole concept. They were still dumping human feces, urine and other filth out of windows and onto streets well into the 19th century, thereby creating literal shitholes. Of course Europeans never bathed. As a matter of fact, their "science" held that germs in water would permeate the skin and kill them. So they eschewed bathing, often for their entire lives. Added to which, they lived in the sort of filth and squalor that is beyond imagination.
    • Replies: @Malla

    As a matter of fact, their “science” held that germs in water would permeate the skin and kill them. So they eschewed bathing, often for their entire lives.
     
    Nope it was the Church. Exposing yourself to nakedness was considered a sin.
    , @Malla
    Rubbish, Europeans did not bath is bull crap. Yeah there might have been some monks who considered it a sin to show their own bodies to themselves and some dregs of society who did not bathe frequently but most did

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoqW3bd6FfE

    Check out, Medieval Paris was full of bath houses where the heat from the bakery ovwns were used to heat the bath water. Pretty smart.Rubbish, Europeans did not bath is bull crap. Yeah there might have been some monks who considered it a sin to show their own bodies to themselves and some dregs of society who did not bathe frequently but most did

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoqW3bd6FfE

    Check out, Medieval Paris was full of bath houses where the heat from the bakery ovwns were used to heat the bath water. Pretty smart.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. Realist says:
    @SMK
    Reading this article, somewhat abstruse and obscurantist, it appears that Ilana agrees with the left and "cucks" and neocons that culture is everything, at least in regard to race as opposed to sex; that blacks and whites are exactly the same apart from skin color and other superficial characteristics; that race "beneath the skin" is a "artificial social construct." No mention of IQ and other genetic racial group differences.

    Biology preceded culture. Culture is what humans, of all races, make of their biology. Biology created and informs culture. The immutably distinct biology and average IQ of Negros created and informs and sustains the cultures of Haiti and Sub-Saharan Africa, with obvious cultural variations, and in the U.S., the cultures of Detroit, St. Louis, Baltimore, Memphis, New Orleans, Birmingham, etc.Reading this article, somewhat abstruse and obscurantist, it appears that Ilana agrees with the left and "cucks" and neocons that culture is everything, at least in regard to race as opposed to sex; that blacks and whites are exactly the same apart from skin color and other superficial characteristics; that race "beneath the skin" is a "artificial social construct." No mention of IQ and other genetic racial group differences.

    Biology preceded culture. Culture is what humans, of all races, make of their biology. Biology created and informs culture. The immutably distinct biology and average IQ of Negros created and informs and sustains the cultures of Haiti and Sub-Saharan Africa, with obvious cultural variations, and in the U.S., the cultures of Detroit, St. Louis, Baltimore, Memphis, New Orleans, Birmingham, etc.

    That is true, but it was implied from her comments.

    Read MoreThat is true, but it was implied from her comments.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. Blacks/Asians/Jews make for shithole countries. (((Ilana Mercer’s))) rabbi father worked to overthrow apartheid in South Africa. He and the family were thrown out of South Africa. Jews always side with blacks/Asians against Caucasians/Europeans.

    Read MoreBlacks/Asians/Jews make for shithole countries. (((Ilana Mercer's))) rabbi father worked to overthrow apartheid in South Africa. He and the family were thrown out of South Africa. Jews always side with blacks/Asians against Caucasians/Europeans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  89. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @proud_Srbin
    Your theory is wonderful but as usual NOTHING is as it appears.
    Have you heard of Omar Khadr who was BORN in Canada just as Conrad Black and Brenda Martin were?
    Omar's problem was that he was just a technical Canadian instead of Old Stock or Pure Laine, which was enough for regime of original invaders not to lift a finger in order to help him.
    Today's NA has very little in common with NA before the fall of USSR, it actually FEELS much worse and way less free than USSR ever did.Your theory is wonderful but as usual NOTHING is as it appears.
    Have you heard of Omar Khadr who was BORN in Canada just as Conrad Black and Brenda Martin were?
    Omar's problem was that he was just a technical Canadian instead of Old Stock or Pure Laine, which was enough for regime of original invaders not to lift a finger in order to help him.
    Today's NA has very little in common with NA before the fall of USSR, it actually FEELS much worse and way less free than USSR ever did.

    Those original settlers, – not ‘invaders’ – built a great country that the Khadr’s of the third world have been inviting themselves to for decades now. Btw, Khadr walked away with a cool 10 million bucks.

    Read MoreThose original settlers, - not 'invaders' - built a great country that the Khadr's of the third world have been inviting themselves to for decades now. Btw, Khadr walked away with a cool 10 million bucks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. Da Wei says:
    @jacques sheete

    'Shithole Countries': What Makes a Country? the Place or the People?
     
    Either or both.

    A picture speaks a thousand words. In this case it sez it all.

    http://thisainthell.us/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/netanyahu-standing-ovation2.jpg


    Hardly a black face in the bunch and you can call it a Zio-shithole.

    jacques sheete,

    As Chester A. Riley would say: “What a revoltin’ development this is!”

    I found the Douglas Reed site. Engrossing. Thank you.

    Read Morejacques sheete, As Chester A. Riley would say: "What a revoltin' development this is!" I found the Douglas Reed site. Engrossing. Thank you.
    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    You're welcome!You're welcome!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. Okechukwu says:
    @Orwellian State

    Aren’t people from India (particularly the Hindus) smarter than us Americans? And couldn’t the same be said of the Chinese?
     
    Indians have an average IQ of 81, not much higher than their African kin. Indians are also incredibly dishonest.Maybe 0.01% of them are trustworthy, no more.

    Chinese have higher IQ, but also dishonest. Maybe 1% of them are trustworthy, no more.

    That's why both China and India are still shithole countries. The vast majority of people from 3rd world countries are dishonest, the honest ones get ripped off and laughed at as idiots, that's why these countries are such shitholes. It's also why we shouldn't take people from 3rd world countries. Let them work out their dishonest ways and become first world on their own, however long that takes, then and only then can they immigrate to other first world countries.

    Indians have an average IQ of 81, not much higher than their African kin. Indians are also incredibly dishonest.Maybe 0.01% of them are trustworthy, no more.

    Only a moron would quote IQ data while making no attempt to verify its veracity.

    These are the questions an intelligent person asks:

    Who was tested?

    Who conducted the test?

    When?

    How?

    Sample size?

    Education level of testees?

    Income level or wealth of testees?

    Whether urban or rural?

    Cultural references?

    As you have asked none of these questions one would have to conclude that it is your own IQ that is lacking.

    It’s funny that a “low IQ” African has to school you on how to properly analyse and authenticate information.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. @Malla
    Ryan Faulk has some interesting things to say about First Worldism. Definitely worth a listen.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKQkSGBAd7c

    First Worldism with Ryan Faulk


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY5QjAjgemM

    Ryan Faulk - In Defense of First World Policies & GeneticsRyan Faulk has some interesting things to say about First Worldism. Definitely worth a listen.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKQkSGBAd7c

    First Worldism with Ryan Faulk


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY5QjAjgemM

    Ryan Faulk - In Defense of First World Policies & Genetics

    Varg and Ryan faulk are both interesting people but they have totally different solutions. Faulk wants to maintain hi tech civillisation but Varg realises that to save the people you need to destroy civillisation. i’m more of a Varg guy.

    Read MoreVarg and Ryan faulk are both interesting people but they have totally different solutions. Faulk wants to maintain hi tech civillisation but Varg realises that to save the people you need to destroy civillisation. i'm more of a Varg guy.
    • Replies: @Malla
    Yes they really have opposite solutions. I realized that. Maybe two societies should be created with people given the choice. Anyways I feel Faulk is very smart and introspective, Varg is even deeper in his introspection about things.Yes they really have opposite solutions. I realized that. Maybe two societies should be created with people given the choice. Anyways I feel Faulk is very smart and introspective, Varg is even deeper in his introspection about things.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. @Da Wei
    jacques sheete,

    As Chester A. Riley would say: "What a revoltin' development this is!"

    I found the Douglas Reed site. Engrossing. Thank you.jacques sheete,

    As Chester A. Riley would say: "What a revoltin' development this is!"

    I found the Douglas Reed site. Engrossing. Thank you.

    You’re welcome!

    Read MoreYou're welcome!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. As you have asked none of these questions one would have to conclude that it is your own IQ that is lacking.

    Ain’t that the truth!

    Funny how so many half-wits pontificate on IQ as if they know anything about it and how few have one above their shoe size (American).

    Funny too that the paratrooper isn’t here tooting his own toy horn.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  95. Bayan says:

    What makes a country? Four things: place, people, external forces, and random events.

    Which of these factors dominate depends on country and time.

    Read MoreWhat makes a country? Four things: place, people, external forces, and random events. Which of these factors dominate depends on country and time.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  96. Godfrey says:

    In the wake of President Trump’s “shithole” remark, which however crude, is totally on the mark, I have thought about what makes a country a shithole. As an ex-South African who left 24years ago I naturally thought about South Africa and Zimbabwe, or Rhodesia as it was known when it still functioned well. Both countries are beautiful, from the mountains to the seas and beaches and both have a diversity of flora and fauna in an abundance not found anywhere else. Both countries have tremendous potential and had by far the most developed infrastructure in Africa. My conclusion is that the people who run the country (or run it down) make the country a shithole and of course they are propped up by whoever is the majority in that country who keep voting for them, if there is a vote, or the people who keep them in power by the use of intimidation and force. So a country that is beautiful to look at becomes a shithole to live in when the people allow their leaders to make it so. Anybody who insists that most countries in Africa are not shitholes must answer the question: “If the country is not a shithole but a paradise, why are people desperate to leave?”

    Read MoreIn the wake of President Trump’s “shithole” remark, which however crude, is totally on the mark, I have thought about what makes a country a shithole. As an ex-South African who left 24years ago I naturally thought about South Africa and Zimbabwe, or Rhodesia as it was known when it still functioned well. Both countries are beautiful, from the mountains to the seas and beaches and both have a diversity of flora and fauna in an abundance not found anywhere else. Both countries have tremendous potential and had by far the most developed infrastructure in Africa. My conclusion is that the people who run the country (or run it down) make the country a shithole and of course they are propped up by whoever is the majority in that country who keep voting for them, if there is a vote, or the people who keep them in power by the use of intimidation and force. So a country that is beautiful to look at becomes a shithole to live in when the people allow their leaders to make it so. Anybody who insists that most countries in Africa are not shitholes must answer the question: “If the country is not a shithole but a paradise, why are people desperate to leave?”
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Anybody who insists that most countries in Africa are not shitholes must answer the question: “If the country is not a shithole but a paradise, why are people desperate to leave?”

    Simple answer--political and economic issues arising from post-European colonialism."Anybody who insists that most countries in Africa are not shitholes must answer the question: “If the country is not a shithole but a paradise, why are people desperate to leave?”

    Simple answer--political and economic issues arising from post-European colonialism.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. Malla says:
    @Okechukwu
    Remember, Europeans invented the shithole concept. They were still dumping human feces, urine and other filth out of windows and onto streets well into the 19th century, thereby creating literal shitholes.

    Of course Europeans never bathed. As a matter of fact, their "science" held that germs in water would permeate the skin and kill them. So they eschewed bathing, often for their entire lives. Added to which, they lived in the sort of filth and squalor that is beyond imagination.Remember, Europeans invented the shithole concept. They were still dumping human feces, urine and other filth out of windows and onto streets well into the 19th century, thereby creating literal shitholes.

    Of course Europeans never bathed. As a matter of fact, their "science" held that germs in water would permeate the skin and kill them. So they eschewed bathing, often for their entire lives. Added to which, they lived in the sort of filth and squalor that is beyond imagination.

    As a matter of fact, their “science” held that germs in water would permeate the skin and kill them. So they eschewed bathing, often for their entire lives.

    Nope it was the Church. Exposing yourself to nakedness was considered a sin.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Okechukwu

    Nope it was the Church. Exposing yourself to nakedness was considered a sin.
     
    That's just as primitive. The church was a wholly European institution. You cannot untangle their stupidity and backwardness from Europe as a whole.

    Added to the church's superstitious fear of water, bathing was also considered dangerous. This is not in dispute.

    it was believed in many parts of Europe that water could carry disease into the body through the pores in the skin. According to one medical treaty of the 16th century, “Water baths warm the body, but weaken the organism and widen pores. That’s why they can be dangerous and cause different diseases, even death.” It wasn’t just diseases from the water itself they were worried about. They also felt that with the pores widened after a bath, this resulted in infections of the air having easier access to the body. Hence, bathing became connected with spread of diseases, not just immorality.

    For some lower class citizens, particularly men, this resulted in them largely forgoing bathing whenever possible. During this time, people tended to restrict their hygienic arrangements to just washing hands, parts of the face, and rinsing their mouths. Washing one’s entire face was thought to be dangerous as it was believed to cause catarrh and weaken the eyesight, so even this was infrequent.

    http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2011/05/why-bathing-was-uncommon-in-medieval-europe/

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. Malla says:
    @Third world nationalist
    Varg and Ryan faulk are both interesting people but they have totally different solutions. Faulk wants to maintain hi tech civillisation but Varg realises that to save the people you need to destroy civillisation. i'm more of a Varg guy.Varg and Ryan faulk are both interesting people but they have totally different solutions. Faulk wants to maintain hi tech civillisation but Varg realises that to save the people you need to destroy civillisation. i'm more of a Varg guy.

    Yes they really have opposite solutions. I realized that. Maybe two societies should be created with people given the choice. Anyways I feel Faulk is very smart and introspective, Varg is even deeper in his introspection about things.

    Read MoreYes they really have opposite solutions. I realized that. Maybe two societies should be created with people given the choice. Anyways I feel Faulk is very smart and introspective, Varg is even deeper in his introspection about things.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. Malla says:
    @Orwellian State

    Aren’t people from India (particularly the Hindus) smarter than us Americans? And couldn’t the same be said of the Chinese?
     
    Indians have an average IQ of 81, not much higher than their African kin. Indians are also incredibly dishonest.Maybe 0.01% of them are trustworthy, no more.

    Chinese have higher IQ, but also dishonest. Maybe 1% of them are trustworthy, no more.

    That's why both China and India are still shithole countries. The vast majority of people from 3rd world countries are dishonest, the honest ones get ripped off and laughed at as idiots, that's why these countries are such shitholes. It's also why we shouldn't take people from 3rd world countries. Let them work out their dishonest ways and become first world on their own, however long that takes, then and only then can they immigrate to other first world countries.

    The vast majority of people from 3rd world countries are dishonest, the honest ones get ripped off and laughed at as idiots, that’s why these countries are such shitholes.

    Very true. There were so many cases of Indian servants ripping off British sahibs even during the British Raj period. The British were the rulers but that made no difference to the desi looters.

    One more thing about the empires. before the European empires, punishment were offen harsh throughout the brown, red , black world. The Whites went and with time made them lenient and humane. but I think those harsh punishments given to the populations by the chiefs and kings of the third world were suited to those populations.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. Talha says:
    @Malla
    http://voiceofdharma.org/books/tpmsi/ch03.htm

    Jihad under Turks

    The chroniclers of the early Turkish rulers of India take pride in affirming that Qutbuddin Aibak was a killer of lakhs of infidels. Leave aside enthusiastic killers like Alauddin Khalji and Muhammad bin Tughlaq, even the "kind-hearted" Firoz Tughlaq killed more than a lakh Bengalis when he invaded their country. Timur Lang or Tamerlane says he killed a hundred thousand infidel prisoners of war in Delhi.34 He built victory pillars from severed heads at many places. These were acts of sultans. The nobles were not lagging behind. One Shaikh Daud Kambu is said to have killed 20,000 with his dagger.35 The Bahmani sultans of Gulbarga and Bidar considered it meritorious to kill a hundred thousand Hindu men, women and children every year.36 These wars were fought in the true spirit of Jihad - the total annihilation or conversion of the non-Muslims. It was in this spirit that some ulema requested Sultan Iltutmish (1210-1236) to confront the Hindus with a choice between Islam and death. He advised them patience as dictated by the compulsions of the situation. Iltutmish fought against Nasiruddin Qubacha and Tajuddin Yaldoz. But his wars against them are not called Jihad. Jihad was against non-Muslims. Hence the insistence of the ulema on this religious duty. In a hundred years time Muslim ambition paved the way for confident optimism. During the reigns of Nasiruddin Mahmud and Ghiyasuddin Balban (1246-86) extensive campaigns in southern Uttar Pradesh, Bundelkhand and Baghelkhand as well as Gwalior, Narwar, Chanderi and Malwa were undertaken. In Katehar and Mewat there were systematic massacres of Rajputs and Mewatis in the true spirit of Jihad. While the numbers of the enslaved boosted Muslim demography, massacres were ordered on selective basis - only of Hindus.37 Similar scenes were witnessed during Alauddin Khalji's invasion of Gujarat in 1299, where massacres by his generals in Anhilwara, Cambay, Asavalli, Vanmanthali and Somnath earned him, according to Rasmala, the sobriquet of Khuni. Also in Chittor, where Alauddin ordered a massacre of 30,000 Hindus. The comment of Amir Khusrau on this genocide (keeping in mind the population of the period) is significant. "Praise be to God"!, writes he in his Khazain-ul-Futuh (completed in 1311 CE) "that he (the sultan) so ordered the massacre of all the chiefs of Hindustan out of the pale of Islam, by his infidel-smiting sword, that if in this time it should by chance happen that a schismatic should claim his right, the pure Sunnis would swear in the name of this Khalifa of God, that heterodoxy has no right."38 Shorn of its verbosity his comment on the horrible massacre only points to the fact that except for Sunni Muslims no other people could be permitted to live in India. Four years later he wrote in his Ashiqa - "Happy Hindustan, the splendour of Religion, where the Law finds perfect honour and security. The whole country, by means of the sword of our holy warriors, has become like a forest denuded of its thorns by fire... Islam is triumphant, idolatry is subdued. Had not the Shariat Law granted exemption from death by the payment of poll-tax, the very name of Hind, root and branch, would have been extinguished."39 Ziyauddin Barani, a contemporary of Amir Khusrau, writes in a similar spirit. He quoted the disposition of Qazi Mughisuddin before Alauddin that the Hindus were the greatest among the enemies of God and the religion of the Prophet40 and so needed to be eliminated. It is in a similar vein that he advocates an all-out Jihad against the Hindus in his Fatawa-i-Jahandari.41 So whether it was a sufi of the stature of Amir Khusrau about whose liberal credentials every secularist swears, or it was an orthodox Maulana like Ziyauddin Barani, the position of the Hindu idolaters in the Islamic law was given by them fairly correctly.42 They deserved to be exterminated through Jihad. If the sultans conceded to the Hindus the status of Zimmis, it was because of the compulsion of the Indian situation.

    That is how wars against Hindus were no ordinary wars, casualties no common casualties, and massacres were massacres of extermination. This thirst for extermination was also whetted by the resistance of "the enemies of God" with their determination for survival. The rite of Jauhar killed the women, the tradition of not deserting the field of battle made Rajputs and others die fighting in large numbers. When Malwa was attacked (1305), its Raja is said to have possessed 40,000 horse and 100,000 foot.43 After the battle, "so far as human eye could see, the ground was muddy with blood". Many cities of Malwa like Mandu, Ujjain, Dharanagri and Chanderi were captured after great resistance. The capitulation of Sevana and Jalor in Rajasthan (1308, 1311) were accompanied by massacres after years of prolonged warfare. In Alauddin's wars in the South, similar killings took place, especially in Dwarsamudra and Tamil Nadu.44 His successor Mubarak Khalji once again sacked Gujarat and Devagiri.

    Under Muhammad Tughlaq, wars and rebellions knew no end. His expeditions to Bengal, Sindh and the Deccan, as well as ruthless suppression of twenty-two rebellions, meant only depopulation in the thirteenth and first half of the fourteenth century.45 For one thing, in spite of constant efforts no addition of territory could be made by Turkish rulers from 1210 to 1296; for another the Turkish rulers were more ruthless in war and less merciful in peace. Hence the extirpating massacres of Balban, and the repeated attacks by others on regions already devastated but not completely subdued. Bengal was attacked by Bakhtiyar, by Balban, by Alauddin, and by all the three Tughlaqs - Ghiyas, Muhammad and Firoz. Malwa and Gujarat were repeatedly attacked and sacked. Almost every Muslim ruler invaded Rantambhor until it was subjugated by Alauddin Khalji (1301, again temporarily). Gwalior, Katehar and Avadh regions were also repeatedly attacked. Rajputana, Sindh and Punjab (also because of the Mongol invasions), knew no peace. in the first decade of the fourteenth century Turkish invaders penetrated into the South, carrying death and destruction. Later on Bahmani and Vijayanagar kingdoms also came to grips with each other. Mulla Daud of Bidar vividly describes the war between Muhammad Shah Bahmani and the Vijayanagar King in 1366 in which "Farishtah computes the victims on the Hindu side alone as numbering no less than half a million."46 Muhammad also devastated the Karnatak region with vengeance.47

    Jihad under Mughals

    The Mughals came with new weapons and new strategy of war, but their religious ideology of Jihad and zeal remained as of old. This is borne out by the difference in Babur's attitude and actions in his two wars, one against the Muslim Ibrahim Lodi and the other against the Hindu Rana Sanga. Babur's war against Ibrahim Lodi was only a war, against Rana Sangram Singh it was Jihad. After the defeat of the Lodi Sultan in the First Battle of Panipat in April 1526, according to Ahmad Yadgar, Babur praised the slain King, and his corpse was given a decent burial at the command of the victor.48 On the other hand, the story of the Battle of Khanwa against Rana Sanga in March 1527 has been described in the royal memoirs in an entirely different idiom. In it Rana Sanga is repeatedly called a pagan (Kafir) with studied contempt. His nobles and soldiers are similarly abused repeatedly. On account of Sanga's large army and reputation for bravery, Babur renounced wine as a measure of seeking God's grace. And how? - cups and flagons were "dashed in pieces, as God willing! soon will be dashed the gods of the idolaters."49 The whole narrative of Babur as well as Shaikh Zain's Fateh Nama is laced with quotations from the Quran for wishing victory against the infidels, for "adequate thanks cannot be rendered for a benefit than which none is greater in the world and nothing is more blessed in the world to come, to wit, victory over most powerful infidels and dominion over wealthiest heretics, 'these are the unbelievers, the wicked'." All the Hindu chiefs killed in battle "trod the road to Hell from this house of clay to the pit of perdition". When they were engaged in battle, they were "made to descend into Hell, the house of perdition. They shall be thrown to burn therein, and an unhappy dwelling shall it be."50 In Babur's memoirs his narrative of Jihad is laced with quotations from the Quran in dozens which shows that he was, like Mahmud Ghaznavi, a scholar of Quran and Hadis and no simple secular warrior.

    After the victory over Rana Sanga, Babur took the title of Ghazi or victor in holy war. As trophy of victory "an order was given to set up a pillar of pagan heads."51 Similar tower of pagan heads was piled up after the success at Chanderi against Medini Rai. "We made general massacre of pagans in it. A pillar of pagan heads was ordered set up on a hill northwest of Chanderi (and) converted what for many years had been a mansion of hostility, into a mansion of Islam."52 Such language is used, such towers of heads of the slain are piled up, only in the case of Hindus. Similar ideas and actions are not found in Babur's description of wars against the Muslims in India. The language betrays the psychology developed by the ideology of Jihad contained in Islamic scriptures. The ideology is not of universal brotherhood. Its brotherhood is confined to Muslims only.

    Even in emperor Akbar's 'secular' reign the religious spirit of Jihad was not lost. Abdul Qadir Badaoni who was then one of Akbar's court chaplains or imams, states that he sought an interview with the emperor when the royal troops were marching against Rana Pratap in 1576, begging leave of absence for "the privilege of joining the campaign to soak his Islamic beard in Hindu infidel blood". Akbar was so pleased at the expression of allegiance to his person and to the Islamic idea of Jihad that he bestowed a handful of gold coins on Badaoni as a token of his pleasure.53 It may be recalled that as an adolescent, Akbar had earned the title of Ghazi by beheading the defenseless infidel Himu. Under Akbar and Jahangir "five or six hundred thousand human beings were killed," says emperor Jahangir.54 The figures given by these killers and their chroniclers may be a few thousand less or a few thousand more, but what bred this ambition of cutting down human beings without compunction was the Muslim theory, practice and spirit of Jihad, as spelled out in Muslim scriptures and rules of administration. Under Aurangzeb every chronicler avers that wars against infidels were fought in the spirit of Jihad. In short, Jihad was never given up in India from the time of Muhammad bin Qasim to that of Aurangzeb and beyond, so long as Muslim rule lasted.

    We may close this discussion on the theory and practice of Jihad by pointing out that the prophet of Islam was a very practical man. He advocated Jihad or aggressive wars against non-Muslims till eternity because he did not visualize a world without Kafirs and people of other faiths. But he could not be sure of success always. Muhammad himself sometimes got Muslim prisoners of war released by giving in exchange beautiful slave girls to the strong adversary at Medina.55 Therefore, in many ahadis he recommended that if infidels harass the Muslims, and offer them peace in return for property the Imam must not accede thereto as far as possible, as this would be a degradation of the Muslim honour. But if destruction is apprehended, purchasing peace with property is lawful, because it is a duty to repel destruction in every possible way.56 Muslims also repelled destruction in this wise in Hindustan from the time of Iltutmish to that of Aurangzeb. Aurangzeb, ever keen on Jihad as stressed in his Fatawa-i-Alamgiri, used to surrender forts to the Marathas when destruction stared him in the face, Rajputs too used to recover their forts and properties from Muslim rulers throughout the medieval period. But Jihad was a religious duty for Muslims till eternity for the annihilation of non-Muslims. It was carried out in India to the best of the competence and strength of Muslim invaders and rulers throughout the medieval period.

    Hey Malla,

    Thanks for referencing an academic source. I actually don’t disagree with the general outline of history regarding the bloody conquests of India from many of the Turkic Muslims (like Ghaznavids, Tamerlane [that dude was in a sanguinary class alone], etc.). I had initially thought Mr. Warner was going to mention the way-overboard number of 80 million killed that he has cited in other places, but it didn’t look like he did that in this video. He says some really weird things though – like; sati was started as a way for Hundu noblewomen to escape becoming part of a Muslim harem…you buy that?

    I (well, actually other academics since I’m not a historian) do critique or contradict Prof. Lal on certain aspects of his narrative, namely:
    1) The specific religious nature of the invasions – sure jihad was a motivation (no doubt about that), but men like Mahmud Ghazni were after wealth, dominion and definitely used a facade of religion:
    “He extended the empire from western Persia to the Ganges valley, financing his army and sophisticated bearacracy by campaigns against wealthy Hindu religious centers and excessive taxation of Khurasan and Afghanistan. The religious impetus of Mahmud’s Indian forays was minimal; he fought equally tenaciously against rival Muslim rulers and established permanent dominion in India only up to Lahore.”
    Medieval Islamic Civilization: An Encyclopedia

    Furthermore, men like him and his successors had plenty of Hindus in positions of power who wanted to gain from the conquests – so the idea that this was solely Muslims vs kaafirs is not accurate:
    “The position of Hindu generals, soldiers, and scholars at the Ghaznavid court is also significant. Even Mahmud, the iconoclast, had a contingent of Hindu officers and soldiers. He richly rewarded at least one Sanskrit poet, and had Hindu pandits at his court. He also issued coins with Sanskrit inscriptions. The Hindu position seems to have improved greatly in the days of his successor, Masud. Only fifty days after the death of Mahmud, his son despatched Sewand Rai, a Hindu chief, with a large body of Hindu cavalry in pursuit of the nobles who had espoused the cause of his brother. Sewand Rai died in the ensuing battle, but his selection for this important assignment indicates his position of trust and eminence…contemporary evidence suggests that the Hindu position under the Ghaznavids was very much better than it was to be in the early days of the Delhi Sultanate.”

    http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00islamlinks/ikram/part1_02.html

    When Prof. Lal calls Mahmud Ghazni a “scholar of Qur’an and hadis” because he quotes verses from it at times is a stretch. I mean – my kid can quote verses and I can quote certain lines from Shakespeare; doesn’t make me a scholar. It’s those kind of statements that make one question his credibility and judgement. His polemical stance certainly does not help.

    2) I think Prof. Lal looks at numbers in medieval sources uncritically the late Prof. Simon Digby called him out on this.

    3) His conclusions that there was some kind of a forced conversion program doesn’t stand up to historical scrutiny. There were instances for sure, these are recorded by Muslims themselves – and the Afghans were especially known for this when they invaded. But, as Prof. Richard Eaton pointed out, the place where most conversions happened were the places out of Muslim political control:
    “If Islamization had ever been a function of military or political force, one would expect that those areas exposed most intensively and over the longest period to rule by Muslim dynasties—that is, those that were most fully exposed to the ‘sword’—would today contain the greatest number of Muslims. Yet the opposite is the case, as those regions where the most dramatic Islamization occurred, such as eastern Bengal or western Punjab, lay on the fringes of Indo-Muslim rule, where the ‘sword’ was weakest, and where brute force could have exerted the least influence. In such regions the first accurate census reports put the Muslim population at between 70 and 90 percent of the total, whereas in the heartland of Muslim rule in the upper Gangetic Plain—the domain of the Delhi Fort and the Taj Mahal, where Muslim regimes had ruled the most intensively and for the longest period of time—the Muslim population ranged from only 10 to 15 percent. In other words, in the subcontinent as a whole there is an inverse relationship between the degree of Muslim political penetration and the degree of Islamization. Even within Bengal this principle holds true.”
    The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, 1204-1760

    People tend to be averse to religion if it’s being forced down their throats.

    You see this too in the state of Kerala which never came under Mughal rule and has almost a 1/3 Muslim population that follow the Shafi’i school of the Muslim traders that brought them Islam (not the official Mughal endorsed, Hanafi school).

    4) This idea of smashing Hindu temples simply out of Hindu hate is also not accurate:
    “Hindu and Jain temples dotted the landscape of Aurangzeb’s kingdom. These religious institutions were entitled to Mughal state protection, and Aurangzeb generally endeavoured to ensure their well-being. By the same token, from a Mughal perspective, that goodwill could be revoked when specific temples or their associates acted against imperial interests. Accordingly, emperor Aurangzeb authorised targeted temple destructions and desecrations throughout his rule….Most glaringly, Aurangzeb counted thousands of Hindu temples within his domains and yet destroyed, at most, a few dozen. This incongruity makes little sense if we cling to a vision of Aurangzeb as a cartoon bigot driven by a single-minded agenda of ridding India of Hindu places of worship.”

    https://qz.com/918425/mughal-emperor-aurangzeb-protected-hindu-temples-more-often-than-he-demolished-them/

    Though it could be argued that Mahmud Ghazni did engage in it from a religious standpoint since the Ghaznavids switched schools after he died (again, from my earlier source):
    “In jurispriudence, the early Ghaznavids were Shafi’i, but Hanafism gained ascendancy by Mas’ud’s time.”

    So yeah – I agree there was quite a bit of blood spilled over the centuries by invading Muslim armies. And those quotes from Medieval Muslims looking to spill pagan blood is fairly understandable given the context when they are heading to fight a Hindu army on the battlefield. Making a total wipe out of an army was never seen as anything immoral and Muslim chroniclers have been praising the ability of a Muslim army to utterly decimate a non-Muslim one from the earliest times – especially when under-armed and under-manned. That’s what armies are paid to do; they fight and die. I plan on teaching my boys about how Persia had her back broken at Qadisiyyah. But those that spilled the blood of innocent men, women and children will be held to account on the Day of Judgement (whether Muslim or not); that is completely out of the pale and absolutely unacceptable. I think the most accurate count for the number of deaths is in the ballpark of between 10-15 million.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Grandpa Charlie
    Talha,

    Your arguments are not persuasive, beginning with your first point that there was a lot of war profiteering involved in Jihad. As though Jihad and profiteering could not (did not) symbiotically coexist.

    Then, you concede so much of what critics of Jihad claim, ("I agree there was quite a bit of blood spilled over the centuries by invading Muslim armies"), that your quibbling over methodology of some of those critics (Dr. Warner) makes you look silly, since a post by Ilana, and associated comment stream, is hardly a forum for professional historians (and Warner disclaims any connection with the methodology of professional historians).

    I mean, on the main point, Jihad was hardly a peaceful endeavor ... ever ... was it? Except that it can be used as a metaph0r for the struggle for enlightenment, and that's fine. But what it is ... is something very different from enlightenment. What it is is an ideology of warfare. Like Communism that way.Talha,

    Your arguments are not persuasive, beginning with your first point that there was a lot of war profiteering involved in Jihad. As though Jihad and profiteering could not (did not) symbiotically coexist.

    Then, you concede so much of what critics of Jihad claim, ("I agree there was quite a bit of blood spilled over the centuries by invading Muslim armies"), that your quibbling over methodology of some of those critics (Dr. Warner) makes you look silly, since a post by Ilana, and associated comment stream, is hardly a forum for professional historians (and Warner disclaims any connection with the methodology of professional historians).

    I mean, on the main point, Jihad was hardly a peaceful endeavor ... ever ... was it? Except that it can be used as a metaph0r for the struggle for enlightenment, and that's fine. But what it is ... is something very different from enlightenment. What it is is an ideology of warfare. Like Communism that way.

    , @Malla

    He says some really weird things though – like; sati was started as a way for Hundu noblewomen to escape becoming part of a Muslim harem…you buy that?
     
    No that is Jauhar and Saca. Sati is different and much older.
    Hindu women did really jump into fires to save themselves from sexual slavery from some Islamic armies. In that way, Dr. Warner is right.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soQkKBqq6uc

    This was mostly done by Rajput women, Rajputs are Scythians from their male side and formed Warrior clans. They had a motto of death before dishonour (that was also the motto of the German SS Wafen strangely).

    As far as the rest of your post, I will answer later. You make some good points. I think Prof Lal definitely has gone a bit overboard.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. Ilana Mercer is once again entirely backwards here.

    I want nothing to do with “Anglo-Protestant” values or the libertarian individualism that Mercer seems to think propelled the rise of the West. These are the very ideologies that are destroying the West. The idea that Africa’s problem is that it has failed to incorporate Western post-Christian decadence, either for cultural reasons or HBD reasons, is utterly preposterous.

    If there was a leader with enough brains, balls and vision to actually improve Africa, he would accept Africa the way that it is. He would use magic, tribalism, and superstition to beat the place into a functioning polity. He would yank Africa up by its nappy hair by becoming himself the Big Mugambo.

    It is passing strange that nobody has hit upon this simple solution before. Instead we send SJW missionaries into the jungle to lecture the darkies about dialectical materialism, Ayn Rand, or free market capitalism as the case may be.

    Read More
    • Replies: @attilathehen
    (((Ilana Mercer))) has it backwards because she is miscegenated, meshuggah Jewess. She is a female version of John Derbyshire (Chinese wife and offspring). Biology first, beliefs second. How she writes these columns without her head exploding is beyond comprehension. As I mentioned in my above comment, her rabbi father worked against apartheid in South Africa which resulted in the expulsion of the entire family.

    You want nothing to do with Anglo-Protestant values. You are a Roman Catholic and I recall in a comment you made you believe that the Catholic Church ruling over a nation or country would be the best form of government. How's the RCC working out in Italy, France, Germany? Not too well. The RCC is a homosexual, Freemasonic, multi-culti grand lodge which is leading the post-Christian decadent breakdown of the West. The RCC has gone native and sides with groids/gloids. The RCC can do nothing to help the world.

    You don't believe in HBD but it is the low IQ of blacks that keeps them down. If you don't believe in IQ, then I suggest you move to Roman Catholic black Haiti (average IQ 67). Haiti did not have Anglo-Protestant values imposed on it, so we can see how culturally and economically advanced they are versus the WASP USA. Perfidious Albion has not corrupted them.

    Also, your idea of a Big Man beating the Africans into having some functioning society reveals something about you. You remind me of the Neo-Nazis Matt Heimbach and Sven Longshanks who yearn for a strong man to solve problems. A new Hitler. Africa needs to be left alone. Christian missionaries need to leave it and blacks in the West have to be sent back or segregated. They cannot be taught, from the basics to Ayn Rand to dialectics. Let their talented 10% take care of them.(((Ilana Mercer))) has it backwards because she is miscegenated, meshuggah Jewess. She is a female version of John Derbyshire (Chinese wife and offspring). Biology first, beliefs second. How she writes these columns without her head exploding is beyond comprehension. As I mentioned in my above comment, her rabbi father worked against apartheid in South Africa which resulted in the expulsion of the entire family.

    You want nothing to do with Anglo-Protestant values. You are a Roman Catholic and I recall in a comment you made you believe that the Catholic Church ruling over a nation or country would be the best form of government. How's the RCC working out in Italy, France, Germany? Not too well. The RCC is a homosexual, Freemasonic, multi-culti grand lodge which is leading the post-Christian decadent breakdown of the West. The RCC has gone native and sides with groids/gloids. The RCC can do nothing to help the world.

    You don't believe in HBD but it is the low IQ of blacks that keeps them down. If you don't believe in IQ, then I suggest you move to Roman Catholic black Haiti (average IQ 67). Haiti did not have Anglo-Protestant values imposed on it, so we can see how culturally and economically advanced they are versus the WASP USA. Perfidious Albion has not corrupted them.

    Also, your idea of a Big Man beating the Africans into having some functioning society reveals something about you. You remind me of the Neo-Nazis Matt Heimbach and Sven Longshanks who yearn for a strong man to solve problems. A new Hitler. Africa needs to be left alone. Christian missionaries need to leave it and blacks in the West have to be sent back or segregated. They cannot be taught, from the basics to Ayn Rand to dialectics. Let their talented 10% take care of them.

    , @Corvinus
    "I want nothing to do with “Anglo-Protestant” values or the libertarian individualism that Mercer seems to think propelled the rise of the West. These are the very ideologies that are destroying the West."

    Actually, those ideologies are rooted in Christianity, and continue to keep the West afloat."I want nothing to do with “Anglo-Protestant” values or the libertarian individualism that Mercer seems to think propelled the rise of the West. These are the very ideologies that are destroying the West."

    Actually, those ideologies are rooted in Christianity, and continue to keep the West afloat.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. Biff says:
    @Malla

    During the 1980’s Iraq was a nice place.

     

    Was it really?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRATeUEBWJQ

    Yeah it was better than what we got after the U.S. invasion, no doubt about that.

    Wow! Nice vid, thanks for sharing.
    One thing that caught my ear was the idea of Iraqi’s not wanting to fix anything, and I have two theory’s that are probably both crap, but here goes:
    Environmental conditions – I now live in South East Asia, coming from the North American Rockies – here I have noticed some of my best stainless steel tools gum up and become corroded in the coastal/tropical environment I live. I can’t imagine what kind effect the Middle East environment has on machinery.

    Or

    Some people just suck at fixing things so they dont even try – my brother comes to mind.

    Read MoreWow! Nice vid, thanks for sharing. One thing that caught my ear was the idea of Iraqi’s not wanting to fix anything, and I have two theory’s that are probably both crap, but here goes: Environmental conditions - I now live in South East Asia, coming from the North American Rockies - here I have noticed some of my best stainless steel tools gum up and become corroded in the coastal/tropical environment I live. I can’t imagine what kind effect the Middle East environment has on machinery. Or Some people just suck at fixing things so they dont even try - my brother comes to mind.
    • Replies: @Malla
    I would go with the second theory. I found it pretty strange too. I mean even Indians are pretty decent in repairing stuff. I think there is a lack of foresight as well as wastefulness involved as well here. V.S. Naipaul had observed something similar in Africa.I would go with the second theory. I found it pretty strange too. I mean even Indians are pretty decent in repairing stuff. I think there is a lack of foresight as well as wastefulness involved as well here. V.S. Naipaul had observed something similar in Africa.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. Biff says:
    @Grandpa Charlie

    "Prior to 1978 Westerners could freely travel about in Afghanistan" -- Biff
     
    I met a young woman from Minnesota back in the 1960s who had been on a trip around the world. She told me, and I believed her, that when she flew into Afghanistan, she and other Americans were met at the airport by a representative of the U.S. State Department who gave each of the Americans a map that marked off an area around the airport -- less than one square mile -- and told to stay within that area because outside of that area, the USA could not guarantee anyone's safety. In particular they told the female Americans that they would certainly, if not accompanied by a man, be kidnapped and probably never seen or heard from again.

    For better or for worse, men do make the country, but women? Not so much ... at least not in many parts of the world.

    BTW, Biff, all the evils of the world cannot rationally be blamed on the USA or on Europeans.

    Suddenly women in Minnesota are a credible source on Afghanistan. Oh well, I just know my brother in 72, and another Friend in 75 traveled in and around Afghanistan without any problems other than the food.

    Read MoreSuddenly women in Minnesota are a credible source on Afghanistan. Oh well, I just know my brother in 72, and another Friend in 75 traveled in and around Afghanistan without any problems other than the food.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. Biff says:
    @Orwellian State

    Africa’s plight is most certainly not the West’s fault.
     
    I must beg to differ here. The West plays a key role in Africa's plight. African peoples are not made for the modern world. They simply do not have the aptitude and ability to live like modern humans, learn like modern humans, and work like modern humans. The West never should've entered Africa. Left to their own devices, these people would have continued to live like Bushmen, instead of the materialistic life that they co-opted from the whites but have no means of sustaining.

    The West dragged Africans kicking and screaming into the modern world, first through slavery, then through colonialism and lastly through philanthropy, each did its own major damage. Slavery took away the most able men in Africa and ravaged their societies. Colonialism introduced modern clothing, materialism, weapons and lifestyles to Africans which they are entirely unsuited for, and turned them into primitive people with guns once the colonialists left. Philanthropy meanwhile, created a toxic cycle of dependency and a population boom thanks to free gifting of modern medicine.

    One does not need what one does not know exist. Africans should've been left to their own dark continent from the get go, like the Amazonians. Survival of the fittest would've allowed for natural population control. The West's unceasing meddling due to greed(slavery and natural resources) and later, guilt (philanthropy) completely fucked up Africa. I would say the West bears a huge responsibility on where Africa is today.

    The question is what to do about it? Is allowing mass number of Africans into the west the answer? The way I see it we have 2 choices: 1) cut off Africa completely, end all out-migration and leave them to their own devices. Since this would cause lots of screaming from the left, 2) send all the black loving white libtards there to govern and lead them to the promised land, not through outmigration, but through whatever the libtards claim will work - education, agriculture, development and whatever else.

    send all the black loving white libtards there to govern and lead them to the promised land, not through outmigration, but through whatever the libtards claim will work – education, agriculture, development and whatever else.

    And get Bono to pay for it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. Biff says:
    @Wally
    Agreed, men who are the inhabitants of a country do make it what it is.
    Hence Haiti & Africa today.

    Of course, as Mercer referenced:

    "By taking account of culture ..... one could have foreseen the postwar economic success of Japan and Germany."

    IOW, western countries which have been devastated by war and the immediate aftermath of war have invariably gotten up and rebuilt a very orderly, safe, productive society.

    The 3rd world is such because of it's incompetent, low IQ inhabitants. Nothing could be more obvious.

    Sorry Biff, but you are hopelessly lost in Marxist groupthink

    My point is shithole countries do not always become that way from with in. Outside influences are sometimes a factor.
    How’s that for Marxist thinking?

    Read MoreMy point is shithole countries do not always become that way from with in. Outside influences are sometimes a factor. How’s that for Marxist thinking?
    • Replies: @Wally
    Except that you cannot prove your point, and I can easily refute any attempts.

    And we do know what's it called when one keeps trying the same thing over & over expecting different results?

    Marxism: the definition of failure

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. @tjm
    From their inception, even the Bible is likely filled with Zionist lies.

    You do get Israel is named in the Bible, and is the basis for Zionism, don't you...

    Or can you add more to the discussion than idiotic condescension, moronFrom their inception, even the Bible is likely filled with Zionist lies.

    You do get Israel is named in the Bible, and is the basis for Zionism, don't you...

    Or can you add more to the discussion than idiotic condescension, moron

    Aha! I know the style. Wordy and emulating the chutzpah that only smart Jews are entitled to, not ones who earn condescencion by tossing in “moron” as if to earn the accurate description “doofus” of to your Yiddisher brethren “shlemiel” or “shnook”. No, I admit it takes genius to excuse your ignorance that Zionism is not “centuries” old by saying “I dunno: it might be thousands of years, but don’t be hard on me I am just an emoting anti-Semite who isn’t interested in evidence”.

    Read MoreAha! I know the style. Wordy and emulating the chutzpah that only smart Jews are entitled to, not ones who earn condescencion by tossing in "moron" as if to earn the accurate description "doofus" of to your Yiddisher brethren "shlemiel" or "shnook". No, I admit it takes genius to excuse your ignorance that Zionism is not "centuries" old by saying "I dunno: it might be thousands of years, but don't be hard on me I am just an emoting anti-Semite who isn't interested in evidence".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. @Charles

    And why and how was it possible that this superior west stood still, scientifically, for some 1600 years, from the year 1 to 1600 ?
     
    Basically, Islam.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_Qpy0mXg8Y

    Even around 1870 the pope stated that science without church guidance was not allowed

    Read MoreEven around 1870 the pope stated that science without church guidance was not allowed
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. @Grandpa Charlie

    "Prior to 1978 Westerners could freely travel about in Afghanistan" -- Biff
     
    I met a young woman from Minnesota back in the 1960s who had been on a trip around the world. She told me, and I believed her, that when she flew into Afghanistan, she and other Americans were met at the airport by a representative of the U.S. State Department who gave each of the Americans a map that marked off an area around the airport -- less than one square mile -- and told to stay within that area because outside of that area, the USA could not guarantee anyone's safety. In particular they told the female Americans that they would certainly, if not accompanied by a man, be kidnapped and probably never seen or heard from again.

    For better or for worse, men do make the country, but women? Not so much ... at least not in many parts of the world.

    BTW, Biff, all the evils of the world cannot rationally be blamed on the USA or on Europeans.

    Peter Levi, ‘The light garden of the angel king, journeys in Afghanistan’, 1972, 1984, Harmondsworth

    Read MorePeter Levi, ‘The light garden of the angel king, journeys in Afghanistan’, 1972, 1984, Harmondsworth
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. @Malla
    Well the empires collapsed because of communist intrigues funded by wall street money. Nesta Webster wrote how the British establishment was very pro communist, the labour party was nearly slaves of the communists or hidden communists themselves and the Conservatives gave the leftoids a free pass everytime. There was definitely banking money involved. Even Douglass Reed writes about this in his books on Rhodesia and Southern Africa in general. One of the main aim of the globalists was to destroy the British Empire before all the other empires.
    So maybe Hitler had a point. He was not against the British empire at the beginning (he became anti-British empire much later in the war), he was primarily an anti communist. I would even say he was more anti Communist than anti-Jewish. As far as him being anti-Slavic, I dunno. I do not doubt the fact that anti Slavism did exist among the German NS top ranks, but I believe it has been blown out of proportion. There were Russians in the SS Wafen.
    Communism is after all creating a slave society by using a target population to come to power by creating anger over some out group in the said population and also making fake promises to the said target population for an Utopian future, the targets might be working classes used against the middle classes, blacks/immigrants against Whites etc... The target population is useful only as a vehicle to come to power and to stabilize the power. Thats it, after that the target population themselves become slaves. At the end of the day, Communism is a globalist banker funded ideology of total control.
    Hitler believed that democracy could never fight communism as communism would infiltrate democratic countries with ease (which is exactly what has happened today) and class warfare or even ethnic/racial rivalries give the communists the chance to infiltrate societies. I guess National Socialism was designed to reduce inter class rivalries as well as to create an airtight social economic system to render it impossible for communist infiltration.Well the empires collapsed because of communist intrigues funded by wall street money. Nesta Webster wrote how the British establishment was very pro communist, the labour party was nearly slaves of the communists or hidden communists themselves and the Conservatives gave the leftoids a free pass everytime. There was definitely banking money involved. Even Douglass Reed writes about this in his books on Rhodesia and Southern Africa in general. One of the main aim of the globalists was to destroy the British Empire before all the other empires.
    So maybe Hitler had a point. He was not against the British empire at the beginning (he became anti-British empire much later in the war), he was primarily an anti communist. I would even say he was more anti Communist than anti-Jewish. As far as him being anti-Slavic, I dunno. I do not doubt the fact that anti Slavism did exist among the German NS top ranks, but I believe it has been blown out of proportion. There were Russians in the SS Wafen.
    Communism is after all creating a slave society by using a target population to come to power by creating anger over some out group in the said population and also making fake promises to the said target population for an Utopian future, the targets might be working classes used against the middle classes, blacks/immigrants against Whites etc... The target population is useful only as a vehicle to come to power and to stabilize the power. Thats it, after that the target population themselves become slaves. At the end of the day, Communism is a globalist banker funded ideology of total control.
    Hitler believed that democracy could never fight communism as communism would infiltrate democratic countries with ease (which is exactly what has happened today) and class warfare or even ethnic/racial rivalries give the communists the chance to infiltrate societies. I guess National Socialism was designed to reduce inter class rivalries as well as to create an airtight social economic system to render it impossible for communist infiltration.

    Tying this in with the comments in this thread about the importance of self-restraint and honest dealing as fundamental to civilization, it becomes obvious why I say that Hitler was wrong and stupid to order the military conquest of Czechoslovakia after being given the Sudetenland in order to unite the German people without firing a shot. Hitler valued deceit over any virtue and demonstrated that when he ordered the attack on Poland. It probably never even occurred to him that Britain fully meant to keep their word and risk everything to back up their commitment to Poland.

    Hitler was a great admirer of Islam and said that he wished he could have had Muslims for soldiers, because he admired their ruthlessness.. Hitler failed to understand self-restraint as a principle and had no comprehension of the importance placed on honest dealing by the British peoples. As for the sincerity of his preaching the racial inferiority of the Slavic peoples, without understanding that, you have no understanding of World War II. Go back and read your copy of Mein Kampf. As for Hitler being such a great anti-Communist, recall the Molotov-Ribbentrop Treaty. Hitler saw anti-Communism as just another ploy to exploit in his political opportunism.

    Hitler was an arrogant fool. Post-war apologists for Hitler are the same. The pity is that Hitler actually was given a chance — a chance to prosecute anti-Communism and to preserve Western civilization — but he blew that chance because he was really nothing but a piddling political opportunist who arrogantly imagined himself to have a great mind.

    Self-restraint. Honest dealing. Important qualities basic to diplomacy and statecraft, just as deceit and deception are basic in war.

    Read MoreTying this in with the comments in this thread about the importance of self-restraint and honest dealing as fundamental to civilization, it becomes obvious why I say that Hitler was wrong and stupid to order the military conquest of Czechoslovakia after being given the Sudetenland in order to unite the German people without firing a shot. Hitler valued deceit over any virtue and demonstrated that when he ordered the attack on Poland. It probably never even occurred to him that Britain fully meant to keep their word and risk everything to back up their commitment to Poland. Hitler was a great admirer of Islam and said that he wished he could have had Muslims for soldiers, because he admired their ruthlessness.. Hitler failed to understand self-restraint as a principle and had no comprehension of the importance placed on honest dealing by the British peoples. As for the sincerity of his preaching the racial inferiority of the Slavic peoples, without understanding that, you have no understanding of World War II. Go back and read your copy of Mein Kampf. As for Hitler being such a great anti-Communist, recall the Molotov-Ribbentrop Treaty. Hitler saw anti-Communism as just another ploy to exploit in his political opportunism. Hitler was an arrogant fool. Post-war apologists for Hitler are the same. The pity is that Hitler actually was given a chance -- a chance to prosecute anti-Communism and to preserve Western civilization -- but he blew that chance because he was really nothing but a piddling political opportunist who arrogantly imagined himself to have a great mind. Self-restraint. Honest dealing. Important qualities basic to diplomacy and statecraft, just as deceit and deception are basic in war.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. Malla says:
    @Okechukwu
    Remember, Europeans invented the shithole concept. They were still dumping human feces, urine and other filth out of windows and onto streets well into the 19th century, thereby creating literal shitholes.

    Of course Europeans never bathed. As a matter of fact, their "science" held that germs in water would permeate the skin and kill them. So they eschewed bathing, often for their entire lives. Added to which, they lived in the sort of filth and squalor that is beyond imagination.Remember, Europeans invented the shithole concept. They were still dumping human feces, urine and other filth out of windows and onto streets well into the 19th century, thereby creating literal shitholes.

    Of course Europeans never bathed. As a matter of fact, their "science" held that germs in water would permeate the skin and kill them. So they eschewed bathing, often for their entire lives. Added to which, they lived in the sort of filth and squalor that is beyond imagination.

    Rubbish, Europeans did not bath is bull crap. Yeah there might have been some monks who considered it a sin to show their own bodies to themselves and some dregs of society who did not bathe frequently but most did

    Check out, Medieval Paris was full of bath houses where the heat from the bakery ovwns were used to heat the bath water. Pretty smart.

    Read MoreRubbish, Europeans did not bath is bull crap. Yeah there might have been some monks who considered it a sin to show their own bodies to themselves and some dregs of society who did not bathe frequently but most did https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoqW3bd6FfE Check out, Medieval Paris was full of bath houses where the heat from the bakery ovwns were used to heat the bath water. Pretty smart.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. @Talha
    Hey Malla,

    Thanks for referencing an academic source. I actually don't disagree with the general outline of history regarding the bloody conquests of India from many of the Turkic Muslims (like Ghaznavids, Tamerlane [that dude was in a sanguinary class alone], etc.). I had initially thought Mr. Warner was going to mention the way-overboard number of 80 million killed that he has cited in other places, but it didn't look like he did that in this video. He says some really weird things though - like; sati was started as a way for Hundu noblewomen to escape becoming part of a Muslim harem...you buy that?

    I (well, actually other academics since I'm not a historian) do critique or contradict Prof. Lal on certain aspects of his narrative, namely:
    1) The specific religious nature of the invasions - sure jihad was a motivation (no doubt about that), but men like Mahmud Ghazni were after wealth, dominion and definitely used a facade of religion:
    “He extended the empire from western Persia to the Ganges valley, financing his army and sophisticated bearacracy by campaigns against wealthy Hindu religious centers and excessive taxation of Khurasan and Afghanistan. The religious impetus of Mahmud’s Indian forays was minimal; he fought equally tenaciously against rival Muslim rulers and established permanent dominion in India only up to Lahore.”
    Medieval Islamic Civilization: An Encyclopedia

    Furthermore, men like him and his successors had plenty of Hindus in positions of power who wanted to gain from the conquests - so the idea that this was solely Muslims vs kaafirs is not accurate:
    “The position of Hindu generals, soldiers, and scholars at the Ghaznavid court is also significant. Even Mahmud, the iconoclast, had a contingent of Hindu officers and soldiers. He richly rewarded at least one Sanskrit poet, and had Hindu pandits at his court. He also issued coins with Sanskrit inscriptions. The Hindu position seems to have improved greatly in the days of his successor, Masud. Only fifty days after the death of Mahmud, his son despatched Sewand Rai, a Hindu chief, with a large body of Hindu cavalry in pursuit of the nobles who had espoused the cause of his brother. Sewand Rai died in the ensuing battle, but his selection for this important assignment indicates his position of trust and eminence…contemporary evidence suggests that the Hindu position under the Ghaznavids was very much better than it was to be in the early days of the Delhi Sultanate.”
    http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00islamlinks/ikram/part1_02.html

    When Prof. Lal calls Mahmud Ghazni a "scholar of Qur'an and hadis" because he quotes verses from it at times is a stretch. I mean - my kid can quote verses and I can quote certain lines from Shakespeare; doesn't make me a scholar. It's those kind of statements that make one question his credibility and judgement. His polemical stance certainly does not help.

    2) I think Prof. Lal looks at numbers in medieval sources uncritically the late Prof. Simon Digby called him out on this.

    3) His conclusions that there was some kind of a forced conversion program doesn't stand up to historical scrutiny. There were instances for sure, these are recorded by Muslims themselves - and the Afghans were especially known for this when they invaded. But, as Prof. Richard Eaton pointed out, the place where most conversions happened were the places out of Muslim political control:
    “If Islamization had ever been a function of military or political force, one would expect that those areas exposed most intensively and over the longest period to rule by Muslim dynasties—that is, those that were most fully exposed to the ‘sword’—would today contain the greatest number of Muslims. Yet the opposite is the case, as those regions where the most dramatic Islamization occurred, such as eastern Bengal or western Punjab, lay on the fringes of Indo-Muslim rule, where the ‘sword’ was weakest, and where brute force could have exerted the least influence. In such regions the first accurate census reports put the Muslim population at between 70 and 90 percent of the total, whereas in the heartland of Muslim rule in the upper Gangetic Plain—the domain of the Delhi Fort and the Taj Mahal, where Muslim regimes had ruled the most intensively and for the longest period of time—the Muslim population ranged from only 10 to 15 percent. In other words, in the subcontinent as a whole there is an inverse relationship between the degree of Muslim political penetration and the degree of Islamization. Even within Bengal this principle holds true.”
    The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, 1204-1760

    People tend to be averse to religion if it's being forced down their throats.

    You see this too in the state of Kerala which never came under Mughal rule and has almost a 1/3 Muslim population that follow the Shafi'i school of the Muslim traders that brought them Islam (not the official Mughal endorsed, Hanafi school).

    4) This idea of smashing Hindu temples simply out of Hindu hate is also not accurate:
    "Hindu and Jain temples dotted the landscape of Aurangzeb’s kingdom. These religious institutions were entitled to Mughal state protection, and Aurangzeb generally endeavoured to ensure their well-being. By the same token, from a Mughal perspective, that goodwill could be revoked when specific temples or their associates acted against imperial interests. Accordingly, emperor Aurangzeb authorised targeted temple destructions and desecrations throughout his rule....Most glaringly, Aurangzeb counted thousands of Hindu temples within his domains and yet destroyed, at most, a few dozen. This incongruity makes little sense if we cling to a vision of Aurangzeb as a cartoon bigot driven by a single-minded agenda of ridding India of Hindu places of worship."
    https://qz.com/918425/mughal-emperor-aurangzeb-protected-hindu-temples-more-often-than-he-demolished-them/

    Though it could be argued that Mahmud Ghazni did engage in it from a religious standpoint since the Ghaznavids switched schools after he died (again, from my earlier source):
    “In jurispriudence, the early Ghaznavids were Shafi’i, but Hanafism gained ascendancy by Mas’ud’s time.”

    So yeah - I agree there was quite a bit of blood spilled over the centuries by invading Muslim armies. And those quotes from Medieval Muslims looking to spill pagan blood is fairly understandable given the context when they are heading to fight a Hindu army on the battlefield. Making a total wipe out of an army was never seen as anything immoral and Muslim chroniclers have been praising the ability of a Muslim army to utterly decimate a non-Muslim one from the earliest times - especially when under-armed and under-manned. That's what armies are paid to do; they fight and die. I plan on teaching my boys about how Persia had her back broken at Qadisiyyah. But those that spilled the blood of innocent men, women and children will be held to account on the Day of Judgement (whether Muslim or not); that is completely out of the pale and absolutely unacceptable. I think the most accurate count for the number of deaths is in the ballpark of between 10-15 million.

    Peace.

    Talha,

    Your arguments are not persuasive, beginning with your first point that there was a lot of war profiteering involved in Jihad. As though Jihad and profiteering could not (did not) symbiotically coexist.

    Then, you concede so much of what critics of Jihad claim, (“I agree there was quite a bit of blood spilled over the centuries by invading Muslim armies”), that your quibbling over methodology of some of those critics (Dr. Warner) makes you look silly, since a post by Ilana, and associated comment stream, is hardly a forum for professional historians (and Warner disclaims any connection with the methodology of professional historians).

    I mean, on the main point, Jihad was hardly a peaceful endeavor … ever … was it? Except that it can be used as a metaph0r for the struggle for enlightenment, and that’s fine. But what it is … is something very different from enlightenment. What it is is an ideology of warfare. Like Communism that way.

    Read MoreTalha, Your arguments are not persuasive, beginning with your first point that there was a lot of war profiteering involved in Jihad. As though Jihad and profiteering could not (did not) symbiotically coexist. Then, you concede so much of what critics of Jihad claim, ("I agree there was quite a bit of blood spilled over the centuries by invading Muslim armies"), that your quibbling over methodology of some of those critics (Dr. Warner) makes you look silly, since a post by Ilana, and associated comment stream, is hardly a forum for professional historians (and Warner disclaims any connection with the methodology of professional historians). I mean, on the main point, Jihad was hardly a peaceful endeavor ... ever ... was it? Except that it can be used as a metaph0r for the struggle for enlightenment, and that's fine. But what it is ... is something very different from enlightenment. What it is is an ideology of warfare. Like Communism that way.
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Grandpa Charlie,

    I never said jihad was a peaceful endeavor. The reason I call Mr. Warner a fool is that he takes some truth (that obviously Muslim imperial political power came by military expansion...uh, whose didn’t), mixes it up with lies and sells a one-sided package. Case in point; in one of his videos, he says that Damascus was “annihilated” by the conquering Muslim army -which is nonsense, because everyone knows it was a negotiated surrender.

    On top of that he tries to link massacres of populations by men like Tamerlane to be indicative of Islamic doctrine; it isn’t. One can make the argument that Islam allows for (or even encourages political expansion by war) but it has (often elaborate) rules of engagement precisely because jihad is part of the sacred law.

    Furthermore, he has a nice map that shows Muslim military conquests and shows nothing about the 300 years or so when Muslims were getting their backsides handed to them by European conquering armies literally over the entire Muslim world.

    But all of this is just part of the same old pro-Zionist “the free world must side with Israel” network anyway:
    https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1263094200437157&id=749158311830751

    And here he is talking about how Israel needs to be more effective at hasbara and attack Islam:
    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2009/10/losing_israel_1.html

    It’s up to you if you want to take him as a legitimate source of information when there is far, far better and more honest work done by people who don’t carry water for the Zionists.

    Peace.Hey Grandpa Charlie,

    I never said jihad was a peaceful endeavor. The reason I call Mr. Warner a fool is that he takes some truth (that obviously Muslim imperial political power came by military expansion...uh, whose didn’t), mixes it up with lies and sells a one-sided package. Case in point; in one of his videos, he says that Damascus was “annihilated” by the conquering Muslim army -which is nonsense, because everyone knows it was a negotiated surrender.

    On top of that he tries to link massacres of populations by men like Tamerlane to be indicative of Islamic doctrine; it isn’t. One can make the argument that Islam allows for (or even encourages political expansion by war) but it has (often elaborate) rules of engagement precisely because jihad is part of the sacred law.

    Furthermore, he has a nice map that shows Muslim military conquests and shows nothing about the 300 years or so when Muslims were getting their backsides handed to them by European conquering armies literally over the entire Muslim world.

    But all of this is just part of the same old pro-Zionist “the free world must side with Israel” network anyway:
    https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1263094200437157&id=749158311830751

    And here he is talking about how Israel needs to be more effective at hasbara and attack Islam:
    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2009/10/losing_israel_1.html

    It’s up to you if you want to take him as a legitimate source of information when there is far, far better and more honest work done by people who don’t carry water for the Zionists.

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. Ilana,

    I got so involved in the comments, many of which are excellent and/or interesting, that I forgot what I wanted to say in geneeral.

    If the question is “What makes a country, the place or the people?” then it needs to be said that for USA, what makes a country is the Constitution. For better or for worse, that’s it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  113. Malla says:
    @Talha
    Hey Malla,

    Thanks for referencing an academic source. I actually don't disagree with the general outline of history regarding the bloody conquests of India from many of the Turkic Muslims (like Ghaznavids, Tamerlane [that dude was in a sanguinary class alone], etc.). I had initially thought Mr. Warner was going to mention the way-overboard number of 80 million killed that he has cited in other places, but it didn't look like he did that in this video. He says some really weird things though - like; sati was started as a way for Hundu noblewomen to escape becoming part of a Muslim harem...you buy that?

    I (well, actually other academics since I'm not a historian) do critique or contradict Prof. Lal on certain aspects of his narrative, namely:
    1) The specific religious nature of the invasions - sure jihad was a motivation (no doubt about that), but men like Mahmud Ghazni were after wealth, dominion and definitely used a facade of religion:
    “He extended the empire from western Persia to the Ganges valley, financing his army and sophisticated bearacracy by campaigns against wealthy Hindu religious centers and excessive taxation of Khurasan and Afghanistan. The religious impetus of Mahmud’s Indian forays was minimal; he fought equally tenaciously against rival Muslim rulers and established permanent dominion in India only up to Lahore.”
    Medieval Islamic Civilization: An Encyclopedia

    Furthermore, men like him and his successors had plenty of Hindus in positions of power who wanted to gain from the conquests - so the idea that this was solely Muslims vs kaafirs is not accurate:
    “The position of Hindu generals, soldiers, and scholars at the Ghaznavid court is also significant. Even Mahmud, the iconoclast, had a contingent of Hindu officers and soldiers. He richly rewarded at least one Sanskrit poet, and had Hindu pandits at his court. He also issued coins with Sanskrit inscriptions. The Hindu position seems to have improved greatly in the days of his successor, Masud. Only fifty days after the death of Mahmud, his son despatched Sewand Rai, a Hindu chief, with a large body of Hindu cavalry in pursuit of the nobles who had espoused the cause of his brother. Sewand Rai died in the ensuing battle, but his selection for this important assignment indicates his position of trust and eminence…contemporary evidence suggests that the Hindu position under the Ghaznavids was very much better than it was to be in the early days of the Delhi Sultanate.”
    http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00islamlinks/ikram/part1_02.html

    When Prof. Lal calls Mahmud Ghazni a "scholar of Qur'an and hadis" because he quotes verses from it at times is a stretch. I mean - my kid can quote verses and I can quote certain lines from Shakespeare; doesn't make me a scholar. It's those kind of statements that make one question his credibility and judgement. His polemical stance certainly does not help.

    2) I think Prof. Lal looks at numbers in medieval sources uncritically the late Prof. Simon Digby called him out on this.

    3) His conclusions that there was some kind of a forced conversion program doesn't stand up to historical scrutiny. There were instances for sure, these are recorded by Muslims themselves - and the Afghans were especially known for this when they invaded. But, as Prof. Richard Eaton pointed out, the place where most conversions happened were the places out of Muslim political control:
    “If Islamization had ever been a function of military or political force, one would expect that those areas exposed most intensively and over the longest period to rule by Muslim dynasties—that is, those that were most fully exposed to the ‘sword’—would today contain the greatest number of Muslims. Yet the opposite is the case, as those regions where the most dramatic Islamization occurred, such as eastern Bengal or western Punjab, lay on the fringes of Indo-Muslim rule, where the ‘sword’ was weakest, and where brute force could have exerted the least influence. In such regions the first accurate census reports put the Muslim population at between 70 and 90 percent of the total, whereas in the heartland of Muslim rule in the upper Gangetic Plain—the domain of the Delhi Fort and the Taj Mahal, where Muslim regimes had ruled the most intensively and for the longest period of time—the Muslim population ranged from only 10 to 15 percent. In other words, in the subcontinent as a whole there is an inverse relationship between the degree of Muslim political penetration and the degree of Islamization. Even within Bengal this principle holds true.”
    The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, 1204-1760

    People tend to be averse to religion if it's being forced down their throats.

    You see this too in the state of Kerala which never came under Mughal rule and has almost a 1/3 Muslim population that follow the Shafi'i school of the Muslim traders that brought them Islam (not the official Mughal endorsed, Hanafi school).

    4) This idea of smashing Hindu temples simply out of Hindu hate is also not accurate:
    "Hindu and Jain temples dotted the landscape of Aurangzeb’s kingdom. These religious institutions were entitled to Mughal state protection, and Aurangzeb generally endeavoured to ensure their well-being. By the same token, from a Mughal perspective, that goodwill could be revoked when specific temples or their associates acted against imperial interests. Accordingly, emperor Aurangzeb authorised targeted temple destructions and desecrations throughout his rule....Most glaringly, Aurangzeb counted thousands of Hindu temples within his domains and yet destroyed, at most, a few dozen. This incongruity makes little sense if we cling to a vision of Aurangzeb as a cartoon bigot driven by a single-minded agenda of ridding India of Hindu places of worship."
    https://qz.com/918425/mughal-emperor-aurangzeb-protected-hindu-temples-more-often-than-he-demolished-them/

    Though it could be argued that Mahmud Ghazni did engage in it from a religious standpoint since the Ghaznavids switched schools after he died (again, from my earlier source):
    “In jurispriudence, the early Ghaznavids were Shafi’i, but Hanafism gained ascendancy by Mas’ud’s time.”

    So yeah - I agree there was quite a bit of blood spilled over the centuries by invading Muslim armies. And those quotes from Medieval Muslims looking to spill pagan blood is fairly understandable given the context when they are heading to fight a Hindu army on the battlefield. Making a total wipe out of an army was never seen as anything immoral and Muslim chroniclers have been praising the ability of a Muslim army to utterly decimate a non-Muslim one from the earliest times - especially when under-armed and under-manned. That's what armies are paid to do; they fight and die. I plan on teaching my boys about how Persia had her back broken at Qadisiyyah. But those that spilled the blood of innocent men, women and children will be held to account on the Day of Judgement (whether Muslim or not); that is completely out of the pale and absolutely unacceptable. I think the most accurate count for the number of deaths is in the ballpark of between 10-15 million.

    Peace.

    He says some really weird things though – like; sati was started as a way for Hundu noblewomen to escape becoming part of a Muslim harem…you buy that?

    No that is Jauhar and Saca. Sati is different and much older.
    Hindu women did really jump into fires to save themselves from sexual slavery from some Islamic armies. In that way, Dr. Warner is right.

    This was mostly done by Rajput women, Rajputs are Scythians from their male side and formed Warrior clans. They had a motto of death before dishonour (that was also the motto of the German SS Wafen strangely).

    As far as the rest of your post, I will answer later. You make some good points. I think Prof Lal definitely has gone a bit overboard.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Malla,

    Hindu women did really jump into fires to save themselves from sexual slavery from some Islamic armies.
     
    No doubt - incidents are fairly well documented. Problem with Mr. Warner is that he takes an event in history and spins or distorts it. Like his statement contradicting well-known historians and pinning the Dark Ages (assuming that is even an accurate description) on Islam. He says; “Well I say...”

    Who cares? He isn’t citing any scholarly work for his conclusions and even many of his bullet points are simply assertions presented as facts to an ignorant audience.

    I think he’s trying to teach the Zionists how hasbara is really done.

    I welcome your comments on the points I made. I have no problems with people criticizing Islam or its history, but it’s not too much to ask people to stick to facts and not go overboard. Prof. Lal just went too far with his assertions and overstepped his knowledge of history into theological criticism (which is chock full of mistaken assertions).

    I will say a couple of things; the people of India (who are probably- historically - the least violent civilization) didn’t have much chance against Turkic conquering armies whatever their motivations. They are fortunate that the armies generally stayed in the north and didn’t go all the way into the deep continent. Especially a man like Tamerlane - otherwise it would have been one of the biggest massacres in history due to population concentrations.

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. Malla says:
    @bjondo
    [If a commenter totally ignores proper capitalization, punctuation, grammar, and spelling, his comments may not be published.]

    sh*tholes are created and maintained
    by the brits (bringers of misery), french, spanish,
    and amurderkens.

    sh*tholes are created and maintained by the brits (bringers of misery), french,

    Yes that explains HongKong.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. @Malla
    Well the empires collapsed because of communist intrigues funded by wall street money. Nesta Webster wrote how the British establishment was very pro communist, the labour party was nearly slaves of the communists or hidden communists themselves and the Conservatives gave the leftoids a free pass everytime. There was definitely banking money involved. Even Douglass Reed writes about this in his books on Rhodesia and Southern Africa in general. One of the main aim of the globalists was to destroy the British Empire before all the other empires.
    So maybe Hitler had a point. He was not against the British empire at the beginning (he became anti-British empire much later in the war), he was primarily an anti communist. I would even say he was more anti Communist than anti-Jewish. As far as him being anti-Slavic, I dunno. I do not doubt the fact that anti Slavism did exist among the German NS top ranks, but I believe it has been blown out of proportion. There were Russians in the SS Wafen.
    Communism is after all creating a slave society by using a target population to come to power by creating anger over some out group in the said population and also making fake promises to the said target population for an Utopian future, the targets might be working classes used against the middle classes, blacks/immigrants against Whites etc... The target population is useful only as a vehicle to come to power and to stabilize the power. Thats it, after that the target population themselves become slaves. At the end of the day, Communism is a globalist banker funded ideology of total control.
    Hitler believed that democracy could never fight communism as communism would infiltrate democratic countries with ease (which is exactly what has happened today) and class warfare or even ethnic/racial rivalries give the communists the chance to infiltrate societies. I guess National Socialism was designed to reduce inter class rivalries as well as to create an airtight social economic system to render it impossible for communist infiltration.Well the empires collapsed because of communist intrigues funded by wall street money. Nesta Webster wrote how the British establishment was very pro communist, the labour party was nearly slaves of the communists or hidden communists themselves and the Conservatives gave the leftoids a free pass everytime. There was definitely banking money involved. Even Douglass Reed writes about this in his books on Rhodesia and Southern Africa in general. One of the main aim of the globalists was to destroy the British Empire before all the other empires.
    So maybe Hitler had a point. He was not against the British empire at the beginning (he became anti-British empire much later in the war), he was primarily an anti communist. I would even say he was more anti Communist than anti-Jewish. As far as him being anti-Slavic, I dunno. I do not doubt the fact that anti Slavism did exist among the German NS top ranks, but I believe it has been blown out of proportion. There were Russians in the SS Wafen.
    Communism is after all creating a slave society by using a target population to come to power by creating anger over some out group in the said population and also making fake promises to the said target population for an Utopian future, the targets might be working classes used against the middle classes, blacks/immigrants against Whites etc... The target population is useful only as a vehicle to come to power and to stabilize the power. Thats it, after that the target population themselves become slaves. At the end of the day, Communism is a globalist banker funded ideology of total control.
    Hitler believed that democracy could never fight communism as communism would infiltrate democratic countries with ease (which is exactly what has happened today) and class warfare or even ethnic/racial rivalries give the communists the chance to infiltrate societies. I guess National Socialism was designed to reduce inter class rivalries as well as to create an airtight social economic system to render it impossible for communist infiltration.

    That is a helluva good comment!

    Read MoreThat is a helluva good comment!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. @Grandpa Charlie

    "during the days of those huge colonial empires, things were much better [respecting security of foreigners passing through places like Afghanistan]" -- Malla
     
    I agree, for sure. I have seen a documentary film privately made of the transfer of power from Sierra Leone as a crown colony to Sierra Leone as an independent nation. The native soldiers formed up for the flag changing ceremony went barefoot and their rifles were only for drill and could not be fired -- and that system was so much better than what has followed! It is all the fault of white men -- because they or some of them allowed African natives to get their hands on modern rifles! As General Sir David Ormsby-Gore reportedly said after putting down the Mau-Mau rebellion in Kenya, effectively employing napalm, "God knows we tried."

    Back in the days of the great European empires and in any event during the days of the British Empire, things were much better for everyone than they have become since then. But the empires were unsustainable after World War II and barely sustainable before. Maybe if Britain had taken up Hitler on his offer to leave the colonial world as it was -- or even to assist Britain where needed -- while letting Germany "take" Russia ... oh well, that's just a pipe dream considering that Hitler after militarily taking Czechoslovakia (beyond just the Sudentenland, which had been allowed by Chamberlain) ... Hitler had proven himself and his government to be completely untrustworthy ... and there is to be found the flea in the ointment of any and all of those theories as to how Hitler really did not bring on World War II when he ordered the invasion of Poland. IMHO, the real problem with Nazism was Hitler's insistence that the Slavs consisted of a lesser race, especially when you consider that the Slavs are actually linguistically and probably genetically closer to the Aryan roots than any of the "races" of Western Europe, including the mutts of the "German or Teutonic race." Well, you can only expect so much of any opportunistic politician!

    Hitler had proven himself and his government to be completely untrustworthy … and there is to be found the flea in the ointment of any and all of those theories as to how Hitler really did not bring on World War II when he ordered the invasion of Poland. IMHO…

    GC, you seem like a fine fellow, but you may want to revisit some of your thoughts.Hitler was less untrustworthy than Wilson, Churchill and FDR to name just three, all of whom flip-flopped seriously and repeatedly for the benefit of their handlers.

    Here’s a good start if you can stomach it.

    -Douglas Reed, “the Controversy of Zion,”

    https://archive.org/stream/TheControversyOfZion/TheControversyOfZion_djvu.txt

    Spoiler: The US was sold down the river a century ago and all the presidents since at least Wilson were traitors to American interests. They were all enslaved by the twin evils of Communism and Zionism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla

    Wilson, Churchill and FDR
     
    Of all the three FDR was the worst. Wilson at least realised his mistakes and internally repented his actions towards the end of his life. Churchill was scum but he had some principles at least. FDR was a total slimeball probably even worse than Stalin and in the same league as Trotsky.

    Hey did you ever read this book

    http://www.jrbooksonline.com/pdf_books/bolshevism_from_moses_to_lenin.pdf

    This brilliant book is a MUST READ if you want to understand the hidden forces of history for thousands of years. If one has not read this book, he or she never understood history.

    , @Grandpa Charlie

    "Hitler was less untrustworthy than Wilson, Churchill and FDR to name just three, all of whom flip-flopped seriously and repeatedly for the benefit of their handlers." -- Jacques Sheete
     
    You want to talk about a very wide and general "grand narrative," in order to introduce your particular favorite ideology by way of a conspiracy theory, as though all conspiracy theories were equally true. I am much less ambitious: I am pointing out that Hitler apologists invariably go from the annexation of Sudetenland, or even from Chamberlain at Munich, straight to the invasion of Poland -- sometimes even neglecting the Molotov-Ribbentrop secret treaty. They leave out the conquest of Czechoslovakia, as though it were unimportant -- whereas Czechoslovakia is key to understanding the beginning of the European World War II.

    By ordering the invasion of Czechoslovakia, Hitler assured the rise of Churchill from the back benches of the House of Commons and thus convinced the British government, the British people and FDR that there was no coexistence possible with the Third Reich. Hitler thereby exposed himself as a fraud and a con artist, but one with military power, which meant that the Third Reich could only be dealt with by military force. Wilson is a very different case, but Churchill and FDR's "handlers" were respectively the British and the American peoples, whereas Hitler was a psychopath, unable to conceive of honest dealing. He was the equivalent of Netanyahu today.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Good article. I guess Koos Van der Merwe was right all along.

    Read MoreGood article. I guess Koos Van der Merwe was right all along.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  118. Malla says:
    @Biff
    Wow! Nice vid, thanks for sharing.
    One thing that caught my ear was the idea of Iraqi’s not wanting to fix anything, and I have two theory’s that are probably both crap, but here goes:
    Environmental conditions - I now live in South East Asia, coming from the North American Rockies - here I have noticed some of my best stainless steel tools gum up and become corroded in the coastal/tropical environment I live. I can’t imagine what kind effect the Middle East environment has on machinery.

    Or

    Some people just suck at fixing things so they dont even try - my brother comes to mind.Wow! Nice vid, thanks for sharing.
    One thing that caught my ear was the idea of Iraqi’s not wanting to fix anything, and I have two theory’s that are probably both crap, but here goes:
    Environmental conditions - I now live in South East Asia, coming from the North American Rockies - here I have noticed some of my best stainless steel tools gum up and become corroded in the coastal/tropical environment I live. I can’t imagine what kind effect the Middle East environment has on machinery.

    Or

    Some people just suck at fixing things so they dont even try - my brother comes to mind.

    I would go with the second theory. I found it pretty strange too. I mean even Indians are pretty decent in repairing stuff. I think there is a lack of foresight as well as wastefulness involved as well here. V.S. Naipaul had observed something similar in Africa.

    Read MoreI would go with the second theory. I found it pretty strange too. I mean even Indians are pretty decent in repairing stuff. I think there is a lack of foresight as well as wastefulness involved as well here. V.S. Naipaul had observed something similar in Africa.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. Talha says:
    @Grandpa Charlie
    Talha,

    Your arguments are not persuasive, beginning with your first point that there was a lot of war profiteering involved in Jihad. As though Jihad and profiteering could not (did not) symbiotically coexist.

    Then, you concede so much of what critics of Jihad claim, ("I agree there was quite a bit of blood spilled over the centuries by invading Muslim armies"), that your quibbling over methodology of some of those critics (Dr. Warner) makes you look silly, since a post by Ilana, and associated comment stream, is hardly a forum for professional historians (and Warner disclaims any connection with the methodology of professional historians).

    I mean, on the main point, Jihad was hardly a peaceful endeavor ... ever ... was it? Except that it can be used as a metaph0r for the struggle for enlightenment, and that's fine. But what it is ... is something very different from enlightenment. What it is is an ideology of warfare. Like Communism that way.Talha,

    Your arguments are not persuasive, beginning with your first point that there was a lot of war profiteering involved in Jihad. As though Jihad and profiteering could not (did not) symbiotically coexist.

    Then, you concede so much of what critics of Jihad claim, ("I agree there was quite a bit of blood spilled over the centuries by invading Muslim armies"), that your quibbling over methodology of some of those critics (Dr. Warner) makes you look silly, since a post by Ilana, and associated comment stream, is hardly a forum for professional historians (and Warner disclaims any connection with the methodology of professional historians).

    I mean, on the main point, Jihad was hardly a peaceful endeavor ... ever ... was it? Except that it can be used as a metaph0r for the struggle for enlightenment, and that's fine. But what it is ... is something very different from enlightenment. What it is is an ideology of warfare. Like Communism that way.

    Hey Grandpa Charlie,

    I never said jihad was a peaceful endeavor. The reason I call Mr. Warner a fool is that he takes some truth (that obviously Muslim imperial political power came by military expansion…uh, whose didn’t), mixes it up with lies and sells a one-sided package. Case in point; in one of his videos, he says that Damascus was “annihilated” by the conquering Muslim army -which is nonsense, because everyone knows it was a negotiated surrender.

    On top of that he tries to link massacres of populations by men like Tamerlane to be indicative of Islamic doctrine; it isn’t. One can make the argument that Islam allows for (or even encourages political expansion by war) but it has (often elaborate) rules of engagement precisely because jihad is part of the sacred law.

    Furthermore, he has a nice map that shows Muslim military conquests and shows nothing about the 300 years or so when Muslims were getting their backsides handed to them by European conquering armies literally over the entire Muslim world.

    But all of this is just part of the same old pro-Zionist “the free world must side with Israel” network anyway:

    https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1263094200437157&id=749158311830751

    And here he is talking about how Israel needs to be more effective at hasbara and attack Islam:

    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2009/10/losing_israel_1.html

    It’s up to you if you want to take him as a legitimate source of information when there is far, far better and more honest work done by people who don’t carry water for the Zionists.

    Peace.

    Read MoreHey Grandpa Charlie, I never said jihad was a peaceful endeavor. The reason I call Mr. Warner a fool is that he takes some truth (that obviously Muslim imperial political power came by military expansion...uh, whose didn’t), mixes it up with lies and sells a one-sided package. Case in point; in one of his videos, he says that Damascus was “annihilated” by the conquering Muslim army -which is nonsense, because everyone knows it was a negotiated surrender. On top of that he tries to link massacres of populations by men like Tamerlane to be indicative of Islamic doctrine; it isn’t. One can make the argument that Islam allows for (or even encourages political expansion by war) but it has (often elaborate) rules of engagement precisely because jihad is part of the sacred law. Furthermore, he has a nice map that shows Muslim military conquests and shows nothing about the 300 years or so when Muslims were getting their backsides handed to them by European conquering armies literally over the entire Muslim world. But all of this is just part of the same old pro-Zionist “the free world must side with Israel” network anyway: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1263094200437157&id=749158311830751 And here he is talking about how Israel needs to be more effective at hasbara and attack Islam: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2009/10/losing_israel_1.html It’s up to you if you want to take him as a legitimate source of information when there is far, far better and more honest work done by people who don’t carry water for the Zionists. Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. Malla says:
    @jacques sheete

    Hitler had proven himself and his government to be completely untrustworthy … and there is to be found the flea in the ointment of any and all of those theories as to how Hitler really did not bring on World War II when he ordered the invasion of Poland. IMHO...
     
    GC, you seem like a fine fellow, but you may want to revisit some of your thoughts.Hitler was less untrustworthy than Wilson, Churchill and FDR to name just three, all of whom flip-flopped seriously and repeatedly for the benefit of their handlers.

    Here's a good start if you can stomach it.

    -Douglas Reed, “the Controversy of Zion,”

    https://archive.org/stream/TheControversyOfZion/TheControversyOfZion_djvu.txt
     

    Spoiler: The US was sold down the river a century ago and all the presidents since at least Wilson were traitors to American interests. They were all enslaved by the twin evils of Communism and Zionism.

    Wilson, Churchill and FDR

    Of all the three FDR was the worst. Wilson at least realised his mistakes and internally repented his actions towards the end of his life. Churchill was scum but he had some principles at least. FDR was a total slimeball probably even worse than Stalin and in the same league as Trotsky.

    Hey did you ever read this book

    http://www.jrbooksonline.com/pdf_books/bolshevism_from_moses_to_lenin.pdf

    This brilliant book is a MUST READ if you want to understand the hidden forces of history for thousands of years. If one has not read this book, he or she never understood history.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Talha says:
    @Malla

    He says some really weird things though – like; sati was started as a way for Hundu noblewomen to escape becoming part of a Muslim harem…you buy that?
     
    No that is Jauhar and Saca. Sati is different and much older.
    Hindu women did really jump into fires to save themselves from sexual slavery from some Islamic armies. In that way, Dr. Warner is right.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soQkKBqq6uc

    This was mostly done by Rajput women, Rajputs are Scythians from their male side and formed Warrior clans. They had a motto of death before dishonour (that was also the motto of the German SS Wafen strangely).

    As far as the rest of your post, I will answer later. You make some good points. I think Prof Lal definitely has gone a bit overboard.

    Hey Malla,

    Hindu women did really jump into fires to save themselves from sexual slavery from some Islamic armies.

    No doubt – incidents are fairly well documented. Problem with Mr. Warner is that he takes an event in history and spins or distorts it. Like his statement contradicting well-known historians and pinning the Dark Ages (assuming that is even an accurate description) on Islam. He says; “Well I say…”

    Who cares? He isn’t citing any scholarly work for his conclusions and even many of his bullet points are simply assertions presented as facts to an ignorant audience.

    I think he’s trying to teach the Zionists how hasbara is really done.

    I welcome your comments on the points I made. I have no problems with people criticizing Islam or its history, but it’s not too much to ask people to stick to facts and not go overboard. Prof. Lal just went too far with his assertions and overstepped his knowledge of history into theological criticism (which is chock full of mistaken assertions).

    I will say a couple of things; the people of India (who are probably- historically – the least violent civilization) didn’t have much chance against Turkic conquering armies whatever their motivations. They are fortunate that the armies generally stayed in the north and didn’t go all the way into the deep continent. Especially a man like Tamerlane – otherwise it would have been one of the biggest massacres in history due to population concentrations.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla

    the people of India (who are probably- historically – the least violent civilization)
     
    Not so. There was some Islamic brutality on Hindus but Hindus in their turn were brutal towards Buddhists and Jains.

    http://bapumraut.blogspot.in/2013/02/how-adi-shankara-destroyed-buddhism-and.html

    http://cricketvoice.com/cricketforum2/index.php?topic=10455.0

    As far as Islamic brutality on Hindus this is understandable as we are idol worshipers and not even people of the book (asmaani qitabi) like Christians and Jews. But yeah some of that brutality was just loot and not Jihad, so I understand your point.
    Anyways even though evil things like this have been done in the name of Islam or loot, it does not mean Islam itself does not have positive points in it. There is a lot of justice in the sharia for example. But anyways more on that later.

    Peace.

    , @Malla
    BTW for interest sake are you Iranian or Pakistani? Even if you are Pakistani it will not make any difference to me at all , you seem like a decent intelligent guy.BTW for interest sake are you Iranian or Pakistani? Even if you are Pakistani it will not make any difference to me at all , you seem like a decent intelligent guy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. Malla says:
    @Orwellian State

    Aren’t people from India (particularly the Hindus) smarter than us Americans? And couldn’t the same be said of the Chinese?
     
    Indians have an average IQ of 81, not much higher than their African kin. Indians are also incredibly dishonest.Maybe 0.01% of them are trustworthy, no more.

    Chinese have higher IQ, but also dishonest. Maybe 1% of them are trustworthy, no more.

    That's why both China and India are still shithole countries. The vast majority of people from 3rd world countries are dishonest, the honest ones get ripped off and laughed at as idiots, that's why these countries are such shitholes. It's also why we shouldn't take people from 3rd world countries. Let them work out their dishonest ways and become first world on their own, however long that takes, then and only then can they immigrate to other first world countries.

    the honest ones get ripped off and laughed at as idiots,

    This is true of Jews as well. Honest Jews are destroyed by evil Jews around them just like honest Indians are destroyed by evul Indians around them.
    You MUST read this book.
    Samuel Roth was a honest decent man who was Jewish. And his life was destroyed by ….not evul WASPs, not any evul goyum but other Jews.

    https://archive.org/stream/JewsMustLive/JML_djvu.txt

    https://archive.org/download/JewsMustLive/JML.pdf

    This is exactly how Indians behave. Decent honest Indian people are ripped apart by other Indians like sharks at a feeding frenzy. I have seen thousands of such cases in front of my eyes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. I think it’s good idea not to import anyone from anywhere. But the commentary and comments remind me suggests that there is a very basic lack of understanding on investment. The reason Haiti is poor is largely due to the fact that they are a society that has not controlled their own country (i use their own – very loosely). The only real value color plays is their history as a people comprised of mostly or entirely slaves. Who fought for their freedom. Now anyone who has a minor understanding of slavery knows that the slaves of Haiti are not a homogeneous ethnicity. In other words, no common belief, no shared values, no common consistent religion, Unlike most slave plantation societies, the slaves of Haiti actually managed to fight their way to freedom.

    A kind of freedom.

    Ar any rate it’s clear that Haiti has not owned it’s land. But instead despite it’s attempts at self government has lacked home rule or either the economy or the investment to develop it into a modern state. It’s really that simple. One need only consider the any community in the U that lost it’s investment and review the consequences before the community emptied out. The degradation is best described in the Hillbilly Eulogy, which I have not read, but has been discussed in some detail on TAC and other sites. What sustains any modern community including – it’s utilities: plumbing, electricity, sewage, transportation in the modern understanding is investment. Frankly, it doesn’t matter whether one is white or black, it takes money to operate

    One might contend that Haiti has had plenty of opportunity to embrace modern development, the reality is that it was never enough to sustain wide distribution. so until there is enough investment to grow what we might consider a developing economy large enough to grow in breadth as well as depth indoor plumbing will be the least of Haiti’s issues. Not only is investment and or some manner of income producing industry required to develop , but it is required to sustain it.

    Combined with natural disasters, such as hurricanes and earthquakes — unstable governance — Haiti resembles pre-midevil Europe. Trying to pretend that the developed world sprung up as the result of white superiority is to forget the or ignore some 1500 years of development and cross pollination.

    And l’est anyone start the typical horning of Rome and Greece. It would wise to remember that borrowed a lot from their fellows in Northern Africa and plumbing — that was the Persians, from whom they borrowed.

    And while I am not for importing anyone from anywhere — a made from Haitie is going to as effective as made from Norway. Manual labor is manual labor — as for modern conveniences — pushing a vacuum cleaner hardly heeds a PH.D. And a broom in Norway is no mare effective than a broom in Haiti.

    Are their some steps that Haiti should engage all on their own, I think so.

    speaking of voodoo values, our intellectual and technical expertise cannot hide the gymnastics of turning a man into a woman or a women into a man and the psychological hoola hoops to justify it.

    Read MoreI think it's good idea not to import anyone from anywhere. But the commentary and comments remind me suggests that there is a very basic lack of understanding on investment. The reason Haiti is poor is largely due to the fact that they are a society that has not controlled their own country (i use their own - very loosely). The only real value color plays is their history as a people comprised of mostly or entirely slaves. Who fought for their freedom. Now anyone who has a minor understanding of slavery knows that the slaves of Haiti are not a homogeneous ethnicity. In other words, no common belief, no shared values, no common consistent religion, Unlike most slave plantation societies, the slaves of Haiti actually managed to fight their way to freedom. A kind of freedom. Ar any rate it's clear that Haiti has not owned it's land. But instead despite it's attempts at self government has lacked home rule or either the economy or the investment to develop it into a modern state. It's really that simple. One need only consider the any community in the U that lost it's investment and review the consequences before the community emptied out. The degradation is best described in the Hillbilly Eulogy, which I have not read, but has been discussed in some detail on TAC and other sites. What sustains any modern community including - it's utilities: plumbing, electricity, sewage, transportation in the modern understanding is investment. Frankly, it doesn't matter whether one is white or black, it takes money to operate One might contend that Haiti has had plenty of opportunity to embrace modern development, the reality is that it was never enough to sustain wide distribution. so until there is enough investment to grow what we might consider a developing economy large enough to grow in breadth as well as depth indoor plumbing will be the least of Haiti's issues. Not only is investment and or some manner of income producing industry required to develop , but it is required to sustain it. Combined with natural disasters, such as hurricanes and earthquakes --- unstable governance -- Haiti resembles pre-midevil Europe. Trying to pretend that the developed world sprung up as the result of white superiority is to forget the or ignore some 1500 years of development and cross pollination. And l'est anyone start the typical horning of Rome and Greece. It would wise to remember that borrowed a lot from their fellows in Northern Africa and plumbing -- that was the Persians, from whom they borrowed. And while I am not for importing anyone from anywhere -- a made from Haitie is going to as effective as made from Norway. Manual labor is manual labor -- as for modern conveniences -- pushing a vacuum cleaner hardly heeds a PH.D. And a broom in Norway is no mare effective than a broom in Haiti. Are their some steps that Haiti should engage all on their own, I think so. speaking of voodoo values, our intellectual and technical expertise cannot hide the gymnastics of turning a man into a woman or a women into a man and the psychological hoola hoops to justify it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  124. Malla says:
    @Talha
    Hey Malla,

    Hindu women did really jump into fires to save themselves from sexual slavery from some Islamic armies.
     
    No doubt - incidents are fairly well documented. Problem with Mr. Warner is that he takes an event in history and spins or distorts it. Like his statement contradicting well-known historians and pinning the Dark Ages (assuming that is even an accurate description) on Islam. He says; “Well I say...”

    Who cares? He isn’t citing any scholarly work for his conclusions and even many of his bullet points are simply assertions presented as facts to an ignorant audience.

    I think he’s trying to teach the Zionists how hasbara is really done.

    I welcome your comments on the points I made. I have no problems with people criticizing Islam or its history, but it’s not too much to ask people to stick to facts and not go overboard. Prof. Lal just went too far with his assertions and overstepped his knowledge of history into theological criticism (which is chock full of mistaken assertions).

    I will say a couple of things; the people of India (who are probably- historically - the least violent civilization) didn’t have much chance against Turkic conquering armies whatever their motivations. They are fortunate that the armies generally stayed in the north and didn’t go all the way into the deep continent. Especially a man like Tamerlane - otherwise it would have been one of the biggest massacres in history due to population concentrations.

    Peace.

    the people of India (who are probably- historically – the least violent civilization)

    Not so. There was some Islamic brutality on Hindus but Hindus in their turn were brutal towards Buddhists and Jains.

    http://bapumraut.blogspot.in/2013/02/how-adi-shankara-destroyed-buddhism-and.html

    http://cricketvoice.com/cricketforum2/index.php?topic=10455.0

    As far as Islamic brutality on Hindus this is understandable as we are idol worshipers and not even people of the book (asmaani qitabi) like Christians and Jews. But yeah some of that brutality was just loot and not Jihad, so I understand your point.
    Anyways even though evil things like this have been done in the name of Islam or loot, it does not mean Islam itself does not have positive points in it. There is a lot of justice in the sharia for example. But anyways more on that later.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Malla,

    I never said they were angels. ;)

    I was comparing them to others from a historical perspective- if I recall, Emperor Ashoka spent the rest of his life making amends for how bloody his unification of India was and the Hindus even ran a formidable empire (Majapahit) out of the island of Java which approximates to current Indonesia. And of course Hindu kingdoms fought with each other for territory- fairly routine. Don’t know if you have come across Steven Pinker’s book on historic violence, he does a good comparison of these things.

    As far as pagans, you’re right that some schools differentiated between them and People of the Book - for instance, the Shafi’is did not legally extend dhimmi status to them (basically convert or fight) - but this was honestly rarely ever put into real practice since the Maliki and Hanafi schools had the widest adoption by sovereigns. The Hanafis and Malikis extended it to pagans and even atheists. So, as I mentioned, it was a good thing that the Hanafi school was adopted in India.

    I’m originally from Pakistan but live in the states. Big fan of Persians though.

    If certain Muslims historically broke our code of ethics in warfare, there is no excuse and there is no justification; they will have to answer for it in the next life.

    Peace.Hey Malla,

    I never said they were angels. ;)

    I was comparing them to others from a historical perspective- if I recall, Emperor Ashoka spent the rest of his life making amends for how bloody his unification of India was and the Hindus even ran a formidable empire (Majapahit) out of the island of Java which approximates to current Indonesia. And of course Hindu kingdoms fought with each other for territory- fairly routine. Don’t know if you have come across Steven Pinker’s book on historic violence, he does a good comparison of these things.

    As far as pagans, you’re right that some schools differentiated between them and People of the Book - for instance, the Shafi’is did not legally extend dhimmi status to them (basically convert or fight) - but this was honestly rarely ever put into real practice since the Maliki and Hanafi schools had the widest adoption by sovereigns. The Hanafis and Malikis extended it to pagans and even atheists. So, as I mentioned, it was a good thing that the Hanafi school was adopted in India.

    I’m originally from Pakistan but live in the states. Big fan of Persians though.

    If certain Muslims historically broke our code of ethics in warfare, there is no excuse and there is no justification; they will have to answer for it in the next life.

    Peace.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. Wally says:
    @Biff
    My point is shithole countries do not always become that way from with in. Outside influences are sometimes a factor.
    How’s that for Marxist thinking?My point is shithole countries do not always become that way from with in. Outside influences are sometimes a factor.
    How’s that for Marxist thinking?

    Except that you cannot prove your point, and I can easily refute any attempts.

    And we do know what’s it called when one keeps trying the same thing over & over expecting different results?

    Marxism: the definition of failure

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. Malla says:
    @Talha
    Hey Malla,

    Hindu women did really jump into fires to save themselves from sexual slavery from some Islamic armies.
     
    No doubt - incidents are fairly well documented. Problem with Mr. Warner is that he takes an event in history and spins or distorts it. Like his statement contradicting well-known historians and pinning the Dark Ages (assuming that is even an accurate description) on Islam. He says; “Well I say...”

    Who cares? He isn’t citing any scholarly work for his conclusions and even many of his bullet points are simply assertions presented as facts to an ignorant audience.

    I think he’s trying to teach the Zionists how hasbara is really done.

    I welcome your comments on the points I made. I have no problems with people criticizing Islam or its history, but it’s not too much to ask people to stick to facts and not go overboard. Prof. Lal just went too far with his assertions and overstepped his knowledge of history into theological criticism (which is chock full of mistaken assertions).

    I will say a couple of things; the people of India (who are probably- historically - the least violent civilization) didn’t have much chance against Turkic conquering armies whatever their motivations. They are fortunate that the armies generally stayed in the north and didn’t go all the way into the deep continent. Especially a man like Tamerlane - otherwise it would have been one of the biggest massacres in history due to population concentrations.

    Peace.

    BTW for interest sake are you Iranian or Pakistani? Even if you are Pakistani it will not make any difference to me at all , you seem like a decent intelligent guy.

    Read MoreBTW for interest sake are you Iranian or Pakistani? Even if you are Pakistani it will not make any difference to me at all , you seem like a decent intelligent guy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. Talha says:
    @Malla

    the people of India (who are probably- historically – the least violent civilization)
     
    Not so. There was some Islamic brutality on Hindus but Hindus in their turn were brutal towards Buddhists and Jains.

    http://bapumraut.blogspot.in/2013/02/how-adi-shankara-destroyed-buddhism-and.html

    http://cricketvoice.com/cricketforum2/index.php?topic=10455.0

    As far as Islamic brutality on Hindus this is understandable as we are idol worshipers and not even people of the book (asmaani qitabi) like Christians and Jews. But yeah some of that brutality was just loot and not Jihad, so I understand your point.
    Anyways even though evil things like this have been done in the name of Islam or loot, it does not mean Islam itself does not have positive points in it. There is a lot of justice in the sharia for example. But anyways more on that later.

    Peace.

    Hey Malla,

    I never said they were angels. ;)

    I was comparing them to others from a historical perspective- if I recall, Emperor Ashoka spent the rest of his life making amends for how bloody his unification of India was and the Hindus even ran a formidable empire (Majapahit) out of the island of Java which approximates to current Indonesia. And of course Hindu kingdoms fought with each other for territory- fairly routine. Don’t know if you have come across Steven Pinker’s book on historic violence, he does a good comparison of these things.

    As far as pagans, you’re right that some schools differentiated between them and People of the Book – for instance, the Shafi’is did not legally extend dhimmi status to them (basically convert or fight) – but this was honestly rarely ever put into real practice since the Maliki and Hanafi schools had the widest adoption by sovereigns. The Hanafis and Malikis extended it to pagans and even atheists. So, as I mentioned, it was a good thing that the Hanafi school was adopted in India.

    I’m originally from Pakistan but live in the states. Big fan of Persians though.

    If certain Muslims historically broke our code of ethics in warfare, there is no excuse and there is no justification; they will have to answer for it in the next life.

    Peace.

    Read MoreHey Malla, I never said they were angels. ;) I was comparing them to others from a historical perspective- if I recall, Emperor Ashoka spent the rest of his life making amends for how bloody his unification of India was and the Hindus even ran a formidable empire (Majapahit) out of the island of Java which approximates to current Indonesia. And of course Hindu kingdoms fought with each other for territory- fairly routine. Don’t know if you have come across Steven Pinker’s book on historic violence, he does a good comparison of these things. As far as pagans, you’re right that some schools differentiated between them and People of the Book - for instance, the Shafi’is did not legally extend dhimmi status to them (basically convert or fight) - but this was honestly rarely ever put into real practice since the Maliki and Hanafi schools had the widest adoption by sovereigns. The Hanafis and Malikis extended it to pagans and even atheists. So, as I mentioned, it was a good thing that the Hanafi school was adopted in India. I’m originally from Pakistan but live in the states. Big fan of Persians though. If certain Muslims historically broke our code of ethics in warfare, there is no excuse and there is no justification; they will have to answer for it in the next life. Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. @Intelligent Dasein
    Ilana Mercer is once again entirely backwards here.

    I want nothing to do with "Anglo-Protestant" values or the libertarian individualism that Mercer seems to think propelled the rise of the West. These are the very ideologies that are destroying the West. The idea that Africa's problem is that it has failed to incorporate Western post-Christian decadence, either for cultural reasons or HBD reasons, is utterly preposterous.

    If there was a leader with enough brains, balls and vision to actually improve Africa, he would accept Africa the way that it is. He would use magic, tribalism, and superstition to beat the place into a functioning polity. He would yank Africa up by its nappy hair by becoming himself the Big Mugambo.

    It is passing strange that nobody has hit upon this simple solution before. Instead we send SJW missionaries into the jungle to lecture the darkies about dialectical materialism, Ayn Rand, or free market capitalism as the case may be.

    (((Ilana Mercer))) has it backwards because she is miscegenated, meshuggah Jewess. She is a female version of John Derbyshire (Chinese wife and offspring). Biology first, beliefs second. How she writes these columns without her head exploding is beyond comprehension. As I mentioned in my above comment, her rabbi father worked against apartheid in South Africa which resulted in the expulsion of the entire family.

    You want nothing to do with Anglo-Protestant values. You are a Roman Catholic and I recall in a comment you made you believe that the Catholic Church ruling over a nation or country would be the best form of government. How’s the RCC working out in Italy, France, Germany? Not too well. The RCC is a homosexual, Freemasonic, multi-culti grand lodge which is leading the post-Christian decadent breakdown of the West. The RCC has gone native and sides with groids/gloids. The RCC can do nothing to help the world.

    You don’t believe in HBD but it is the low IQ of blacks that keeps them down. If you don’t believe in IQ, then I suggest you move to Roman Catholic black Haiti (average IQ 67). Haiti did not have Anglo-Protestant values imposed on it, so we can see how culturally and economically advanced they are versus the WASP USA. Perfidious Albion has not corrupted them.

    Also, your idea of a Big Man beating the Africans into having some functioning society reveals something about you. You remind me of the Neo-Nazis Matt Heimbach and Sven Longshanks who yearn for a strong man to solve problems. A new Hitler. Africa needs to be left alone. Christian missionaries need to leave it and blacks in the West have to be sent back or segregated. They cannot be taught, from the basics to Ayn Rand to dialectics. Let their talented 10% take care of them.

    Read More(((Ilana Mercer))) has it backwards because she is miscegenated, meshuggah Jewess. She is a female version of John Derbyshire (Chinese wife and offspring). Biology first, beliefs second. How she writes these columns without her head exploding is beyond comprehension. As I mentioned in my above comment, her rabbi father worked against apartheid in South Africa which resulted in the expulsion of the entire family. You want nothing to do with Anglo-Protestant values. You are a Roman Catholic and I recall in a comment you made you believe that the Catholic Church ruling over a nation or country would be the best form of government. How's the RCC working out in Italy, France, Germany? Not too well. The RCC is a homosexual, Freemasonic, multi-culti grand lodge which is leading the post-Christian decadent breakdown of the West. The RCC has gone native and sides with groids/gloids. The RCC can do nothing to help the world. You don't believe in HBD but it is the low IQ of blacks that keeps them down. If you don't believe in IQ, then I suggest you move to Roman Catholic black Haiti (average IQ 67). Haiti did not have Anglo-Protestant values imposed on it, so we can see how culturally and economically advanced they are versus the WASP USA. Perfidious Albion has not corrupted them. Also, your idea of a Big Man beating the Africans into having some functioning society reveals something about you. You remind me of the Neo-Nazis Matt Heimbach and Sven Longshanks who yearn for a strong man to solve problems. A new Hitler. Africa needs to be left alone. Christian missionaries need to leave it and blacks in the West have to be sent back or segregated. They cannot be taught, from the basics to Ayn Rand to dialectics. Let their talented 10% take care of them.
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    There is nothing i would like better than for the US to make any attempt to expel blacks citizens.

    Laughing.There is nothing i would like better than for the US to make any attempt to expel blacks citizens.

    Laughing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. stephenf says:
    @Philosophical Donkey
    Every civilisation is based on a religion. The civilisation of sub-Saharan Africa, whatever we think of it, is based on a darker version of paganism. African traditional religions embrace human sacrifices, ritual cannibalism, black magic (and paranoidal fear of it) and some other unsavoury things. And it influences both the everyday life of ordinary people and the historical course of their civilisation. Of course, African societies are not 100% per cent horrible, they have their positive aspects, otherwise they would not have survived at all, but the burden of infernal superstitions on them is too heavy.

    Civilisations rooted in other religions are also conditioned by them. You cannot understand India without Hindooism, Japan without Buddhism, Shintoism and Confucianism, the Arab world without Islam.

    The European civilisation is based on Christianity (though it did learn a few tricks from ancient Greeks and Romans). It became great and global thanks to its Christian faith. But as it has discarded its faith (in a long, gradual and, at first, imperceptible process), it has slowly but surely entered into decadence. It began with religious scepticism which developed into an all-out materialism, continued with moral and cultural scepticism which, by now, has reached the stage of final degradation and finally lost the will to live. As people in post-Christian societies no longer believe that anything is more important than their personal pleasure and convenience, they no longer want to have children, and post-Christian nations begin to die out. They no longer want to fight for their countries or for their civilisation as a whole. They lost respect for their ancestors. They have turned into a sort of senile children, superficial, short-sighted, avid for sweets and bright-coloured toys, ready to believe any stupid idea if it flatters them and are totally indifferent to the really serious things.

    Therefore, the post-Christian civilisation has become weaker than other civilisations, more cruel and primitive, but still believing in something transcendental. People of non-Christian civilisations still have something to die for. Post-Christians have nothing to die for and only a bit of frivolous entertainment to live for. They are doomed.Every civilisation is based on a religion. The civilisation of sub-Saharan Africa, whatever we think of it, is based on a darker version of paganism. African traditional religions embrace human sacrifices, ritual cannibalism, black magic (and paranoidal fear of it) and some other unsavoury things. And it influences both the everyday life of ordinary people and the historical course of their civilisation. Of course, African societies are not 100% per cent horrible, they have their positive aspects, otherwise they would not have survived at all, but the burden of infernal superstitions on them is too heavy.

    Civilisations rooted in other religions are also conditioned by them. You cannot understand India without Hindooism, Japan without Buddhism, Shintoism and Confucianism, the Arab world without Islam.

    The European civilisation is based on Christianity (though it did learn a few tricks from ancient Greeks and Romans). It became great and global thanks to its Christian faith. But as it has discarded its faith (in a long, gradual and, at first, imperceptible process), it has slowly but surely entered into decadence. It began with religious scepticism which developed into an all-out materialism, continued with moral and cultural scepticism which, by now, has reached the stage of final degradation and finally lost the will to live. As people in post-Christian societies no longer believe that anything is more important than their personal pleasure and convenience, they no longer want to have children, and post-Christian nations begin to die out. They no longer want to fight for their countries or for their civilisation as a whole. They lost respect for their ancestors. They have turned into a sort of senile children, superficial, short-sighted, avid for sweets and bright-coloured toys, ready to believe any stupid idea if it flatters them and are totally indifferent to the really serious things.

    Therefore, the post-Christian civilisation has become weaker than other civilisations, more cruel and primitive, but still believing in something transcendental. People of non-Christian civilisations still have something to die for. Post-Christians have nothing to die for and only a bit of frivolous entertainment to live for. They are doomed.

    Happen to be an ax I’ve been grinding lately. We’ll take just one example: Scandinavia, where a swath of really nice nations was built on the values inherited from Christianity (the rest of Europe could be said to have had the same advantage, at one time or another and to one degree or another). You can do all kinds of nice things, even universal healthcare, when you have a strong cultural ethic of responsibility to the community, personal productivity, one’s own physical health, an ethic of lagom (roughly, “sufficiency” or “enough”) and deferred gratification, etc. I suppose some conservatives reading this will object because of the “liberalism” of these countries, but it was not always so, and what “liberalism” was there — and to some extent what is still there — is different in some important respects from, say, the American or British left. More of a community ethic that made sense because the community was culturally homogenous, and that culture was a good one.

    But now, as those nations move farther and farther away from their roots and more and more into post-Christianity, and as more migrant and refugee cultures “diversify” them, you’re seeing cracks in the social structure and the viability of governments. If present trends continue, they’ll be destroyed as far as retaining the essential qualities that made them good places to live.

    Anyway…the idea that post-Christian nations and cultures replace God with an idea of the transcendental state-and-mass-culture entity is squarely on target. One need only look at the nature and locations of the opposition to Trump and the almost universal contempt in mass culture for his supporters.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    You make some very good points.

    Peace.You make some very good points.

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. stephenf says:

    So brilliant I absolutely can’t stand it, but I figured it would be. Of course.

    Read MoreSo brilliant I absolutely can't stand it, but I figured it would be. Of course.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  131. The headline does indeed pose an intellectual question? Is it the country or is it its people? I elaborate further and and also tkake the actions of said country into consideration. I would also add the wealth of the country. I would add how it treats its own citizens. I would add an equality index. I would add how well government functions. I would add corruption index, Crime index. learning index. I would add how it defines its foreign policy. Is it a benign power. Is it well liked.
    You see where I am going. Compared to Norway the US is a shithole country. There is no way around this, it all adds up, I have double checked all the figures.
    I am sorry, where can I send a few dollars?

    Read MoreThe headline does indeed pose an intellectual question? Is it the country or is it its people? I elaborate further and and also tkake the actions of said country into consideration. I would also add the wealth of the country. I would add how it treats its own citizens. I would add an equality index. I would add how well government functions. I would add corruption index, Crime index. learning index. I would add how it defines its foreign policy. Is it a benign power. Is it well liked. You see where I am going. Compared to Norway the US is a shithole country. There is no way around this, it all adds up, I have double checked all the figures. I am sorry, where can I send a few dollars?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  132. @attilathehen
    (((Ilana Mercer))) has it backwards because she is miscegenated, meshuggah Jewess. She is a female version of John Derbyshire (Chinese wife and offspring). Biology first, beliefs second. How she writes these columns without her head exploding is beyond comprehension. As I mentioned in my above comment, her rabbi father worked against apartheid in South Africa which resulted in the expulsion of the entire family.

    You want nothing to do with Anglo-Protestant values. You are a Roman Catholic and I recall in a comment you made you believe that the Catholic Church ruling over a nation or country would be the best form of government. How's the RCC working out in Italy, France, Germany? Not too well. The RCC is a homosexual, Freemasonic, multi-culti grand lodge which is leading the post-Christian decadent breakdown of the West. The RCC has gone native and sides with groids/gloids. The RCC can do nothing to help the world.

    You don't believe in HBD but it is the low IQ of blacks that keeps them down. If you don't believe in IQ, then I suggest you move to Roman Catholic black Haiti (average IQ 67). Haiti did not have Anglo-Protestant values imposed on it, so we can see how culturally and economically advanced they are versus the WASP USA. Perfidious Albion has not corrupted them.

    Also, your idea of a Big Man beating the Africans into having some functioning society reveals something about you. You remind me of the Neo-Nazis Matt Heimbach and Sven Longshanks who yearn for a strong man to solve problems. A new Hitler. Africa needs to be left alone. Christian missionaries need to leave it and blacks in the West have to be sent back or segregated. They cannot be taught, from the basics to Ayn Rand to dialectics. Let their talented 10% take care of them.(((Ilana Mercer))) has it backwards because she is miscegenated, meshuggah Jewess. She is a female version of John Derbyshire (Chinese wife and offspring). Biology first, beliefs second. How she writes these columns without her head exploding is beyond comprehension. As I mentioned in my above comment, her rabbi father worked against apartheid in South Africa which resulted in the expulsion of the entire family.

    You want nothing to do with Anglo-Protestant values. You are a Roman Catholic and I recall in a comment you made you believe that the Catholic Church ruling over a nation or country would be the best form of government. How's the RCC working out in Italy, France, Germany? Not too well. The RCC is a homosexual, Freemasonic, multi-culti grand lodge which is leading the post-Christian decadent breakdown of the West. The RCC has gone native and sides with groids/gloids. The RCC can do nothing to help the world.

    You don't believe in HBD but it is the low IQ of blacks that keeps them down. If you don't believe in IQ, then I suggest you move to Roman Catholic black Haiti (average IQ 67). Haiti did not have Anglo-Protestant values imposed on it, so we can see how culturally and economically advanced they are versus the WASP USA. Perfidious Albion has not corrupted them.

    Also, your idea of a Big Man beating the Africans into having some functioning society reveals something about you. You remind me of the Neo-Nazis Matt Heimbach and Sven Longshanks who yearn for a strong man to solve problems. A new Hitler. Africa needs to be left alone. Christian missionaries need to leave it and blacks in the West have to be sent back or segregated. They cannot be taught, from the basics to Ayn Rand to dialectics. Let their talented 10% take care of them.

    There is nothing i would like better than for the US to make any attempt to expel blacks citizens.

    Laughing.

    Read MoreThere is nothing i would like better than for the US to make any attempt to expel blacks citizens. Laughing.
    • Replies: @attilathehen
    They are starting to leave on their own. We can give them more incentives to leave.

    Asians also have to go back.

    https://www.amren.com/news/2018/01/african-americans-moving-africa/They are starting to leave on their own. We can give them more incentives to leave.

    Asians also have to go back.

    https://www.amren.com/news/2018/01/african-americans-moving-africa/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. Corvinus says:
    @Da Wei
    Thank you, Ilana Mercer, for yet another example of your intelligent writing.

    We are what we do and what we make of ourselves. To say we are what society has done to us denies our freedom and is the whimpering cry of the victim society. We make our own world.

    By the way, why DO we have to take people from shithole countries, and not nice clean places like Norway? I think that's a sensible question. And I think President Trump asked it in a closed meeting, where confidences should be respected. People who don't respect confidences like that are dishonorable tattle tale weasels and have no place in government.Thank you, Ilana Mercer, for yet another example of your intelligent writing.

    We are what we do and what we make of ourselves. To say we are what society has done to us denies our freedom and is the whimpering cry of the victim society. We make our own world.

    By the way, why DO we have to take people from shithole countries, and not nice clean places like Norway? I think that's a sensible question. And I think President Trump asked it in a closed meeting, where confidences should be respected. People who don't respect confidences like that are dishonorable tattle tale weasels and have no place in government.

    “By the way, why DO we have to take people from shithole countries, and not nice clean places like Norway?”

    Enlighten yourself.

    Read More"By the way, why DO we have to take people from shithole countries, and not nice clean places like Norway?" Enlighten yourself. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V35Vw29tay0
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. Talha says:
    @stephenf
    Happen to be an ax I've been grinding lately. We'll take just one example: Scandinavia, where a swath of really nice nations was built on the values inherited from Christianity (the rest of Europe could be said to have had the same advantage, at one time or another and to one degree or another). You can do all kinds of nice things, even universal healthcare, when you have a strong cultural ethic of responsibility to the community, personal productivity, one's own physical health, an ethic of lagom (roughly, "sufficiency" or "enough") and deferred gratification, etc. I suppose some conservatives reading this will object because of the "liberalism" of these countries, but it was not always so, and what "liberalism" was there -- and to some extent what is still there -- is different in some important respects from, say, the American or British left. More of a community ethic that made sense because the community was culturally homogenous, and that culture was a good one.

    But now, as those nations move farther and farther away from their roots and more and more into post-Christianity, and as more migrant and refugee cultures "diversify" them, you're seeing cracks in the social structure and the viability of governments. If present trends continue, they'll be destroyed as far as retaining the essential qualities that made them good places to live.

    Anyway...the idea that post-Christian nations and cultures replace God with an idea of the transcendental state-and-mass-culture entity is squarely on target. One need only look at the nature and locations of the opposition to Trump and the almost universal contempt in mass culture for his supporters.

    You make some very good points.

    Peace.

    Read MoreYou make some very good points. Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. Corvinus says:
    @Intelligent Dasein
    Ilana Mercer is once again entirely backwards here.

    I want nothing to do with "Anglo-Protestant" values or the libertarian individualism that Mercer seems to think propelled the rise of the West. These are the very ideologies that are destroying the West. The idea that Africa's problem is that it has failed to incorporate Western post-Christian decadence, either for cultural reasons or HBD reasons, is utterly preposterous.

    If there was a leader with enough brains, balls and vision to actually improve Africa, he would accept Africa the way that it is. He would use magic, tribalism, and superstition to beat the place into a functioning polity. He would yank Africa up by its nappy hair by becoming himself the Big Mugambo.

    It is passing strange that nobody has hit upon this simple solution before. Instead we send SJW missionaries into the jungle to lecture the darkies about dialectical materialism, Ayn Rand, or free market capitalism as the case may be.

    “I want nothing to do with “Anglo-Protestant” values or the libertarian individualism that Mercer seems to think propelled the rise of the West. These are the very ideologies that are destroying the West.”

    Actually, those ideologies are rooted in Christianity, and continue to keep the West afloat.

    Read More"I want nothing to do with “Anglo-Protestant” values or the libertarian individualism that Mercer seems to think propelled the rise of the West. These are the very ideologies that are destroying the West." Actually, those ideologies are rooted in Christianity, and continue to keep the West afloat.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. Corvinus says:
    @Godfrey
    In the wake of President Trump’s “shithole” remark, which however crude, is totally on the mark, I have thought about what makes a country a shithole. As an ex-South African who left 24years ago I naturally thought about South Africa and Zimbabwe, or Rhodesia as it was known when it still functioned well. Both countries are beautiful, from the mountains to the seas and beaches and both have a diversity of flora and fauna in an abundance not found anywhere else. Both countries have tremendous potential and had by far the most developed infrastructure in Africa. My conclusion is that the people who run the country (or run it down) make the country a shithole and of course they are propped up by whoever is the majority in that country who keep voting for them, if there is a vote, or the people who keep them in power by the use of intimidation and force. So a country that is beautiful to look at becomes a shithole to live in when the people allow their leaders to make it so. Anybody who insists that most countries in Africa are not shitholes must answer the question: “If the country is not a shithole but a paradise, why are people desperate to leave?”In the wake of President Trump’s “shithole” remark, which however crude, is totally on the mark, I have thought about what makes a country a shithole. As an ex-South African who left 24years ago I naturally thought about South Africa and Zimbabwe, or Rhodesia as it was known when it still functioned well. Both countries are beautiful, from the mountains to the seas and beaches and both have a diversity of flora and fauna in an abundance not found anywhere else. Both countries have tremendous potential and had by far the most developed infrastructure in Africa. My conclusion is that the people who run the country (or run it down) make the country a shithole and of course they are propped up by whoever is the majority in that country who keep voting for them, if there is a vote, or the people who keep them in power by the use of intimidation and force. So a country that is beautiful to look at becomes a shithole to live in when the people allow their leaders to make it so. Anybody who insists that most countries in Africa are not shitholes must answer the question: “If the country is not a shithole but a paradise, why are people desperate to leave?”

    “Anybody who insists that most countries in Africa are not shitholes must answer the question: “If the country is not a shithole but a paradise, why are people desperate to leave?”

    Simple answer–political and economic issues arising from post-European colonialism.

    Read More"Anybody who insists that most countries in Africa are not shitholes must answer the question: “If the country is not a shithole but a paradise, why are people desperate to leave?” Simple answer--political and economic issues arising from post-European colonialism.
    • Replies: @Drapetomaniac
    "Simple answer–political and economic issues arising from post-European colonialism."

    So the countries were paradises before European colonialism? Ha!"Simple answer–political and economic issues arising from post-European colonialism."

    So the countries were paradises before European colonialism? Ha!
    , @Malla

    Simple answer–political and economic issues arising from post-European colonialism.
     
    Simple question
    Why did that not happen in Singapore or HongKong or Taiwan?
    Why not even Malaysia?
    Why Liberia has 'issues' when it was not colonised?
    Why Ethiopia has so many issues?
    Why Turkey has issues?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. Okechukwu says:
    @Malla

    As a matter of fact, their “science” held that germs in water would permeate the skin and kill them. So they eschewed bathing, often for their entire lives.
     
    Nope it was the Church. Exposing yourself to nakedness was considered a sin.

    Nope it was the Church. Exposing yourself to nakedness was considered a sin.

    That’s just as primitive. The church was a wholly European institution. You cannot untangle their stupidity and backwardness from Europe as a whole.

    Added to the church’s superstitious fear of water, bathing was also considered dangerous. This is not in dispute.

    it was believed in many parts of Europe that water could carry disease into the body through the pores in the skin. According to one medical treaty of the 16th century, “Water baths warm the body, but weaken the organism and widen pores. That’s why they can be dangerous and cause different diseases, even death.” It wasn’t just diseases from the water itself they were worried about. They also felt that with the pores widened after a bath, this resulted in infections of the air having easier access to the body. Hence, bathing became connected with spread of diseases, not just immorality.

    For some lower class citizens, particularly men, this resulted in them largely forgoing bathing whenever possible. During this time, people tended to restrict their hygienic arrangements to just washing hands, parts of the face, and rinsing their mouths. Washing one’s entire face was thought to be dangerous as it was believed to cause catarrh and weaken the eyesight, so even this was infrequent.

    http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2011/05/why-bathing-was-uncommon-in-medieval-europe/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha

    The church was a wholly European institution
     
    I would ease back a little on the aggressive posture, but there is no escape from this. Especially after the Great Schism.

    Peace.
    , @Malla

    You cannot untangle their stupidity and backwardness from Europe as a whole.
     
    And Nigeria was like super developed? Right.

    https://78.media.tumblr.com/7281a8b875162935939484ef93bb82af/tumblr_nq4li7kukx1uosweyo1_1280.jpg

    Entrance to the palace at Abeokuta in Nigeria

    vs

    http://www.struck.us/BikePics/Germany/2011-09-28%20013.JPG

    http://www.struck.us/BikePics/Germany/2011-09-28%20015.JPG

    http://www.bestourism.com/img/items/big/148/Castle-Howard-England_Beautiful-view-of-the-castle_580.jpg
    , @Malla
    Leftoid propaganda.

    https://wuhstry.wordpress.com/2012/10/13/the-great-unwashed/

    In their book ‘Life in a Medieval Castle’ Joseph & Frances Gies claimed that ‘baths were taken in a wooden tub, protected by a tent or canopy and padded with cloth…. when the Lord traveled the tub accompanied him, along with a bathman who prepared the baths”. This passage goes on to say “In some important thirteenth century castles and palaces there were permanent bathrooms, and in Henry III’s palace at Westminster there was even hot and cold running water in the bath house…”[i].

    Not all though, seem to had such conveniences available to them and “even the accounts and illustrations of bathing in palaces and noble residences seldom depict bathing as a solitary activity”[ii]. Part of the reason for this seems to have been the time and effort involved in the preparation of hot baths, and the desire to conserve the water used. As a result of this, public or communal bathing seem to have been more popular, whether in natural water sources, or (perhaps later) in the public bath houses which some major European cities had.

    Bathing also seems to have some taken on some ceremonial associations apart from simple cleanliness. In another passage from the same book a Chronicler by the name of Jean de Tours recounted how “a bath was prepared according to the custom for novice knights” in this case a young Geoffrey of Anjou, and how “after bathing Geoffrey donned a linen undergarment, a tunic of cloth of gold…” and other finery, who was being “initiated into knighthood” along with his attendants.” So it would seem that bathing was in some way associated with Knighting ceremonies, and in England, the Order of the Bath was also established, which may have placed even more prominence on the tub.

    The simple necessity of keeping clean is one thing, but did medieval people have any appreciation of hygienic and health benefits of bathing? It would seem so.

    Another source states that “hygienic bathing was not the rare activity during the medieval period that most critics assume….some medical manuals recommended daily baths, hot or cold”. In this context in appears that “indoor and outdoor baths were common” hot springs and natural spas were even held to have health benefits and some indoor facilities allegedly “had indwelling glaze tile tall stoves or dry heaters with hot stones”[iii].

    Such may have been all well and good for the wealthy or upper classes, but what of commoners or the poor? Were they truly ‘the great unwashed’? According to the above source “All social classes… could bathe somewhere on the ocean shore, riverbanks, lake fronts, stream beds, hot springs water holes, natural ponds and artificial pools”[iv].

    If this was the case and the less regular less regular bathing of Medieval people can “be attributed to more limited facilities available for washing and the … inconvenience of using them then to any cultural bias against cleanliness”, they’re taking the opportunity to wash wherever or whenever they could may make perfect sense, and who can blame them?[v].

    So it would appear that washing and bathing were not such an uncommon occurrence for later medieval people regardless of whether they were rich or poor, and that they, like us, were concerned about personal hygiene. What gave rise to the misconceptions about smelly medieval bathing only once a year, or not wanting to wash because they were afraid of catching cold hay have to be a subject for a future post, but taking such claims with a large helping of salt (or low sodium alternative) may be a good idea.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. @EliteCommInc.
    There is nothing i would like better than for the US to make any attempt to expel blacks citizens.

    Laughing.There is nothing i would like better than for the US to make any attempt to expel blacks citizens.

    Laughing.

    They are starting to leave on their own. We can give them more incentives to leave.

    Asians also have to go back.

    https://www.amren.com/news/2018/01/african-americans-moving-africa/

    Read MoreThey are starting to leave on their own. We can give them more incentives to leave. Asians also have to go back. https://www.amren.com/news/2018/01/african-americans-moving-africa/
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    Hmmmmm . . . .


    0.01068863131947%. Only 46,770,000 or 99.98931136868% to go.Hmmmmm . . . .


    0.01068863131947%. Only 46,770,000 or 99.98931136868% to go.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. @Philosophical Donkey
    Every civilisation is based on a religion. The civilisation of sub-Saharan Africa, whatever we think of it, is based on a darker version of paganism. African traditional religions embrace human sacrifices, ritual cannibalism, black magic (and paranoidal fear of it) and some other unsavoury things. And it influences both the everyday life of ordinary people and the historical course of their civilisation. Of course, African societies are not 100% per cent horrible, they have their positive aspects, otherwise they would not have survived at all, but the burden of infernal superstitions on them is too heavy.

    Civilisations rooted in other religions are also conditioned by them. You cannot understand India without Hindooism, Japan without Buddhism, Shintoism and Confucianism, the Arab world without Islam.

    The European civilisation is based on Christianity (though it did learn a few tricks from ancient Greeks and Romans). It became great and global thanks to its Christian faith. But as it has discarded its faith (in a long, gradual and, at first, imperceptible process), it has slowly but surely entered into decadence. It began with religious scepticism which developed into an all-out materialism, continued with moral and cultural scepticism which, by now, has reached the stage of final degradation and finally lost the will to live. As people in post-Christian societies no longer believe that anything is more important than their personal pleasure and convenience, they no longer want to have children, and post-Christian nations begin to die out. They no longer want to fight for their countries or for their civilisation as a whole. They lost respect for their ancestors. They have turned into a sort of senile children, superficial, short-sighted, avid for sweets and bright-coloured toys, ready to believe any stupid idea if it flatters them and are totally indifferent to the really serious things.

    Therefore, the post-Christian civilisation has become weaker than other civilisations, more cruel and primitive, but still believing in something transcendental. People of non-Christian civilisations still have something to die for. Post-Christians have nothing to die for and only a bit of frivolous entertainment to live for. They are doomed.Every civilisation is based on a religion. The civilisation of sub-Saharan Africa, whatever we think of it, is based on a darker version of paganism. African traditional religions embrace human sacrifices, ritual cannibalism, black magic (and paranoidal fear of it) and some other unsavoury things. And it influences both the everyday life of ordinary people and the historical course of their civilisation. Of course, African societies are not 100% per cent horrible, they have their positive aspects, otherwise they would not have survived at all, but the burden of infernal superstitions on them is too heavy.

    Civilisations rooted in other religions are also conditioned by them. You cannot understand India without Hindooism, Japan without Buddhism, Shintoism and Confucianism, the Arab world without Islam.

    The European civilisation is based on Christianity (though it did learn a few tricks from ancient Greeks and Romans). It became great and global thanks to its Christian faith. But as it has discarded its faith (in a long, gradual and, at first, imperceptible process), it has slowly but surely entered into decadence. It began with religious scepticism which developed into an all-out materialism, continued with moral and cultural scepticism which, by now, has reached the stage of final degradation and finally lost the will to live. As people in post-Christian societies no longer believe that anything is more important than their personal pleasure and convenience, they no longer want to have children, and post-Christian nations begin to die out. They no longer want to fight for their countries or for their civilisation as a whole. They lost respect for their ancestors. They have turned into a sort of senile children, superficial, short-sighted, avid for sweets and bright-coloured toys, ready to believe any stupid idea if it flatters them and are totally indifferent to the really serious things.

    Therefore, the post-Christian civilisation has become weaker than other civilisations, more cruel and primitive, but still believing in something transcendental. People of non-Christian civilisations still have something to die for. Post-Christians have nothing to die for and only a bit of frivolous entertainment to live for. They are doomed.

    Some good points, but you miss the big picture: IQ. Caucasians are first, Asians second, blacks last.

    Today’s Indian Hindus (average IQ 82) are not related to the original Aryan Indians who created Hinduism to try and understand the world. Today’s Asiatic Indians are just mimicking what the original Aryan Indians created. Low IQ correlates to conformity. Islam, a Christian heresy, destroyed the high IQ Caucasian North African populations by introducing black slavery, polygamy and concubinage. Today’s black/Asian Muslims (more than 95% of Muslims are non-white) have low IQs and enforce conformity to their degraded belief system by killing anyone who tries to leave Islam. Japan is the only intelligent Asian country which is preserving itself. Being an island is a big help. Not allowing foreigners to settle is another plus. Their average IQ of 100 keeps them intact. Sub-Saharan African beliefs are the most primitive because they have the lowest IQs. Also, when you state that these people have something to die for, it is usual the result of their criminal mentality. They don’t die for anything worthwhile. Blacks/Asians because of their low IQs are predestined to criminality, i.e., sinning.

    In the West, among the Caucasian/European peoples, the post Vatican II world is what is causing the crisis. Before Vatican II, the world was large, difficult place to travel. You could not have the mass invasions that we have today. Christianity is a universal religion and this is now coming into conflict with biology. Loving and accepting all races as equal is gone. Caucasian-European high IQs created the modern world. The chasm between the first and second and third worlds cannot be bridged by religion. I left the RCC because I do not accept black/Asian priests-popes. The mystery, transcendence of religious belief is lost when coming into contact with blacks/Asians. The RCC and cuck pope Frannie are the biggest problems in the Western world. The ancient Egyptians (Caucasians) were destroyed by mixing with blacks. The ancient Aryan Indians were destroyed by mixing with Asians. This is the crux of the problem. Universal beliefs are coming in conflict with biology. A new religion for the West must be created.

    Read MoreSome good points, but you miss the big picture: IQ. Caucasians are first, Asians second, blacks last. Today's Indian Hindus (average IQ 82) are not related to the original Aryan Indians who created Hinduism to try and understand the world. Today's Asiatic Indians are just mimicking what the original Aryan Indians created. Low IQ correlates to conformity. Islam, a Christian heresy, destroyed the high IQ Caucasian North African populations by introducing black slavery, polygamy and concubinage. Today's black/Asian Muslims (more than 95% of Muslims are non-white) have low IQs and enforce conformity to their degraded belief system by killing anyone who tries to leave Islam. Japan is the only intelligent Asian country which is preserving itself. Being an island is a big help. Not allowing foreigners to settle is another plus. Their average IQ of 100 keeps them intact. Sub-Saharan African beliefs are the most primitive because they have the lowest IQs. Also, when you state that these people have something to die for, it is usual the result of their criminal mentality. They don't die for anything worthwhile. Blacks/Asians because of their low IQs are predestined to criminality, i.e., sinning. In the West, among the Caucasian/European peoples, the post Vatican II world is what is causing the crisis. Before Vatican II, the world was large, difficult place to travel. You could not have the mass invasions that we have today. Christianity is a universal religion and this is now coming into conflict with biology. Loving and accepting all races as equal is gone. Caucasian-European high IQs created the modern world. The chasm between the first and second and third worlds cannot be bridged by religion. I left the RCC because I do not accept black/Asian priests-popes. The mystery, transcendence of religious belief is lost when coming into contact with blacks/Asians. The RCC and cuck pope Frannie are the biggest problems in the Western world. The ancient Egyptians (Caucasians) were destroyed by mixing with blacks. The ancient Aryan Indians were destroyed by mixing with Asians. This is the crux of the problem. Universal beliefs are coming in conflict with biology. A new religion for the West must be created.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. Talha says:
    @Okechukwu

    Nope it was the Church. Exposing yourself to nakedness was considered a sin.
     
    That's just as primitive. The church was a wholly European institution. You cannot untangle their stupidity and backwardness from Europe as a whole.

    Added to the church's superstitious fear of water, bathing was also considered dangerous. This is not in dispute.

    it was believed in many parts of Europe that water could carry disease into the body through the pores in the skin. According to one medical treaty of the 16th century, “Water baths warm the body, but weaken the organism and widen pores. That’s why they can be dangerous and cause different diseases, even death.” It wasn’t just diseases from the water itself they were worried about. They also felt that with the pores widened after a bath, this resulted in infections of the air having easier access to the body. Hence, bathing became connected with spread of diseases, not just immorality.

    For some lower class citizens, particularly men, this resulted in them largely forgoing bathing whenever possible. During this time, people tended to restrict their hygienic arrangements to just washing hands, parts of the face, and rinsing their mouths. Washing one’s entire face was thought to be dangerous as it was believed to cause catarrh and weaken the eyesight, so even this was infrequent.

    http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2011/05/why-bathing-was-uncommon-in-medieval-europe/

    The church was a wholly European institution

    I would ease back a little on the aggressive posture, but there is no escape from this. Especially after the Great Schism.

    Peace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. H. S. says:

    Peru:

    ”The indigenous population dramatically collapsed due to exploitation, socioeconomic change and epidemic diseases introduced by the Spanish.[32]

    Exploitation and socioeconomic change also contributed to the collapse. Viceroy Francisco de Toledo reorganized the country in the 1570s with gold and silver mining as its main economic activity and Amerindian forced labor as its primary workforce.[33]

    With the discovery of the great silver and gold lodes at Potosí (present-day Bolivia) and Huancavelica, the viceroyalty flourished as an important provider of mineral resources. Peruvian bullion provided revenue for the Spanish Crown and fueled a complex trade network that extended as far as Europe and the Philippines.[34]

    Because of lack of available work force, African slaves were added to the labor population. The expansion of a colonial administrative apparatus and bureaucracy paralleled the economic reorganization. With the conquest started the spread of Christianity in South America; most people were forcefully converted to Catholicism, taking only a generation to convert the population. They built churches in every city and replaced some of the Inca temples with churches, such as the Coricancha in the city of Cusco. The church employed the Inquisition, making use of torture to ensure that newly converted Catholics did not stray to other religions or beliefs. Peruvian Catholicism follows the syncretism found in many Latin American countries, in which religious native rituals have been integrated with Christian celebrations.[35] In this endeavor, the church came to play an important role in the acculturation of the natives, drawing them into the cultural orbit of the Spanish settlers.”

    Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peru

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  142. @Christopher Chantrill
    I like to look at this the other way up, that it is amazing and miraculous that northwestern Europeans should have shucked off the culture of envy and tribalism to create The Great Enrichment (Google it).

    Envy and tribalism make complete sense in the world of War Before Civilization by Lawrence H. Keeley. Serfdom/slavery make complete sense in the agricultural world.

    But in the new world you encourage and venerate the innovator, you trust the stranger that has a 5-star trust rating. And this is an utter transformation.

    No wonder we have a reactionary cultural movement that pushes the neo-tribalism of identity politics and the neo-feudalism of the welfare state. Lots of people, even in the West, long for the good old days.

    You can take man out of the animal world but you can’t take the animal world out of man.

    Default setting.

    Read MoreYou can take man out of the animal world but you can't take the animal world out of man. Default setting.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. @Corvinus
    "Anybody who insists that most countries in Africa are not shitholes must answer the question: “If the country is not a shithole but a paradise, why are people desperate to leave?”

    Simple answer--political and economic issues arising from post-European colonialism."Anybody who insists that most countries in Africa are not shitholes must answer the question: “If the country is not a shithole but a paradise, why are people desperate to leave?”

    Simple answer--political and economic issues arising from post-European colonialism.

    “Simple answer–political and economic issues arising from post-European colonialism.”

    So the countries were paradises before European colonialism? Ha!

    Read More"Simple answer–political and economic issues arising from post-European colonialism." So the countries were paradises before European colonialism? Ha!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. @attilathehen
    They are starting to leave on their own. We can give them more incentives to leave.

    Asians also have to go back.

    https://www.amren.com/news/2018/01/african-americans-moving-africa/They are starting to leave on their own. We can give them more incentives to leave.

    Asians also have to go back.

    https://www.amren.com/news/2018/01/african-americans-moving-africa/

    Hmmmmm . . . .

    0.01068863131947%. Only 46,770,000 or 99.98931136868% to go.

    Read MoreHmmmmm . . . . 0.01068863131947%. Only 46,770,000 or 99.98931136868% to go.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. Malla says:
    @Okechukwu

    Nope it was the Church. Exposing yourself to nakedness was considered a sin.
     
    That's just as primitive. The church was a wholly European institution. You cannot untangle their stupidity and backwardness from Europe as a whole.

    Added to the church's superstitious fear of water, bathing was also considered dangerous. This is not in dispute.

    it was believed in many parts of Europe that water could carry disease into the body through the pores in the skin. According to one medical treaty of the 16th century, “Water baths warm the body, but weaken the organism and widen pores. That’s why they can be dangerous and cause different diseases, even death.” It wasn’t just diseases from the water itself they were worried about. They also felt that with the pores widened after a bath, this resulted in infections of the air having easier access to the body. Hence, bathing became connected with spread of diseases, not just immorality.

    For some lower class citizens, particularly men, this resulted in them largely forgoing bathing whenever possible. During this time, people tended to restrict their hygienic arrangements to just washing hands, parts of the face, and rinsing their mouths. Washing one’s entire face was thought to be dangerous as it was believed to cause catarrh and weaken the eyesight, so even this was infrequent.

    http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2011/05/why-bathing-was-uncommon-in-medieval-europe/

    You cannot untangle their stupidity and backwardness from Europe as a whole.

    And Nigeria was like super developed? Right.

    Entrance to the palace at Abeokuta in Nigeria

    vs

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. Malla says:
    @Okechukwu

    Nope it was the Church. Exposing yourself to nakedness was considered a sin.
     
    That's just as primitive. The church was a wholly European institution. You cannot untangle their stupidity and backwardness from Europe as a whole.

    Added to the church's superstitious fear of water, bathing was also considered dangerous. This is not in dispute.

    it was believed in many parts of Europe that water could carry disease into the body through the pores in the skin. According to one medical treaty of the 16th century, “Water baths warm the body, but weaken the organism and widen pores. That’s why they can be dangerous and cause different diseases, even death.” It wasn’t just diseases from the water itself they were worried about. They also felt that with the pores widened after a bath, this resulted in infections of the air having easier access to the body. Hence, bathing became connected with spread of diseases, not just immorality.

    For some lower class citizens, particularly men, this resulted in them largely forgoing bathing whenever possible. During this time, people tended to restrict their hygienic arrangements to just washing hands, parts of the face, and rinsing their mouths. Washing one’s entire face was thought to be dangerous as it was believed to cause catarrh and weaken the eyesight, so even this was infrequent.

    http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2011/05/why-bathing-was-uncommon-in-medieval-europe/

    Leftoid propaganda.

    https://wuhstry.wordpress.com/2012/10/13/the-great-unwashed/

    In their book ‘Life in a Medieval Castle’ Joseph & Frances Gies claimed that ‘baths were taken in a wooden tub, protected by a tent or canopy and padded with cloth…. when the Lord traveled the tub accompanied him, along with a bathman who prepared the baths”. This passage goes on to say “In some important thirteenth century castles and palaces there were permanent bathrooms, and in Henry III’s palace at Westminster there was even hot and cold running water in the bath house…”[i].

    Not all though, seem to had such conveniences available to them and “even the accounts and illustrations of bathing in palaces and noble residences seldom depict bathing as a solitary activity”[ii]. Part of the reason for this seems to have been the time and effort involved in the preparation of hot baths, and the desire to conserve the water used. As a result of this, public or communal bathing seem to have been more popular, whether in natural water sources, or (perhaps later) in the public bath houses which some major European cities had.

    Bathing also seems to have some taken on some ceremonial associations apart from simple cleanliness. In another passage from the same book a Chronicler by the name of Jean de Tours recounted how “a bath was prepared according to the custom for novice knights” in this case a young Geoffrey of Anjou, and how “after bathing Geoffrey donned a linen undergarment, a tunic of cloth of gold…” and other finery, who was being “initiated into knighthood” along with his attendants.” So it would seem that bathing was in some way associated with Knighting ceremonies, and in England, the Order of the Bath was also established, which may have placed even more prominence on the tub.

    The simple necessity of keeping clean is one thing, but did medieval people have any appreciation of hygienic and health benefits of bathing? It would seem so.

    Another source states that “hygienic bathing was not the rare activity during the medieval period that most critics assume….some medical manuals recommended daily baths, hot or cold”. In this context in appears that “indoor and outdoor baths were common” hot springs and natural spas were even held to have health benefits and some indoor facilities allegedly “had indwelling glaze tile tall stoves or dry heaters with hot stones”[iii].

    Such may have been all well and good for the wealthy or upper classes, but what of commoners or the poor? Were they truly ‘the great unwashed’? According to the above source “All social classes… could bathe somewhere on the ocean shore, riverbanks, lake fronts, stream beds, hot springs water holes, natural ponds and artificial pools”[iv].

    If this was the case and the less regular less regular bathing of Medieval people can “be attributed to more limited facilities available for washing and the … inconvenience of using them then to any cultural bias against cleanliness”, they’re taking the opportunity to wash wherever or whenever they could may make perfect sense, and who can blame them?[v].

    So it would appear that washing and bathing were not such an uncommon occurrence for later medieval people regardless of whether they were rich or poor, and that they, like us, were concerned about personal hygiene. What gave rise to the misconceptions about smelly medieval bathing only once a year, or not wanting to wash because they were afraid of catching cold hay have to be a subject for a future post, but taking such claims with a large helping of salt (or low sodium alternative) may be a good idea.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. Malla says:
    @Corvinus
    "Anybody who insists that most countries in Africa are not shitholes must answer the question: “If the country is not a shithole but a paradise, why are people desperate to leave?”

    Simple answer--political and economic issues arising from post-European colonialism."Anybody who insists that most countries in Africa are not shitholes must answer the question: “If the country is not a shithole but a paradise, why are people desperate to leave?”

    Simple answer--political and economic issues arising from post-European colonialism.

    Simple answer–political and economic issues arising from post-European colonialism.

    Simple question
    Why did that not happen in Singapore or HongKong or Taiwan?
    Why not even Malaysia?
    Why Liberia has ‘issues’ when it was not colonised?
    Why Ethiopia has so many issues?
    Why Turkey has issues?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Malla,

    Why Turkey has issues?
     
    I haven't been, but I know plenty of people (including non-Muslim co-workers) that have visited Turkey. Not just Istanbul, but all the way into the interior like near Lake Van, etc. Not a single person was disappointed. Every country has issues. I could ask, why does Germany have issues? And there are issues completely unrelated to immigration - you could kick out all the immigrants and certain dysfunctions remain. Why do Germans commit suicide at way higher rates than say Algerians or Jordanians? Why do French commit suicides at the same rate as Rwandans? Can't they see that they live in vastly better conditions than the latter?

    Same with Singapore and many other first world countries. Why can't they get their populations out of a steep nose dive? That's an issue - in fact that's probably an issue that will dwarf others in the coming years as they grow older. You should read this heart-breaking article about the abandoned elderly in Japan:
    "A Generation in Japan Faces a Lonely Death...The first time it happened, or at least the first time it drew national attention, the corpse of a 69-year-old man living near Mrs. Ito had been lying on the floor for three years, without anyone noticing his absence. His monthly rent and utilities had been withdrawn automatically from his bank account. Finally, after his savings were depleted in 2000, the authorities came to the apartment and found his skeleton near the kitchen, its flesh picked clean by maggots and beetles, just a few feet away from his next-door neighbors."
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/30/world/asia/japan-lonely-deaths-the-end.html

    Some of the countries you call dysfunctional would literally die of shame if this was happening to their older generations. Or if their elderly had to go live in other countries after retiring just to be able to afford life in a decent manner. Why are elderly French "invading" third world countries like Morocco and Senegal in increasing numbers:
    "According to the French website Retraite-etranger.fr, Morocco ranked the world’s top country for French senior citizens to retire. Morocco came on top of a list of 10 countries, which included Thailand, Mauritius, Tunisia, Portugal, Bali (Indonesia), Spain, Dominican Republic, Senegal and Italy."
    https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2014/04/127424/morocco-worlds-top-retirement-destination-for-french-senior-citizens/

    One must look at things in a holistic manner when approaching these subjects. Ignoring one's own dysfunctions while pointing those out in others is great for the ego, but not much else.

    Peace.
    , @anonymous

    Why Liberia has ‘issues’ when it was not colonised?
    Why Ethiopia has so many issues?
    Why Turkey has issues?
     
    Why have you not included your home country, India, which has also experienced colonialism?

    Just compare the living conditions and the environment in your country, and some other countries in the Middle East, heck even Turkey. Your country still looks and feels like a "third world shithole," even if you pride on some advances over those nations.

    Bottom line, what does the common man really need? Escape from poverty, corruption, an environment which still looks 100yrs prior, poor sanitation, pollution, rapes, lynchings, child-mortality, etc., OR pride in rockets & satellites, nuclear weapons, CEOs and engineers in multi-national companies, etc.?

    At a personal level, pride in your nations's accomplishments can mean only so much, and only for so long, you understand... unless you are one of those scientists or CEOs or engineers.

    What one really needs is better living conditions and self-prosperity. India is still far behind on such indices.

    Some of that applies to the scores of trailer trash in western nations also. The irony is that many of those lurk around in sites like Brietbart, and *cough*unz*cough* :) etc., exulting in the "greatness" of their civilisation, revulsion of "shithole" countries and people... while living hand to mouth.
    , @Corvinus
    "Why did that not happen in Singapore or HongKong or Taiwan? Why not even Malaysia?"

    These areas had experienced trade with Europe, developed immunities from diseases, and had long-time established stability both politically and economically. In Africa, the Europeans forced groups that were historically against one another, who lived their own lives in harmony, to do their bidding for raw materials and cheap labor. Moreover, the British had immersed their culture more dramatically, with the people in these places incorporating "foreign" governmental and financial institutions with their own political and economic concepts."Why did that not happen in Singapore or HongKong or Taiwan? Why not even Malaysia?"

    These areas had experienced trade with Europe, developed immunities from diseases, and had long-time established stability both politically and economically. In Africa, the Europeans forced groups that were historically against one another, who lived their own lives in harmony, to do their bidding for raw materials and cheap labor. Moreover, the British had immersed their culture more dramatically, with the people in these places incorporating "foreign" governmental and financial institutions with their own political and economic concepts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. Malla says:
    @Orwellian State
    The answer to the question posited: What makes a country, the people or the place, is obvious. Just like there is no such thing as a "bad school", only "bad students (and teachers)", shithole countries are shitholes because majority of the people who live in them are shit. You can blame it on culture all you want, but at the end of the day, culture is created by people, and high IQ people create high culture, while low IQ people create low culture.

    From Indonesia to India, El Salvador to Africa, there is not a single black or brown country in the world that is half way livable. These people create shit cultures that ruined their environments. Every single one of these countries, if never populated, likely would've been pristine, beautiful places. And if populated by WASPs, would've been an improvement, more Western Europes and North Americas, Australias, New Zealands. Countries that the rest of the world want to flock to.

    At the end of the day, the two most salient qualities of a high culture are honesty and self-restraint. These are qualities the WASPs have in spade thanks to Protestantism(but now brought low by the dishonest and unrestraint Jewish culture). The Northeast Asians have self-restraint but lack honesty(except for the Japanese), that's why China is still struggling with corruption despite all the semblance of a modern country in its cities. The vast majority in black and brown countries lack both, that's why they are shithole countries.

    The question is, will these people adopt high culture when they move to a country dominated by high culture? Only the top 0.01 to 0.1% will have the IQ to do so (maybe top 25% from Northeast Asian countries). Beyond that, no. They'll just drag down the new country.

    These are qualities the WASPs have in spade thanks to Protestantism(but now brought low by the dishonest and unrestraint Jewish culture). The Northeast Asians have self-restraint but lack honesty(except for the Japanese),

    There is one more country where people are quite honest and trustworthy nearly as much as WASPs and Japanese. The people of Bhutan.
    Unfortunately they are too close to India and India runs that country like a pseudo colonial power. I feel bad for their unfortunate location and situation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @üeljang
    "Honest" and "trustworthy" are not words that I would use to describe the Japanese as a group. I'm not even sure whether they should be described as "having self-restraint." "Law-abiding" may be a more appropriate descriptor.

    The Japanese (and other East Asians with whom I am familiar) tend to be extremely psychopathic and extremely cowardly (scared of physical punishment). Their self-image seems to be something like that of a primitive tribe who have been forced to behave properly by White people. I think it should be interesting (to say the least) to see how they will act if/when the present White-led world order has crumbled."Honest" and "trustworthy" are not words that I would use to describe the Japanese as a group. I'm not even sure whether they should be described as "having self-restraint." "Law-abiding" may be a more appropriate descriptor.

    The Japanese (and other East Asians with whom I am familiar) tend to be extremely psychopathic and extremely cowardly (scared of physical punishment). Their self-image seems to be something like that of a primitive tribe who have been forced to behave properly by White people. I think it should be interesting (to say the least) to see how they will act if/when the present White-led world order has crumbled.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. Western cultures emphasize the future; view work as a blessing rather than as a burden; promote individuals based on their merit; value education and frugality, are philanthropic, identify with universal causes, and have higher ethics.

    Supposed to be…

    after 99% of its time full blown in xtian obscurantism AND with (((patronized))) new-ones…

    Excessive work IS semi-slavery…

    ”promote individuals based on their merit”

    less when celebrities in sub-art and in sports receive in one payment what most people never will have in their whole life…

    less when (((merit))) mean born in (((that tribe)))

    After very stupid ”colonization’ in Amurricas; adventures in Africa and Asia; two extremely destructive world wars…

    I’m not taking any comma of what you said about ”african values” [i believe it's not ALL african tribes who behave like that...] but this dichotomy of ”how western world is infallibly great and how the rest of the world is not..” must go..

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla

    dichotomy of ”how western world is infallibly great and how the rest of the world is not..” must go..
     
    Actually after watching hours of media programming, one would believe that the non White world, especially blacks are infallible and the western world is just evul evul evul. So what must go where?

    less when celebrities in sub-art and in sports receive in one payment what most people never will have in their whole life…
     
    That is the case everywhere and it is much much worse. In India for example it is just cricket and Bollywood, cricket and Bollywood, cricket and Bollywood till one dies or commits suicide from the madness.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Obviously, what makes a country, are its people.

    With that in mind, and notwithstanding the admittedly great advances in science and technology, etc., what should we make of the western civilisation which also thrives on the following… at various levels, some of which reaching satanically evil levels;

    Greed, Psychopathy, Promiscuity, Adultery, Mass Murder, Usury, Shamelessness, Thievery, Genocide, Hypocrisy, Polytheism, Racism, Hate, Pornography, Misogyny, Pederasty, Gambling, Sodomy…

    You would of course like to think that the “advances” cancels out the “ills,” but your spiritually deluded and/or godless minds would be plain wrong… as you will find out.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  151. üeljang says:
    @Malla

    These are qualities the WASPs have in spade thanks to Protestantism(but now brought low by the dishonest and unrestraint Jewish culture). The Northeast Asians have self-restraint but lack honesty(except for the Japanese),
     
    There is one more country where people are quite honest and trustworthy nearly as much as WASPs and Japanese. The people of Bhutan.
    Unfortunately they are too close to India and India runs that country like a pseudo colonial power. I feel bad for their unfortunate location and situation.

    “Honest” and “trustworthy” are not words that I would use to describe the Japanese as a group. I’m not even sure whether they should be described as “having self-restraint.” “Law-abiding” may be a more appropriate descriptor.

    The Japanese (and other East Asians with whom I am familiar) tend to be extremely psychopathic and extremely cowardly (scared of physical punishment). Their self-image seems to be something like that of a primitive tribe who have been forced to behave properly by White people. I think it should be interesting (to say the least) to see how they will act if/when the present White-led world order has crumbled.

    Read More"Honest" and "trustworthy" are not words that I would use to describe the Japanese as a group. I'm not even sure whether they should be described as "having self-restraint." "Law-abiding" may be a more appropriate descriptor. The Japanese (and other East Asians with whom I am familiar) tend to be extremely psychopathic and extremely cowardly (scared of physical punishment). Their self-image seems to be something like that of a primitive tribe who have been forced to behave properly by White people. I think it should be interesting (to say the least) to see how they will act if/when the present White-led world order has crumbled.
    • Replies: @Malla
    Well I had a different experience. Indeed of all the people I met the Japanese (and I have met a lot of them) were some of the kindest, most helpful people of all. For example when I was looking for a place in Japan, a Japanese guy sensing I am a foreigner went with me to the place and made sure I found it and left me after a bow (Try asking for directions in a small town in India, they will misdirect you just for fun). Japanese restaurant owner in small town giving me an umbrella for free when it was raining outside. Had many experiences like that. The only 'barbaric experience' I had ever was there was during rush hour in Tokyo underground.

    Indeed there were many such experiences where Japanese people went out of their way to help me, there was no law to do any of that.
    But anyways if you are correct, lets see how they behave when Whitey world crumbles.Well I had a different experience. Indeed of all the people I met the Japanese (and I have met a lot of them) were some of the kindest, most helpful people of all. For example when I was looking for a place in Japan, a Japanese guy sensing I am a foreigner went with me to the place and made sure I found it and left me after a bow (Try asking for directions in a small town in India, they will misdirect you just for fun). Japanese restaurant owner in small town giving me an umbrella for free when it was raining outside. Had many experiences like that. The only 'barbaric experience' I had ever was there was during rush hour in Tokyo underground.

    Indeed there were many such experiences where Japanese people went out of their way to help me, there was no law to do any of that.
    But anyways if you are correct, lets see how they behave when Whitey world crumbles.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. Talha says:
    @Malla

    Simple answer–political and economic issues arising from post-European colonialism.
     
    Simple question
    Why did that not happen in Singapore or HongKong or Taiwan?
    Why not even Malaysia?
    Why Liberia has 'issues' when it was not colonised?
    Why Ethiopia has so many issues?
    Why Turkey has issues?

    Hey Malla,

    Why Turkey has issues?

    I haven’t been, but I know plenty of people (including non-Muslim co-workers) that have visited Turkey. Not just Istanbul, but all the way into the interior like near Lake Van, etc. Not a single person was disappointed. Every country has issues. I could ask, why does Germany have issues? And there are issues completely unrelated to immigration – you could kick out all the immigrants and certain dysfunctions remain. Why do Germans commit suicide at way higher rates than say Algerians or Jordanians? Why do French commit suicides at the same rate as Rwandans? Can’t they see that they live in vastly better conditions than the latter?

    Same with Singapore and many other first world countries. Why can’t they get their populations out of a steep nose dive? That’s an issue – in fact that’s probably an issue that will dwarf others in the coming years as they grow older. You should read this heart-breaking article about the abandoned elderly in Japan:
    “A Generation in Japan Faces a Lonely Death…The first time it happened, or at least the first time it drew national attention, the corpse of a 69-year-old man living near Mrs. Ito had been lying on the floor for three years, without anyone noticing his absence. His monthly rent and utilities had been withdrawn automatically from his bank account. Finally, after his savings were depleted in 2000, the authorities came to the apartment and found his skeleton near the kitchen, its flesh picked clean by maggots and beetles, just a few feet away from his next-door neighbors.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/30/world/asia/japan-lonely-deaths-the-end.html

    Some of the countries you call dysfunctional would literally die of shame if this was happening to their older generations. Or if their elderly had to go live in other countries after retiring just to be able to afford life in a decent manner. Why are elderly French “invading” third world countries like Morocco and Senegal in increasing numbers:
    “According to the French website Retraite-etranger.fr, Morocco ranked the world’s top country for French senior citizens to retire. Morocco came on top of a list of 10 countries, which included Thailand, Mauritius, Tunisia, Portugal, Bali (Indonesia), Spain, Dominican Republic, Senegal and Italy.”

    https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2014/04/127424/morocco-worlds-top-retirement-destination-for-french-senior-citizens/

    One must look at things in a holistic manner when approaching these subjects. Ignoring one’s own dysfunctions while pointing those out in others is great for the ego, but not much else.

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla
    In a holistic manner. Yes. Some places have nasty, lying people but hey the food tastes good. Other places, the people civilised, honest and things run on time but the weather gloomy and cloudy. Every country has it's good and bad points. Kenya has it's good and bad points, Thailand has it's good and bad points, Luxembourg has it's good and bad points.

    But no denying that some places have a higher standard of life than others and people voting with their feet want to move to those place.

    Turkey has seen a lot of economic growth lately but decades ago Turks would line up infront of the German embassy to get a chance to go to Germany and Turkey was never colonised, it was a coloniser.
    But when seen in a holistic manner, sure, you are right.

    Also I would prefer living in some posh neighbourhood of Lagos over a slum in Rio De Janiero anyday.

    Peace.In a holistic manner. Yes. Some places have nasty, lying people but hey the food tastes good. Other places, the people civilised, honest and things run on time but the weather gloomy and cloudy. Every country has it's good and bad points. Kenya has it's good and bad points, Thailand has it's good and bad points, Luxembourg has it's good and bad points.

    But no denying that some places have a higher standard of life than others and people voting with their feet want to move to those place.

    Turkey has seen a lot of economic growth lately but decades ago Turks would line up infront of the German embassy to get a chance to go to Germany and Turkey was never colonised, it was a coloniser.
    But when seen in a holistic manner, sure, you are right.

    Also I would prefer living in some posh neighbourhood of Lagos over a slum in Rio De Janiero anyday.

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Malla

    Simple answer–political and economic issues arising from post-European colonialism.
     
    Simple question
    Why did that not happen in Singapore or HongKong or Taiwan?
    Why not even Malaysia?
    Why Liberia has 'issues' when it was not colonised?
    Why Ethiopia has so many issues?
    Why Turkey has issues?

    Why Liberia has ‘issues’ when it was not colonised?
    Why Ethiopia has so many issues?
    Why Turkey has issues?

    Why have you not included your home country, India, which has also experienced colonialism?

    Just compare the living conditions and the environment in your country, and some other countries in the Middle East, heck even Turkey. Your country still looks and feels like a “third world shithole,” even if you pride on some advances over those nations.

    Bottom line, what does the common man really need? Escape from poverty, corruption, an environment which still looks 100yrs prior, poor sanitation, pollution, rapes, lynchings, child-mortality, etc., OR pride in rockets & satellites, nuclear weapons, CEOs and engineers in multi-national companies, etc.?

    At a personal level, pride in your nations’s accomplishments can mean only so much, and only for so long, you understand… unless you are one of those scientists or CEOs or engineers.

    What one really needs is better living conditions and self-prosperity. India is still far behind on such indices.

    Some of that applies to the scores of trailer trash in western nations also. The irony is that many of those lurk around in sites like Brietbart, and *cough*unz*cough* :) etc., exulting in the “greatness” of their civilisation, revulsion of “shithole” countries and people… while living hand to mouth.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla
    You misunderstood my point. I was taking the names of those places which never experienced European colonialism, they are still crapholes irrespective of never experiencing colonialism. Turkey by the way is a semi European country or lets say an Eurasian country on the cross roads and it has seen a lot of economic improvements lately.
    India experienced colonialism but is that the reason it is a 'shithole' as you say. I doubt it very much.
    European nations who had few or no colonies (Finland) are doing much better economically than those countries who had huge empires (Portugal).
    So I think colonialism plays a tiny part in why some countries are shitholes.You misunderstood my point. I was taking the names of those places which never experienced European colonialism, they are still crapholes irrespective of never experiencing colonialism. Turkey by the way is a semi European country or lets say an Eurasian country on the cross roads and it has seen a lot of economic improvements lately.
    India experienced colonialism but is that the reason it is a 'shithole' as you say. I doubt it very much.
    European nations who had few or no colonies (Finland) are doing much better economically than those countries who had huge empires (Portugal).
    So I think colonialism plays a tiny part in why some countries are shitholes.
    , @Malla

    At a personal level, pride in your nations’s accomplishments can mean only so much, and only for so long, you understand… unless you are one of those scientists or CEOs or engineers.
     
    Maybe we should shop having pride in our accomplishments as a species (humans) unless we are one of the scientists or CEO.
    , @attilathehen
    (((Ilana Mercer))) is definitely be a piece of this (((trash))). Her columns are always written with an underlying "Jewish supremacy" tone. If only her tribe were in charge, things would be different...she thinks.(((Ilana Mercer))) is definitely be a piece of this (((trash))). Her columns are always written with an underlying "Jewish supremacy" tone. If only her tribe were in charge, things would be different...she thinks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. Malla says:
    @anonymous

    Why Liberia has ‘issues’ when it was not colonised?
    Why Ethiopia has so many issues?
    Why Turkey has issues?
     
    Why have you not included your home country, India, which has also experienced colonialism?

    Just compare the living conditions and the environment in your country, and some other countries in the Middle East, heck even Turkey. Your country still looks and feels like a "third world shithole," even if you pride on some advances over those nations.

    Bottom line, what does the common man really need? Escape from poverty, corruption, an environment which still looks 100yrs prior, poor sanitation, pollution, rapes, lynchings, child-mortality, etc., OR pride in rockets & satellites, nuclear weapons, CEOs and engineers in multi-national companies, etc.?

    At a personal level, pride in your nations's accomplishments can mean only so much, and only for so long, you understand... unless you are one of those scientists or CEOs or engineers.

    What one really needs is better living conditions and self-prosperity. India is still far behind on such indices.

    Some of that applies to the scores of trailer trash in western nations also. The irony is that many of those lurk around in sites like Brietbart, and *cough*unz*cough* :) etc., exulting in the "greatness" of their civilisation, revulsion of "shithole" countries and people... while living hand to mouth.

    You misunderstood my point. I was taking the names of those places which never experienced European colonialism, they are still crapholes irrespective of never experiencing colonialism. Turkey by the way is a semi European country or lets say an Eurasian country on the cross roads and it has seen a lot of economic improvements lately.
    India experienced colonialism but is that the reason it is a ‘shithole’ as you say. I doubt it very much.
    European nations who had few or no colonies (Finland) are doing much better economically than those countries who had huge empires (Portugal).
    So I think colonialism plays a tiny part in why some countries are shitholes.

    Read MoreYou misunderstood my point. I was taking the names of those places which never experienced European colonialism, they are still crapholes irrespective of never experiencing colonialism. Turkey by the way is a semi European country or lets say an Eurasian country on the cross roads and it has seen a lot of economic improvements lately. India experienced colonialism but is that the reason it is a 'shithole' as you say. I doubt it very much. European nations who had few or no colonies (Finland) are doing much better economically than those countries who had huge empires (Portugal). So I think colonialism plays a tiny part in why some countries are shitholes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. Malla says:
    @Talha
    Hey Malla,

    Why Turkey has issues?
     
    I haven't been, but I know plenty of people (including non-Muslim co-workers) that have visited Turkey. Not just Istanbul, but all the way into the interior like near Lake Van, etc. Not a single person was disappointed. Every country has issues. I could ask, why does Germany have issues? And there are issues completely unrelated to immigration - you could kick out all the immigrants and certain dysfunctions remain. Why do Germans commit suicide at way higher rates than say Algerians or Jordanians? Why do French commit suicides at the same rate as Rwandans? Can't they see that they live in vastly better conditions than the latter?

    Same with Singapore and many other first world countries. Why can't they get their populations out of a steep nose dive? That's an issue - in fact that's probably an issue that will dwarf others in the coming years as they grow older. You should read this heart-breaking article about the abandoned elderly in Japan:
    "A Generation in Japan Faces a Lonely Death...The first time it happened, or at least the first time it drew national attention, the corpse of a 69-year-old man living near Mrs. Ito had been lying on the floor for three years, without anyone noticing his absence. His monthly rent and utilities had been withdrawn automatically from his bank account. Finally, after his savings were depleted in 2000, the authorities came to the apartment and found his skeleton near the kitchen, its flesh picked clean by maggots and beetles, just a few feet away from his next-door neighbors."
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/30/world/asia/japan-lonely-deaths-the-end.html

    Some of the countries you call dysfunctional would literally die of shame if this was happening to their older generations. Or if their elderly had to go live in other countries after retiring just to be able to afford life in a decent manner. Why are elderly French "invading" third world countries like Morocco and Senegal in increasing numbers:
    "According to the French website Retraite-etranger.fr, Morocco ranked the world’s top country for French senior citizens to retire. Morocco came on top of a list of 10 countries, which included Thailand, Mauritius, Tunisia, Portugal, Bali (Indonesia), Spain, Dominican Republic, Senegal and Italy."
    https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2014/04/127424/morocco-worlds-top-retirement-destination-for-french-senior-citizens/

    One must look at things in a holistic manner when approaching these subjects. Ignoring one's own dysfunctions while pointing those out in others is great for the ego, but not much else.

    Peace.

    In a holistic manner. Yes. Some places have nasty, lying people but hey the food tastes good. Other places, the people civilised, honest and things run on time but the weather gloomy and cloudy. Every country has it’s good and bad points. Kenya has it’s good and bad points, Thailand has it’s good and bad points, Luxembourg has it’s good and bad points.

    But no denying that some places have a higher standard of life than others and people voting with their feet want to move to those place.

    Turkey has seen a lot of economic growth lately but decades ago Turks would line up infront of the German embassy to get a chance to go to Germany and Turkey was never colonised, it was a coloniser.
    But when seen in a holistic manner, sure, you are right.

    Also I would prefer living in some posh neighbourhood of Lagos over a slum in Rio De Janiero anyday.

    Peace.

    Read MoreIn a holistic manner. Yes. Some places have nasty, lying people but hey the food tastes good. Other places, the people civilised, honest and things run on time but the weather gloomy and cloudy. Every country has it's good and bad points. Kenya has it's good and bad points, Thailand has it's good and bad points, Luxembourg has it's good and bad points. But no denying that some places have a higher standard of life than others and people voting with their feet want to move to those place. Turkey has seen a lot of economic growth lately but decades ago Turks would line up infront of the German embassy to get a chance to go to Germany and Turkey was never colonised, it was a coloniser. But when seen in a holistic manner, sure, you are right. Also I would prefer living in some posh neighbourhood of Lagos over a slum in Rio De Janiero anyday. Peace.
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Malla,

    I do like your voting with their feet as a generally good way to gauge things. Even within a country people move for various reasons; economic, family, religion, etc. People move to Nashville to be part of the music scene. People in Illinois think I’m crazy to have left California, but I came here to be close to my spiritual guide and because the Midwest is just more family- friendly.

    I have a Senagalese friend who has lived in the US and France, but his wife keeps bugging him to move back to Dakar; she doesn’t like the non-traditional nuclear family here - tough to raise kids.

    I also know of other Muslims (even converts) that have left for Jordan, Pakistan, UAE, etc. for the spiritual safety of their families.

    No doubt that people who are primarily concerned with material benefits will pine to come to the West. The fact that such materially-oriented people are coming to societies already reeling with dysfunctions associated with hyper-materialism is just adding fuel to the fire.

    By the way, I think it’s a great thing if more and more Europeans retire and spend their twilight years in the more enjoyable and safe parts of the Muslim world. They can hopefully experience some good times in traditional and hospitable Muslim societies. Maybe even visit some Sufi gatherings in places like Marrakech and dive in! :)

    Peace.Hey Malla,

    I do like your voting with their feet as a generally good way to gauge things. Even within a country people move for various reasons; economic, family, religion, etc. People move to Nashville to be part of the music scene. People in Illinois think I’m crazy to have left California, but I came here to be close to my spiritual guide and because the Midwest is just more family- friendly.

    I have a Senagalese friend who has lived in the US and France, but his wife keeps bugging him to move back to Dakar; she doesn’t like the non-traditional nuclear family here - tough to raise kids.

    I also know of other Muslims (even converts) that have left for Jordan, Pakistan, UAE, etc. for the spiritual safety of their families.

    No doubt that people who are primarily concerned with material benefits will pine to come to the West. The fact that such materially-oriented people are coming to societies already reeling with dysfunctions associated with hyper-materialism is just adding fuel to the fire.

    By the way, I think it’s a great thing if more and more Europeans retire and spend their twilight years in the more enjoyable and safe parts of the Muslim world. They can hopefully experience some good times in traditional and hospitable Muslim societies. Maybe even visit some Sufi gatherings in places like Marrakech and dive in! :)

    Peace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. Malla says:
    @üeljang
    "Honest" and "trustworthy" are not words that I would use to describe the Japanese as a group. I'm not even sure whether they should be described as "having self-restraint." "Law-abiding" may be a more appropriate descriptor.

    The Japanese (and other East Asians with whom I am familiar) tend to be extremely psychopathic and extremely cowardly (scared of physical punishment). Their self-image seems to be something like that of a primitive tribe who have been forced to behave properly by White people. I think it should be interesting (to say the least) to see how they will act if/when the present White-led world order has crumbled."Honest" and "trustworthy" are not words that I would use to describe the Japanese as a group. I'm not even sure whether they should be described as "having self-restraint." "Law-abiding" may be a more appropriate descriptor.

    The Japanese (and other East Asians with whom I am familiar) tend to be extremely psychopathic and extremely cowardly (scared of physical punishment). Their self-image seems to be something like that of a primitive tribe who have been forced to behave properly by White people. I think it should be interesting (to say the least) to see how they will act if/when the present White-led world order has crumbled.

    Well I had a different experience. Indeed of all the people I met the Japanese (and I have met a lot of them) were some of the kindest, most helpful people of all. For example when I was looking for a place in Japan, a Japanese guy sensing I am a foreigner went with me to the place and made sure I found it and left me after a bow (Try asking for directions in a small town in India, they will misdirect you just for fun). Japanese restaurant owner in small town giving me an umbrella for free when it was raining outside. Had many experiences like that. The only ‘barbaric experience’ I had ever was there was during rush hour in Tokyo underground.

    Indeed there were many such experiences where Japanese people went out of their way to help me, there was no law to do any of that.
    But anyways if you are correct, lets see how they behave when Whitey world crumbles.

    Read MoreWell I had a different experience. Indeed of all the people I met the Japanese (and I have met a lot of them) were some of the kindest, most helpful people of all. For example when I was looking for a place in Japan, a Japanese guy sensing I am a foreigner went with me to the place and made sure I found it and left me after a bow (Try asking for directions in a small town in India, they will misdirect you just for fun). Japanese restaurant owner in small town giving me an umbrella for free when it was raining outside. Had many experiences like that. The only 'barbaric experience' I had ever was there was during rush hour in Tokyo underground. Indeed there were many such experiences where Japanese people went out of their way to help me, there was no law to do any of that. But anyways if you are correct, lets see how they behave when Whitey world crumbles.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. Malla says:
    @Santoculto

    Western cultures emphasize the future; view work as a blessing rather than as a burden; promote individuals based on their merit; value education and frugality, are philanthropic, identify with universal causes, and have higher ethics.
     
    Supposed to be...

    after 99% of its time full blown in xtian obscurantism AND with (((patronized))) new-ones...

    Excessive work IS semi-slavery...

    ''promote individuals based on their merit''

    less when celebrities in sub-art and in sports receive in one payment what most people never will have in their whole life...

    less when (((merit))) mean born in (((that tribe)))

    After very stupid ''colonization' in Amurricas; adventures in Africa and Asia; two extremely destructive world wars...

    I'm not taking any comma of what you said about ''african values'' [i believe it's not ALL african tribes who behave like that...] but this dichotomy of ''how western world is infallibly great and how the rest of the world is not..'' must go..

    dichotomy of ”how western world is infallibly great and how the rest of the world is not..” must go..

    Actually after watching hours of media programming, one would believe that the non White world, especially blacks are infallible and the western world is just evul evul evul. So what must go where?

    less when celebrities in sub-art and in sports receive in one payment what most people never will have in their whole life…

    That is the case everywhere and it is much much worse. In India for example it is just cricket and Bollywood, cricket and Bollywood, cricket and Bollywood till one dies or commits suicide from the madness.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    This is about normies and abnormies aka leftoids... i'm directing this comment exactly to the type of crowd UNZ tend to attract.

    Yes i know ''celebritch madness'' is not insular into the west but it was here where this pathology become global.This is about normies and abnormies aka leftoids... i'm directing this comment exactly to the type of crowd UNZ tend to attract.

    Yes i know ''celebritch madness'' is not insular into the west but it was here where this pathology become global.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. Malla says:
    @anonymous

    Why Liberia has ‘issues’ when it was not colonised?
    Why Ethiopia has so many issues?
    Why Turkey has issues?
     
    Why have you not included your home country, India, which has also experienced colonialism?

    Just compare the living conditions and the environment in your country, and some other countries in the Middle East, heck even Turkey. Your country still looks and feels like a "third world shithole," even if you pride on some advances over those nations.

    Bottom line, what does the common man really need? Escape from poverty, corruption, an environment which still looks 100yrs prior, poor sanitation, pollution, rapes, lynchings, child-mortality, etc., OR pride in rockets & satellites, nuclear weapons, CEOs and engineers in multi-national companies, etc.?

    At a personal level, pride in your nations's accomplishments can mean only so much, and only for so long, you understand... unless you are one of those scientists or CEOs or engineers.

    What one really needs is better living conditions and self-prosperity. India is still far behind on such indices.

    Some of that applies to the scores of trailer trash in western nations also. The irony is that many of those lurk around in sites like Brietbart, and *cough*unz*cough* :) etc., exulting in the "greatness" of their civilisation, revulsion of "shithole" countries and people... while living hand to mouth.

    At a personal level, pride in your nations’s accomplishments can mean only so much, and only for so long, you understand… unless you are one of those scientists or CEOs or engineers.

    Maybe we should shop having pride in our accomplishments as a species (humans) unless we are one of the scientists or CEO.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. Talha says:
    @Malla
    In a holistic manner. Yes. Some places have nasty, lying people but hey the food tastes good. Other places, the people civilised, honest and things run on time but the weather gloomy and cloudy. Every country has it's good and bad points. Kenya has it's good and bad points, Thailand has it's good and bad points, Luxembourg has it's good and bad points.

    But no denying that some places have a higher standard of life than others and people voting with their feet want to move to those place.

    Turkey has seen a lot of economic growth lately but decades ago Turks would line up infront of the German embassy to get a chance to go to Germany and Turkey was never colonised, it was a coloniser.
    But when seen in a holistic manner, sure, you are right.

    Also I would prefer living in some posh neighbourhood of Lagos over a slum in Rio De Janiero anyday.

    Peace.In a holistic manner. Yes. Some places have nasty, lying people but hey the food tastes good. Other places, the people civilised, honest and things run on time but the weather gloomy and cloudy. Every country has it's good and bad points. Kenya has it's good and bad points, Thailand has it's good and bad points, Luxembourg has it's good and bad points.

    But no denying that some places have a higher standard of life than others and people voting with their feet want to move to those place.

    Turkey has seen a lot of economic growth lately but decades ago Turks would line up infront of the German embassy to get a chance to go to Germany and Turkey was never colonised, it was a coloniser.
    But when seen in a holistic manner, sure, you are right.

    Also I would prefer living in some posh neighbourhood of Lagos over a slum in Rio De Janiero anyday.

    Peace.

    Hey Malla,

    I do like your voting with their feet as a generally good way to gauge things. Even within a country people move for various reasons; economic, family, religion, etc. People move to Nashville to be part of the music scene. People in Illinois think I’m crazy to have left California, but I came here to be close to my spiritual guide and because the Midwest is just more family- friendly.

    I have a Senagalese friend who has lived in the US and France, but his wife keeps bugging him to move back to Dakar; she doesn’t like the non-traditional nuclear family here – tough to raise kids.

    I also know of other Muslims (even converts) that have left for Jordan, Pakistan, UAE, etc. for the spiritual safety of their families.

    No doubt that people who are primarily concerned with material benefits will pine to come to the West. The fact that such materially-oriented people are coming to societies already reeling with dysfunctions associated with hyper-materialism is just adding fuel to the fire.

    By the way, I think it’s a great thing if more and more Europeans retire and spend their twilight years in the more enjoyable and safe parts of the Muslim world. They can hopefully experience some good times in traditional and hospitable Muslim societies. Maybe even visit some Sufi gatherings in places like Marrakech and dive in! :)

    Peace.

    Read MoreHey Malla, I do like your voting with their feet as a generally good way to gauge things. Even within a country people move for various reasons; economic, family, religion, etc. People move to Nashville to be part of the music scene. People in Illinois think I’m crazy to have left California, but I came here to be close to my spiritual guide and because the Midwest is just more family- friendly. I have a Senagalese friend who has lived in the US and France, but his wife keeps bugging him to move back to Dakar; she doesn’t like the non-traditional nuclear family here - tough to raise kids. I also know of other Muslims (even converts) that have left for Jordan, Pakistan, UAE, etc. for the spiritual safety of their families. No doubt that people who are primarily concerned with material benefits will pine to come to the West. The fact that such materially-oriented people are coming to societies already reeling with dysfunctions associated with hyper-materialism is just adding fuel to the fire. By the way, I think it’s a great thing if more and more Europeans retire and spend their twilight years in the more enjoyable and safe parts of the Muslim world. They can hopefully experience some good times in traditional and hospitable Muslim societies. Maybe even visit some Sufi gatherings in places like Marrakech and dive in! :) Peace.
    • Replies: @Malla

    I have a Senagalese friend who has lived in the US and France, but his wife keeps bugging him to move back to Dakar; she doesn’t like the non-traditional nuclear family here – tough to raise kids.
     
    Well I have observed that too. Many immigrant women prefer back home. Also because they would be the upper middle class, atleast middle class back home and enjoy a decent standard of living and the familiarity and culture of home countries.
    But I do not think the whole thing is just material. There are other factors at work. I have a better knowledge of Europe compared to North America as I have lived there longer. People in Europe are less corrupt, there is less cheating swindling, roads and surrounding are cleaner, less hassles, less dust and grime, less arrogant officials to deal with, most people in Germanic/ Norse/Anglo countries do not lie much etc etc.... There are other factors than just the material if you ask me.

    The fact that such materially-oriented people are coming to societies already reeling with dysfunctions associated with hyper-materialism is just adding fuel to the fire.
     
    I am not sure hyper materialism is the driver of the dysfunction. I am convinced there has been a deliberate push by the elites using the media and education system to destroy the traditional norms of the West which has caused a lot of the dysfunction. You can research Cultural Marxism for example. This process is quite old but took up speed after WW2 and further during the hippie revolution of the Vietnam War era. Compare the norms of Victorian era England or even the 1950s for example to life today in the West.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co54X683Ob8

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iV7X4x7GeX4

    The society in the videos above is a 1000 times more healthier society than the one today. Homogeneous societies with a sense of continuity with the past, much better family values, respect for elders, sense of community, the West was quite prosperous but people were happier with much simpler lives etc...
    Actually a very knowledgeable Pakistani bureaucrat Orya Maqbool Jaan had said something of this nature of deliberate destruction of the traditional West but I cannot get the video now and that the same thing is being pushed throughout the world.

    So the leftoids destroy the traditional west and then import loads of immigrants from conservative countries. Either the leftoids are plain stupid or with some evil agenda or both.
    Hence the West (society not elites) are not the aggressors in this respect but the first victim.

    I would also recommend the movie How Green Was My Valley (6 Academy Awards Winner) if you want to understand the level of cultural destruction in the West which was done deliberately. A definite watch, you can get it free on youtube.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94EISGCAsTw

    A small part of the movie, if you watch it you will understand what I am talking about.

    or the movie The Winslow Boy. Trailer below. Based on a true story.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0_kIPbEKrM

    By the way, I think it’s a great thing if more and more Europeans retire and spend their twilight years in the more enjoyable and safe parts of the Muslim world. They can hopefully experience some good times in traditional and hospitable Muslim societies. Maybe even visit some Sufi gatherings in places like Marrakech and dive in
     
    Hehe, not a bad idea. I believe there are many who do this already.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. navanova says:

    I am an African and have read the article and all the comments under. It is shocking that everybody here unanimously agreed that black people are naturally less intelligent than whites. The author of the article stress culture as the primary factor for Africa’s backwardness but it is obvious she shares the same racist view of others. No matter you are bragging about your supper white race status having higher standard of cultural values such as honesty and restrain, Forget about your philanthropy, you are not what you are claiming, you are cruel and selfish people who does not want to share the little knowledge that you have accumulated for over five century. The Chinese people managed to par in less than half a century, which in some advanced technology like quantum computing, AI and genetic engineering even started to lead. For the time being, you are in a position with immense power to sabotaging, looting and blaming defenseless Africa which was evidenced by a very recent high culture and moral actions of yours on Libya. But the technological advancement you are bragging about will only soon to leave you the majority of the white people enslaved than that of the less advanced backward African people. One thing you should know is static culture is more natural and much better than your dynamically manufactured tasteless culture which is designed to destroy human elements. You are becoming like the robots you are designing and configuring. A simple example that distinguishes the African society from a white society in its present state is that the latter one neither loughs nor cry.

    Read MoreI am an African and have read the article and all the comments under. It is shocking that everybody here unanimously agreed that black people are naturally less intelligent than whites. The author of the article stress culture as the primary factor for Africa’s backwardness but it is obvious she shares the same racist view of others. No matter you are bragging about your supper white race status having higher standard of cultural values such as honesty and restrain, Forget about your philanthropy, you are not what you are claiming, you are cruel and selfish people who does not want to share the little knowledge that you have accumulated for over five century. The Chinese people managed to par in less than half a century, which in some advanced technology like quantum computing, AI and genetic engineering even started to lead. For the time being, you are in a position with immense power to sabotaging, looting and blaming defenseless Africa which was evidenced by a very recent high culture and moral actions of yours on Libya. But the technological advancement you are bragging about will only soon to leave you the majority of the white people enslaved than that of the less advanced backward African people. One thing you should know is static culture is more natural and much better than your dynamically manufactured tasteless culture which is designed to destroy human elements. You are becoming like the robots you are designing and configuring. A simple example that distinguishes the African society from a white society in its present state is that the latter one neither loughs nor cry.
    • Replies: @Malla

    you are cruel and selfish people who does not want to share the little knowledge that you have accumulated for over five century.
     
    False. We use technology invented by Whites in our daily life including the computer and Internet you are using. Automobiles, modern medicine (which has saved the lives of billions of non Whites), air travel, use of electricity just to name a few. So how is that not sharing? How is it LITTLE Knowledge?

    But the technological advancement you are bragging about will only soon to leave you the majority of the white people enslaved than that of the less advanced backward African people.
     
    That is very true actually but that is because the technological world is under the control of big money who are directing the technological world in that direction of enslavement. Technology is neutral, it is upto you to decide how to use it. But the bad news for Africans is that these behind the scenes forces is going to bring that world (technological slavery) to Africa too, it already has started. Mobile phones and digital payments like m-pesa (atleast in Eastern Africa) abound.

    For the time being, you are in a position with immense power to sabotaging, looting and blaming defenseless Africa which was evidenced by a very recent high culture and moral actions of yours on Libya.
     
    It is not the West but the elites of the West and their minions like Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton, the great liberal, who claims to speak for the coloured masses back home was bragging how she went and conquered Qaddafi.

    One thing you should know is static culture is more natural and much better than your dynamically manufactured tasteless culture which is designed to destroy human elements. You are becoming like the robots you are designing and configuring.
     
    You are correct but I guess everything comes with a price. There is a trade off. When humans began farming, leaving behind their hunter gatherer life, there were trade offs too. As far as destruction of the human elements is concerned , I think this has more to do with the economic system dominant in the world (fake option in between Capitalism vs Communism approved by the globalist elites) which makes machine the lord of man. Machine invented to serve man has become his master.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. Jose says:

    How does India even have a Spatial program? they sure are more ambitious, despiste backwardness, they are among few countries that could go to Space, along United States, China, Russia, European Union or Japan. But yeah, among “spatial powers” they are the ones with lowest per capita.

    Read MoreHow does India even have a Spatial program? they sure are more ambitious, despiste backwardness, they are among few countries that could go to Space, along United States, China, Russia, European Union or Japan. But yeah, among "spatial powers" they are the ones with lowest per capita.
    • Replies: @Malla
    India is a oligarchy, India traditionally has been a land where caste played a big role and you had wide contrasts in wealth, intelligence and knowledge, wider than most parts of the world. A tiny community wrote philosophy and dabbled in advanced mathematics while the masses were ignorant. A minority swam in golden coins while the masses were destitute. It is the same thing today.India is a oligarchy, India traditionally has been a land where caste played a big role and you had wide contrasts in wealth, intelligence and knowledge, wider than most parts of the world. A tiny community wrote philosophy and dabbled in advanced mathematics while the masses were ignorant. A minority swam in golden coins while the masses were destitute. It is the same thing today.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. Malla says:
    @Talha
    Hey Malla,

    I do like your voting with their feet as a generally good way to gauge things. Even within a country people move for various reasons; economic, family, religion, etc. People move to Nashville to be part of the music scene. People in Illinois think I’m crazy to have left California, but I came here to be close to my spiritual guide and because the Midwest is just more family- friendly.

    I have a Senagalese friend who has lived in the US and France, but his wife keeps bugging him to move back to Dakar; she doesn’t like the non-traditional nuclear family here - tough to raise kids.

    I also know of other Muslims (even converts) that have left for Jordan, Pakistan, UAE, etc. for the spiritual safety of their families.

    No doubt that people who are primarily concerned with material benefits will pine to come to the West. The fact that such materially-oriented people are coming to societies already reeling with dysfunctions associated with hyper-materialism is just adding fuel to the fire.

    By the way, I think it’s a great thing if more and more Europeans retire and spend their twilight years in the more enjoyable and safe parts of the Muslim world. They can hopefully experience some good times in traditional and hospitable Muslim societies. Maybe even visit some Sufi gatherings in places like Marrakech and dive in! :)

    Peace.Hey Malla,

    I do like your voting with their feet as a generally good way to gauge things. Even within a country people move for various reasons; economic, family, religion, etc. People move to Nashville to be part of the music scene. People in Illinois think I’m crazy to have left California, but I came here to be close to my spiritual guide and because the Midwest is just more family- friendly.

    I have a Senagalese friend who has lived in the US and France, but his wife keeps bugging him to move back to Dakar; she doesn’t like the non-traditional nuclear family here - tough to raise kids.

    I also know of other Muslims (even converts) that have left for Jordan, Pakistan, UAE, etc. for the spiritual safety of their families.

    No doubt that people who are primarily concerned with material benefits will pine to come to the West. The fact that such materially-oriented people are coming to societies already reeling with dysfunctions associated with hyper-materialism is just adding fuel to the fire.

    By the way, I think it’s a great thing if more and more Europeans retire and spend their twilight years in the more enjoyable and safe parts of the Muslim world. They can hopefully experience some good times in traditional and hospitable Muslim societies. Maybe even visit some Sufi gatherings in places like Marrakech and dive in! :)

    Peace.

    I have a Senagalese friend who has lived in the US and France, but his wife keeps bugging him to move back to Dakar; she doesn’t like the non-traditional nuclear family here – tough to raise kids.

    Well I have observed that too. Many immigrant women prefer back home. Also because they would be the upper middle class, atleast middle class back home and enjoy a decent standard of living and the familiarity and culture of home countries.
    But I do not think the whole thing is just material. There are other factors at work. I have a better knowledge of Europe compared to North America as I have lived there longer. People in Europe are less corrupt, there is less cheating swindling, roads and surrounding are cleaner, less hassles, less dust and grime, less arrogant officials to deal with, most people in Germanic/ Norse/Anglo countries do not lie much etc etc…. There are other factors than just the material if you ask me.

    The fact that such materially-oriented people are coming to societies already reeling with dysfunctions associated with hyper-materialism is just adding fuel to the fire.

    I am not sure hyper materialism is the driver of the dysfunction. I am convinced there has been a deliberate push by the elites using the media and education system to destroy the traditional norms of the West which has caused a lot of the dysfunction. You can research Cultural Marxism for example. This process is quite old but took up speed after WW2 and further during the hippie revolution of the Vietnam War era. Compare the norms of Victorian era England or even the 1950s for example to life today in the West.

    The society in the videos above is a 1000 times more healthier society than the one today. Homogeneous societies with a sense of continuity with the past, much better family values, respect for elders, sense of community, the West was quite prosperous but people were happier with much simpler lives etc…
    Actually a very knowledgeable Pakistani bureaucrat Orya Maqbool Jaan had said something of this nature of deliberate destruction of the traditional West but I cannot get the video now and that the same thing is being pushed throughout the world.

    So the leftoids destroy the traditional west and then import loads of immigrants from conservative countries. Either the leftoids are plain stupid or with some evil agenda or both.
    Hence the West (society not elites) are not the aggressors in this respect but the first victim.

    I would also recommend the movie How Green Was My Valley (6 Academy Awards Winner) if you want to understand the level of cultural destruction in the West which was done deliberately. A definite watch, you can get it free on youtube.

    A small part of the movie, if you watch it you will understand what I am talking about.

    or the movie The Winslow Boy. Trailer below. Based on a true story.

    By the way, I think it’s a great thing if more and more Europeans retire and spend their twilight years in the more enjoyable and safe parts of the Muslim world. They can hopefully experience some good times in traditional and hospitable Muslim societies. Maybe even visit some Sufi gatherings in places like Marrakech and dive in

    Hehe, not a bad idea. I believe there are many who do this already.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. Malla says:
    @Jose
    How does India even have a Spatial program? they sure are more ambitious, despiste backwardness, they are among few countries that could go to Space, along United States, China, Russia, European Union or Japan. But yeah, among "spatial powers" they are the ones with lowest per capita.How does India even have a Spatial program? they sure are more ambitious, despiste backwardness, they are among few countries that could go to Space, along United States, China, Russia, European Union or Japan. But yeah, among "spatial powers" they are the ones with lowest per capita.

    India is a oligarchy, India traditionally has been a land where caste played a big role and you had wide contrasts in wealth, intelligence and knowledge, wider than most parts of the world. A tiny community wrote philosophy and dabbled in advanced mathematics while the masses were ignorant. A minority swam in golden coins while the masses were destitute. It is the same thing today.

    Read MoreIndia is a oligarchy, India traditionally has been a land where caste played a big role and you had wide contrasts in wealth, intelligence and knowledge, wider than most parts of the world. A tiny community wrote philosophy and dabbled in advanced mathematics while the masses were ignorant. A minority swam in golden coins while the masses were destitute. It is the same thing today.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. @Malla

    dichotomy of ”how western world is infallibly great and how the rest of the world is not..” must go..
     
    Actually after watching hours of media programming, one would believe that the non White world, especially blacks are infallible and the western world is just evul evul evul. So what must go where?

    less when celebrities in sub-art and in sports receive in one payment what most people never will have in their whole life…
     
    That is the case everywhere and it is much much worse. In India for example it is just cricket and Bollywood, cricket and Bollywood, cricket and Bollywood till one dies or commits suicide from the madness.

    This is about normies and abnormies aka leftoids… i’m directing this comment exactly to the type of crowd UNZ tend to attract.

    Yes i know ”celebritch madness” is not insular into the west but it was here where this pathology become global.

    Read MoreThis is about normies and abnormies aka leftoids... i'm directing this comment exactly to the type of crowd UNZ tend to attract. Yes i know ''celebritch madness'' is not insular into the west but it was here where this pathology become global.
    • Replies: @Malla

    Yes i know ”celebritch madness” is not insular into the west but it was here where this pathology become global.
     
    I tend to look at it as a natural tendency in humans exploited and taken to extreme levels by the media cabals. Humans have always loved heroes and have invented heroes. Mythological stories full of of Gods and demons and prophets, stories of Great Kings, humans have always had an inner need for celebrities. I cannot think of many cultures on Earth who do not have stories of heroes/ heroines, true or invented. It is just that this tendency is being exploited just like our natural desires for sex, status etc... are being exploited to the maximum as much as technology &understanding of psychology now permits.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. Malla says:
    @navanova
    I am an African and have read the article and all the comments under. It is shocking that everybody here unanimously agreed that black people are naturally less intelligent than whites. The author of the article stress culture as the primary factor for Africa’s backwardness but it is obvious she shares the same racist view of others. No matter you are bragging about your supper white race status having higher standard of cultural values such as honesty and restrain, Forget about your philanthropy, you are not what you are claiming, you are cruel and selfish people who does not want to share the little knowledge that you have accumulated for over five century. The Chinese people managed to par in less than half a century, which in some advanced technology like quantum computing, AI and genetic engineering even started to lead. For the time being, you are in a position with immense power to sabotaging, looting and blaming defenseless Africa which was evidenced by a very recent high culture and moral actions of yours on Libya. But the technological advancement you are bragging about will only soon to leave you the majority of the white people enslaved than that of the less advanced backward African people. One thing you should know is static culture is more natural and much better than your dynamically manufactured tasteless culture which is designed to destroy human elements. You are becoming like the robots you are designing and configuring. A simple example that distinguishes the African society from a white society in its present state is that the latter one neither loughs nor cry.I am an African and have read the article and all the comments under. It is shocking that everybody here unanimously agreed that black people are naturally less intelligent than whites. The author of the article stress culture as the primary factor for Africa’s backwardness but it is obvious she shares the same racist view of others. No matter you are bragging about your supper white race status having higher standard of cultural values such as honesty and restrain, Forget about your philanthropy, you are not what you are claiming, you are cruel and selfish people who does not want to share the little knowledge that you have accumulated for over five century. The Chinese people managed to par in less than half a century, which in some advanced technology like quantum computing, AI and genetic engineering even started to lead. For the time being, you are in a position with immense power to sabotaging, looting and blaming defenseless Africa which was evidenced by a very recent high culture and moral actions of yours on Libya. But the technological advancement you are bragging about will only soon to leave you the majority of the white people enslaved than that of the less advanced backward African people. One thing you should know is static culture is more natural and much better than your dynamically manufactured tasteless culture which is designed to destroy human elements. You are becoming like the robots you are designing and configuring. A simple example that distinguishes the African society from a white society in its present state is that the latter one neither loughs nor cry.

    you are cruel and selfish people who does not want to share the little knowledge that you have accumulated for over five century.

    False. We use technology invented by Whites in our daily life including the computer and Internet you are using. Automobiles, modern medicine (which has saved the lives of billions of non Whites), air travel, use of electricity just to name a few. So how is that not sharing? How is it LITTLE Knowledge?

    But the technological advancement you are bragging about will only soon to leave you the majority of the white people enslaved than that of the less advanced backward African people.

    That is very true actually but that is because the technological world is under the control of big money who are directing the technological world in that direction of enslavement. Technology is neutral, it is upto you to decide how to use it. But the bad news for Africans is that these behind the scenes forces is going to bring that world (technological slavery) to Africa too, it already has started. Mobile phones and digital payments like m-pesa (atleast in Eastern Africa) abound.

    For the time being, you are in a position with immense power to sabotaging, looting and blaming defenseless Africa which was evidenced by a very recent high culture and moral actions of yours on Libya.

    It is not the West but the elites of the West and their minions like Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton, the great liberal, who claims to speak for the coloured masses back home was bragging how she went and conquered Qaddafi.

    One thing you should know is static culture is more natural and much better than your dynamically manufactured tasteless culture which is designed to destroy human elements. You are becoming like the robots you are designing and configuring.

    You are correct but I guess everything comes with a price. There is a trade off. When humans began farming, leaving behind their hunter gatherer life, there were trade offs too. As far as destruction of the human elements is concerned , I think this has more to do with the economic system dominant in the world (fake option in between Capitalism vs Communism approved by the globalist elites) which makes machine the lord of man. Machine invented to serve man has become his master.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. Malla says:
    @Santoculto
    This is about normies and abnormies aka leftoids... i'm directing this comment exactly to the type of crowd UNZ tend to attract.

    Yes i know ''celebritch madness'' is not insular into the west but it was here where this pathology become global.This is about normies and abnormies aka leftoids... i'm directing this comment exactly to the type of crowd UNZ tend to attract.

    Yes i know ''celebritch madness'' is not insular into the west but it was here where this pathology become global.

    Yes i know ”celebritch madness” is not insular into the west but it was here where this pathology become global.

    I tend to look at it as a natural tendency in humans exploited and taken to extreme levels by the media cabals. Humans have always loved heroes and have invented heroes. Mythological stories full of of Gods and demons and prophets, stories of Great Kings, humans have always had an inner need for celebrities. I cannot think of many cultures on Earth who do not have stories of heroes/ heroines, true or invented. It is just that this tendency is being exploited just like our natural desires for sex, status etc… are being exploited to the maximum as much as technology &understanding of psychology now permits.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    Yes i understand thisYes i understand this
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. @Malla

    Yes i know ”celebritch madness” is not insular into the west but it was here where this pathology become global.
     
    I tend to look at it as a natural tendency in humans exploited and taken to extreme levels by the media cabals. Humans have always loved heroes and have invented heroes. Mythological stories full of of Gods and demons and prophets, stories of Great Kings, humans have always had an inner need for celebrities. I cannot think of many cultures on Earth who do not have stories of heroes/ heroines, true or invented. It is just that this tendency is being exploited just like our natural desires for sex, status etc... are being exploited to the maximum as much as technology &understanding of psychology now permits.

    Yes i understand this

    Read MoreYes i understand this
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. @anonymous

    Why Liberia has ‘issues’ when it was not colonised?
    Why Ethiopia has so many issues?
    Why Turkey has issues?
     
    Why have you not included your home country, India, which has also experienced colonialism?

    Just compare the living conditions and the environment in your country, and some other countries in the Middle East, heck even Turkey. Your country still looks and feels like a "third world shithole," even if you pride on some advances over those nations.

    Bottom line, what does the common man really need? Escape from poverty, corruption, an environment which still looks 100yrs prior, poor sanitation, pollution, rapes, lynchings, child-mortality, etc., OR pride in rockets & satellites, nuclear weapons, CEOs and engineers in multi-national companies, etc.?

    At a personal level, pride in your nations's accomplishments can mean only so much, and only for so long, you understand... unless you are one of those scientists or CEOs or engineers.

    What one really needs is better living conditions and self-prosperity. India is still far behind on such indices.

    Some of that applies to the scores of trailer trash in western nations also. The irony is that many of those lurk around in sites like Brietbart, and *cough*unz*cough* :) etc., exulting in the "greatness" of their civilisation, revulsion of "shithole" countries and people... while living hand to mouth.

    (((Ilana Mercer))) is definitely be a piece of this (((trash))). Her columns are always written with an underlying “Jewish supremacy” tone. If only her tribe were in charge, things would be different…she thinks.

    Read More(((Ilana Mercer))) is definitely be a piece of this (((trash))). Her columns are always written with an underlying "Jewish supremacy" tone. If only her tribe were in charge, things would be different...she thinks.
    • Replies: @Malla
    If her tribe wants to run Africa, let them have it. They already run a lot of things in Africa as it is.

    https://wideawakegentile.wordpress.com/2014/11/15/the-central-african-holocaust-and-the-bling-bang-torah-gang/

    https://wideawakegentile.wordpress.com/2014/11/15/the-central-african-holocaust-and-the-bling-bang-torah-gang-part-2/

    But if both Africans and Jews benefit from each other, then let them have each other. I believe gentile Euros should get out of the way (except in the Southern parts). Buy the resource on the market and ensure that most of the forest reserves are safe, thats it. Maybe such a relationship would be beneficial to each other.

    However there was this pretty great blog by an Israeli called 'Diary of an Israeli Water Engineer', a smart decent writer. He was lamenting the fact that the Middle East was not still run by European colonial Empires and how things have become worse since the Euros left.If her tribe wants to run Africa, let them have it. They already run a lot of things in Africa as it is.

    https://wideawakegentile.wordpress.com/2014/11/15/the-central-african-holocaust-and-the-bling-bang-torah-gang/

    https://wideawakegentile.wordpress.com/2014/11/15/the-central-african-holocaust-and-the-bling-bang-torah-gang-part-2/

    But if both Africans and Jews benefit from each other, then let them have each other. I believe gentile Euros should get out of the way (except in the Southern parts). Buy the resource on the market and ensure that most of the forest reserves are safe, thats it. Maybe such a relationship would be beneficial to each other.

    However there was this pretty great blog by an Israeli called 'Diary of an Israeli Water Engineer', a smart decent writer. He was lamenting the fact that the Middle East was not still run by European colonial Empires and how things have become worse since the Euros left.
    , @EnrriqueCardovaaa
    This is not so at all. In what way does she push this alleged "Jewish supremacy"? Specifically say how and where.This is not so at all. In what way does she push this alleged "Jewish supremacy"? Specifically say how and where.
    , @Santoculto
    She write via (((neocon))) narrativAShe write via (((neocon))) narrativA
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. Corvinus says:
    @Malla

    Simple answer–political and economic issues arising from post-European colonialism.
     
    Simple question
    Why did that not happen in Singapore or HongKong or Taiwan?
    Why not even Malaysia?
    Why Liberia has 'issues' when it was not colonised?
    Why Ethiopia has so many issues?
    Why Turkey has issues?

    “Why did that not happen in Singapore or HongKong or Taiwan? Why not even Malaysia?”

    These areas had experienced trade with Europe, developed immunities from diseases, and had long-time established stability both politically and economically. In Africa, the Europeans forced groups that were historically against one another, who lived their own lives in harmony, to do their bidding for raw materials and cheap labor. Moreover, the British had immersed their culture more dramatically, with the people in these places incorporating “foreign” governmental and financial institutions with their own political and economic concepts.

    Read More"Why did that not happen in Singapore or HongKong or Taiwan? Why not even Malaysia?" These areas had experienced trade with Europe, developed immunities from diseases, and had long-time established stability both politically and economically. In Africa, the Europeans forced groups that were historically against one another, who lived their own lives in harmony, to do their bidding for raw materials and cheap labor. Moreover, the British had immersed their culture more dramatically, with the people in these places incorporating "foreign" governmental and financial institutions with their own political and economic concepts.
    • Replies: @Malla

    who lived their own lives in harmony, to do their bidding for raw materials
     
    Who lived their lives in harmony? What you smoke? The Ndebele and the Shona would have frequent wars, this is just one example. Bidding for raw material? Do the rubber plantations of Malaysia ring any bell?

    Moreover, the British had immersed their culture more dramatically, with the people in these places incorporating “foreign” governmental and financial institutions with their own political and economic concepts.
     
    What? That is superbly dumb. The whole world uses so called "foreign" governmental and financial institutions.

    Looks like some parts of this explanation were scrambled together with very little basis in reality.
    Still does not explain why Ethiopia and Liberia which were not colonized, are economic disasters too.
    , @Malla
    Corvinus, you might have to look into the possibility that it were leftist trained 'freedom fighters' who did more damage to the traditional African way of life than the Giant European Empires.Corvinus, you might have to look into the possibility that it were leftist trained 'freedom fighters' who did more damage to the traditional African way of life than the Giant European Empires.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. Malla says:
    @Corvinus
    "Why did that not happen in Singapore or HongKong or Taiwan? Why not even Malaysia?"

    These areas had experienced trade with Europe, developed immunities from diseases, and had long-time established stability both politically and economically. In Africa, the Europeans forced groups that were historically against one another, who lived their own lives in harmony, to do their bidding for raw materials and cheap labor. Moreover, the British had immersed their culture more dramatically, with the people in these places incorporating "foreign" governmental and financial institutions with their own political and economic concepts."Why did that not happen in Singapore or HongKong or Taiwan? Why not even Malaysia?"

    These areas had experienced trade with Europe, developed immunities from diseases, and had long-time established stability both politically and economically. In Africa, the Europeans forced groups that were historically against one another, who lived their own lives in harmony, to do their bidding for raw materials and cheap labor. Moreover, the British had immersed their culture more dramatically, with the people in these places incorporating "foreign" governmental and financial institutions with their own political and economic concepts.

    who lived their own lives in harmony, to do their bidding for raw materials

    Who lived their lives in harmony? What you smoke? The Ndebele and the Shona would have frequent wars, this is just one example. Bidding for raw material? Do the rubber plantations of Malaysia ring any bell?

    Moreover, the British had immersed their culture more dramatically, with the people in these places incorporating “foreign” governmental and financial institutions with their own political and economic concepts.

    What? That is superbly dumb. The whole world uses so called “foreign” governmental and financial institutions.

    Looks like some parts of this explanation were scrambled together with very little basis in reality.
    Still does not explain why Ethiopia and Liberia which were not colonized, are economic disasters too.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. Malla says:
    @Corvinus
    "Why did that not happen in Singapore or HongKong or Taiwan? Why not even Malaysia?"

    These areas had experienced trade with Europe, developed immunities from diseases, and had long-time established stability both politically and economically. In Africa, the Europeans forced groups that were historically against one another, who lived their own lives in harmony, to do their bidding for raw materials and cheap labor. Moreover, the British had immersed their culture more dramatically, with the people in these places incorporating "foreign" governmental and financial institutions with their own political and economic concepts."Why did that not happen in Singapore or HongKong or Taiwan? Why not even Malaysia?"

    These areas had experienced trade with Europe, developed immunities from diseases, and had long-time established stability both politically and economically. In Africa, the Europeans forced groups that were historically against one another, who lived their own lives in harmony, to do their bidding for raw materials and cheap labor. Moreover, the British had immersed their culture more dramatically, with the people in these places incorporating "foreign" governmental and financial institutions with their own political and economic concepts.

    Corvinus, you might have to look into the possibility that it were leftist trained ‘freedom fighters’ who did more damage to the traditional African way of life than the Giant European Empires.

    Read MoreCorvinus, you might have to look into the possibility that it were leftist trained 'freedom fighters' who did more damage to the traditional African way of life than the Giant European Empires.
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Still does not explain why Ethiopia and Liberia which were not colonized, are economic disasters too."

    Educate yourself.

    http://streamafrica.com/culture/liberia-ethiopia-never-colonized-african-countries

    "you might have to look into the possibility that it were leftist trained ‘freedom fighters’ who did more damage to the traditional African way of life than the Giant European Empires."

    Again, educate yourself.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbbuTjntpGc&feature=youtu.be"Still does not explain why Ethiopia and Liberia which were not colonized, are economic disasters too."

    Educate yourself.

    http://streamafrica.com/culture/liberia-ethiopia-never-colonized-african-countries

    "you might have to look into the possibility that it were leftist trained ‘freedom fighters’ who did more damage to the traditional African way of life than the Giant European Empires."

    Again, educate yourself.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbbuTjntpGc&feature=youtu.be
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. Malla says:
    @attilathehen
    (((Ilana Mercer))) is definitely be a piece of this (((trash))). Her columns are always written with an underlying "Jewish supremacy" tone. If only her tribe were in charge, things would be different...she thinks.(((Ilana Mercer))) is definitely be a piece of this (((trash))). Her columns are always written with an underlying "Jewish supremacy" tone. If only her tribe were in charge, things would be different...she thinks.

    If her tribe wants to run Africa, let them have it. They already run a lot of things in Africa as it is.

    https://wideawakegentile.wordpress.com/2014/11/15/the-central-african-holocaust-and-the-bling-bang-torah-gang/

    https://wideawakegentile.wordpress.com/2014/11/15/the-central-african-holocaust-and-the-bling-bang-torah-gang-part-2/

    But if both Africans and Jews benefit from each other, then let them have each other. I believe gentile Euros should get out of the way (except in the Southern parts). Buy the resource on the market and ensure that most of the forest reserves are safe, thats it. Maybe such a relationship would be beneficial to each other.

    However there was this pretty great blog by an Israeli called ‘Diary of an Israeli Water Engineer’, a smart decent writer. He was lamenting the fact that the Middle East was not still run by European colonial Empires and how things have become worse since the Euros left.

    Read MoreIf her tribe wants to run Africa, let them have it. They already run a lot of things in Africa as it is. https://wideawakegentile.wordpress.com/2014/11/15/the-central-african-holocaust-and-the-bling-bang-torah-gang/ https://wideawakegentile.wordpress.com/2014/11/15/the-central-african-holocaust-and-the-bling-bang-torah-gang-part-2/ But if both Africans and Jews benefit from each other, then let them have each other. I believe gentile Euros should get out of the way (except in the Southern parts). Buy the resource on the market and ensure that most of the forest reserves are safe, thats it. Maybe such a relationship would be beneficial to each other. However there was this pretty great blog by an Israeli called 'Diary of an Israeli Water Engineer', a smart decent writer. He was lamenting the fact that the Middle East was not still run by European colonial Empires and how things have become worse since the Euros left.
    • Replies: @attilathehen
    Good points. But there are 2 major problems: the RCC and the Zioevangizers. The RCC believes that Africans will save the RCC. They are busy evangelizing and they will start sending black priests to Europe and the USA. This is why I consistently call for the collapse of the RCC and that the papacy be moved either to the Congo or to the Philippines.

    The Zioevangizers are in competition with the RCC in Africa (and Latin America). They spread their Israel chosen people nonsense and they rely on the USA government to help them with this. Until we deal with these 2 groups first, we will have problems. There are not many Jews and they just want to exploit and take what they can from Africa and take it to Israel or Jews around the world. They have no real interest in governing and they can barely govern Israel.

    A couple of interesting things have come up that while they don't deal with Africa directly, they do deal with China/Russia.

    China has taken over the RCC churches and is closing evangelical (Zio churches) churches. I hear some complaints from Vatican but no one really cares. Likewise, the USA Zioevangizers don't criticize China too much. However, Russia has closed down many Zio churches and keeps close tabs on any RCC churches in Russia. I watch several Zioevangizer websites and they are babbling about Russia being Gog Magog, Putin is the anti-Christ and other nonsense like this. They will not hesitate to support a war with Russia. They are also always babbling about Iran. Iran is a country where the average IQ is 84. The Zioevangizers want a war with Iran because of Israel. These people are insane.

    You make an excellent point about Europe just buying what it needs from Africa on the open market, but until we deal with the RCC/Zioevangizers we will have problems in Africa and Middle East. Cuck pope Frannie is the one behind the black/Asian/Muslim invasion of Europe. The RCC is a universal church which accepts all races and is using this to justify the invasion of Europe. The Zioevangizers believe it is their mission to Christianize the world. We have the opportunity now that China and Russia are repressing the RCC/Zioevangizers to make them realize that they must leave the rest of the world alone. The RCC needs to focus on Europe and Protestants on the USA. We need to support Israel so Jews can be resettled their and we need to bar them from any government positions in Western countries.Good points. But there are 2 major problems: the RCC and the Zioevangizers. The RCC believes that Africans will save the RCC. They are busy evangelizing and they will start sending black priests to Europe and the USA. This is why I consistently call for the collapse of the RCC and that the papacy be moved either to the Congo or to the Philippines.

    The Zioevangizers are in competition with the RCC in Africa (and Latin America). They spread their Israel chosen people nonsense and they rely on the USA government to help them with this. Until we deal with these 2 groups first, we will have problems. There are not many Jews and they just want to exploit and take what they can from Africa and take it to Israel or Jews around the world. They have no real interest in governing and they can barely govern Israel.

    A couple of interesting things have come up that while they don't deal with Africa directly, they do deal with China/Russia.

    China has taken over the RCC churches and is closing evangelical (Zio churches) churches. I hear some complaints from Vatican but no one really cares. Likewise, the USA Zioevangizers don't criticize China too much. However, Russia has closed down many Zio churches and keeps close tabs on any RCC churches in Russia. I watch several Zioevangizer websites and they are babbling about Russia being Gog Magog, Putin is the anti-Christ and other nonsense like this. They will not hesitate to support a war with Russia. They are also always babbling about Iran. Iran is a country where the average IQ is 84. The Zioevangizers want a war with Iran because of Israel. These people are insane.

    You make an excellent point about Europe just buying what it needs from Africa on the open market, but until we deal with the RCC/Zioevangizers we will have problems in Africa and Middle East. Cuck pope Frannie is the one behind the black/Asian/Muslim invasion of Europe. The RCC is a universal church which accepts all races and is using this to justify the invasion of Europe. The Zioevangizers believe it is their mission to Christianize the world. We have the opportunity now that China and Russia are repressing the RCC/Zioevangizers to make them realize that they must leave the rest of the world alone. The RCC needs to focus on Europe and Protestants on the USA. We need to support Israel so Jews can be resettled their and we need to bar them from any government positions in Western countries.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. @attilathehen
    (((Ilana Mercer))) is definitely be a piece of this (((trash))). Her columns are always written with an underlying "Jewish supremacy" tone. If only her tribe were in charge, things would be different...she thinks.(((Ilana Mercer))) is definitely be a piece of this (((trash))). Her columns are always written with an underlying "Jewish supremacy" tone. If only her tribe were in charge, things would be different...she thinks.

    This is not so at all. In what way does she push this alleged “Jewish supremacy”? Specifically say how and where.

    Read MoreThis is not so at all. In what way does she push this alleged "Jewish supremacy"? Specifically say how and where.
    • Replies: @attilathehen
    She wrote a book - Into the Cannibal's Pot. What she failed to mention is that her father gathered and placed the kindling wood under the pot to start the fire.

    http://www.ilanamercer.com/biographical/

    She is a rabbi's daughter so believes she is the "chosen." They are not. She claims to be a libertarian but this is just nonsense pushed by Jews.

    (((Mike Cernovich))), who has an Iranian Muslim wife (nothing kosher here) is a libertarian.

    (((Lauren Southern))) - yes she's Jewish and dates black guys - is traveling in South Africa babbling about the suffering of the white farmers. She will not acknowledge that Jews were instrumental in the anti-apartheid movement. She dates blacks - who are a huge problem. She is a libertarian. She gets her money from beta white guys who think they will meet and date her if they give her money.

    So, Jews mixing with blacks/Asians/Muslims. Do you see the pattern?

    But, again, big picture, it is the Caucasian RCC/Zioevangizer/Freemason male who allows this to happen.She wrote a book - Into the Cannibal's Pot. What she failed to mention is that her father gathered and placed the kindling wood under the pot to start the fire.

    http://www.ilanamercer.com/biographical/

    She is a rabbi's daughter so believes she is the "chosen." They are not. She claims to be a libertarian but this is just nonsense pushed by Jews.

    (((Mike Cernovich))), who has an Iranian Muslim wife (nothing kosher here) is a libertarian.

    (((Lauren Southern))) - yes she's Jewish and dates black guys - is traveling in South Africa babbling about the suffering of the white farmers. She will not acknowledge that Jews were instrumental in the anti-apartheid movement. She dates blacks - who are a huge problem. She is a libertarian. She gets her money from beta white guys who think they will meet and date her if they give her money.

    So, Jews mixing with blacks/Asians/Muslims. Do you see the pattern?

    But, again, big picture, it is the Caucasian RCC/Zioevangizer/Freemason male who allows this to happen.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. Mercer says:
    The idea that culture is benign and harmonious if not disrupted is a delusion, argues anthropologist Robert B. Edgerton, who also believes that in Africa, “traditional cultural values are at the root of poverty, authoritarianism, and injustice.”

    But this is a bit of a strawman. Very few people, including the PC legions, believe that culture is always “benign and harmonious.” Nor do they believe that some cultural elements do not need “disruption.”

    In fact, “disrupting” culture has been a standard modus operandi of “the liberals,” in numerous parts of the world, whether it be in stopping the Indian “sutee” or burning of widows, to the “structural adjustment” policies of international neoliberal elites, to the stopping of murders or beatings of black people attempting to vote in the white culture of the Jim Crow south.

    Likewise the notion that “traditional cultural values are at the root of poverty, authoritarianism, and injustice” is only partially true. There are other factors in the mix. It may be true that traditionally racist or anti-Semitic values in pre and WW2 era Germany may have been responsible for that terrible injustice and authoritarianism inflicted on Jews, but economic pressures, crumbling economies, rampant inflation etc etc also played a part in bringing about “the Final Solution” in terms of setting the stage for various crises, whereby one manifestation of traditionally anti-Semitic values was able to gain power to carry out its program.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla

    Likewise the notion that “traditional cultural values are at the root of poverty, authoritarianism, and injustice” is only partially true.
     
    That is very correct. What we know as cultures are complicated with their positive and negative sides from a point of view. If we can speak of an African culture (Africa is VAST with a huge diversity of cultures), destroying African culture outright would be an exercise in foolishness and a big loss to all mankind. Those aspects of African cultures which are socially positive (at the same time do not inhibit economic progress) and helpful should be kept and preserved but those aspects which are destructive such as certain aspects of witchcraft for example, should be removed. Which are positive and which are negative needs deep study and wisdom, the effects of their removal must be studied, the reasons why such particular practices were brought about in the first place and what purpose did they serve should be studied first. Destroying African cultures outright would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
    At the same time those aspects of Western or other cultures (cultures which evolved during the Industrial are such as pre WW2 Victorian era culture) which are beneficial to progress should be inculcated in the population without destroying cultural identity. If you want economic progress, stubbornly sticking with every aspect of your culture however harmful will never give you good results at the same time sweeping your culture away is a deep loss too.
    This is true for all cultures in the world, even that of Europe. However I feel the modern post WW2 cultural world poses a bigger to traditional cultures around the world than European Empires ever did.
    , @Santoculto

    Likewise the notion that “traditional cultural values are at the root of poverty, authoritarianism, and injustice” is only partially true.
     
    ”Traditional values” are basically the transplantation and symbolization of food chain in natural world into human world… yes, the roots of social human world is conservative and it’s already promoted all this three beasts, consciously or not. But i still agree that it’s

    ”only”

    partly true.

    The way you describe or characterize ”traditional values” is already authoritarian, EVEN ”authoritarianism” is basically a synonimous of conformity and without a context ”angels no have sex” or ”this word no have good, neutral//debatable or bad moral/value outcome”.

    The problem, at priori, it's not be authoritarian, even because it always will be, in some or another way. The problem is when it's a a BAD authoritarianism, as always has been.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. Mercer says:
    Etounga-Manguelle was referring to what he perceives to be the culture of envy—the kind of all-consuming envy that, in the Rwanda of 1994, caused certain Africans (Hutus) to attempt to kill off other, frequently more industrious, better-looking brethren (Tutsis). The culture of envy makes it hard for Africa as a whole to rejoice in the success of its exceptional sons and daughters.

    But this too is rather dubious as a blanket description for the diverse continent of Africa, and Mercer’s having the black libertarian say it does not disguise a second pattern of her argumentation- namely sweeping stereotypes of Africans and Africa, often stretched. If we are to apply Etounga’s approach across the board, then white Europe is similarly afflicted with “a culture of envy” since it has frequently attempted to kill off the most industrious etc- like those familiar whipping boys called Jews.

    In like manner, the white Boers of South Africa, and whites in many parts of the US again and again has displayed a “culture of envy” in attempting to shut down productive Black or Asian farmers, merchants, skilled tradesmen etc etc, through not only its “colour bar” laws, or confiscatory “WHite Land Reservation” policies but outright violence. Thus a “culture of envy” using the same Mercer approach, is typical of white culture. Just ass the productive Chinese of California who were massacred wholesale and driven out of numerous venues by whites who envied their acumen, hard work and productivity.

    Same for Japanese immigrants, who coming with their intensive farming culture and internal Japanese organization intact, and enjoying the advantage of an initial environment that allowed them liberty to do business, rose from laborers to independent operators that began to dominate certain categories of fresh fruit, flowers and other fresh farm produce of California’s burgeoning truck farming industry. Envious whites used a variety of deceptions and laws to shut them down as scholars like Thomas Sowell has clearly documented.

    Read More
    • Replies: @attilathehen
    "...productive Chinese of California who were massacred wholesale and driven out of numerous venues by whites who envied their acumen, hard work and productivity." The "productive Chinese" went back to China. Why didn't China learn from these "productive Chinese" and become an industrial power like Japan? The answer is because the Japanese are smarter than the Chinese.

    China is a bit more modern today, but it is a repressive country. Japan is modern, industrial and the people enjoy rights and are free."...productive Chinese of California who were massacred wholesale and driven out of numerous venues by whites who envied their acumen, hard work and productivity." The "productive Chinese" went back to China. Why didn't China learn from these "productive Chinese" and become an industrial power like Japan? The answer is because the Japanese are smarter than the Chinese.

    China is a bit more modern today, but it is a repressive country. Japan is modern, industrial and the people enjoy rights and are free.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. @EnrriqueCardovaaa
    This is not so at all. In what way does she push this alleged "Jewish supremacy"? Specifically say how and where.This is not so at all. In what way does she push this alleged "Jewish supremacy"? Specifically say how and where.

    She wrote a book – Into the Cannibal’s Pot. What she failed to mention is that her father gathered and placed the kindling wood under the pot to start the fire.

    http://www.ilanamercer.com/biographical/

    She is a rabbi’s daughter so believes she is the “chosen.” They are not. She claims to be a libertarian but this is just nonsense pushed by Jews.

    (((Mike Cernovich))), who has an Iranian Muslim wife (nothing kosher here) is a libertarian.

    (((Lauren Southern))) – yes she’s Jewish and dates black guys – is traveling in South Africa babbling about the suffering of the white farmers. She will not acknowledge that Jews were instrumental in the anti-apartheid movement. She dates blacks – who are a huge problem. She is a libertarian. She gets her money from beta white guys who think they will meet and date her if they give her money.

    So, Jews mixing with blacks/Asians/Muslims. Do you see the pattern?

    But, again, big picture, it is the Caucasian RCC/Zioevangizer/Freemason male who allows this to happen.

    Read MoreShe wrote a book - Into the Cannibal's Pot. What she failed to mention is that her father gathered and placed the kindling wood under the pot to start the fire. http://www.ilanamercer.com/biographical/ She is a rabbi's daughter so believes she is the "chosen." They are not. She claims to be a libertarian but this is just nonsense pushed by Jews. (((Mike Cernovich))), who has an Iranian Muslim wife (nothing kosher here) is a libertarian. (((Lauren Southern))) - yes she's Jewish and dates black guys - is traveling in South Africa babbling about the suffering of the white farmers. She will not acknowledge that Jews were instrumental in the anti-apartheid movement. She dates blacks - who are a huge problem. She is a libertarian. She gets her money from beta white guys who think they will meet and date her if they give her money. So, Jews mixing with blacks/Asians/Muslims. Do you see the pattern? But, again, big picture, it is the Caucasian RCC/Zioevangizer/Freemason male who allows this to happen.
    • Replies: @EnrriqueCardovaaa
    I can't agree with your characterization of Mercer. Can you provide more detail? Why can't she be just another white libertarian pushing the same "free market" stuff that has outsourced and off-shored numerous jobs white guys used to have, away to Asia? Isn't this what the neocons and conservative libertarians have celebrated as the just working of the market- more qualified, certified Indians for example snapping up the tech jobs?

    ANd it doesn;t sound to me that she likes black people- she kinda views them as unproductive losers compared to nicer, more virtuous white people. Are you saying this is all a ruse? How? She is on record with these things for years.

    Haven;t read much on Lauren Southern but I'll check her out. Now as to her dating black guys, does this create a crisis of envy among white beta males? So they are just kissing up to her as you suggest? But that seems sort of strange. They should rather be doing the OPPOSITE, rejecting her, for her breach of the color line.I can't agree with your characterization of Mercer. Can you provide more detail? Why can't she be just another white libertarian pushing the same "free market" stuff that has outsourced and off-shored numerous jobs white guys used to have, away to Asia? Isn't this what the neocons and conservative libertarians have celebrated as the just working of the market- more qualified, certified Indians for example snapping up the tech jobs?

    ANd it doesn;t sound to me that she likes black people- she kinda views them as unproductive losers compared to nicer, more virtuous white people. Are you saying this is all a ruse? How? She is on record with these things for years.

    Haven;t read much on Lauren Southern but I'll check her out. Now as to her dating black guys, does this create a crisis of envy among white beta males? So they are just kissing up to her as you suggest? But that seems sort of strange. They should rather be doing the OPPOSITE, rejecting her, for her breach of the color line.

    , @Santoculto

    (((Lauren Southern))) – yes she’s Jewish and dates black guys – is traveling in South Africa babbling about the suffering of the white farmers. She will not acknowledge that Jews were instrumental in the anti-apartheid movement. She dates blacks – who are a huge problem. She is a libertarian. She gets her money from beta white guys who think they will meet and date her if they give her money.
     
    Black white thinking, aka, simpleton.

    If she can be ''instrumental'' to your ''cause'' her past or even her present is not necessarily a problem. And she is a individual, what a individual and specially a different one do is not at prior a problem. What is a problem is when:

    creative classes
    and
    average joey

    are marrying out above the 50%

    It's mean

    reduction of

    brain power

    and

    demographic power

    at long term

    Or ''you'' are becoming a obsolete collectivity or ''you'' are becoming basically instinct...

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. Mercer says:
    In this context, the systematic “expulsion and slaughter of productive minorities,” at the behest of the people, not necessarily their leaders, deserves scrutiny, too. This has been a factor in Zimbabwe’s demise and in South Africa’s increasing economic insecurity. In both countries, life for the productive European minority is perilous.”
    —————————————————————-

    I agree with Mercer here, and as Sowell shows, killing and driving out productive minorities is a typical pattern with white cultures, from America, to Germany, to South Africa. It also has occurred with INTERNAL non-immigrant minorities, Some thriving black business districts in the United States for example were looted and burned to the ground by envious whites. Likewise acculturated “civilized” Indians like the Cherokee fell foul of white envy in various venues and suffered expropriation and dispossession. With OUTSIDE migrants of course such things was often par for the course, as rampaging white mobs drove out productive Chinese whom they did not give “a Chinaman’s chance.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  178. Mercer says
    The plight of “witch children” across Africa—amplified in Nigeria, a country touted by the anti-Trump media as fertile recruiting grounds for future Americans—comports with Etounga-Manguelle’s paradigm. In Nigeria, this designated class of kids is blamed for every pestilence to plague the community.

    Mercer has a point here about certain negative practices in certain places. The plight of “witch children” is indeed a bad one, but it in no way characterizes the vast African continent as a whole. And once again if the “oh how terrible” approach is applied evenly, and the plight of badly treated children is the rule, then white Europe is easily in the dock for judgment. The case is easily made as regards the tens of thousands of abandoned white children in white countries fairly recently in history (such as the thousands of Irish abandoned in 19th century New York, Boston) or a similar pattern in Britain, to various “witchcraft trials” in white nations, to the routine sacrifice of white children to various. Brutal Infanticide is a typical characteristic of white culture, and when continents are compared, Africa actually has the lowest incidence of infanticide as credible scholars show- see for example Milner, L.S. (2000). Hardness of Heart / Hardness of Life: the stain of infanticide. University Press. p. 160)

    As regards dastardly “witchcraft”, serious studies such as “The European Witch-Hunt” by Julian Goodare details plenty of evidence as to how white Europe also persecuted and killed “witch” children, including killings during the supposedly more noble Reformation era.

    In white Scotland for example, several cases of brutal child abuse are recorded as the righteous attempted to “beat the devil” out of “bewitched” white children. One “treatment” of a young child, along with “scourging” involved obtaining “three haires of his sister’s privities.” (Goodare, 2008). But of course in the hypocritical approach of some folk, only black Africans do such terrible things.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Okechukwu

    Mercer has a point here about certain negative practices in certain places. The plight of “witch children” is indeed a bad one, but it in no way characterizes the vast African continent as a whole.
     
    I'm of Nigerian heritage and I've never heard of "witch children," nor has any of the other Nigerians I know. There are likely more white men boinking little boys per capita than there are Africans who accuse children of witchcraft. Yet no one suggests that pedophilia is an intrinsic part of white American life.

    By the way, Mercer is a hack. I would encourage everyone to read Enrique Cordova's review of her book on Amazon. You'll see a real scholar toying with an uneducated, uninformed, bigoted little girl.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. In static cultures, individuals tend to be fatalistic rather than future-oriented; live for the present or past; work only because they need to; diminish or dismiss the value of education, frugality, and philanthropy; are often mired in nepotism and corruption; and promote individuals based on clan and connections, rather than capabilities.
    —————————————————————

    But fatalism and such is hardly an African monopoly. Such patterns appear among white “role models” in white Ireland, and white southern Italy as Thomas Sowell has shown in his numerous books. And ironically, the same fatalism has been frequently observed among white South African Boers. Distinguished author Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and others commented on unproductive, blinkered Boer fundamentalism, along with laziness and slackness especially since they had so much cheap, oft coerced African labor to do the heavy lifting. Conan- Doyle criticized white Boer venality and incompetence, saying in one writing:

    “.. while to their corruption they added such crass ignorance that they argue in the published reports of the Volksraad debates that using dynamite bombs to bring down rain was firing at God, that it is impious to destroy locusts, that the word ‘participate’ should not be used because it is not in the Bible, and that postal pillar boxes are extravagant and effeminate.”
    –Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, 1902.

    As one biography puts it-Quote:

    “in the Boer Republics he found a whole culture, from its political leadership to the education if its children, in the grip of a ‘dour fatalistic Old Testament religion’ that held it stubbornly in the past: this ‘ancient theology’, armed with ‘inconveniently modern rifles..’”
    –Douglas Kerr. 2013. Conan Doyle: Writing, Profession, and Practice

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  180. The paucity of planning and future preparation in African life, Etounga-Manguelle puts down to a suspended sense of time. The reverence for the “strongman of the moment” he roots in the sincerely held belief that these men harbor magical powers. Magic wins out over reason; community over individual; communal ownership over private property; force and coercion over rights and responsibilities; wealth distribution over its accumulation.

    Sounds dire indeed, but the alleged ‘African” pattern is easily found among white people, such as the aforementioned white Boers with the rigid claims of their mystical Old Testament theology, and white communal ownership over African ownership- individual or collective, white force and coercion over African rights, and white wealth distribution and accumulation by force or deception to whites, over Africans. Throw in the white-created philosophies of Marxism and socialism, and the “African pattern” actually seems to be very white.

    Africans inhabit stratified societies in which “strength prevails over law,”
    —————————————-
    The only thing wrong with this claim is that it pretty much characterizes almost every white society, including white Europeans in South Africa.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Malla

    Throw in the white-created philosophies of Marxism and socialism, and the “African pattern” actually seems to be very white.
     
    Ummmm, no. Communism/ Marxism is Jewish, Socialism is White gentile.

    As Otto Weininger, himself of Jewish birth noted

    It is in harmony with the foregoing that the Jew is so readily disposed to communism. Communism must be distinguished clearly from socialism, the former being based on a community of goods, an absence of individual property, the latter meaning, in the first place a co-operation of individual with individual, of worker with worker, and a recognition of human individuality in every one. Socialism is Aryan (Owen, Carlyle, Ruskin, Fichte). Communism is Jewish (Marx). Modern social democracy has moved far apart from the earlier socialism, precisely because Jews have taken so large a share in developing it. In spite of the associative element in it, the Marxian doctrine does not lead in any way towards the State as a union of all the separate individual aims, as the higher unit combining the purposes of the lower units. Such a conception is as foreign to the Jew as it is to the woman.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. @attilathehen
    She wrote a book - Into the Cannibal's Pot. What she failed to mention is that her father gathered and placed the kindling wood under the pot to start the fire.

    http://www.ilanamercer.com/biographical/

    She is a rabbi's daughter so believes she is the "chosen." They are not. She claims to be a libertarian but this is just nonsense pushed by Jews.

    (((Mike Cernovich))), who has an Iranian Muslim wife (nothing kosher here) is a libertarian.

    (((Lauren Southern))) - yes she's Jewish and dates black guys - is traveling in South Africa babbling about the suffering of the white farmers. She will not acknowledge that Jews were instrumental in the anti-apartheid movement. She dates blacks - who are a huge problem. She is a libertarian. She gets her money from beta white guys who think they will meet and date her if they give her money.

    So, Jews mixing with blacks/Asians/Muslims. Do you see the pattern?

    But, again, big picture, it is the Caucasian RCC/Zioevangizer/Freemason male who allows this to happen.She wrote a book - Into the Cannibal's Pot. What she failed to mention is that her father gathered and placed the kindling wood under the pot to start the fire.

    http://www.ilanamercer.com/biographical/

    She is a rabbi's daughter so believes she is the "chosen." They are not. She claims to be a libertarian but this is just nonsense pushed by Jews.

    (((Mike Cernovich))), who has an Iranian Muslim wife (nothing kosher here) is a libertarian.

    (((Lauren Southern))) - yes she's Jewish and dates black guys - is traveling in South Africa babbling about the suffering of the white farmers. She will not acknowledge that Jews were instrumental in the anti-apartheid movement. She dates blacks - who are a huge problem. She is a libertarian. She gets her money from beta white guys who think they will meet and date her if they give her money.

    So, Jews mixing with blacks/Asians/Muslims. Do you see the pattern?

    But, again, big picture, it is the Caucasian RCC/Zioevangizer/Freemason male who allows this to happen.

    I can’t agree with your characterization of Mercer. Can you provide more detail? Why can’t she be just another white libertarian pushing the same “free market” stuff that has outsourced and off-shored numerous jobs white guys used to have, away to Asia? Isn’t this what the neocons and conservative libertarians have celebrated as the just working of the market- more qualified, certified Indians for example snapping up the tech jobs?

    ANd it doesn;t sound to me that she likes black people- she kinda views them as unproductive losers compared to nicer, more virtuous white people. Are you saying this is all a ruse? How? She is on record with these things for years.

    Haven;t read much on Lauren Southern but I’ll check her out. Now as to her dating black guys, does this create a crisis of envy among white beta males? So they are just kissing up to her as you suggest? But that seems sort of strange. They should rather be doing the OPPOSITE, rejecting her, for her breach of the color line.

    Read MoreI can't agree with your characterization of Mercer. Can you provide more detail? Why can't she be just another white libertarian pushing the same "free market" stuff that has outsourced and off-shored numerous jobs white guys used to have, away to Asia? Isn't this what the neocons and conservative libertarians have celebrated as the just working of the market- more qualified, certified Indians for example snapping up the tech jobs? ANd it doesn;t sound to me that she likes black people- she kinda views them as unproductive losers compared to nicer, more virtuous white people. Are you saying this is all a ruse? How? She is on record with these things for years. Haven;t read much on Lauren Southern but I'll check her out. Now as to her dating black guys, does this create a crisis of envy among white beta males? So they are just kissing up to her as you suggest? But that seems sort of strange. They should rather be doing the OPPOSITE, rejecting her, for her breach of the color line.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. @EnrriqueCardovaaa
    Mercer says:
    Etounga-Manguelle was referring to what he perceives to be the culture of envy—the kind of all-consuming envy that, in the Rwanda of 1994, caused certain Africans (Hutus) to attempt to kill off other, frequently more industrious, better-looking brethren (Tutsis). The culture of envy makes it hard for Africa as a whole to rejoice in the success of its exceptional sons and daughters.

    But this too is rather dubious as a blanket description for the diverse continent of Africa, and Mercer's having the black libertarian say it does not disguise a second pattern of her argumentation- namely sweeping stereotypes of Africans and Africa, often stretched. If we are to apply Etounga's approach across the board, then white Europe is similarly afflicted with "a culture of envy" since it has frequently attempted to kill off the most industrious etc- like those familiar whipping boys called Jews.

    In like manner, the white Boers of South Africa, and whites in many parts of the US again and again has displayed a "culture of envy" in attempting to shut down productive Black or Asian farmers, merchants, skilled tradesmen etc etc, through not only its "colour bar" laws, or confiscatory "WHite Land Reservation" policies but outright violence. Thus a "culture of envy" using the same Mercer approach, is typical of white culture. Just ass the productive Chinese of California who were massacred wholesale and driven out of numerous venues by whites who envied their acumen, hard work and productivity.

    Same for Japanese immigrants, who coming with their intensive farming culture and internal Japanese organization intact, and enjoying the advantage of an initial environment that allowed them liberty to do business, rose from laborers to independent operators that began to dominate certain categories of fresh fruit, flowers and other fresh farm produce of California's burgeoning truck farming industry. Envious whites used a variety of deceptions and laws to shut them down as scholars like Thomas Sowell has clearly documented.

    “…productive Chinese of California who were massacred wholesale and driven out of numerous venues by whites who envied their acumen, hard work and productivity.” The “productive Chinese” went back to China. Why didn’t China learn from these “productive Chinese” and become an industrial power like Japan? The answer is because the Japanese are smarter than the Chinese.

    China is a bit more modern today, but it is a repressive country. Japan is modern, industrial and the people enjoy rights and are free.

    Read More"...productive Chinese of California who were massacred wholesale and driven out of numerous venues by whites who envied their acumen, hard work and productivity." The "productive Chinese" went back to China. Why didn't China learn from these "productive Chinese" and become an industrial power like Japan? The answer is because the Japanese are smarter than the Chinese. China is a bit more modern today, but it is a repressive country. Japan is modern, industrial and the people enjoy rights and are free.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. Mercer says:
    Be it Africa or Arabia, the Left labors under the romantic delusion that the effects of millennia of development-resistant, self-defeating, fatalistic, atavistic, superstition-infused, unfathomably cruel cultures can be cured by an infusion of foreign aid, by the removal of tyrants such as Robert Mugabe or Jacob Zuma, or by bringing the underdeveloped world to America. (Left-libertarian Katherine Mangu-Ward actually told Tucker Carlson that, “If we had a billion people in America, America would be unstoppable. That would be amazing.”)
    ————————

    Mercer has a point as to SOME PC leftist types particularly on college campuses. But it is doubtful whether this scenario characterizes all of the Left or even a majority. It is doubtful if there are legions of credible people who can be described as “left” holding such “delusion” -that foreign-aid is a cure-all. Matter of fact you hear condemnations of foreign aid as a tool of imperialist control all the time from the Left. How many are credibly making any such “cure all” argument as Mercer suggests?

    Second, Mangu-Ward, who is actually a libertarian (editor of the libertarian magazine Reason) and is opposed to many radical leftist redistribution notions, was not talking about importing massive numbers of violent Third World illiterates, but the power the US would have if it could join its productive capacity with a larger population engaged in that production.

    This is an old argument actually advanced by whites, including conservatives, when they imported huge numbers of African slaves to build up the “unstoppable” economic power of the American south, as well as the millions of white immigrants to the north and elsewhere. White conservatives, from captains of industry, to local civil boosters advanced a similar argument as Mangu-Ward.

    And ” development-resistant, self-defeating, fatalistic, atavistic, superstition-infused, unfathomably cruel cultures” pretty much describes numerous white cultures, whether it be the turbulent white Irish, to the turbulent whites of the Balkans, to the white Boers of South Africa.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  184. @Malla
    If her tribe wants to run Africa, let them have it. They already run a lot of things in Africa as it is.

    https://wideawakegentile.wordpress.com/2014/11/15/the-central-african-holocaust-and-the-bling-bang-torah-gang/

    https://wideawakegentile.wordpress.com/2014/11/15/the-central-african-holocaust-and-the-bling-bang-torah-gang-part-2/

    But if both Africans and Jews benefit from each other, then let them have each other. I believe gentile Euros should get out of the way (except in the Southern parts). Buy the resource on the market and ensure that most of the forest reserves are safe, thats it. Maybe such a relationship would be beneficial to each other.

    However there was this pretty great blog by an Israeli called 'Diary of an Israeli Water Engineer', a smart decent writer. He was lamenting the fact that the Middle East was not still run by European colonial Empires and how things have become worse since the Euros left.If her tribe wants to run Africa, let them have it. They already run a lot of things in Africa as it is.

    https://wideawakegentile.wordpress.com/2014/11/15/the-central-african-holocaust-and-the-bling-bang-torah-gang/

    https://wideawakegentile.wordpress.com/2014/11/15/the-central-african-holocaust-and-the-bling-bang-torah-gang-part-2/

    But if both Africans and Jews benefit from each other, then let them have each other. I believe gentile Euros should get out of the way (except in the Southern parts). Buy the resource on the market and ensure that most of the forest reserves are safe, thats it. Maybe such a relationship would be beneficial to each other.

    However there was this pretty great blog by an Israeli called 'Diary of an Israeli Water Engineer', a smart decent writer. He was lamenting the fact that the Middle East was not still run by European colonial Empires and how things have become worse since the Euros left.

    Good points. But there are 2 major problems: the RCC and the Zioevangizers. The RCC believes that Africans will save the RCC. They are busy evangelizing and they will start sending black priests to Europe and the USA. This is why I consistently call for the collapse of the RCC and that the papacy be moved either to the Congo or to the Philippines.

    The Zioevangizers are in competition with the RCC in Africa (and Latin America). They spread their Israel chosen people nonsense and they rely on the USA government to help them with this. Until we deal with these 2 groups first, we will have problems. There are not many Jews and they just want to exploit and take what they can from Africa and take it to Israel or Jews around the world. They have no real interest in governing and they can barely govern Israel.

    A couple of interesting things have come up that while they don’t deal with Africa directly, they do deal with China/Russia.

    China has taken over the RCC churches and is closing evangelical (Zio churches) churches. I hear some complaints from Vatican but no one really cares. Likewise, the USA Zioevangizers don’t criticize China too much. However, Russia has closed down many Zio churches and keeps close tabs on any RCC churches in Russia. I watch several Zioevangizer websites and they are babbling about Russia being Gog Magog, Putin is the anti-Christ and other nonsense like this. They will not hesitate to support a war with Russia. They are also always babbling about Iran. Iran is a country where the average IQ is 84. The Zioevangizers want a war with Iran because of Israel. These people are insane.

    You make an excellent point about Europe just buying what it needs from Africa on the open market, but until we deal with the RCC/Zioevangizers we will have problems in Africa and Middle East. Cuck pope Frannie is the one behind the black/Asian/Muslim invasion of Europe. The RCC is a universal church which accepts all races and is using this to justify the invasion of Europe. The Zioevangizers believe it is their mission to Christianize the world. We have the opportunity now that China and Russia are repressing the RCC/Zioevangizers to make them realize that they must leave the rest of the world alone. The RCC needs to focus on Europe and Protestants on the USA. We need to support Israel so Jews can be resettled their and we need to bar them from any government positions in Western countries.

    Read MoreGood points. But there are 2 major problems: the RCC and the Zioevangizers. The RCC believes that Africans will save the RCC. They are busy evangelizing and they will start sending black priests to Europe and the USA. This is why I consistently call for the collapse of the RCC and that the papacy be moved either to the Congo or to the Philippines. The Zioevangizers are in competition with the RCC in Africa (and Latin America). They spread their Israel chosen people nonsense and they rely on the USA government to help them with this. Until we deal with these 2 groups first, we will have problems. There are not many Jews and they just want to exploit and take what they can from Africa and take it to Israel or Jews around the world. They have no real interest in governing and they can barely govern Israel. A couple of interesting things have come up that while they don't deal with Africa directly, they do deal with China/Russia. China has taken over the RCC churches and is closing evangelical (Zio churches) churches. I hear some complaints from Vatican but no one really cares. Likewise, the USA Zioevangizers don't criticize China too much. However, Russia has closed down many Zio churches and keeps close tabs on any RCC churches in Russia. I watch several Zioevangizer websites and they are babbling about Russia being Gog Magog, Putin is the anti-Christ and other nonsense like this. They will not hesitate to support a war with Russia. They are also always babbling about Iran. Iran is a country where the average IQ is 84. The Zioevangizers want a war with Iran because of Israel. These people are insane. You make an excellent point about Europe just buying what it needs from Africa on the open market, but until we deal with the RCC/Zioevangizers we will have problems in Africa and Middle East. Cuck pop