The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Robert D. Kaplan Goes Full "Submission" in the Atlantic
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

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

From The Atlantic, an essay by Robert D. Kaplan that would make a good appendix to Houellebecq’s Submission:

How Islam Created Europe
In late antiquity, the religion split the Mediterranean world in two. Now it is remaking the Continent.

ROBERT D. KAPLAN MAY 2016 ISSUE GLOBAL

Europe was essentially defined by Islam. And Islam is redefining it now.

For centuries in early and middle antiquity, Europe meant the world surrounding the Mediterranean, or Mare Nostrum (“Our Sea”), as the Romans famously called it.

In Michel Houellebecq’s 2015 novel Submission, the new Muslim president of France moves the capital of the E.U. from northerly Brussels to Rome to be closer to the center of a new/old unified realm in which the votes of the demographically vibrant Islamic world can outweigh those of infertile Europeans.

A daring aspect of Submission is Houellebecq’s unexpected intuition that the crucial betrayal of Christendom might not come simply from the brainless left (who in Houellebecq’s near future are recognized to be running on intellectual fumes), but from the conservative souls of the center-right.

Kaplan is a relatively hardheaded analyst, who has been everywhere, so this article of his is striking. (The possibility that Kaplan is trolling readers with self-parody can’t be dismissed.)

It included North Africa.

That might have come as a surprise to Herodotus, not to mention the Sons of Noah.

Look, the ancient world recognized geographic and cultural differences among Europe, Asia, and Africa. Herodotus’ seminal history of the Persian wars is built, of course, around a (no doubt biased and tendentious, yet highly relevant) distinction between Asian despotism and European liberty.

Rome ruled over parts of all three continents not because they were culturally identical, but because it could.

Indeed, early in the fifth century a.d., when Saint Augustine lived in what is today Algeria, North Africa was as much a center of Christianity as Italy or Greece.

There’s long been a theory that the 5th Century theological rivalry between Augustine of Hippo and Pelagius of the British Isles reflects enduring ideological differences between the Middle East versus Western Europe. It popped up in the Clive Owen movie King Arthur.

But the swift advance of Islam across North Africa in the seventh and eighth centuries virtually extinguished Christianity there

In truth, extinguishing Christianity seems to be more of a 21st Century phenomenon.

, thus severing the Mediterranean region into two civilizational halves, with the “Middle Sea” a hard border between them rather than a unifying force.

Islam instituted a long era of conquest, piracy, and slaveraiding on the Mediterranean. Italian fishing villages are built on top of mountains to slow Islamic slavers from kidnapping them.

… In sum, “the West” emerged in northern Europe (albeit in a very slow and tortuous manner) mainly after Islam had divided the Mediterranean world.

Islam did much more than geographically define Europe, however. Denys Hay, a British historian, explained in a brilliant though obscure book published in 1957, Europe: The Emergence of an Idea, that European unity began with the concept (exemplified by the Song of Roland) of a Christendom in “inevitable opposition” to Islam—a concept that culminated in the Crusades.

The Song of Roland (and its descendant Orlando Furioso), along with El Cid, fancifully describe battles against invading Muslims in Dark Age Europe.

The scholar Edward Said took this point further, writing in his book Orientalism in 1978 that Islam had defined Europe culturally, by showing Europe what it was against. Europe’s very identity, in other words, was built in significant measure on a sense of superiority to the Muslim Arab world on its periphery. Imperialism proved the ultimate expression of this evolution: Early modern Europe, starting with Napoleon, conquered the Middle East, then dispatched scholars and diplomats to study Islamic civilization, classifying it as something beautiful, fascinating, and—most crucial—inferior.

But since Said’s time, we have learned that Islamic civilization is not inferior, and may be superior — see the latest ISIS video for proof.

A classical geography is reasserting itself, as terrorism and migration reunite North Africa and the Levant with Europe.

In the postcolonial era, Europe’s sense of cultural preeminence was buttressed by the new police states of North Africa and the Levant. With these dictatorships holding their peoples prisoner inside secure borders—borders artificially drawn by European colonial agents—

Uhm … I can think of two examples of Arab dictators not allowing transit of their countries by foreigners — Egypt under Mubarak and the latest dictator didn’t allow black Africans to walk into Israel, but the Muslim Brotherhood did, causing Israel to build fences; and Berlusconi bribed Kaddafi to not let black Africans set sail from Libya. But, in general, Arab dictators had few objections to their own citizens migrating to Europe and earning hard currency.

Another way to look at this is that the anarchy encouraged by the West in the name of the Arab Spring broke down Syria and Libya, encouraging Syrians to head for Europe. But even that is overstated in that there has been little flow of Libyans rather than sub-Saharans coming through Libya; and the “Syrian” refugee crisis is overstated with large fractions of the “Syrians” making hegira to Europe actually being economic migrant impostors from other countries.

Europeans could lecture Arabs about human rights without worrying about the possibility of messy democratic experiments that could lead to significant migration.

Some Europeans did worry about significant migration.

Significant migration is inevitable as long as other parts of the world are crappier and faster growing than Europe and Europe unilaterally ideologically disarms itself of having any concept of the right of collective self-defense. Yet, the experience of Israel, which is geographically much more vulnerable to migration flows than is Europe, shows that all it takes for a modern state to defend itself against hegira is self-confidence.

Precisely because the Arabs lacked human rights, the Europeans felt at once superior to and secure from them.

Islam is now helping to undo what it once helped to create. A classical geography is organically reasserting itself, as the forces of terrorism and human migration reunite the Mediterranean Basin, including North Africa and the Levant, with Europe.

Except for Israel. Funny how that works …

Today, hundreds of thousands of Muslims who have no desire to be Christian are filtering into economically stagnant European states, threatening to undermine the fragile social peace. Though Europe’s elites have for decades used idealistic rhetoric to deny the forces of religion and ethnicity, those were the very forces that provided European states with their own internal cohesion.

Meanwhile, the new migration, driven by war and state collapse, is erasing the distinction between the imperial centers and their former colonies. Orientalism, through which one culture appropriated and dominated another, is slowly evaporating in a world of cosmopolitan interactions and comparative studies, as Said intuited it might.

Or, perhaps, to know the cabdrivers of Rotherham and Malmo is to become disillusioned with the pleasant Orientalist fantasies of Delacroix, Kipling, Mozart, Verdi, and Byron?

Europe has responded by artificially reconstructing national-cultural identities on the extreme right and left, to counter the threat from the civilization it once dominated.

Or, more accurately, European elites have scored a massive own goal on their own peoples.

Although the idea of an end to history—with all its ethnic and territorial disputes—turns out to have been a fantasy, this realization is no excuse for a retreat into nationalism. The cultural purity that Europe craves in the face of the Muslim-refugee influx is simply impossible in a world of increasing human interactions.

Except for Israel …

“The West,” if it does have a meaning beyond geography, manifests a spirit of ever more inclusive liberalism.

Or maybe not. Perhaps “liberty” and “inclusiveness” are contradictory? The Roman Empire, for example, was long on inclusiveness and short on liberty.

Just as in the 19th century there was no going back to feudalism, there is no going back now to nationalism, not without courting disaster.

One striking Dog That Does Not Bark is the word that never gets mentioned by those saying Europeans can’t go back to nationalism because that will lead to the resumption of wars among Europeans countries: continentalism. Why not encourage Europeans to unify in self-defense against hegira? Rather than the Chancellor of Germany stabbing the other nations of Europe in the back on a whim, why not encourage European states to work together to build perimeter defenses of the Continent?

But European continentalism is unthinkable because it’s tantamount to European racialism, which is the worst thing in the world. The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.

The question is thus posed: What, in a civilizational sense, will replace Rome? For while empire, as Said documented, certainly had its evils, its very ability to govern vast multiethnic spaces around the Mediterranean provided a solution of sorts that no longer exists.

Europe must now find some other way to dynamically incorporate the world of Islam without diluting its devotion to the rule-of-law-based system that arose in Europe’s north, a system in which individual rights and agency are uppermost in a hierarchy of needs. If it cannot evolve in the direction of universal values, there will be only the dementia of ideologies and coarse nationalisms to fill the void. This would signal the end of “the West” in Europe.

Well, there is one set of universal values that would be satisfactory to the migrant masses from Asia and Africa currently making hegira into Europe: Islam. Obviously, the migrant Muslim masses don’t seem to be in any hurry to give up their version of universal values. Perhaps if Europeans are lectured hard enough that Resistance Is Racist, then universal values can rule all sides of the Mediterranean.

That’s the solution at the end of Submission: the Roman imperium is restored via the Islamification of Europe.

Like I said, there’s a good chance that Kaplan is trolling, and that resemblances to Submission are intentional.

 
• Tags: Books, Houellebecq 
Hide 341 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Ed says:

    One of the themes of “Submission” is how much the French elites, and on the right as well as the left, want to be Islamicized.

    Because we are the cultural heirs of northwest European, we tend to think of the Roman Empire as ending when they withdrew from northwestern Europe. They continued to dominate the Mediterannean until the Arabs overran the southern and eastern shores of the sea in the 7th century. There is a story in Muslim histories of the time about how Mohammed wrote to the Roman Emperor at the time, Heraclius, encouraging him to convert, and Heraclius was interested but talked out of it by his advisors.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jeremiahjohnbalaya
    One of the themes of “Submission” is how much the French elites, and on the right as well as the left, want to be Islamicized.

    Could this be a thing? Is it possible that, with socialist policy all but ubiquitous, Earth Day coming around only once a year, recycling becoming ordinary, and global warming a distant dream, is it possible that these sorts of people do actually yearn for something even more rigid? Could they actually want to submit to Islam?

    Maybe I should read this book.
    , @flyingtiger
    Heraclius politely declined. The Persian emperor, who received the same request, demanded that they find this madman and kill him.
    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
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/robert-d-kaplan-goes-full-submission-in-the-atlantic/#comment-1390740
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Sarkozy pushed for this idea – a “Mediterranean Union”:

    ” Sarkozy pushes Mediterranean Union ”

    http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0824/p07s02-woeu.html

    The deep blue waters of the Mediterranean Sea connect three continents and 21 countries with a combined population of more than 400 million. But can this vast and diverse region – with Christians, Muslims, and Jews; Africans, Europeans, and Arabs – operate as a coherent political entity?

    That’s the idea that French President Nicolas Sarkozy has been touting in his first three months in office. Launching his presidency with big ideas, he’s proposed the creation of a “Mediterranean Union” to address common regional issues such as immigration, terrorism, environmental degradation, and economic development. Despite its hazy outlines, the plan appears to be gathering momentum on opposite sides of the sea.

    Read More
    • Replies: @berserker
    Something else that Sarkozy pushed for is racial interbreeding: https://youtu.be/I8yaiN6ew_g
    - I cannot vouch for the translation.
    - I am sure he will be the first to offer his children for the project.

    The Mediterranean Union idea appears to have its origins in the Barcelona Declaration: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=URISERV:r15001
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Warrior Politics-style imperial bushwhacking dropped a hornets’ nest into Europe’s lap and here’s Kaplan back to tell us we should buck up and enjoy it. I wonder how all these itinerant Sunnis feel about the guy who spent a decade advocating drone strikes and special forces wetworks squads?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. Yak-15 says:

    European imperialism was bad, Islamic imperialism is good.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    Imperialism, as leftist academics describe it, is rooted in Marx's view of it. Marx thought capitalism needed more markets, so it sought colonies. Subsequent communists thought that the fall of imperialism via 'wars of national liberation' would expose the foundations of capitalism, leading to the World Revolution.

    When it comes to Islam, there is no desire for an elite Muslim minority to 'civilize' a population of kuffar barbarians. The entire society is to become a Sunni caliphate that speaks Arabic, with a substantial influx of foriegn Y chromosomes. Furthermore, Islam wants the same World Revolution.

    While it isn't pure communism, it has enough to keep the fellow travelers on board.


    *My personal view is that any sympathy and potential conversion to Islam from the right-of-center would come from the Shi'a direction. The Shia clerical system is aristocratic and clearly defined, and the Shia have the nation of Iran, "land of Aryans".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Hepp says:

    These historical types are weird. I knew some right leaning history professors who valued patriotism and heroism. But it never seemed to strike them that while French, the British, and Germans killed each other in the name of ruling their own countries, now these same peoples are just handing over their countries to completely alien races.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Romanian
    Dominique Venner is a good exception. His last work has been translated into English.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Herodotus distinguished groups such as the “Keltoi” from the Greeks. He didn’t write about them as “Europeans”.

    The Carthaginians were originally from the eastern Mediterranean and had colonies in North Africa and Iberia and Southwestern Europe. When Hannibal and Carthage waged war against Rome, they had Iberian, Celtic, and other European allies against the Romans.

    The Romans waged war against Britons, Gauls, and Germans with Arab and African soldiers.

    Europe as a geopolitical-cultural bloc really emerges in the Medieval period out of the Catholic Church.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Casey

    Europe as a geopolitical-cultural bloc really emerges in the Medieval period out of the Catholic Church.
     
    Correct, and we should keep saying it, while the Holy Father accrues what moral capital he can (since he literally can't do anything else, policy wise).

    But European continentalism is unthinkable because it’s tantamount to European racialism, which is the worst thing in the world. The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.
     
    I'm glad Steve gave this professorial essay a full treatment, because it (and he) suggest a few points close to the heart, mine I mean.

    Prior to the Reformation, Europe was basically a Roman Catholic Caliphate. The values that it defined itself against were not primarily Islamic or Arabian, but Jewish. (And very quickly those were the values Islam defined itself against, just as it yearned to establish itself as a caliphate, to the extent histories I read haven't been retconned by anti-semites.)

    Those values, back then, were understood to reduce to the sinfulness of usury. And it's always good to remind people that what Shakespeare's Shylock demanded from delinquent debtors was historically accurate: Jewish moneylenders were barbaric bankers.

    The history of Europe is, in a blazing way, the history of how a culture fructifies against and amidst usury. This is exactly what Ezra Pound's Cantos are about. Art sought patrons when it could not seek usurers. Artists created Europe's identity by making Cathedrals that didn't stand a chance to make a profit. If you can derive a rule about history from the cultural monuments that give Europe it's identity as much as the pyramids are yet still Egypts identity, it would be you must cut out the moneymen if you want true identiy; their must be patrons, and those patrons must not assent to Jewish taste. Elsewise you have entertainments, nickelodeons, ect.

    The history of the Islamic caliphate is the history of a people lacking a single identity. And I'd argue that has everything to do with Art too.

    , @Andrew
    "Europe as a geopolitical-cultural bloc really emerges in the Medieval period out of the Catholic Church."

    This definition of Europe essentially identifies it as "Francia" which can be defined exactly as the non-Roman and non-Russian part of the European landmass.

    The cultural contrast already existed at the time of Alexander the Great as a distinction between Germano-Celtic areas in the north and west and Greco-Roman and Carthaginian areas in the south and east, so it is not an invention of the Catholic Church. The only thing the Catholic Church did was to define its exact outline - the ethno-cultural fault between the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic running between Serbia and Croatia, around the Carpathian mountains, up the Bug and down the Narva River, and splitting the Finnic peninsula from Russia. Also, within the Catholic part, the "Otherness" of what later became the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies" and together with the former Muslim areas of Spain and the rest of Catholic Europe was also always apparent and remains so to this day.

    The same approximate dichotomy existed between the Merovingians and Justinian's Empire, between Charlemagne and the Muslims and East Romans, and the Hapsburgs and France together versus the Ottomans and Russians.

    Ancient Germans and Celts did not get a chance to write much preserved history, so whether or not the were a geopolitical-cultural bloc from the start is not well known although trade patterns would tend to indicate it. They certainly acted like one as soon as they conquered the western part of the Empire - recognizing themselves as one united nation and the Romans as an "other".

    The differences in thinking of northwest Europe from Mediterranean Europe, near Asia and North Africa has been contrasted repeatedly throughout history.
    , @Marcus
    Correct, it was "Christendom," not "Europe."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Leftist conservative [AKA "Make Unz.com Great Again"] says: • Website

    Significant migration is inevitable as long as other parts of the world are crappier and faster growing than Europe and Europe unilaterally ideologically disarms itself of having any concept of the right of collective self-defense. Yet, the experience of Israel, which is geographically much more vulnerable to migration flows than is Europe, shows that all it takes for a modern state to defend itself against hegira is self-confidence.

    kids in Israel have not had their heads crammed full of anti-Israeli propaganda. Whereas in america and western europe white kids are told that whites are the demons of history and that immigrants and nonwhites are good and holy. Just coincidentally, that propaganda makes white kids grow up to be ashamed of their race. And just coincidentally that reservoir of white guilt makes it easier for the corporations to get more immigrants into america and western europe. And just coincidentally that surplus pool of workers and consumers suppresses wage growth and increases sales, which increases corporate profits.

    Oh, wait. I am sorry. I am on unz.com, and everyone here (except me) seems to believe that the goal of the elite regarding immigration is just to get more Democrat/Liberal voters and dependent welfare state clients, and that the GOP/conservatives are just too stupid to figure out what the liberals are doing. Yeah, that sounds good.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Taco

    Oh, wait. I am sorry. I am on unz.com, and everyone here (except me) seems to believe that the goal of the elite regarding immigration is just to get more Democrat/Liberal voters and dependent welfare state clients, and that the GOP/conservatives are just too stupid to figure out what the liberals are doing. Yeah, that sounds good.
     
    I think most of us here realize it is a two prong attack.

    the left gets their voters/social services customers, corporations get cheap labor.
    , @Maj. Kong
    Yes you are on unz, not on redstate, nro, the blaze or breitbart.

    Some of us do remember it was Bush and McCain pushing the amnesty bill in 2006-07, and Rubio in 2013.
    , @Hunsdon
    Make Unz Great Again said: Yeah, that sounds good.

    Hunsdon said: Either you have not been here very long, or your reading comprehension skills are quite poor, or maybe you just haven't been paying attention. Long time readers might remember our host talking about the high-low coalition, about crops rotting in the fields!---or about Angelo Mozilo.
    , @Harry Baldwin
    Another one of these "No one here but me gets it!" guys.
    , @Jay
    Ranters are rarely accurate in their characterizations, nor logically precise. Tone is a good indicator of content.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. “Except for Israel …”

    And Japan. “We do not want to find ourselves in the situation of France” – Akira Morita, Director-General of the National Institute of Population and Social Security Research.

    http://www.challenges.fr/monde/asie-pacifique/20160407.CHA7521/le-japon-fait-contre-mauvaise-fortune-immigration.html

    Really the current borderlessness only afflicts the West. The rest of the world are very strict about their borders.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "“Except for Israel …”

    And Japan. “We do not want to find ourselves in the situation of France” – Akira Morita, Director-General of the National Institute of Population and Social Security Research.

    http://www.challenges.fr/monde/asie-pacifique/20160407.CHA7521/le-japon-fait-contre-mauvaise-fortune-immigration.html

    Really the current borderlessness only afflicts the West. The rest of the world are very strict about their borders."

    Most Eastern European countries are very strict about their borders, that is why they did not take in too many MENA refugees.

    Most Eastern European countries are very ethnically homogeneous if you exclude the Gypsies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. The relevant book here is Mohammed and Charlemagne, Revisited, about how Arab cutting of trade networks created the Dark Ages (favorite factoid: cutting the supply of papyrus led to a collapse in commerce in France, as there was no cheap way to keep accounts. The author points out that French royal archives from before the 7th century are on papyrus.). Emmet Scott also points out that Arab herders, unused to agriculture, allowed their flocks to graze newly-planted fields, eating the new supply of wheat, causing a collapse in agriculture and population. The denuded fields washed into the Mediterranean and formed the Younger Fill.

    Of course, Mohammed might never have existed if the Christian Roman Empire of 550AD hadn’t focused so much on fighting other (Arian) Christians and had instead proselytized so that Medina and Mecca had been Christian cities. That was their charge, and they preferred to sit in Constantinople and live in luxury instead.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clio

    about how Arab cutting of trade networks created the Dark Ages favorite factoid: cutting the supply of papyrus led to a collapse in commerce in France, as there was no cheap way to keep accounts. The author points out that French royal archives from before the 7th century are on papyrus.

     

    This is complete nonsense; papyrus grows in Sicily to this day.
    , @Andrew
    "Of course, Mohammed might never have existed if the Christian Roman Empire of 550AD hadn’t focused so much on fighting other (Arian) Christians and had instead proselytized so that Medina and Mecca had been Christian cities. "

    There were numerous Christian throughout Arabia at the time of Mohammad and they had been there for hundreds of years at that time. They were under the Patriarch of Seleucia-Cstesiphon in the Persian Empire, and thus part of what was call "The Catholic Church of the East" as opposed to the "Catholic Church of Rome." The remnants of these Christians are the Christians of Assyria and Kerala.

    The Christian Church in the Roman Empire ~AD 550 was convulsed with trying to reconcile the Monophysites, who formed the majority of the Christians in Egypt, Syria, and Armenia (i.e. the entire border of the Empire with its main rival - Persia) to the official faith of the Catholic Church (Chalcedonianism). In doing this, it was also separating itself from the autonomously governed Church province inside the Persian Empire, so it would hardly have been sending missionaries into areas controlled by or under the influence of the Parthians.

    The fighting against other Christians, as you put it, was the successful effort to liberate Africa, Italy, Spain, and the Mediterranean islands from the rule of the German tribes. I suppose that you can call the Arians Christian in a technical sense, in the same way that Unitarians and Mormons are (those are the two faiths closest to Arianism). These were of course rich provinces full of Romans involuntarily separated from the Empire. I don't think I understand why you think Justinian's reuniting the Empire was not an important task. The Empire wasn't going to become stronger by losing these provinces forever.
    , @Expletive Deleted
    Book of Kells, Durrow, Echternach etc, wouldn't have lasted long on papyrus (of which even the godforsaken Picts were at least aware, used as mould slips in coin-forging and other sundry craft purposes).
    Houses of Parliament burnt down in 1834, by overenthusiastic decommissioning of piles of mediaeval tally-sticks by the Exchequer.
    Materials required for personalised inland revenue record?; 1 bush or hedge; 1 knife, axe or billhook; a quantity of fingers (and possibly removal of boots), or pebbles, for calculation.

    Some historians must spend their entire lives in the library as disembodied heads on life support.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Taco says:
    @Leftist conservative

    Significant migration is inevitable as long as other parts of the world are crappier and faster growing than Europe and Europe unilaterally ideologically disarms itself of having any concept of the right of collective self-defense. Yet, the experience of Israel, which is geographically much more vulnerable to migration flows than is Europe, shows that all it takes for a modern state to defend itself against hegira is self-confidence.

     

    kids in Israel have not had their heads crammed full of anti-Israeli propaganda. Whereas in america and western europe white kids are told that whites are the demons of history and that immigrants and nonwhites are good and holy. Just coincidentally, that propaganda makes white kids grow up to be ashamed of their race. And just coincidentally that reservoir of white guilt makes it easier for the corporations to get more immigrants into america and western europe. And just coincidentally that surplus pool of workers and consumers suppresses wage growth and increases sales, which increases corporate profits.

    Oh, wait. I am sorry. I am on unz.com, and everyone here (except me) seems to believe that the goal of the elite regarding immigration is just to get more Democrat/Liberal voters and dependent welfare state clients, and that the GOP/conservatives are just too stupid to figure out what the liberals are doing. Yeah, that sounds good.

    Oh, wait. I am sorry. I am on unz.com, and everyone here (except me) seems to believe that the goal of the elite regarding immigration is just to get more Democrat/Liberal voters and dependent welfare state clients, and that the GOP/conservatives are just too stupid to figure out what the liberals are doing. Yeah, that sounds good.

    I think most of us here realize it is a two prong attack.

    the left gets their voters/social services customers, corporations get cheap labor.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Big Bill
    Don't feed the trolls. He obviously doesn't visit iSteve. He just wants to do a bit of virtue preening.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Maj. Kong says:
    @Yak-15
    European imperialism was bad, Islamic imperialism is good.

    Imperialism, as leftist academics describe it, is rooted in Marx’s view of it. Marx thought capitalism needed more markets, so it sought colonies. Subsequent communists thought that the fall of imperialism via ‘wars of national liberation’ would expose the foundations of capitalism, leading to the World Revolution.

    When it comes to Islam, there is no desire for an elite Muslim minority to ‘civilize’ a population of kuffar barbarians. The entire society is to become a Sunni caliphate that speaks Arabic, with a substantial influx of foriegn Y chromosomes. Furthermore, Islam wants the same World Revolution.

    While it isn’t pure communism, it has enough to keep the fellow travelers on board.

    *My personal view is that any sympathy and potential conversion to Islam from the right-of-center would come from the Shi’a direction. The Shia clerical system is aristocratic and clearly defined, and the Shia have the nation of Iran, “land of Aryans”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew
    "*My personal view is that any sympathy and potential conversion to Islam from the right-of-center would come from the Shi’a direction. The Shia clerical system is aristocratic and clearly defined, and the Shia have the nation of Iran, “land of Aryans”."

    You are exactly right. The Shia are much closer in thinking to traditional Catholic and Orthodox religion and culture than the Sunni.

    Rightists in America have been blinded to this by the fierce rivalry of Iran and Hezbollah with Israel and America since the Iranian revolution and the slavish subservience of American rightists to Israeli policy goals.

    The Syrian war, however, has exposed this reality by contrasting the Alawite/Shia/Druze/Christian Assad regime with the barbarism of ISIS (and frankly of Saudi Arabia), which is the full reality of Sunni Islam down through the ages. There aren't many people on the right who have any sympathy for the civilization that ISIS and the Saudis want to create and impose on us. On the other hand, I think many people could see themselves being able to get along with the Shia if a man like Assad were in charge.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. @Ed
    One of the themes of "Submission" is how much the French elites, and on the right as well as the left, want to be Islamicized.

    Because we are the cultural heirs of northwest European, we tend to think of the Roman Empire as ending when they withdrew from northwestern Europe. They continued to dominate the Mediterannean until the Arabs overran the southern and eastern shores of the sea in the 7th century. There is a story in Muslim histories of the time about how Mohammed wrote to the Roman Emperor at the time, Heraclius, encouraging him to convert, and Heraclius was interested but talked out of it by his advisors.

    One of the themes of “Submission” is how much the French elites, and on the right as well as the left, want to be Islamicized.

    Could this be a thing? Is it possible that, with socialist policy all but ubiquitous, Earth Day coming around only once a year, recycling becoming ordinary, and global warming a distant dream, is it possible that these sorts of people do actually yearn for something even more rigid? Could they actually want to submit to Islam?

    Maybe I should read this book.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Maj. Kong says:
    @Leftist conservative

    Significant migration is inevitable as long as other parts of the world are crappier and faster growing than Europe and Europe unilaterally ideologically disarms itself of having any concept of the right of collective self-defense. Yet, the experience of Israel, which is geographically much more vulnerable to migration flows than is Europe, shows that all it takes for a modern state to defend itself against hegira is self-confidence.

     

    kids in Israel have not had their heads crammed full of anti-Israeli propaganda. Whereas in america and western europe white kids are told that whites are the demons of history and that immigrants and nonwhites are good and holy. Just coincidentally, that propaganda makes white kids grow up to be ashamed of their race. And just coincidentally that reservoir of white guilt makes it easier for the corporations to get more immigrants into america and western europe. And just coincidentally that surplus pool of workers and consumers suppresses wage growth and increases sales, which increases corporate profits.

    Oh, wait. I am sorry. I am on unz.com, and everyone here (except me) seems to believe that the goal of the elite regarding immigration is just to get more Democrat/Liberal voters and dependent welfare state clients, and that the GOP/conservatives are just too stupid to figure out what the liberals are doing. Yeah, that sounds good.

    Yes you are on unz, not on redstate, nro, the blaze or breitbart.

    Some of us do remember it was Bush and McCain pushing the amnesty bill in 2006-07, and Rubio in 2013.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson

    Bush and McCain pushing the amnesty bill in 2006-07, and Rubio in 2013.
     
    Once you convince yourself that you are the cynosure, the rest naturally follows.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    Read More
    • Replies: @Cracker
    Spetsnaz type of operation....
    , @bomag
    Quite a story: a fake citizen with fake credentials does fake work at a state lab, and her supervisors say nothing; no doubt in service to racial sensibilities.

    It is time to rephrase Blackstone: "It is better that one hundred mistakes go free than to correct one vibrant."
    , @Penguinchip
    In my peregrinactions through life, it has come to my notice that Trinidadian's are pretty much malignant garbage. Think Nikki Minaj.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. Pat Casey says:
    @Anonymous
    Herodotus distinguished groups such as the "Keltoi" from the Greeks. He didn't write about them as "Europeans".

    The Carthaginians were originally from the eastern Mediterranean and had colonies in North Africa and Iberia and Southwestern Europe. When Hannibal and Carthage waged war against Rome, they had Iberian, Celtic, and other European allies against the Romans.

    The Romans waged war against Britons, Gauls, and Germans with Arab and African soldiers.

    Europe as a geopolitical-cultural bloc really emerges in the Medieval period out of the Catholic Church.

    Europe as a geopolitical-cultural bloc really emerges in the Medieval period out of the Catholic Church.

    Correct, and we should keep saying it, while the Holy Father accrues what moral capital he can (since he literally can’t do anything else, policy wise).

    But European continentalism is unthinkable because it’s tantamount to European racialism, which is the worst thing in the world. The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.

    I’m glad Steve gave this professorial essay a full treatment, because it (and he) suggest a few points close to the heart, mine I mean.

    Prior to the Reformation, Europe was basically a Roman Catholic Caliphate. The values that it defined itself against were not primarily Islamic or Arabian, but Jewish. (And very quickly those were the values Islam defined itself against, just as it yearned to establish itself as a caliphate, to the extent histories I read haven’t been retconned by anti-semites.)

    Those values, back then, were understood to reduce to the sinfulness of usury. And it’s always good to remind people that what Shakespeare’s Shylock demanded from delinquent debtors was historically accurate: Jewish moneylenders were barbaric bankers.

    The history of Europe is, in a blazing way, the history of how a culture fructifies against and amidst usury. This is exactly what Ezra Pound’s Cantos are about. Art sought patrons when it could not seek usurers. Artists created Europe’s identity by making Cathedrals that didn’t stand a chance to make a profit. If you can derive a rule about history from the cultural monuments that give Europe it’s identity as much as the pyramids are yet still Egypts identity, it would be you must cut out the moneymen if you want true identiy; their must be patrons, and those patrons must not assent to Jewish taste. Elsewise you have entertainments, nickelodeons, ect.

    The history of the Islamic caliphate is the history of a people lacking a single identity. And I’d argue that has everything to do with Art too.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    I think Christians were a little more worried about Roman paganism before Constantine, and Islam as soon as it got going.
    , @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Yeah, hold it, hold it. Many of those High Middle Ages Cathedrals were financed not by usury nor patrons, but by the Church via theology (the Indulgences, which helped pave the way for Lutherism in particular). The Catholic Church during the Middle Ages was the one institution that consciously attempted to build itself on the ruins of the Roman Empire in the West, at least stylistically. As an organization, over time it became very wealthy and owned near 25% of the total land in Western Europe. In addition to its vast wealth it was a major bureaucracy and had its own cannon law and religious courts in most Western nations, provinces, etc. And of course the Church had its own type of fundraising even then (Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales shows a late 14th century pilgrimage to the shrine of Thomas Becket; his Tomb/shrine was a major source of fundraising for the Church in Medieval England.) So while the Church prohibited usury, they had their own methods for raising the funds.

    Just sayin.

    From the start, Islam had an identity, and it was Arabian as Mohammed declared the Arabians to be the most perfect of peoples. All other tribes were allowed to come along for the ride, but they would always be considered inferior culturally and racially to the Arabs. After all, their most holy prophet was Arabian and he was the closest to god.

    , @Charles Erwin Wilson

    while the Holy Father accrues what moral capital he can (since he literally can’t do anything else, policy wise).
     
    Really? It looks to me as if he is spending moral capital like a sailor on shore leave. The Pope has dissuaded me of much of my former affection for the Church of Rome built up by JP II and Benedict XVI.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Bill P says:

    We are on the cusp of another spiritual cataclysm, and the vast majority of our conservative commentators have opted out of the game. To do what? Leave it to Pope Francis and the liberals? Leave it to the Muslims? The left-nihilists?

    There’s no spiritual response from the West to what’s happening. It’s like a total surrender. What are we supposed to rally behind Ted Cruz who’ll fix it all by fighting Russia for Israel (or whatever other psychotic, non-sequitur garbage he comes up with)?

    Islam is the most democratic of all the Abrahamic faiths. This point is lost on the Ross Douthats of the world. Christianity is fundamentally aristocratic, yet it has totally abdicated its throne.

    So we are a people unmoored, without leadership, living in a state of spiritual anarchy, ripe for the picking. If this doesn’t change, we’ll lose. We can’t throw facts and opinions at our enemies and hope that moves people’s hearts and souls. It’s a hopeless endeavor. Trump’s popularity stems from this yearning for conviction that’s been lost since the Berlin Wall fell down. Right or wrong, we need faith more than ever, and we neglect it to our peril and probable doom.

    Does anyone besides me and a few other weirdos like Houellebecq even recognize this?

    Read More
    • Replies: @newrouter
    >Islam is the most democratic of all the Abrahamic faiths.<

    let's vote to stone the infidel/adulterer/homo schmuck!!11!!.
    , @Intelligent Dasein
    I've recognized this and continuously talked about it for the last ten years, and I've been so battered by arguing with idiots, here and elsewhere, that sometimes I no longer remember why I started.
    , @The Last Real Calvinist
    I agree with you entirely that the crisis of the postmodern, post-industrial West is spiritual. This is the only way of understanding the irrational, self-defeating actions of western leaders and nations. They are heretical post-Christians who are trying to replace Jesus as the protagonist of the Christian narrative of sin, salvation, and eternity (i.e. utopia, in their clouded vision).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    What would it take to reform Muslim societies to make them compatible with Western civilization?

    To begin with, you would have to end polygamy and cousin marriage, break up the clans,
    outlaw the hijab along with the sequestration of women, and gradually develop representative national institutions that work with, rather than at cross purposes, to the tribal groupings that compose these societies. You would also have to ban the Koran, destroy all the mosques, imprison all imams and jihadis for life, throw the Kaaba stone into the sea and level Mecca to the ground. Madrases would be closed and replaced with a system of secular public education. In place of Islam the original, pure religion of Abraham (hanifya) would be reintroduced as it existed in that part of the world before Muhammad appeared on the scene. As for Muhammad himself, he would be disavowed as an evil false prophet in the same category as Hitler and Mao-Tse Tung.

    Clearly it would take generations, if not centuries, to accomplish these changes. It could only be done under the aegis of an authoritarian central government like the one Ataturk established in Turkey.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    And it still doesn't seem to have happened in Turkey after 90 years.
    , @Anon
    "What would it take to reform Muslim societies to make them compatible with Western civilization? To begin with, you would have to end polygamy and cousin marriage, break up the clans, outlaw the hijab along with the sequestration of women, and gradually develop representative national institutions that work with, rather than at cross purposes, to the tribal groupings that compose these societies."

    Cousin marriage. Ewwww.
    As for polygamy, it is rare in the Muslim world. Not a real problem.

    As for 'western civilization', what is it?
    If you mean WC up to the 50s, even 60s, okay. Good stuff.

    But what is WC today? Rap music? Black thugs in sports? Tattoos and piercing? Meth? Potheads? Kids with access to porn? Interracism? 'White guilt'? Cuckold culture? Miley Cyrus and Walt Disney promoting whore fashion for young girls? Emma Sulkowicz? Media that give us zimmerman as white guy and Jackie Coakley as victim? Media lies about WMD and destruction of entire nations? Hysteria about Trump as Hitler? Slut pride and rape culture hysteria both? Black Lives Matter? Michael Brown as Hands Up gentle giant? NYT lies about immigration? 'Gay marriage' and trannies using women's restroom? and we can go on and on.

    I don't like Muslim culture, but today's WC is sick, sick, sick.
    Also, WC is now about whites hating whites and cheering their own destruction. It is white college students cheering Clinton for saying whites will be minority in the future. That is WC.
    If WC is about suicide, then Muslims are for WC since they attack the West with terrorism. But let's remember that Western invasion killed many more Muslims than Muslims killed whites by terrorism.

    I don't like Muslim view of women, but why should Muslim fathers allow their daughters to end up like so many hook-up trash in America? Where is family honor?
    Muslim girls should get cues from Lena Dunham or Brian William's rimjobbing-on-TV daughter?
    , @Ed
    "What would it take to reform Muslim societies to make them compatible with Western civilization?"

    This is @17 but it is a complicated question that gets to the heart of the thread.

    The complexity comes from the commentator, I am assuming from the tone of the rest of the comment, confounding "Muslim" with "Arab" and also "Western civilization" with "modern civilization". These things go together but are not quite the same.

    To take the Muslim/ Arab distinction first, most Muslims in the world are in fact not Arab. A Westerner can convert to Islam. Bosnia and Albania are examples of Western places that are Muslim, though they are minor weird examples that shows this is barely possible, but unlikely. However, Islam is infused with Arabic culture, and of course its scriptures are written in Arabic, so its easy for both its followers and opponents to confuse the two.

    Arabic culture pre-dates Islam of course, and never was considered to be part of Western civilization or its Hellenic (Greek and Roman) precursor. And in classical times (before Constantine and before Mohamed, with a long transition between the two), the Greeks at least made a distinction between the places that had adopted Greek language and culture, and the different civilizations on the eastern and southern shores of the Med. The Greeks were often allied with Egypt and Lydia in Asia Minor, but antagonistic towards the Persians and the Phonecians in what is now Lebanon and Tunisia. Herodotus wrote about the war against Persia and their Punic fleet. The Arabs were farther away, but definitely within the Persian-Punic orbit, as were incidentally the Jews of that time.

    Rome was not a Greek city, but modeled itself on a Greek city state, and after some back and forth assimilated into Hellenic civilization. The Syrians and Egyptians conquered by Alexander the Great never assimilated, though Greek colonists were sent to both places, and throughout the thousand years these places were under Macedonian control there is a long record of rebellions and support for religious heresies. They welcomed first the Persian and then the Arab armies that arrived in these places in the seventh century. The remaining Christians in these places belong to churches that have separated, for obscure doctrinal reasons, from the Catholic/ Orthodox/ Protestant churches since the fifth century. After the Romans conquered Carthage there were somewhat similar problems with assimilating the former Punic territories in North Africa, to a lessor degree.

    So Kaplan is informed and writes well but is wrong, as is usual with him. The civilizations between Europe and the Near East pre-date Christianity and Islam, and it is the fact that Christianity became associated with the heirs of Greece and Rome (despite mass conversions occurring in Syria and Egypt first), and Islam with the Levant and Persia, that has sharpened the divide between Christianity and Islam, not the other way around. Just looking at their doctrines and ignoring the culture baggage, the two religions have enough overlap that Islam has been described as another Christian heresy.

    Having Arabs join "Western" civilization is unlikely since they have never been part of Western civilization, and this includes the Christian Arabs. With Islam, the problem is all the Arab culture baggage.

    Mohamed was not only an Arab, but unlike Siddharta and unlike Jesus, he had/ kept his connections to powerful tribal figures and became a successful politician. At the end of his life he made a deal with his opponents in the Meccan aristocracy, under which they converted to Islam and allowed Mohamed to go home, in return for taking over his new religion. After the assassination of Mohamed's son-in-law Ali, the Caliphs for a century were all from the family of Mohamed's chief opponents in the Meccan aristocracy. It was they who first wrote down the Koran and assembled Mohamed's sayings (the Hadith) that are not in the Koran.

    Since Mohamed was a practical politician, as were his immediate successors, he was trying to create a function polity with all sorts of rules for behavior. Consider how influential in Christianity Paul's attempts to meditate disputes within various churches became and its easy to see the problem here. An Islamic version of the reformation would have to drop all of this, basically drop the Hadith and keep the Koran. It shouldn't be necessary to destroy the religion to the extent that @17 wants. But otherwise the religion comes with lots of Arabic tribal elements.

    I've overwritten, but to address the Western/ Modern distinction there are similar considerations. Since Europeans settled the Western Hemisphere and started the Industrial Revolution, the fruits of the Age of Discovery and the Industrial Revolution have been heavily intertwined with Western or European civilization. With non-Western countries like Japan and Turkey, or even mostly Western countries such as Russia and Mexico, its been a recurring debate about whether you can modernize, but separate modernity from Western civilization and get one without the other. Like with Near Eastern civilization and Islam, in principal you should be able to but in practice its almost impossible.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    “Europe must now find some other way to dynamically incorporate the world of Islam without diluting its devotion to the rule-of-law-based system that arose in Europe’s north, a system in which individual rights and agency are uppermost in a hierarchy of needs. If it cannot evolve in the direction of universal values, there will be only the dementia of ideologies and coarse nationalisms to fill the void. This would signal the end of “the West” in Europe.”

    What are “universal values”? There are some, sure, and they are basic. Humans need to eat, humans need to breath, etc.. But at a cultural and civilization level? I don’t see it. What does he mean? Has it been defined as anything other than a mommy group-hug?

    Likewise, let’s be specific about the “dementia of ideologies and coarse nationalisms”. Is free speech a demented ideology? Is that what he means? Why are nationalisms coarse? Is Israeli nationalism coarse or of course?

    “…devotion to the rule-of-law-based system… in which individual rights and agency are uppermost in a hierarchy of needs”. Unless you are a white European? Who specifically is going to look out for their rights?

    Is he just flapping around big words that sound good to get well paid by the Atlantic? Or selling a darker agenda?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    If 'universal values' are so important, let's begin with an end to the West favoring Jews and Israel. Western sympathies are far too tribalist. It favors the Jewish tribe over other tribes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. George says:

    “Rather than the Chancellor of Germany stabbing the other nations of Europe in the back on a whim”

    Europeans allowed and encouraged wars in Libya, Syria and Afghanistan to name a few. The so called refugee crisis was caused by these wars, and giving the refugees somewhere to go makes maintaining the wars possible. It really is not the camp of the saints situation. The refugee crisis is at minimum a by product of European foreign policy. A foreign policy that has not changed.

    Anytime Germany wants the refugees to go home all they have to do is rebuild the damage they helped produce. While the US Marshal plan is portrayed as do gooding, it reduced the flow of refugees to the US and help reduce the threat of communist take overs in Europe.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iSteveFan
    If you are going to say that you have to say that Turkey, the Gulf States, Israel and Russia are all bombing inside Syria, and so they must take in refugees too. To an extent Turkey is, but they are keeping them in tents until they have transportation to Europe. I don't think the Turks are looking at the Syrians as permanent residents. So I don't buy the argument that Europe must take in these people because of their foreign policy.

    Additionally your description doesn't explain the sub-saharans that are streaming into Europe. A lot are coming from nations that are not in war.

    , @biz
    You have repeated a common but false talking point.

    The migrants streaming into Europe are not refugees fleeing war. First of all, if any were, they ceased to be refugees the minute their feet touched the ground safely in Turkey. Any movement beyond that was to seek economic benefit. But more importantly, the 'fleeing war' explanation does not account for the high number of refugees from Eritrea and other places without a war on, and certainly without a war that can be blamed on the West.
    , @anon

    The so called refugee crisis was caused by these wars
     
    So the neocons are responsible for both the supply and demand?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Pat Casey says:

    well said. I do.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  21. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    “Europe as a geopolitical-cultural bloc really emerges in the Medieval period out of the Catholic Church.”

    While the people, culture, and “civilization” of North Western Europe emerged from the areas surrounding the North Sea.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  22. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Once upon a time I was thoroughly fascinated by Kaplan and read everything by him I could find.

    In his writings on topics where I had some expertise, I came to believe that for all his large erudition, Kaplan’s filter is “is it good for my tribe” and to a lesser extent “is it good for Israel.” Facts that don’t meet this test were simply ignored, no matter how important they are to understanding the topic.

    And there ended my interest in Kaplan.

    Read More
    • Replies: @celt darnell
    Amen, brother. You've summed up his "scholarship" perfectly.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Smitty says:

    The Dracula myth is an allegory for Christian-Islamic conflict, so it’s not as if time slowed the basic dynamic of having Muslim neighbors (they tend to stay psycho, bloodthirsty, and ignorant of the concept of truces or treaties). On another note why is Edward Said not considered a Western intellectual? His books are very Euro-white in their structure, befitting a past chairman of the MLA — despite the terrorist-sounding acronym, not an outft that blows up buses, at least not yet. Ed was an Anglican educated at a Quaker prep school and IIRC played piano… And not really in the Jerry Lee Lewis style either

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Said was the opera critic for The Nation magazine.
    , @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    You really believe that Edward Said would think it a high compliment to be considered a Western Intellectual? Seriously? Now, maybe if he were considered to be a forerunner to Palestinian independence or a major influence for some Islamic nation that overthrew the remaining shackles of Western influence, that'd be a different matter entirely.
    , @Bill B.

    why is Edward Said not considered a Western intellectual? His books are very Euro-white in their structure, befitting a past chairman of the MLA — despite the terrorist-sounding acronym, not an outft that blows up buses, at least not yet. Ed was an Anglican educated at a Quaker prep school and IIRC played piano… And not really in the Jerry Lee Lewis style either
     
    Why is "Ed" considered much at all? He was a charlatan and bigot who attempted to derail the West's ability to understand the Arab world at a particularly crucial moment in history. His peculiarly insidious polemics played an important role in the left's abandonment of the white working classes for an infatuation with 'brown people' as holy beings holding unimpeachable motives.

    That fact that he sucked hard and hypocritically at the teat of Ivy League largesse indicates neither sophistication nor affinity.

    If by Anglican prep school you are referring to his fabled attendance at St. George's School in Jerusalem then Commentary in 1999 established that he had never lived there and had been brought up by his father in Cairo.

    My respect for the Egyptian actor Omar Sharif went up when "Ed" claimed that he had been bulled by him at Victoria College in Cairo.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. iSteveFan says:

    —borders artificially drawn by European colonial agents—

    Didn’t they also artificially draw the borders of modern Israel?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Romanian
    Is artificial just the word we use for more recent border establishments?

    As far as I remember, with the exception of insular folk in small areas and people divided by almost unpassable natural borders, borders have always been artificial, reflecting dowries, conquests, compromises and so on. The result of the border demarcation, if stable enough, would result in a population adapting to that border, maybe even until the border somehow seems "natural" post-fact.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Cracker says:
    @Anon
    vibrant chemistry.

    http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2016/04/12/annie-dookhan-released-prison/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annie_Dookhan

    Spetsnaz type of operation….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. iSteveFan says:

    The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.

    Might this be a reason why Russia is so hated?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.

    Might this be a reason why Russia is so hated?"

    Russians are not very Christian religious. They are as Godless as Western Europeans.

    Has anybody here ever met a Russian bible thumper? A Russian version of Rick Warren?
    , @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Uh, yes, most definitely. I mean, first they wouldn't give total new civil rights to homosexuals, and forget about building separate bathrooms for transgenders.

    Amazing. Stalin's show trials, Ukrainian Famine, the Prague Spring, Hungarian Uprising, etc. didn't upset the liberal orthodoxy but an outright refusal to build new bathrooms for Kaitlyn Jennerskys is just totally unacceptable. I mean, after all, one thing threatens Western values but the others are mere trifles.

    , @Big Bill
    Yes. A strong nationalist Christian Western country is anathema.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. sflicht says:

    Steve, I’ve been reading Bacevich’s latest, so I’m having trouble preventing myself from overfitting to recent history. Nonetheless, the uptick in migration from Africa to Europe seems suspiciously like a direct consequence of ramped up US engagement in Africa — to wit, the rising stature of AFRICOM within the Pentagon establishment, and the gradual escalation of drone warfare in Nigeria, Mauritania, Somalia, etc. And it doesn’t necessarily have to be an *intended* consequence. One should at least consider the possibility that incompetent planners in Arlington VA failed to anticipate an eminently predictable demographic effect of meddling with regional power structures in the Mahgreb and the sub-Sahara. Perhaps grand narratives about the West and Islam with respective capital letters W and I are less important than people not wanting to be droned.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    So, let me get this straight. Bacevich (or whoever) thinks that sub-saharan Africans' fear of drone strikes is causing them to migrate towards the the drone operators? Is that correct?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. SFG says:
    @Pat Casey

    Europe as a geopolitical-cultural bloc really emerges in the Medieval period out of the Catholic Church.
     
    Correct, and we should keep saying it, while the Holy Father accrues what moral capital he can (since he literally can't do anything else, policy wise).

    But European continentalism is unthinkable because it’s tantamount to European racialism, which is the worst thing in the world. The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.
     
    I'm glad Steve gave this professorial essay a full treatment, because it (and he) suggest a few points close to the heart, mine I mean.

    Prior to the Reformation, Europe was basically a Roman Catholic Caliphate. The values that it defined itself against were not primarily Islamic or Arabian, but Jewish. (And very quickly those were the values Islam defined itself against, just as it yearned to establish itself as a caliphate, to the extent histories I read haven't been retconned by anti-semites.)

    Those values, back then, were understood to reduce to the sinfulness of usury. And it's always good to remind people that what Shakespeare's Shylock demanded from delinquent debtors was historically accurate: Jewish moneylenders were barbaric bankers.

    The history of Europe is, in a blazing way, the history of how a culture fructifies against and amidst usury. This is exactly what Ezra Pound's Cantos are about. Art sought patrons when it could not seek usurers. Artists created Europe's identity by making Cathedrals that didn't stand a chance to make a profit. If you can derive a rule about history from the cultural monuments that give Europe it's identity as much as the pyramids are yet still Egypts identity, it would be you must cut out the moneymen if you want true identiy; their must be patrons, and those patrons must not assent to Jewish taste. Elsewise you have entertainments, nickelodeons, ect.

    The history of the Islamic caliphate is the history of a people lacking a single identity. And I'd argue that has everything to do with Art too.

    I think Christians were a little more worried about Roman paganism before Constantine, and Islam as soon as it got going.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Casey
    Who can really say? Probably you're right that's what they were worried about. The point is, what did they say? Go back to basics, the Divine Comedy. Pagans? Did you know Dante never got to read Homer?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. iSteveFan says:

    How Islam Created Europe

    This quote reminded me of a similar quote written a few months back that was covered in an iSteve post. Someone in the NYT (I think) declared that islam has always been a part of America and that islam in effect contributed to the Founding of America. They were suggesting that since some slaves were muslim, and since a couple more muslims washed up on shore, that the muslims were part of the Founding and that the US and islam are inseparable. I might be misquoting, but that is the gist of what I recall.

    Anyway this headline seems similar. It is written in such a way as to portray islam as part and parcel with Europe. My guess is that it is being done like the earlier comment on islam and America to weaken the will of the people to resist further immigration into the USA and Europe of muslims. After all if they created the US and Europe, we can’t keep them out.

    Of course the guy’s description about islam and Europe also let’s the astute reader read between the lines and realize that islam has really been at war with Europe for centuries with a goal of conquering it all. But I imagine the author knows that the racism slur can pretty much guarantee that no one will take away that message.

    BTW, isn’t Turkey trying to get in the EU by playing the same card? They say that the Turks have been a part of Europe for centuries and played a crucial role in their history. Of course they don’t dwell on the fact that their role was one of outside occupier and slave taker.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    "Someone in the NYT (I think) declared that islam has always been a part of America and that islam in effect contributed to the Founding of America. "

    I think the "Someone" you refer to was Obama, who has been spouting this "Islam has always been a part of America" hooey for a while. And yes, his NYT courtiers love to reprint it. And yes, it is transparently false. And yes, he is almost certainly saying it to try to normalize Islamic infiltration and occupation. And yes, Kaplan's also false Islam-is-part-of-Europe meme is probably for the same purpose.

    To be fair, the most reductionist interpretation of the Obama/Kaplan Islam-was-always-part-of- thesis is sort of true, ... Islam has always been part of America/Europe in the same sense that malaria has always been a part of the tropics, or that gravity has always been part of the space program. You know, "Yes, but not in a good way."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. Hunsdon says:
    @Leftist conservative

    Significant migration is inevitable as long as other parts of the world are crappier and faster growing than Europe and Europe unilaterally ideologically disarms itself of having any concept of the right of collective self-defense. Yet, the experience of Israel, which is geographically much more vulnerable to migration flows than is Europe, shows that all it takes for a modern state to defend itself against hegira is self-confidence.

     

    kids in Israel have not had their heads crammed full of anti-Israeli propaganda. Whereas in america and western europe white kids are told that whites are the demons of history and that immigrants and nonwhites are good and holy. Just coincidentally, that propaganda makes white kids grow up to be ashamed of their race. And just coincidentally that reservoir of white guilt makes it easier for the corporations to get more immigrants into america and western europe. And just coincidentally that surplus pool of workers and consumers suppresses wage growth and increases sales, which increases corporate profits.

    Oh, wait. I am sorry. I am on unz.com, and everyone here (except me) seems to believe that the goal of the elite regarding immigration is just to get more Democrat/Liberal voters and dependent welfare state clients, and that the GOP/conservatives are just too stupid to figure out what the liberals are doing. Yeah, that sounds good.

    Make Unz Great Again said: Yeah, that sounds good.

    Hunsdon said: Either you have not been here very long, or your reading comprehension skills are quite poor, or maybe you just haven’t been paying attention. Long time readers might remember our host talking about the high-low coalition, about crops rotting in the fields!—or about Angelo Mozilo.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    It might be so-called "radical centrist", or "leftist conservative". He is severely lacking in reading comprehension skills. We make fun of cuckservatives all the time here, and yes, we know why their usual MO is to cuck except when their pay packets are threatened (see Trump) and finally they exhibit some backbone.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Hunsdon says:

    I am ever so glad that Western civilization has these Ashkenazi moral guideposts to chart our course and point out our failings. I just don’t know where we’d be without them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Brutusale
    It does get tedious. When Jewish friends get going about life in these United States, I whip out my cell and say "El Al ticket counter, please!".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. newrouter says:
    @Bill P
    We are on the cusp of another spiritual cataclysm, and the vast majority of our conservative commentators have opted out of the game. To do what? Leave it to Pope Francis and the liberals? Leave it to the Muslims? The left-nihilists?

    There's no spiritual response from the West to what's happening. It's like a total surrender. What are we supposed to rally behind Ted Cruz who'll fix it all by fighting Russia for Israel (or whatever other psychotic, non-sequitur garbage he comes up with)?

    Islam is the most democratic of all the Abrahamic faiths. This point is lost on the Ross Douthats of the world. Christianity is fundamentally aristocratic, yet it has totally abdicated its throne.

    So we are a people unmoored, without leadership, living in a state of spiritual anarchy, ripe for the picking. If this doesn't change, we'll lose. We can't throw facts and opinions at our enemies and hope that moves people's hearts and souls. It's a hopeless endeavor. Trump's popularity stems from this yearning for conviction that's been lost since the Berlin Wall fell down. Right or wrong, we need faith more than ever, and we neglect it to our peril and probable doom.

    Does anyone besides me and a few other weirdos like Houellebecq even recognize this?

    >Islam is the most democratic of all the Abrahamic faiths.<

    let's vote to stone the infidel/adulterer/homo schmuck!!11!!.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. iSteveFan says:

    Also, isn’t islam part of India? Didn’t islam influence India and how its borders were drawn? So why don’t the muslims go to India? Didn’t islam influence China? Why don’t the muslims go to China? And isn’t islam closely linked to the modern state of Israel? I mean islam was a part of modern Israel before there even was a modern Israel. Why aren’t muslims heading to Israel?

    And of course why aren’t they heading to the rich Gulf Arab states? And why aren’t the super rich Gulf Arab states not funding a Marshall-type plan to develop the economies of the muslim world?

    No, he wants them to go to Europe, the historical enemy of islam. On what planet would that be a good idea?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    China birth rate 1.55
    EU birth rate 1.6
    China is doomed, dooooomed I tell ye!
    Needs more barely-sentient muslims and africans, pronto. This ought to be a global geopolitical priority.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Pat Casey says:
    @SFG
    I think Christians were a little more worried about Roman paganism before Constantine, and Islam as soon as it got going.

    Who can really say? Probably you’re right that’s what they were worried about. The point is, what did they say? Go back to basics, the Divine Comedy. Pagans? Did you know Dante never got to read Homer?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    One thing no one has mentioned yet is the environmental variance from the time of Herodotus until now; Carthage used to be a relatively green space, such that the Romans salted the city when they emerged victorious in the Punic Wars.

    Now it’s just more desert. As Southern Europe gets hotter and less temperate, expect Islam to march closer than ever before.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  36. iSteveFan says:

    Islam instituted a long era of conquest, piracy, and slaveraiding on the Mediterranean. Italian fishing villages are built on top of mountains to slow Islamic slavers from kidnapping them.

    Here is an excellent book on the subject. Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters… is about the muslim slavers in the Mediterranean from 1500 to 1800. It documents one million Europeans taken into slavery during this time. It even records slaves taken as far north as Iceland! And it describes how life in coastal Italian villages was forever changed so as to protect the residents from the raiders.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  37. @Leftist conservative

    Significant migration is inevitable as long as other parts of the world are crappier and faster growing than Europe and Europe unilaterally ideologically disarms itself of having any concept of the right of collective self-defense. Yet, the experience of Israel, which is geographically much more vulnerable to migration flows than is Europe, shows that all it takes for a modern state to defend itself against hegira is self-confidence.

     

    kids in Israel have not had their heads crammed full of anti-Israeli propaganda. Whereas in america and western europe white kids are told that whites are the demons of history and that immigrants and nonwhites are good and holy. Just coincidentally, that propaganda makes white kids grow up to be ashamed of their race. And just coincidentally that reservoir of white guilt makes it easier for the corporations to get more immigrants into america and western europe. And just coincidentally that surplus pool of workers and consumers suppresses wage growth and increases sales, which increases corporate profits.

    Oh, wait. I am sorry. I am on unz.com, and everyone here (except me) seems to believe that the goal of the elite regarding immigration is just to get more Democrat/Liberal voters and dependent welfare state clients, and that the GOP/conservatives are just too stupid to figure out what the liberals are doing. Yeah, that sounds good.

    Another one of these “No one here but me gets it!” guys.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Incidentally, Kaplan is most famous for his article 20 years ago called “The Coming Anarchy”, which presaged this sort of anarchy:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Coming_Anarchy

    The Coming Anarchy: How scarcity, crime, overpopulation, tribalism, and disease are rapidly destroying the social fabric of our planet is an influential article written by journalist Robert D. Kaplan, which was first published in the February 1994 edition of The Atlantic Monthly. It is considered to be one of the fundamental theses on the state of current world affairs in the post Cold War era, and is ranked on the same level of doctrinal importance as Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations and Francis Fukuyama’s The End of History and the Last Man theses.[citation needed] U.S. President Bill Clinton reportedly recommended the article to White House staff.[1] It has also been criticized as a Malthusian reading of the world, for blaming the situation on its victims and for overlooking alleged political and economical causes such as neoliberal policy.[2]

    He wrote a follow up to it a couple years ago:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Coming_Anarchy#20_Years_Later

    20 years after the original publication of the original article, Robert D. Kaplan published a follow up article, entitled Why So Much Anarchy? , reflecting on the original’s article relevance on current events, especially in Arab countries.[3] In this new article, Kaplan recognizes that some of his prophecies, such as a revival of racial violence in America, did not come to be. However, he also stands by some of his more provocative arguments, such as the belief that “Islam is a religion ideally suited for the urbanizing poor who were willing to fight [sic]“. He thus mentions the growing popularity of Turkish President Erdogan’s conservative Justice and Development Party, largely seen as aligning itself with islamic tendencies, as fulfilling his prediction of the rise of political Islam in Turkey. He also advances further arguments to determine which regimes are bound to fail, notably the presence of a strong, robust bureaucracy, which in turn necessitates a well entrenched middle class. Thus, the arguably successful democratic transition of most former Soviet republics into stable democracies can be explained by a strong bureaucratic apparatus backed by an important middle class. The lack of “bourgeoise traditions”, on the other hand, can be interpreted as one of the main reasons of the failure of states such as Sierra Leone. Overall, Kaplan sticks to his original narrative, forecasting an inevitable anarchy on vast portions of the world.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  39. Jefferson says:
    @iSteveFan

    The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.
     
    Might this be a reason why Russia is so hated?

    “The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.

    Might this be a reason why Russia is so hated?”

    Russians are not very Christian religious. They are as Godless as Western Europeans.

    Has anybody here ever met a Russian bible thumper? A Russian version of Rick Warren?

    Read More
    • Replies: @iSteveFan
    They are attempting to re-Christianize with the blessing of Putin. They are building Churches and putting the Orthodox Church back into a prominent position.

    Here is an interesting portion of a video featuring Cossacks in Church.
    , @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Uh, yes, actually. There a few of them since US missionaries have been in the ex-Soviet Union since at least the middle 1980's. Southern California's TBN, one of the world's largest cable religious stations has an influence in Russia and most of Eastern Europe as its been there for over twenty-five yrs. The fact that Putin is publicly allowing Russia to worship freely and re-building churches may be the one thing that is scaring the hell out of Western liberals.

    Was wondering why they tend to be so pissed off at Russia for the last decade or so when they clearly weren't bothered by Stalin, Breshnev, or Gorbachev.
    , @Intelligent Dasein

    Has anybody here ever met a Russian bible thumper? A Russian version of Rick Warren?
     
    You do realize, do you not, that televangelist-style Bible-thumping is a rather late and uniquely Anglospheric heretical innovation? It has nothing to do with what the vast majority of Christians, both East and West, have for thousands of years understood to be Christianity.

    The Russians are Orthodox. Their Christianity has very nearly the same priestly and sacramental system as Roman Catholicism did before the heretical Second Vatican Council and the abomination known as the Novus Ordo Missae. It even has the comparative advantage of not having endured a Protestant Revolt.

    I simply cannot stress how little American Evangelical Protestantism has to do with real Christianity.
    , @Andrei Martyanov

    Has anybody here ever met a Russian bible thumper? A Russian version of Rick Warren?
     
    You, evidently, have a very perverted view of how most Russians (including secular ones) view and practice spirituality. Try to implement Sharia in Russia. It is possible in Europe, though.
    , @Anon
    "Russians are not very Christian religious. They are as Godless as Western Europeans."

    True, but Christianity is part of national identity.

    It's like even secular Jews in Israel see Judaism as the locus of Jewish identity.

    In America, Christianity is a creed than identity. You BECOME Christian. Even if born to Christian parents, you need to be 'born again'.

    In Russia, one is born orthodox almost like one is born Jewish.
    Less a matter of faith than being.

    America is credo/conscious-centric. 'Being' is a matter of thinking or feeling.
    Like Descartes said,"I think, therefore I am."

    But in some culture, being is understood in more primal and elemental terms. "My parents had sex, therefore I am."

    In a way, the latter view is truer cuz mere sex alone produces a new being whereas all the thinking and feeling without sex produces nothing.

    In Russia, Christianity is more a matter of being than believing. It is seen as part of Russianness even if one isn't particularly religious.
    , @Tracy

    “Russians are not very Christian religious. They are as Godless as Western Europeans.

    Has anybody here ever met a Russian bible thumper? A Russian version of Rick Warren?"
     
    Man, if you equate "Christian" with "Bible thumper" or "Rick Warren," I -- well, I just don't know. The only people with a real, classic claim to the word "Christian" are the Catholics and the Orthodox.

    Re. the main topic: a must-see video about Muslim aggression and the Dark Ages, etc.: https://youtu.be/30j61Ql-Ljs
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. “In sum, “the West” emerged in northern Europe (albeit in a very slow and tortuous manner) mainly after Islam had divided the Mediterranean world.”

    Wasn’t the Mediterranean world significantly divided during late Antiquity due to the Emperor Constantine moving the Empire’s capital from Rome to…Constantinople? Also, unless Kaplan discusses it in the Atlantic article, he seems to have just entirely bypassed the role that the Eastern (Orthodox Christian) Byzantium Empire had in dividing the Mediterranean world not so much between North and South, (Europe vs Africa) but between East vs. West, (Europe, in both its directions). If Western Europe experienced a Dark Ages and regressed into barbarism for several centuries, it was just as primitive when compared to Byzantium (Eastern Europe and Middle East) as it was with the Islamic Caliphate of the same time.

    And, for the first few centuries, the Byzantine empire was still much stronger than Islam, [culturally; militarily; etc] at least until ca.850, or 900AD.

    Funny how Kaplan just ignores that part. Does sound like its a larger part to make the Islamic invasion of Europe a more acceptable thing along the lines of “Resistance is futile, and submission is inevitable.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted

    “In sum, “the West” emerged in northern Europe (albeit in a very slow and tortuous manner) mainly after Islam had divided the Mediterranean world.”
     
    Sounds like projection, guilty consciences and all that.
    I feex for you, effendi, very cheap

    “In sum, “Israel” emerged in the Near East (albeit in a very slow and tortuous manner) mainly after the British Empire and France had divided the Mediterranean world”
     
    and is now irrevocable, and an eternal fixture, just like "the West" ought to be, if they do as they are told ...
    , @anon

    Funny how Kaplan just ignores that part. Does sound like its a larger part to make the Islamic invasion of Europe a more acceptable thing along the lines of “Resistance is futile, and submission is inevitable.”
     
    That's exactly what is - cultural sedation / demoralization - no different to Lord Haw Haw or Tokyo Rose.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. iSteveFan says:
    @George
    "Rather than the Chancellor of Germany stabbing the other nations of Europe in the back on a whim"

    Europeans allowed and encouraged wars in Libya, Syria and Afghanistan to name a few. The so called refugee crisis was caused by these wars, and giving the refugees somewhere to go makes maintaining the wars possible. It really is not the camp of the saints situation. The refugee crisis is at minimum a by product of European foreign policy. A foreign policy that has not changed.

    Anytime Germany wants the refugees to go home all they have to do is rebuild the damage they helped produce. While the US Marshal plan is portrayed as do gooding, it reduced the flow of refugees to the US and help reduce the threat of communist take overs in Europe.

    If you are going to say that you have to say that Turkey, the Gulf States, Israel and Russia are all bombing inside Syria, and so they must take in refugees too. To an extent Turkey is, but they are keeping them in tents until they have transportation to Europe. I don’t think the Turks are looking at the Syrians as permanent residents. So I don’t buy the argument that Europe must take in these people because of their foreign policy.

    Additionally your description doesn’t explain the sub-saharans that are streaming into Europe. A lot are coming from nations that are not in war.

    Read More
    • Replies: @George
    "Russia are all bombing inside Syria, and so they must take in refugees too."

    Life isn't fair.

    Germany permitted the Greek financial crisis to go on indefinitely so Greece was unable to stop the migrants.

    Germany saddled Greece with expensive cold war weapons like U Boats.

    Germany permitted the NATO bombing of Syria Libya ect.

    Germany made sure NATO was luxuriously funded but the border agency Frontex got next to nothing. The destruction of Libya and the poor funding of Frontex are mostly responsible for the refugee surge.

    So if Germany was in South America they would be insulated from the crisis they created, but they are not in South America they are in Europe. German policy was worse than a crime it was a mistake. So I have little sympathy for Germany. Their only choice is having a huge middle eastern muslim population or paying reparations and rebuilding at minimum Libya and Syria.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Sometimes when a guy writes about something a lot, he begins to take its side, he gets captured by his subject, it becomes like an argument he has to win, he falls in love with it:

    “Beyond its stark, clearly articulated message, Islam’s very militancy makes it attractive to the downtrodden. It is the one religion that is prepared to fight. A political era driven by environmental stress, increased cultural sensitivity, unregulated urbanization, and refugee migrations is an era divinely created for the spread and intensification of Islam, already the world’s fastest-growing religion.”

    –Robert D. Kaplan, “The Coming Anarchy: How scarcity, crime, overpopulation, tribalism, and disease are rapidly destroying the social fabric of our planet”, The Atlantic, February 1994.

    But don’t worry about Israel:

    America’s fascination with the Israeli-Palestinian issue, coupled with its lack of interest in the Turkish-Kurdish one, is a function of its own domestic and ethnic obsessions, not of the cartographic reality that is about to transform the Middle East. The diplomatic process involving Israelis and Palestinians will, I believe, have little effect on the early- and mid-twenty-first-century map of the region. Israel, with a 6.6 percent economic growth rate based increasingly on high-tech exports, is about to enter Homer-Dixon’s stretch limo, fortified by a well-defined political community that is an organic outgrowth of history and ethnicity. Like prosperous and peaceful Japan on the one hand, and war-torn and poverty-wracked Armenia on the other, Israel is a classic national-ethnic organism.

    But demography is destiny, don’t worry about that:

    “…the Arab world, however, will undergo alteration, as Islam spreads across artificial frontiers, fueled by mass migrations into the cities and a soaring birth rate of more than 3.2 percent. …

    …seventeen out of twenty-two Arab states have a declining gross national product; in the next twenty years, at current growth rates, the population of many Arab countries will double. These states, like most African ones, will be ungovernable through conventional secular ideologies. …

    Israel is destined to be a Jewish ethnic fortress amid a vast and volatile realm of Islam. …

    “Oh, what a relief to fight, to fight enemies who defend themselves, enemies who are awake!” Andre Malraux wrote in Man’s Fate. I cannot think of a more suitable battle cry for many combatants in the early decades of the twenty-first century. …

    …in places where the Western Enlightenment has not penetrated and where there has always been mass poverty, people find liberation in violence. …”

    I guess we are doomed to refight the Thirty Years War (didn’t a third of the German population or something like that die?):

    “…the period of nation-states and, therefore, of state conflict is now ending, and with it the clear “threefold division into government, army, and people” which state-directed wars enforce. Thus, to see the future, the first step is to look back to the past immediately prior to the birth of modernism—the wars in medieval Europe which began during the Reformation and reached their culmination in the Thirty Years’ War. …

    …Loose and shadowy organisms such as Islamic terrorist organizations suggest why borders will mean increasingly little and sedimentary layers of tribalistic identity and control will mean more…

    …it is not clear that the United States will survive the next century in exactly its present form. Because America is a multi-ethnic society, the nation-state has always been more fragile here than it is in more homogeneous societies like Germany and Japan…

    …During the 1960s, as is now clear, America began a slow but unmistakable process of transformation. The signs hardly need belaboring: racial polarity, educational dysfunction, social fragmentation…”

    He might be right that the core of the failure was unrealistic expectations of the civil rights era:

    “…William Irwin Thompson… writes, “The educational system that had worked on the Jews or the Irish could no longer work on the blacks; and when Jewish teachers in New York tried to take black children away from their parents exactly in the way they had been taken from theirs, they were shocked to encounter a violent affirmation of negritude. …

    …This and many other factors will make the United States less of a nation than it is today…”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cwhatfuture

    Beyond its stark, clearly articulated message, Islam’s very militancy makes it attractive to the downtrodden. It is the one religion that is prepared to fight
     
    Islam's holy book is utterly incoherent, virtually non-understandable. Islam doesn't fight, it breeds. When it comes up against anyone else really prepared to fight, it cringes. Islam's militancy - that is the propensity for bullying - makes it attractive to the stupid, the criminal and the in-bred. China, Burma, Israel - any nation really that stands up to their sociopathy - does as it wishes with the great Islamic nation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. iSteveFan says:

    OT – I saw an old 1980 episode of the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson on antenna TV. Dr. Paul Erlich was a guest. This guy was talking to Johnny about overpopulation. He talked about the USA being overpopulated at 220 million people and the world at 4 billion. He discussed that we had no need for anything over 140 million, our population during WW2.

    Interestingly he discussed the recent phenomenon of Mexican immigration and how we would have to choose between births by natives or immigrant admissions. He said to keep the population at zero growth, you’d have to sacrifice a birth for every immigrant admitted. Or you’d have to cut back an immigrant for every native birth. It was interesting to hear people discuss the issue without fear.

    Of course 36 years later and the USA now has over 325 million people and the world is over 7 billion. And Mexican immigration is still front and center.

    I’d like to hear what Ehrlich thinks now. Of course he was way off on oil. He kept telling Johnny we had only 20 years left of oil.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Ehrlich made a bunch of dumb, apocalyptic predictions that made him famous but hurt his cause by failing to materialize:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/01/us/the-unrealized-horrors-of-population-explosion.html

    No one was more influential — or more terrifying, some would say — than Paul R. Ehrlich, a Stanford University biologist. His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” sold in the millions with a jeremiad that humankind stood on the brink of apocalypse because there were simply too many of us. Dr. Ehrlich’s opening statement was the verbal equivalent of a punch to the gut: “The battle to feed all of humanity is over.” He later went on to forecast that hundreds of millions would starve to death in the 1970s, that 65 million of them would be Americans, that crowded India was essentially doomed, that odds were fair “England will not exist in the year 2000.” Dr. Ehrlich was so sure of himself that he warned in 1970 that “sometime in the next 15 years, the end will come.” By “the end,” he meant “an utter breakdown of the capacity of the planet to support humanity.”
     
    , @A Sparkling Drop of Retsyn
    I remember the fear of overpopulation back in the day. It predates the ozone layer, nuclear winter and global warming fears. Given the population forecasts from the UN, I'm surprised there hasn't been more opposition to mass immigration from baby boomers who grew up with Erlich's ideas.
    , @Jay
    In 1979, Ehrlich coauthored the book, The Golden Door, about illegal Mexican immigration, and in it advocated a North American Union with free movement of people. So The Population Bomb was only intended to suppress the reproduction of Caucasians, who then would be replaced by Meztizos. Ehrlich of course was aware that natural habitats in Mexico had been almost completely destroyed; even the roosting sites of Monarch Butterflies are being clear-cut.

    Ehrlich is not the only Ashkenazi who has put Caucasian replacement ahead of the North American environment. David Gelbaum, although responsible for preserving substantial acreages in California, made a 100 million dollar donation to the Sierra Club contingent upon its changing its anti-immigration policy to one of neutrality. Since then (1996) no conservation organization has dared to discuss the link between immigration and environmental degradation. See the details here http://www.thesocialcontract.com/artman2/publish/tsc_24_4/tsc_24_4_walker.shtml
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. @Smitty
    The Dracula myth is an allegory for Christian-Islamic conflict, so it's not as if time slowed the basic dynamic of having Muslim neighbors (they tend to stay psycho, bloodthirsty, and ignorant of the concept of truces or treaties). On another note why is Edward Said not considered a Western intellectual? His books are very Euro-white in their structure, befitting a past chairman of the MLA -- despite the terrorist-sounding acronym, not an outft that blows up buses, at least not yet. Ed was an Anglican educated at a Quaker prep school and IIRC played piano... And not really in the Jerry Lee Lewis style either

    Said was the opera critic for The Nation magazine.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    “…a violent affirmation of negritude.”

    Kaplan didn’t write this, he’s careful to quote it, but you can see why he writes for The Atlantic.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  46. @Ed
    One of the themes of "Submission" is how much the French elites, and on the right as well as the left, want to be Islamicized.

    Because we are the cultural heirs of northwest European, we tend to think of the Roman Empire as ending when they withdrew from northwestern Europe. They continued to dominate the Mediterannean until the Arabs overran the southern and eastern shores of the sea in the 7th century. There is a story in Muslim histories of the time about how Mohammed wrote to the Roman Emperor at the time, Heraclius, encouraging him to convert, and Heraclius was interested but talked out of it by his advisors.

    Heraclius politely declined. The Persian emperor, who received the same request, demanded that they find this madman and kill him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Clio says:
    @TomSchmidt
    The relevant book here is Mohammed and Charlemagne, Revisited, about how Arab cutting of trade networks created the Dark Ages (favorite factoid: cutting the supply of papyrus led to a collapse in commerce in France, as there was no cheap way to keep accounts. The author points out that French royal archives from before the 7th century are on papyrus.). Emmet Scott also points out that Arab herders, unused to agriculture, allowed their flocks to graze newly-planted fields, eating the new supply of wheat, causing a collapse in agriculture and population. The denuded fields washed into the Mediterranean and formed the Younger Fill.

    Of course, Mohammed might never have existed if the Christian Roman Empire of 550AD hadn't focused so much on fighting other (Arian) Christians and had instead proselytized so that Medina and Mecca had been Christian cities. That was their charge, and they preferred to sit in Constantinople and live in luxury instead.

    about how Arab cutting of trade networks created the Dark Ages favorite factoid: cutting the supply of papyrus led to a collapse in commerce in France, as there was no cheap way to keep accounts. The author points out that French royal archives from before the 7th century are on papyrus.

    This is complete nonsense; papyrus grows in Sicily to this day.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Drake
    Muslims began raiding Sicily in 652, and ruled it from 827 to 1091.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquest_of_Sicily
    , @TomSchmidt
    Did Sicily have a system for the production of papyrus, the cross-threaded "paper" of the ancient world? As "Drake" points out, Muslim raids in Sicily might have cut off trade between there and
    France; the bigger issue is whether Sicily produced any cheap paper at all.

    I found the anecdote interesting because I thought that the same thing could happen to business and accounts in the West today: one EMP that wipes non-paper records and we are down for years. Maybe never to restore.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. @Pat Casey

    Europe as a geopolitical-cultural bloc really emerges in the Medieval period out of the Catholic Church.
     
    Correct, and we should keep saying it, while the Holy Father accrues what moral capital he can (since he literally can't do anything else, policy wise).

    But European continentalism is unthinkable because it’s tantamount to European racialism, which is the worst thing in the world. The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.
     
    I'm glad Steve gave this professorial essay a full treatment, because it (and he) suggest a few points close to the heart, mine I mean.

    Prior to the Reformation, Europe was basically a Roman Catholic Caliphate. The values that it defined itself against were not primarily Islamic or Arabian, but Jewish. (And very quickly those were the values Islam defined itself against, just as it yearned to establish itself as a caliphate, to the extent histories I read haven't been retconned by anti-semites.)

    Those values, back then, were understood to reduce to the sinfulness of usury. And it's always good to remind people that what Shakespeare's Shylock demanded from delinquent debtors was historically accurate: Jewish moneylenders were barbaric bankers.

    The history of Europe is, in a blazing way, the history of how a culture fructifies against and amidst usury. This is exactly what Ezra Pound's Cantos are about. Art sought patrons when it could not seek usurers. Artists created Europe's identity by making Cathedrals that didn't stand a chance to make a profit. If you can derive a rule about history from the cultural monuments that give Europe it's identity as much as the pyramids are yet still Egypts identity, it would be you must cut out the moneymen if you want true identiy; their must be patrons, and those patrons must not assent to Jewish taste. Elsewise you have entertainments, nickelodeons, ect.

    The history of the Islamic caliphate is the history of a people lacking a single identity. And I'd argue that has everything to do with Art too.

    Yeah, hold it, hold it. Many of those High Middle Ages Cathedrals were financed not by usury nor patrons, but by the Church via theology (the Indulgences, which helped pave the way for Lutherism in particular). The Catholic Church during the Middle Ages was the one institution that consciously attempted to build itself on the ruins of the Roman Empire in the West, at least stylistically. As an organization, over time it became very wealthy and owned near 25% of the total land in Western Europe. In addition to its vast wealth it was a major bureaucracy and had its own cannon law and religious courts in most Western nations, provinces, etc. And of course the Church had its own type of fundraising even then (Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales shows a late 14th century pilgrimage to the shrine of Thomas Becket; his Tomb/shrine was a major source of fundraising for the Church in Medieval England.) So while the Church prohibited usury, they had their own methods for raising the funds.

    Just sayin.

    From the start, Islam had an identity, and it was Arabian as Mohammed declared the Arabians to be the most perfect of peoples. All other tribes were allowed to come along for the ride, but they would always be considered inferior culturally and racially to the Arabs. After all, their most holy prophet was Arabian and he was the closest to god.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Casey
    I get your point, but that wasn't really my point, and I really don't think I need to spell out the difference. But maybe that's because I know what a different kind of debt than student debt is like to live under, a period I like to think was due to my artistic temperAment. Please pun me.
    , @Yak-15
    I agree with this statement. Kaplan argues that nationalism is the problem. But it's not. Nationalism is the solution. Recreating an Egyptian or Iraqi identity separate and above their tribal and religious identity is the best possible solution. Nasser and similar MENA dictators dealt with religious extremism harshly. If only they had banned consanguineous marriage!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    So is the West supposed to cave because of the threat of low-level unorganized violence? Once you let that happen things might not stay as controlled as might be expected.

    The Mongols rolled over about a third (or half?) of the Islamic world pretty easily. (Likewise Russia.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  50. Notable Own Goals, See: Anglo-Saxon Settlement, Battle of Hastings, Thanksgiving.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  51. Dave Pinsen says: • Website

    Look, the ancient world recognized geographic and cultural differences among Europe, Asia, and Africa. Herodotus’ seminal history of the Persian wars is built, of course, around a distinction between Asian despotism and European liberty.

    Rome ruled over parts of all three continents not because they were culturally identical, but because it could.

    Yeah, but he has a point about North Africa and Southern Europe, specifically (along with the Levant), pre-Islam, and pre-Christianity, for that matter. There was a something to the idea Mediterranean civilization, and there were advanced cities and city states on the Mediterranean coasts of all three continents. Persia was another animal.

    As for his claim that Islam “created” Europe, only in the sense Ed West notes below.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  52. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    “So while the Church prohibited usury, they had their own methods for raising the funds. “

    You might also think of the monks who pretty much terra-formed much of Europe, drained the swamps, dug the wells, built many of the fields, and built the waterwheels, as a form of direct investment in people, no money needed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Of course, they were mostly working their own land only, not the ordinary villages where the serfs and peasants lived. Monks (monastic orders) lived in total isolation apart from townspeople as well as rural villagers. Over time, of course, the monasteries became more open to outside influences. Many monasteries made wine (in Germany they brewed beer) and did other forms of manual labor to support themselves. Of course as time continued to pass this helped increase the wealth of the larger monasteries which became an additional source of wealth for the Church as an institution.

    Point being, the monasteries didn't directly invest in ordinary villages or infant towns. For the most part they invested in their own monasteries (lands owned directly by the Church, which further increased the value of the Church's property).

    Why do you think Henry VIII sacked the monasteries in 1536? Because they were a source of vast wealth that wasn't going directly to the state but to the Church.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. iSteveFan says:
    @Jefferson
    "The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.

    Might this be a reason why Russia is so hated?"

    Russians are not very Christian religious. They are as Godless as Western Europeans.

    Has anybody here ever met a Russian bible thumper? A Russian version of Rick Warren?

    They are attempting to re-Christianize with the blessing of Putin. They are building Churches and putting the Orthodox Church back into a prominent position.

    Here is an interesting portion of a video featuring Cossacks in Church.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. @Smitty
    The Dracula myth is an allegory for Christian-Islamic conflict, so it's not as if time slowed the basic dynamic of having Muslim neighbors (they tend to stay psycho, bloodthirsty, and ignorant of the concept of truces or treaties). On another note why is Edward Said not considered a Western intellectual? His books are very Euro-white in their structure, befitting a past chairman of the MLA -- despite the terrorist-sounding acronym, not an outft that blows up buses, at least not yet. Ed was an Anglican educated at a Quaker prep school and IIRC played piano... And not really in the Jerry Lee Lewis style either

    You really believe that Edward Said would think it a high compliment to be considered a Western Intellectual? Seriously? Now, maybe if he were considered to be a forerunner to Palestinian independence or a major influence for some Islamic nation that overthrew the remaining shackles of Western influence, that’d be a different matter entirely.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @iSteveFan
    OT - I saw an old 1980 episode of the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson on antenna TV. Dr. Paul Erlich was a guest. This guy was talking to Johnny about overpopulation. He talked about the USA being overpopulated at 220 million people and the world at 4 billion. He discussed that we had no need for anything over 140 million, our population during WW2.

    Interestingly he discussed the recent phenomenon of Mexican immigration and how we would have to choose between births by natives or immigrant admissions. He said to keep the population at zero growth, you'd have to sacrifice a birth for every immigrant admitted. Or you'd have to cut back an immigrant for every native birth. It was interesting to hear people discuss the issue without fear.

    Of course 36 years later and the USA now has over 325 million people and the world is over 7 billion. And Mexican immigration is still front and center.

    I'd like to hear what Ehrlich thinks now. Of course he was way off on oil. He kept telling Johnny we had only 20 years left of oil.

    Ehrlich made a bunch of dumb, apocalyptic predictions that made him famous but hurt his cause by failing to materialize:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/01/us/the-unrealized-horrors-of-population-explosion.html

    No one was more influential — or more terrifying, some would say — than Paul R. Ehrlich, a Stanford University biologist. His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” sold in the millions with a jeremiad that humankind stood on the brink of apocalypse because there were simply too many of us. Dr. Ehrlich’s opening statement was the verbal equivalent of a punch to the gut: “The battle to feed all of humanity is over.” He later went on to forecast that hundreds of millions would starve to death in the 1970s, that 65 million of them would be Americans, that crowded India was essentially doomed, that odds were fair “England will not exist in the year 2000.” Dr. Ehrlich was so sure of himself that he warned in 1970 that “sometime in the next 15 years, the end will come.” By “the end,” he meant “an utter breakdown of the capacity of the planet to support humanity.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    odds were fair “England will not exist in the year 2000.”

    So he was 50 years Early?
    , @Randal

    “England will not exist in the year 2000.”
     
    'I feel like a stranger where I live’
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    For this thread:

    The Song of Roland:

    “…There are nine extant manuscripts of the Song of Roland in Old French. The oldest of these manuscripts is held at the Bodleian Library at Oxford. This copy dates between 1129 and 1165 and was written in Anglo-Norman.”

    Online text:

    http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/391

    HTML text:

    http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/391/pg391-images.html:

    “…When the Emperour his justice hath achieved,
    His mighty wrath’s abated from its heat

    …Passes the day, the darkness is grown deep,
    And now that King in ‘s vaulted chamber sleeps.

    …”God!” said the King: “My life is hard indeed!”
    Tears filled his eyes, he tore his snowy beard.

    SO ENDS THE TALE WHICH TUROLD HATH CONCEIVED.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  57. If it [Europe] cannot evolve in the direction of universal values

    Translation: We’re gonna Tikkun your Olam till you die laughing!

    OT (well, it does involve defense of territory):

    The subject (localism) of this past iSteve post and recent quote (“…trust funders who are most in danger of death from being eaten by a Great White Shark while surfing.”) was recently in the NYT.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    If you move to Maine and decide to put out lobster traps, bad things will happen to your property until you finally get the message.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @Jefferson
    "The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.

    Might this be a reason why Russia is so hated?"

    Russians are not very Christian religious. They are as Godless as Western Europeans.

    Has anybody here ever met a Russian bible thumper? A Russian version of Rick Warren?

    Uh, yes, actually. There a few of them since US missionaries have been in the ex-Soviet Union since at least the middle 1980′s. Southern California’s TBN, one of the world’s largest cable religious stations has an influence in Russia and most of Eastern Europe as its been there for over twenty-five yrs. The fact that Putin is publicly allowing Russia to worship freely and re-building churches may be the one thing that is scaring the hell out of Western liberals.

    Was wondering why they tend to be so pissed off at Russia for the last decade or so when they clearly weren’t bothered by Stalin, Breshnev, or Gorbachev.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. @iSteveFan

    The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.
     
    Might this be a reason why Russia is so hated?

    Uh, yes, most definitely. I mean, first they wouldn’t give total new civil rights to homosexuals, and forget about building separate bathrooms for transgenders.

    Amazing. Stalin’s show trials, Ukrainian Famine, the Prague Spring, Hungarian Uprising, etc. didn’t upset the liberal orthodoxy but an outright refusal to build new bathrooms for Kaitlyn Jennerskys is just totally unacceptable. I mean, after all, one thing threatens Western values but the others are mere trifles.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. Dave Pinsen says: • Website

    Kaplan skips over quite a bit here:

    Europe’s very identity, in other words, was built in significant measure on a sense of superiority to the Muslim Arab world on its periphery. Imperialism proved the ultimate expression of this evolution: Early modern Europe, starting with Napoleon, conquered the Middle East

    Islamic imperialism long preceded European imperialism, and then it became sclerotic. Not only did it occupy part of Europe, but it took a vig on the spice trade to Europe. Long before Napoleon, Europeans put a stop the that, and leapfrogged the Islamic World in a flash, thanks to advances in European technology. The timeline is amazing when you think of it:

    1492: Reconquista wraps up with the fall of Grenada.

    1498: Vasco Da Gama reaches India from Portugal.

    1511: Alfonso de Albuquerque conquers Malacca and Portugal begins to take over the spice trade.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The Italian city-states dominated trade with the East before Portuguese expansion.
    , @syonredux

    Kaplan skips over quite a bit here:

    Europe’s very identity, in other words, was built in significant measure on a sense of superiority to the Muslim Arab world on its periphery. Imperialism proved the ultimate expression of this evolution: Early modern Europe, starting with Napoleon, conquered the Middle East

    Islamic imperialism long preceded European imperialism, and then it became sclerotic.
     
    Yeah, Kaplan (for rather obvious reasons) doesn't want to dwell on things like the Muslim conquest of the Iberian Peninsula, the destruction of the Byzantine Empire, the subjugation of the Balkans, the two sieges of Vienna (1539 and 1683), etc, etc,
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. I think Sailer is missing the point here. Kaplan, if you read his earlier works, seems to also think geopolitically and not just from an ethno-nationalist point of view. He is taking note of the four main players in a large geopolitical reshuffle and writing about how it will affect what is known as Mediterranean Europe and its former colonies.

    The four main players, to my amateur eyes are:
    1) Northern Europe
    2) Mediterranean Europe
    3) North Africa
    4) Sub-Saharan Africa.

    The countries in the for categories are neither exhaustive nor exclusively of one or the other. Rather they are a spectra.

    Steve mentioned how nationalism could be an effective deterrent against the hegira.

    “One striking Dog That Does Not Bark is the word that never gets mentioned by those saying Europeans can’t go back to nationalism because that will lead to the resumption of wars among Europeans countries: continentalism. Why not encourage Europeans to unify in self-defense against hegira? Rather than the Chancellor of Germany stabbing the other nations of Europe in the back on a whim, why not encourage European states to work together to build perimeter defenses of the Continent?”

    The problem with this is that Europe as a whole is too utterly divided to work together. Just think of how talk of Northern Italy wanting to break away from Southern Italy pops up every few years.

    Northern europe (UK, Germany, France) gets the benefits of the EU.

    Mediterranean Europe, ie The PIGS (Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain), do not benefit as much.

    Germany is the economic powerhouse of the EU and thus has political power. But France wants more power than Germany despite not having as much economic clout. So France has to arrange the situation so that it gets to be top dog. Which is why talk of the Mediterranean Union or whatever was started.

    The MU consists of countries that share the Mediterranean sea. Any union requires some sort of economic trade. But trade alone without considering political will of your partners is a source of danger. This is why the whiter countries of the MU will take steps to affect the situation of the North African countries of the MU. Italy seems to be doing this with assassinations of the leaders of the boat migrant gangs.

    So let’s see if I can summarize it simply.

    Because Mediterranean Europe wants a better deal than what it is getting from Northern Europe, talk of some sort of Mediterranean Union will proceed. This means having some sort of deal with North African countries for trade. This means some form of cultural exchange. I am not saying that cultural exchange is a good thing. Rather that it happens as a side effect of economic exchange.

    One the plus side. If the MU goes ahead, I imagine that deals similar to Quadaffy Duck will be struck to ensure that Sub Saharan Africans don’t flood into europe.

    Apologies for any inclarities in writing. I just quickly put this together.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Winthorp
    No, the point is that having a common enemy is precisely what ameliorates that kind of squabbling. Take the economic and fiscal divide. The EU isn't an optimal currency area, but it could be more workable if it operated more like the US with its fiscal transfers. But that's a pretty tough sell in the absence of common identity, which Europe lacks for want of a common enemy. But the Mediterranean being on the front lines of Europe's collective defense - actually pulling its weight in a palpably common endeavor - provides the stingy Northerners an affective justification to allow for otherwise verboten fiscal stimulus.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "I just quickly put this together."

    It shows too. It is, like everything you write, insipid drivel. Leave this site to people who have something interesting to say, which category does not include bloviating idiots like you.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    If it [Europe] cannot evolve in the direction of universal values
     
    Translation: We’re gonna Tikkun your Olam till you die laughing!

    OT (well, it does involve defense of territory):

    The subject (localism) of this past iSteve post and recent quote (“…trust funders who are most in danger of death from being eaten by a Great White Shark while surfing.”) was recently in the NYT.

    If you move to Maine and decide to put out lobster traps, bad things will happen to your property until you finally get the message.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Quite true. I went sea kayaking decades past (in a group) and we were prewarned by the guide not to mess with buoys and such. When someone is in another’s “backyard” one must calibrate so as not to rudely “drop in.” Occasionally, I may have to relearn this. Cheers.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Dave Pinsen
    Kaplan skips over quite a bit here:

    Europe’s very identity, in other words, was built in significant measure on a sense of superiority to the Muslim Arab world on its periphery. Imperialism proved the ultimate expression of this evolution: Early modern Europe, starting with Napoleon, conquered the Middle East
     
    Islamic imperialism long preceded European imperialism, and then it became sclerotic. Not only did it occupy part of Europe, but it took a vig on the spice trade to Europe. Long before Napoleon, Europeans put a stop the that, and leapfrogged the Islamic World in a flash, thanks to advances in European technology. The timeline is amazing when you think of it:

    1492: Reconquista wraps up with the fall of Grenada.

    1498: Vasco Da Gama reaches India from Portugal.

    1511: Alfonso de Albuquerque conquers Malacca and Portugal begins to take over the spice trade.

    The Italian city-states dominated trade with the East before Portuguese expansion.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Right, they had the European end of it, after the Muslims took their vig.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. @Bill P
    We are on the cusp of another spiritual cataclysm, and the vast majority of our conservative commentators have opted out of the game. To do what? Leave it to Pope Francis and the liberals? Leave it to the Muslims? The left-nihilists?

    There's no spiritual response from the West to what's happening. It's like a total surrender. What are we supposed to rally behind Ted Cruz who'll fix it all by fighting Russia for Israel (or whatever other psychotic, non-sequitur garbage he comes up with)?

    Islam is the most democratic of all the Abrahamic faiths. This point is lost on the Ross Douthats of the world. Christianity is fundamentally aristocratic, yet it has totally abdicated its throne.

    So we are a people unmoored, without leadership, living in a state of spiritual anarchy, ripe for the picking. If this doesn't change, we'll lose. We can't throw facts and opinions at our enemies and hope that moves people's hearts and souls. It's a hopeless endeavor. Trump's popularity stems from this yearning for conviction that's been lost since the Berlin Wall fell down. Right or wrong, we need faith more than ever, and we neglect it to our peril and probable doom.

    Does anyone besides me and a few other weirdos like Houellebecq even recognize this?

    I’ve recognized this and continuously talked about it for the last ten years, and I’ve been so battered by arguing with idiots, here and elsewhere, that sometimes I no longer remember why I started.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    No, Steve, it doesn’t require ‘self confidence’ to resist the third world immigration deluge.

    It requires ‘intelligence’.

    Something severely lacking in today’s Economist-whipped EU political class.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  66. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    In the final analysis, Kaplan is actually questioning the right of Europeans to exist.
    - that is what all the flowery overblown rhetoric and cod scholarship reduces down to.

    Now, the ‘right to exist’ is a curious term. At the most basic, fundamental level, it is *the* principle behind all life on this planet be it microbiological, vegetable or animal, since the very first replicators emerged from that much hypothesized ‘soup’ billions of years ago.

    It is also the guiding principle of absolutely every human societal construct from the family, to the tribe, to the nation to Microsoft and Apple, and even iSteve and Steve posters daring to sound their voices.

    So, Robert Kaplan is in, effect, calling for the voluntary extinction, nay, negation, of the primordial impulse of this existential universe, as manifest in its highest bearers.

    Even a flea fights for its life.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew
    "In the final analysis, Kaplan is actually questioning the right of Europeans to exist."

    I.e. the rallying cry of PEGIDA and AfD "Wir sind das Volk!"
    , @Jonathan Silber
    ..Kaplan is...calling for the voluntary extinction...of the primordial impulse of this existential universe.

    Because believing we've a right to live, like anyone else, is Not Who We Are.

    We're better than that.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. syonredux says:

    Kaplan is a relatively hardheaded analyst, so this article of his is striking. (The possibility that Kaplan is trolling readers with self-parody can’t be dismissed.)

    Yeah, reading this, I’m not sure what Kaplan is doing here. Has he gone full-retard? Or is he parodying multiculturalism?

    Frankly, this article is so stupid, that I’m not sure.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  68. @Jefferson
    "The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.

    Might this be a reason why Russia is so hated?"

    Russians are not very Christian religious. They are as Godless as Western Europeans.

    Has anybody here ever met a Russian bible thumper? A Russian version of Rick Warren?

    Has anybody here ever met a Russian bible thumper? A Russian version of Rick Warren?

    You do realize, do you not, that televangelist-style Bible-thumping is a rather late and uniquely Anglospheric heretical innovation? It has nothing to do with what the vast majority of Christians, both East and West, have for thousands of years understood to be Christianity.

    The Russians are Orthodox. Their Christianity has very nearly the same priestly and sacramental system as Roman Catholicism did before the heretical Second Vatican Council and the abomination known as the Novus Ordo Missae. It even has the comparative advantage of not having endured a Protestant Revolt.

    I simply cannot stress how little American Evangelical Protestantism has to do with real Christianity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iSteveFan

    I simply cannot stress how little American Evangelical Protestantism has to do with real Christianity.
     
    I saw an American Orthodox priest during an interview where he said he was sadden by the fact that some of the rudest people towards him have been Evangelicals. He said when he speaks at religious schools they look curiously at his appearance, (beard and garments) and ask him if he believes in the Bible as though he were not even a Christian. He said he often replies, "yes, we believe in the Bible. The New Testament was written by Orthodox Christians."
    , @Jefferson
    "You do realize, do you not, that televangelist-style Bible-thumping is a rather late and uniquely Anglospheric heretical innovation? It has nothing to do with what the vast majority of Christians, both East and West, have for thousands of years understood to be Christianity.

    The Russians are Orthodox. Their Christianity has very nearly the same priestly and sacramental system as Roman Catholicism did before the heretical Second Vatican Council and the abomination known as the Novus Ordo Missae. It even has the comparative advantage of not having endured a Protestant Revolt.

    I simply cannot stress how little American Evangelical Protestantism has to do with real Christianity."

    The only things the Russian immigrants I have met here in The U.S care about is alcohol and money. They do not seem to care for Christianity and organized religion in general. They are not big on talking about God and Jesus Christ.

    If someone were to make a list of the top 10 most extremely religious Christian ethnic groups in the world, Russians would definitely not make the list.

    The only way Russia would become a religious nation and not continue to be a Godless Atheist & Agnostic nation would be if Islam took over.

    , @neon2
    Vatican II was everything you say, and the NOM is the abomination of desolation, but the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church on priesthood and sacrament is today precisely what it always was.
    There lie the seeds of its revival, Francis and his string-pullers notwithstanding.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. Pat Casey says:
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Yeah, hold it, hold it. Many of those High Middle Ages Cathedrals were financed not by usury nor patrons, but by the Church via theology (the Indulgences, which helped pave the way for Lutherism in particular). The Catholic Church during the Middle Ages was the one institution that consciously attempted to build itself on the ruins of the Roman Empire in the West, at least stylistically. As an organization, over time it became very wealthy and owned near 25% of the total land in Western Europe. In addition to its vast wealth it was a major bureaucracy and had its own cannon law and religious courts in most Western nations, provinces, etc. And of course the Church had its own type of fundraising even then (Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales shows a late 14th century pilgrimage to the shrine of Thomas Becket; his Tomb/shrine was a major source of fundraising for the Church in Medieval England.) So while the Church prohibited usury, they had their own methods for raising the funds.

    Just sayin.

    From the start, Islam had an identity, and it was Arabian as Mohammed declared the Arabians to be the most perfect of peoples. All other tribes were allowed to come along for the ride, but they would always be considered inferior culturally and racially to the Arabs. After all, their most holy prophet was Arabian and he was the closest to god.

    I get your point, but that wasn’t really my point, and I really don’t think I need to spell out the difference. But maybe that’s because I know what a different kind of debt than student debt is like to live under, a period I like to think was due to my artistic temperAment. Please pun me.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. @Bill P
    We are on the cusp of another spiritual cataclysm, and the vast majority of our conservative commentators have opted out of the game. To do what? Leave it to Pope Francis and the liberals? Leave it to the Muslims? The left-nihilists?

    There's no spiritual response from the West to what's happening. It's like a total surrender. What are we supposed to rally behind Ted Cruz who'll fix it all by fighting Russia for Israel (or whatever other psychotic, non-sequitur garbage he comes up with)?

    Islam is the most democratic of all the Abrahamic faiths. This point is lost on the Ross Douthats of the world. Christianity is fundamentally aristocratic, yet it has totally abdicated its throne.

    So we are a people unmoored, without leadership, living in a state of spiritual anarchy, ripe for the picking. If this doesn't change, we'll lose. We can't throw facts and opinions at our enemies and hope that moves people's hearts and souls. It's a hopeless endeavor. Trump's popularity stems from this yearning for conviction that's been lost since the Berlin Wall fell down. Right or wrong, we need faith more than ever, and we neglect it to our peril and probable doom.

    Does anyone besides me and a few other weirdos like Houellebecq even recognize this?

    I agree with you entirely that the crisis of the postmodern, post-industrial West is spiritual. This is the only way of understanding the irrational, self-defeating actions of western leaders and nations. They are heretical post-Christians who are trying to replace Jesus as the protagonist of the Christian narrative of sin, salvation, and eternity (i.e. utopia, in their clouded vision).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    And silly old ignorant me always thought that Greece and Rome were the ‘defining creators’ of ‘European civilization’ – well I’ve got the excuse that they taught me that in school.

    Also, wrongly, as Kaplan now tells me, I always thought that ‘great migrations’, were of tough, hard men from the cold north to the warm, soft, indolent south.
    So, I’m wrong here again.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  72. The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.

    Almost. The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its faith.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    This would be really bad for the 20% of guys who are getting laid a lot because women will be slut shamed and there can be no PUA community.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. @Steve Sailer
    If you move to Maine and decide to put out lobster traps, bad things will happen to your property until you finally get the message.

    Quite true. I went sea kayaking decades past (in a group) and we were prewarned by the guide not to mess with buoys and such. When someone is in another’s “backyard” one must calibrate so as not to rudely “drop in.” Occasionally, I may have to relearn this. Cheers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Anytime you see “Europe must” beware of incoming logic bombs and inconsistency. In this case, “Europe must … incorporate the world of Islam [because of Europe’s] system in which individual rights and agency are uppermost in a hierarchy of needs.” Perfect, incorporate Islam because we love our individual rights – nothing contradictory there! Does the author understand the very tenets of Islam?

    Author then invokes “universal values,” presumably of democracy and human rights, which Islam of course does not share. Followed by a slam of the very ideologies which built Europe, Christianity and nationalism: “the dementia of ideologies and coarse nationalisms … would signal the end of “the West” in Europe.” It would in fact signal the rebuilding of European confidence, not as a globalist centerpiece but as strong, self-aware cultures.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  75. iSteveFan says:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Has anybody here ever met a Russian bible thumper? A Russian version of Rick Warren?
     
    You do realize, do you not, that televangelist-style Bible-thumping is a rather late and uniquely Anglospheric heretical innovation? It has nothing to do with what the vast majority of Christians, both East and West, have for thousands of years understood to be Christianity.

    The Russians are Orthodox. Their Christianity has very nearly the same priestly and sacramental system as Roman Catholicism did before the heretical Second Vatican Council and the abomination known as the Novus Ordo Missae. It even has the comparative advantage of not having endured a Protestant Revolt.

    I simply cannot stress how little American Evangelical Protestantism has to do with real Christianity.

    I simply cannot stress how little American Evangelical Protestantism has to do with real Christianity.

    I saw an American Orthodox priest during an interview where he said he was sadden by the fact that some of the rudest people towards him have been Evangelicals. He said when he speaks at religious schools they look curiously at his appearance, (beard and garments) and ask him if he believes in the Bible as though he were not even a Christian. He said he often replies, “yes, we believe in the Bible. The New Testament was written by Orthodox Christians.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sam Haysom
    Yea it's that kind of smug ahistoricism combined with a penchant for on the head ethnocentrcism that has made Orthodox Christian a complete non-starter outside of places that used Church Slavonic or Greek.

    I have a hard time taking seriously a religion whose clergy so eagerly flouts the spirit if not the letter of the law by rushing to get married the day before they are ordained. Orthodoxy is every bit as Protestant as Presbyterianism.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Anonym says:
    @Hunsdon
    Make Unz Great Again said: Yeah, that sounds good.

    Hunsdon said: Either you have not been here very long, or your reading comprehension skills are quite poor, or maybe you just haven't been paying attention. Long time readers might remember our host talking about the high-low coalition, about crops rotting in the fields!---or about Angelo Mozilo.

    It might be so-called “radical centrist”, or “leftist conservative”. He is severely lacking in reading comprehension skills. We make fun of cuckservatives all the time here, and yes, we know why their usual MO is to cuck except when their pay packets are threatened (see Trump) and finally they exhibit some backbone.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. Winthorp says:
    @Sailer has an interesting life
    I think Sailer is missing the point here. Kaplan, if you read his earlier works, seems to also think geopolitically and not just from an ethno-nationalist point of view. He is taking note of the four main players in a large geopolitical reshuffle and writing about how it will affect what is known as Mediterranean Europe and its former colonies.

    The four main players, to my amateur eyes are:
    1) Northern Europe
    2) Mediterranean Europe
    3) North Africa
    4) Sub-Saharan Africa.

    The countries in the for categories are neither exhaustive nor exclusively of one or the other. Rather they are a spectra.

    Steve mentioned how nationalism could be an effective deterrent against the hegira.

    "One striking Dog That Does Not Bark is the word that never gets mentioned by those saying Europeans can’t go back to nationalism because that will lead to the resumption of wars among Europeans countries: continentalism. Why not encourage Europeans to unify in self-defense against hegira? Rather than the Chancellor of Germany stabbing the other nations of Europe in the back on a whim, why not encourage European states to work together to build perimeter defenses of the Continent?"

    The problem with this is that Europe as a whole is too utterly divided to work together. Just think of how talk of Northern Italy wanting to break away from Southern Italy pops up every few years.

    Northern europe (UK, Germany, France) gets the benefits of the EU.

    Mediterranean Europe, ie The PIGS (Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain), do not benefit as much.

    Germany is the economic powerhouse of the EU and thus has political power. But France wants more power than Germany despite not having as much economic clout. So France has to arrange the situation so that it gets to be top dog. Which is why talk of the Mediterranean Union or whatever was started.

    The MU consists of countries that share the Mediterranean sea. Any union requires some sort of economic trade. But trade alone without considering political will of your partners is a source of danger. This is why the whiter countries of the MU will take steps to affect the situation of the North African countries of the MU. Italy seems to be doing this with assassinations of the leaders of the boat migrant gangs.

    So let's see if I can summarize it simply.

    Because Mediterranean Europe wants a better deal than what it is getting from Northern Europe, talk of some sort of Mediterranean Union will proceed. This means having some sort of deal with North African countries for trade. This means some form of cultural exchange. I am not saying that cultural exchange is a good thing. Rather that it happens as a side effect of economic exchange.

    One the plus side. If the MU goes ahead, I imagine that deals similar to Quadaffy Duck will be struck to ensure that Sub Saharan Africans don't flood into europe.

    Apologies for any inclarities in writing. I just quickly put this together.

    No, the point is that having a common enemy is precisely what ameliorates that kind of squabbling. Take the economic and fiscal divide. The EU isn’t an optimal currency area, but it could be more workable if it operated more like the US with its fiscal transfers. But that’s a pretty tough sell in the absence of common identity, which Europe lacks for want of a common enemy. But the Mediterranean being on the front lines of Europe’s collective defense – actually pulling its weight in a palpably common endeavor – provides the stingy Northerners an affective justification to allow for otherwise verboten fiscal stimulus.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    You'd think.

    I know this might sound insane because everybody knows that the sensible thing for Germany to do is to pay Turkey to push Germany around and invite Turkey into the EU, but what if the Germans used some of their money to hire unemployed fellow Europeans in Greece to guard the frontiers of Europe?

    Well, that would be crazy, so forget I ever said that.

    , @Sailer has an interesting life

    No, the point is that having a common enemy is precisely what ameliorates that kind of squabbling.
     
    You are missing the forest for the trees. Ignoring political impossibilities of having an EU (read German) controlled pan EU border guard, you also seem to assume that this would take a lot of time and effort. Most of the technicalities have already been done. What is required is the political and monetary will to implement it EU/med wide. This means that after MAYBE three years of a full time border guard, the EU will devolve back to their regional squabbling. I have more to state but let me post that in my reply to Steve.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @Winthorp
    No, the point is that having a common enemy is precisely what ameliorates that kind of squabbling. Take the economic and fiscal divide. The EU isn't an optimal currency area, but it could be more workable if it operated more like the US with its fiscal transfers. But that's a pretty tough sell in the absence of common identity, which Europe lacks for want of a common enemy. But the Mediterranean being on the front lines of Europe's collective defense - actually pulling its weight in a palpably common endeavor - provides the stingy Northerners an affective justification to allow for otherwise verboten fiscal stimulus.

    You’d think.

    I know this might sound insane because everybody knows that the sensible thing for Germany to do is to pay Turkey to push Germany around and invite Turkey into the EU, but what if the Germans used some of their money to hire unemployed fellow Europeans in Greece to guard the frontiers of Europe?

    Well, that would be crazy, so forget I ever said that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    As I've said many times before, Steve, EU laws *mandate* that anyone, anyone at all, who washes up on EU shores and is able to utter the word 'asylum' is invited straight into the EU, and it is, in fact, a criminal offence to refuse him entry, let alone trying to dissuade him, peacefully or otherwise.

    As long as this madness continues - and there is absolutely no sign of it ever changing - the 'migrant crisis' - more like 'gullibility crisis' - will thrive prosper.

    , @Anonym
    I know this might sound insane because everybody knows that the sensible thing for Germany to do is to pay Turkey to push Germany around and invite Turkey into the EU, but what if the Germans used some of their money to hire unemployed fellow Europeans in Greece to guard the frontiers of Europe?

    Well, that would be crazy, so forget I ever said that.

    Are you insane?

    Seriously, that's a great idea. You know, your idea of "continentalism" sounds new and refreshing. But in hindsight, it shouldn't because Europe already has continentalism, the EU project. Except that it's really faux continentalism. Very sad. You had one job, EU!

    , @Sailer has an interesting life

    what if the Germans used some of their money to hire unemployed fellow Europeans in Greece to guard the frontiers of Europe?
     
    The problem of ensuring a standardized Border Guard EU-wide means that in order to be truly effective you need centralization.

    I've heard a German friend tell me this bit of trivia. Apparently when the Greeks petitioned to join the EU the total area of land they claimed was their territory was more than what was already publicly known. Or words to that effect. I'm doing a bad job of explaining his point but I think you've got the jist of it. If the government is so lazy/corrupt/inane/whatever then it means that the med countries are the weak link in the chain.

    So what's the alternative? Ignoring political infeasibility, assume that the talented tenth of all the EU countries were selected on a volunteer basis to work for the Border Guard. (This is from the police/security services mind you. Not the general population).

    Assume three years to stop the tide. Not stem it. Stop it. Afterwards you have a pan-EU police mechanism that has been trained by Ze Deutchlands to select and sort people.

    Steve once mentioned something like how the US Armed Forces made the weapons and tactics of their soldiers idiot proof. He also said that they've studied how to optimize the effectiveness of each unit when working together. It would be trivial to use this force to keep an eye on anyone with naughty thoughts.

    No complaints about how I am being pessimistic. The weakest links in the EU are outside the Hajnal line. This is why I mentioned German control and the talented tenth being selected from police and security services.
    , @Pat Casey
    I vote that comment not remain among the underground. POST pleeeeeeeeease. The spirit of the thing is inspiring. Seriously. Like Ed West said. Or like I'll say: the reigning prophet we've got.

    Damnit I've got esoteric credentials. [post or don't I'm only sharing cause you showed me "the lattice of coincidence" scene long ago. Did you know coincidences are actually a thing? I feel like I do now.]

    “Lyle turned out to be the key.” (IJ p. 254) Can you see the Key in Lyle? And Lyle turns out to be the first key because he puts the lie to 'le.' The second key requires a bit of background:

    And there went out another horse that was red: and power was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword. Rev. 6: 4
     
    "He said I was around five and crying and was vividly red in the cold spring air" (10).

    ‘I’m thinking it’d be doing a favor if Staff clued in anybody new that comes in on the fact that the H-facet in the shower that its H really stands for Holy Cow That’s Cold’ (564).

    Read Holy Cow That’s Cold and see Holy Cow That’s Cool, in order to see the H is a †. “You imagine the points moving inexorably toward each other until for all practical purposes they’re the same point.” (1063) And there was given unto him a sword.

    The third key (and there are always three) is the book he wrote I have not read but the title of: a title I see slip the straight line of an e across an eye to a T:The Pale KingCan you see the T see c? The lie to le?

    That is to say, can you see someone's crown?

    These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth; Rev. 3: 7
    Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown. Rev. 3:11

     

    And the suit on the cover of that book looks like a damn shamrock to me. Ha! It should be the king of Hearts! The suicide king. And yet its not!

    DFW made a moral puzzle, and he knew it would take a certain kind of wannabe shall we say to know what to do to when and where with what he wrote: "I'd tell you all you want and more, if the sounds I made could be what you hear" (17). To know moral obligation and moral authority are identical in the face of something sinister.

    To wit, the “ghostwords” that invade Gately’s thought are distinguished in straight caps and italics. None appear that way twice. But one does thrice: SINISTRAL. (832, 862, 884) That is thus the basis for the working assumption that the particular word SINISTRAL serves a function.

    Hint. Badly wounded, fated for the hospital, where ghostwords will be got, Gately sets himself down, and the residents tepidly draw to him: “Everybody except Lenz and Minty look unwell” (615). Take that to undergird this: only Lenz (562) and Minty (128) speak the misspelled word “yrstruly.”

    The fact of that misspelling allows, in principle, for SINISTRAL to phonically transmute into SINISTER AL. Now, constate the working assumption, and posit the function: drop al/la from the key words. Of which needed now is a map, some estimate of the territory: Herald King James in canons.

    And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals. And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof? And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon. And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon. And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of tribe of Ju’-da, the Root of Da’-vid, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.
    Rev. 5: 1- 5 (KJV)
     
    Seven seals: seven see als.

    Postal code: certain things are rock-solid, high-grade true (IJ p.1068).
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. @iSteveFan

    I simply cannot stress how little American Evangelical Protestantism has to do with real Christianity.
     
    I saw an American Orthodox priest during an interview where he said he was sadden by the fact that some of the rudest people towards him have been Evangelicals. He said when he speaks at religious schools they look curiously at his appearance, (beard and garments) and ask him if he believes in the Bible as though he were not even a Christian. He said he often replies, "yes, we believe in the Bible. The New Testament was written by Orthodox Christians."

    Yea it’s that kind of smug ahistoricism combined with a penchant for on the head ethnocentrcism that has made Orthodox Christian a complete non-starter outside of places that used Church Slavonic or Greek.

    I have a hard time taking seriously a religion whose clergy so eagerly flouts the spirit if not the letter of the law by rushing to get married the day before they are ordained. Orthodoxy is every bit as Protestant as Presbyterianism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iSteveFan

    Orthodoxy is every bit as Protestant as Presbyterianism.
     
    If Presbyterianism had a million martyrs, maybe.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Steve Sailer
    You'd think.

    I know this might sound insane because everybody knows that the sensible thing for Germany to do is to pay Turkey to push Germany around and invite Turkey into the EU, but what if the Germans used some of their money to hire unemployed fellow Europeans in Greece to guard the frontiers of Europe?

    Well, that would be crazy, so forget I ever said that.

    As I’ve said many times before, Steve, EU laws *mandate* that anyone, anyone at all, who washes up on EU shores and is able to utter the word ‘asylum’ is invited straight into the EU, and it is, in fact, a criminal offence to refuse him entry, let alone trying to dissuade him, peacefully or otherwise.

    As long as this madness continues – and there is absolutely no sign of it ever changing – the ‘migrant crisis’ – more like ‘gullibility crisis’ – will thrive prosper.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wilkey
    And you have to wonder what threat the vote on June 23 poses to this order. If the UK chooses to leave (assuming the election isn't rigged) what feints in the direction of local control will the EU make in order to keep their EUmpire together?
    , @Expletive Deleted
    "anyone at all, who washes up on EU shores and is able to utter the word ‘asylum’ is invited straight into the EU"
    The problem is, no matter how physically in extremis they might be when washed/picked up, they are very very careful not to utter the dread word "asylum", as that would lead them to be mired (temporarily) in the bureaucracy of whichever raggedy-ass Med/Balkan country they've encroached on, and will go to absurd lengths to resist claiming asylum at landfall.
    That part of the EU they're very definitely not interested in.

    The idea seems to be that only the very furthest reaches of the continent, preferably next to and beyond River Oceanus, in the lands of the Cimmerians and the midnight sun, are worthy of their full attention.
    I blame the parents, stuffing their heads with ancient mythical rubbish.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. @Anon
    What would it take to reform Muslim societies to make them compatible with Western civilization?

    To begin with, you would have to end polygamy and cousin marriage, break up the clans,
    outlaw the hijab along with the sequestration of women, and gradually develop representative national institutions that work with, rather than at cross purposes, to the tribal groupings that compose these societies. You would also have to ban the Koran, destroy all the mosques, imprison all imams and jihadis for life, throw the Kaaba stone into the sea and level Mecca to the ground. Madrases would be closed and replaced with a system of secular public education. In place of Islam the original, pure religion of Abraham (hanifya) would be reintroduced as it existed in that part of the world before Muhammad appeared on the scene. As for Muhammad himself, he would be disavowed as an evil false prophet in the same category as Hitler and Mao-Tse Tung.

    Clearly it would take generations, if not centuries, to accomplish these changes. It could only be done under the aegis of an authoritarian central government like the one Ataturk established in Turkey.

    And it still doesn’t seem to have happened in Turkey after 90 years.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ReaderfromGreece
    Having spent time there, I'd argue it did happen in the cities, as well as smaller towns that had a strong presence of culture and the arts. Although the state has always straddled between being a dictatorship and a democracy, there was still a truly secular, modern-minded dominant culture. That's no small thing when you consider that Istanbul alone is as large or larger than many European countries. It has noticeably regressed terribly in the last few years. I'm not convinced Erdogan's government is to blame; it's a chicken/egg question. A key thing to understand about Turkey is that such cities and towns are facing the exact same problems with immigrant communities (from rural areas) that places like Brussels and the West in general have with Muslim immigrants.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson
    But it did happen under the Shah's rule in Iran. The key is educating the women. Check the Iranian birth rate. If it were replicated in the Moose Limb world we would be one or two generations away from quiescence.

    OTOH it would not help us defeat our current foremost enemy, the left. Defeat the left, and defeating the Moose Limbs will be manageable if not easy. If we don't defeat the left, the moose limbs may be the way to bet. I doubt the Mormons can keep up.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Anonymous
    The Italian city-states dominated trade with the East before Portuguese expansion.

    Right, they had the European end of it, after the Muslims took their vig.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. OT: Stefan Molyneux interviews Helmuth Nyborg: April 17th 2016

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  84. @Winthorp
    No, the point is that having a common enemy is precisely what ameliorates that kind of squabbling. Take the economic and fiscal divide. The EU isn't an optimal currency area, but it could be more workable if it operated more like the US with its fiscal transfers. But that's a pretty tough sell in the absence of common identity, which Europe lacks for want of a common enemy. But the Mediterranean being on the front lines of Europe's collective defense - actually pulling its weight in a palpably common endeavor - provides the stingy Northerners an affective justification to allow for otherwise verboten fiscal stimulus.

    No, the point is that having a common enemy is precisely what ameliorates that kind of squabbling.

    You are missing the forest for the trees. Ignoring political impossibilities of having an EU (read German) controlled pan EU border guard, you also seem to assume that this would take a lot of time and effort. Most of the technicalities have already been done. What is required is the political and monetary will to implement it EU/med wide. This means that after MAYBE three years of a full time border guard, the EU will devolve back to their regional squabbling. I have more to state but let me post that in my reply to Steve.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Anon
    What would it take to reform Muslim societies to make them compatible with Western civilization?

    To begin with, you would have to end polygamy and cousin marriage, break up the clans,
    outlaw the hijab along with the sequestration of women, and gradually develop representative national institutions that work with, rather than at cross purposes, to the tribal groupings that compose these societies. You would also have to ban the Koran, destroy all the mosques, imprison all imams and jihadis for life, throw the Kaaba stone into the sea and level Mecca to the ground. Madrases would be closed and replaced with a system of secular public education. In place of Islam the original, pure religion of Abraham (hanifya) would be reintroduced as it existed in that part of the world before Muhammad appeared on the scene. As for Muhammad himself, he would be disavowed as an evil false prophet in the same category as Hitler and Mao-Tse Tung.

    Clearly it would take generations, if not centuries, to accomplish these changes. It could only be done under the aegis of an authoritarian central government like the one Ataturk established in Turkey.

    “What would it take to reform Muslim societies to make them compatible with Western civilization? To begin with, you would have to end polygamy and cousin marriage, break up the clans, outlaw the hijab along with the sequestration of women, and gradually develop representative national institutions that work with, rather than at cross purposes, to the tribal groupings that compose these societies.”

    Cousin marriage. Ewwww.
    As for polygamy, it is rare in the Muslim world. Not a real problem.

    As for ‘western civilization’, what is it?
    If you mean WC up to the 50s, even 60s, okay. Good stuff.

    But what is WC today? Rap music? Black thugs in sports? Tattoos and piercing? Meth? Potheads? Kids with access to porn? Interracism? ‘White guilt’? Cuckold culture? Miley Cyrus and Walt Disney promoting whore fashion for young girls? Emma Sulkowicz? Media that give us zimmerman as white guy and Jackie Coakley as victim? Media lies about WMD and destruction of entire nations? Hysteria about Trump as Hitler? Slut pride and rape culture hysteria both? Black Lives Matter? Michael Brown as Hands Up gentle giant? NYT lies about immigration? ‘Gay marriage’ and trannies using women’s restroom? and we can go on and on.

    I don’t like Muslim culture, but today’s WC is sick, sick, sick.
    Also, WC is now about whites hating whites and cheering their own destruction. It is white college students cheering Clinton for saying whites will be minority in the future. That is WC.
    If WC is about suicide, then Muslims are for WC since they attack the West with terrorism. But let’s remember that Western invasion killed many more Muslims than Muslims killed whites by terrorism.

    I don’t like Muslim view of women, but why should Muslim fathers allow their daughters to end up like so many hook-up trash in America? Where is family honor?
    Muslim girls should get cues from Lena Dunham or Brian William’s rimjobbing-on-TV daughter?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. Anonym says:
    @Steve Sailer
    You'd think.

    I know this might sound insane because everybody knows that the sensible thing for Germany to do is to pay Turkey to push Germany around and invite Turkey into the EU, but what if the Germans used some of their money to hire unemployed fellow Europeans in Greece to guard the frontiers of Europe?

    Well, that would be crazy, so forget I ever said that.

    I know this might sound insane because everybody knows that the sensible thing for Germany to do is to pay Turkey to push Germany around and invite Turkey into the EU, but what if the Germans used some of their money to hire unemployed fellow Europeans in Greece to guard the frontiers of Europe?

    Well, that would be crazy, so forget I ever said that.

    Are you insane?

    Seriously, that’s a great idea. You know, your idea of “continentalism” sounds new and refreshing. But in hindsight, it shouldn’t because Europe already has continentalism, the EU project. Except that it’s really faux continentalism. Very sad. You had one job, EU!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. @Steve Sailer
    You'd think.

    I know this might sound insane because everybody knows that the sensible thing for Germany to do is to pay Turkey to push Germany around and invite Turkey into the EU, but what if the Germans used some of their money to hire unemployed fellow Europeans in Greece to guard the frontiers of Europe?

    Well, that would be crazy, so forget I ever said that.

    what if the Germans used some of their money to hire unemployed fellow Europeans in Greece to guard the frontiers of Europe?

    The problem of ensuring a standardized Border Guard EU-wide means that in order to be truly effective you need centralization.

    I’ve heard a German friend tell me this bit of trivia. Apparently when the Greeks petitioned to join the EU the total area of land they claimed was their territory was more than what was already publicly known. Or words to that effect. I’m doing a bad job of explaining his point but I think you’ve got the jist of it. If the government is so lazy/corrupt/inane/whatever then it means that the med countries are the weak link in the chain.

    So what’s the alternative? Ignoring political infeasibility, assume that the talented tenth of all the EU countries were selected on a volunteer basis to work for the Border Guard. (This is from the police/security services mind you. Not the general population).

    Assume three years to stop the tide. Not stem it. Stop it. Afterwards you have a pan-EU police mechanism that has been trained by Ze Deutchlands to select and sort people.

    Steve once mentioned something like how the US Armed Forces made the weapons and tactics of their soldiers idiot proof. He also said that they’ve studied how to optimize the effectiveness of each unit when working together. It would be trivial to use this force to keep an eye on anyone with naughty thoughts.

    No complaints about how I am being pessimistic. The weakest links in the EU are outside the Hajnal line. This is why I mentioned German control and the talented tenth being selected from police and security services.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. Unfortunately Europe is a bit short on Charles Martels right now, but there is a feisty pixie with a Phd in chemistry. Perhaps in combination with Saint Marine she can produce a bit of politically incorrect alchemy and stall the invasion:

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/interview-with-frauke-petry-of-the-alternative-for-germany-a-1084493.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    Interesting interview. Impressive woman vs unabashedly hostile interviewer.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Nationalism brought ruin to Europe in the form of WWI with 10 million dead Europeans.

    Racialism brought utter destruction to Europe in the form of WWII with tens of millions of dead Europeans. If the Nazis had gone through with their plan how many Poles and Russians and other racial groups that did not meet the standard would have been wiped out to clear the way for Germans.

    The conclusion for European elites then is that nationalism and especially racialist thinking needs to be smothered to keep Europe and the white race safe.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jaakko Raipala
    You have to be a complete idiot or a lying propagandist to claim that World War I was blamed on nationalism since before the war Europe was dominated by multinational empires, not nation-states, and as multinational empires entities like Austria-Hungary and Russia of course demonized all forms of nationalism within them just as much the EU does (or even more, the EU after all isn't sending our nationalists to Siberia yet).

    After the first World War the map of Europe was redrawn from empires to nation-states by *progressives* like Woodrow Wilson and Vladimir Lenin who championed various nationalisms in the empires that they wanted to break up. Nationalism was the progressive ideology that was supposed to prevent another World War from ever happening again - everyone gets their national home-state and with Europe split into dozens and dozens of nation-states instead of a few huge rival empires and alliances there won't be any war escalating into a World War the way things cascaded in 1914.
    , @AnotherDad

    Nationalism brought ruin to Europe in the form of WWI with 10 million dead Europeans.

    Racialism brought utter destruction to Europe in the form of WWII with tens of millions of dead Europeans.
     
    One gets this nonsense all the time, but it's still nonsense.

    War has existed ... forever. It doesn't require "nationalism". In the case of the Great War, it was imperialism--the Austro-Hungarian trying to squash Balkan nationalisms and the Russians taking their side that was the launching point. And it was the range and extent of British imperialism colliding with a rising Germany locked out of resources and markets around the world, that led to the full "great power" conflict.

    As for World War II, the evil of the war wasn't the Nazis "nationalism", it was there imperialism--rolling their tanks into other countries with the idea of establishing a continental version of the British empire with Germany at the center. If they were just nationalist, idolizing their mythic past, marching around bonfires and such and kept within their borders--like Franco--no one would be talking about it.

    Nationalism is far and away the *best* way anyone has found to organize the world. It does require defined borders that folks agree are legitimate to separate different ethnys. In contrast, imperialism, globalism and "diversity" are sources of continual conflict big and small.
    , @anon
    A better solution would be to remove the money power from the banking mafia.

    I think you'd find that if you remove the pressure to impose the banking mafia on reluctant countries and the recurring economic calamities that result from having the banking mafia imposed that lots of historical unpleasantness would happen a lot less often.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.

     

    Almost. The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its faith.

    This would be really bad for the 20% of guys who are getting laid a lot because women will be slut shamed and there can be no PUA community.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. Imperialism proved the ultimate expression of this evolution: Early modern Europe, starting with Napoleon, conquered the Middle East

    So did the Romans (who gave us the base for the word ‘imperialism’), and before them the Greeks. Also, the Mongols, Arabs, Persians and Assyrians.

    Read More
    • Replies: @backup
    Furthermore, after Napoleon the Ottomans ruled it until 1918. I don't remember Kaplan being so sloppy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. Re-Houellebecq:

    9/10 Italian schoolchildren would convert to Islam if Islamic state conquered the country.

    The sample is very small, and it’s still a fantasy scenario ultiamtely, but it does stir one to reflection…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Italians. It's in their nature. Pro-Nazi, anti-Nazi.

    Who's winning? We go with winners.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. Pat Casey says:
    @Steve Sailer
    You'd think.

    I know this might sound insane because everybody knows that the sensible thing for Germany to do is to pay Turkey to push Germany around and invite Turkey into the EU, but what if the Germans used some of their money to hire unemployed fellow Europeans in Greece to guard the frontiers of Europe?

    Well, that would be crazy, so forget I ever said that.

    I vote that comment not remain among the underground. POST pleeeeeeeeease. The spirit of the thing is inspiring. Seriously. Like Ed West said. Or like I’ll say: the reigning prophet we’ve got.

    Damnit I’ve got esoteric credentials. [post or don't I'm only sharing cause you showed me "the lattice of coincidence" scene long ago. Did you know coincidences are actually a thing? I feel like I do now.]

    “Lyle turned out to be the key.” (IJ p. 254) Can you see the Key in Lyle? And Lyle turns out to be the first key because he puts the lie to ‘le.’ The second key requires a bit of background:

    And there went out another horse that was red: and power was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword. Rev. 6: 4

    “He said I was around five and crying and was vividly red in the cold spring air” (10).

    ‘I’m thinking it’d be doing a favor if Staff clued in anybody new that comes in on the fact that the H-facet in the shower that its H really stands for Holy Cow That’s Cold’ (564).

    Read Holy Cow That’s Cold and see Holy Cow That’s Cool, in order to see the H is a †. “You imagine the points moving inexorably toward each other until for all practical purposes they’re the same point.” (1063) And there was given unto him a sword.

    The third key (and there are always three) is the book he wrote I have not read but the title of: a title I see slip the straight line of an e across an eye to a T:The Pale KingCan you see the T see c? The lie to le?

    That is to say, can you see someone’s crown?

    These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth; Rev. 3: 7
    Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown. Rev. 3:11

    And the suit on the cover of that book looks like a damn shamrock to me. Ha! It should be the king of Hearts! The suicide king. And yet its not!

    DFW made a moral puzzle, and he knew it would take a certain kind of wannabe shall we say to know what to do to when and where with what he wrote: “I’d tell you all you want and more, if the sounds I made could be what you hear” (17). To know moral obligation and moral authority are identical in the face of something sinister.

    To wit, the “ghostwords” that invade Gately’s thought are distinguished in straight caps and italics. None appear that way twice. But one does thrice: SINISTRAL. (832, 862, 884) That is thus the basis for the working assumption that the particular word SINISTRAL serves a function.

    Hint. Badly wounded, fated for the hospital, where ghostwords will be got, Gately sets himself down, and the residents tepidly draw to him: “Everybody except Lenz and Minty look unwell” (615). Take that to undergird this: only Lenz (562) and Minty (128) speak the misspelled word “yrstruly.”

    The fact of that misspelling allows, in principle, for SINISTRAL to phonically transmute into SINISTER AL. Now, constate the working assumption, and posit the function: drop al/la from the key words. Of which needed now is a map, some estimate of the territory: Herald King James in canons.

    And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals. And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof? And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon. And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon. And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of tribe of Ju’-da, the Root of Da’-vid, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.
    Rev. 5: 1- 5 (KJV)

    Seven seals: seven see als.

    Postal code: certain things are rock-solid, high-grade true (IJ p.1068).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @anonymous
    Sometimes when a guy writes about something a lot, he begins to take its side, he gets captured by his subject, it becomes like an argument he has to win, he falls in love with it:


    "Beyond its stark, clearly articulated message, Islam's very militancy makes it attractive to the downtrodden. It is the one religion that is prepared to fight. A political era driven by environmental stress, increased cultural sensitivity, unregulated urbanization, and refugee migrations is an era divinely created for the spread and intensification of Islam, already the world's fastest-growing religion."

     

    --Robert D. Kaplan, "The Coming Anarchy: How scarcity, crime, overpopulation, tribalism, and disease are rapidly destroying the social fabric of our planet", The Atlantic, February 1994.

    But don't worry about Israel:


    "America's fascination with the Israeli-Palestinian issue, coupled with its lack of interest in the Turkish-Kurdish one, is a function of its own domestic and ethnic obsessions, not of the cartographic reality that is about to transform the Middle East. The diplomatic process involving Israelis and Palestinians will, I believe, have little effect on the early- and mid-twenty-first-century map of the region. Israel, with a 6.6 percent economic growth rate based increasingly on high-tech exports, is about to enter Homer-Dixon's stretch limo, fortified by a well-defined political community that is an organic outgrowth of history and ethnicity. Like prosperous and peaceful Japan on the one hand, and war-torn and poverty-wracked Armenia on the other, Israel is a classic national-ethnic organism.

     

    But demography is destiny, don't worry about that:


    "...the Arab world, however, will undergo alteration, as Islam spreads across artificial frontiers, fueled by mass migrations into the cities and a soaring birth rate of more than 3.2 percent. ...

    ...seventeen out of twenty-two Arab states have a declining gross national product; in the next twenty years, at current growth rates, the population of many Arab countries will double. These states, like most African ones, will be ungovernable through conventional secular ideologies. ...

    ...Israel is destined to be a Jewish ethnic fortress amid a vast and volatile realm of Islam. ...

    ..."Oh, what a relief to fight, to fight enemies who defend themselves, enemies who are awake!" Andre Malraux wrote in Man's Fate. I cannot think of a more suitable battle cry for many combatants in the early decades of the twenty-first century. ...

    ...in places where the Western Enlightenment has not penetrated and where there has always been mass poverty, people find liberation in violence. ..."

     

    I guess we are doomed to refight the Thirty Years War (didn't a third of the German population or something like that die?):


    "...the period of nation-states and, therefore, of state conflict is now ending, and with it the clear "threefold division into government, army, and people" which state-directed wars enforce. Thus, to see the future, the first step is to look back to the past immediately prior to the birth of modernism—the wars in medieval Europe which began during the Reformation and reached their culmination in the Thirty Years' War. ...

    ...Loose and shadowy organisms such as Islamic terrorist organizations suggest why borders will mean increasingly little and sedimentary layers of tribalistic identity and control will mean more...

    ...it is not clear that the United States will survive the next century in exactly its present form. Because America is a multi-ethnic society, the nation-state has always been more fragile here than it is in more homogeneous societies like Germany and Japan...

    ...During the 1960s, as is now clear, America began a slow but unmistakable process of transformation. The signs hardly need belaboring: racial polarity, educational dysfunction, social fragmentation..."

     

    He might be right that the core of the failure was unrealistic expectations of the civil rights era:


    "...William Irwin Thompson... writes, "The educational system that had worked on the Jews or the Irish could no longer work on the blacks; and when Jewish teachers in New York tried to take black children away from their parents exactly in the way they had been taken from theirs, they were shocked to encounter a violent affirmation of negritude. ...

    ...This and many other factors will make the United States less of a nation than it is today..."

     

    Beyond its stark, clearly articulated message, Islam’s very militancy makes it attractive to the downtrodden. It is the one religion that is prepared to fight

    Islam’s holy book is utterly incoherent, virtually non-understandable. Islam doesn’t fight, it breeds. When it comes up against anyone else really prepared to fight, it cringes. Islam’s militancy – that is the propensity for bullying – makes it attractive to the stupid, the criminal and the in-bred. China, Burma, Israel – any nation really that stands up to their sociopathy – does as it wishes with the great Islamic nation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    Islam’s holy book is utterly incoherent, virtually non-understandable.

    I disagree. The reason why so many Islamic terrorists are engineers is that sometimes it takes an engineer to RTFM.

    I have read a translation and it made a lot of sense to me. If you want to spread your religion over time, it makes a lot of sense the way the Muslims do it. At first appear innocuous. Gradually get more aggressive until you can afford to put to the sword those whose territory you covet, or they convert, or they pay you a tax to fund your further adventures. Apostates are killed, that goes some way to solve the free rider problem.

    Of course, a society that focuses on war and spoils of war to the virtual exclusion of all else is bound to have lackluster science and economic growth. It won't even have an effective modern military, for that very reason. Islam is basically the embodied religion of 14 year old male desires. That's not to say it isn't dangerous or something to keep out of our countries.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. OT:

    USA Today, 04/17/16 – Urban Meyer on Cardale Jones: He ‘wasn’t necessarily very good at school’

    http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/04/urban-meyer-cardale-jones-ohio-state-school-nfl-draft

    Ohio State football coach Urban Meyer on NFL quarterback prospect Cardale Jones:

    “A really good skill set, intellectual, very smart, wasn’t necessarily very good at school. I wonder if that kind of set him back a little bit. That’s one difference between pro and college — now he doesn’t have to worry about classes and going to school and all that stuff. He can focus completely on football.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  96. @Anonymous
    Nationalism brought ruin to Europe in the form of WWI with 10 million dead Europeans.

    Racialism brought utter destruction to Europe in the form of WWII with tens of millions of dead Europeans. If the Nazis had gone through with their plan how many Poles and Russians and other racial groups that did not meet the standard would have been wiped out to clear the way for Germans.

    The conclusion for European elites then is that nationalism and especially racialist thinking needs to be smothered to keep Europe and the white race safe.

    You have to be a complete idiot or a lying propagandist to claim that World War I was blamed on nationalism since before the war Europe was dominated by multinational empires, not nation-states, and as multinational empires entities like Austria-Hungary and Russia of course demonized all forms of nationalism within them just as much the EU does (or even more, the EU after all isn’t sending our nationalists to Siberia yet).

    After the first World War the map of Europe was redrawn from empires to nation-states by *progressives* like Woodrow Wilson and Vladimir Lenin who championed various nationalisms in the empires that they wanted to break up. Nationalism was the progressive ideology that was supposed to prevent another World War from ever happening again – everyone gets their national home-state and with Europe split into dozens and dozens of nation-states instead of a few huge rival empires and alliances there won’t be any war escalating into a World War the way things cascaded in 1914.

    Read More
    • Replies: @celt darnell
    In fairness to Anonymous, he's repeating a line doled out in schools and universities.

    You're quite correct, but the whole "nationalism caused World War I" is almost conventional wisdom.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. Drake says:
    @Clio

    about how Arab cutting of trade networks created the Dark Ages favorite factoid: cutting the supply of papyrus led to a collapse in commerce in France, as there was no cheap way to keep accounts. The author points out that French royal archives from before the 7th century are on papyrus.

     

    This is complete nonsense; papyrus grows in Sicily to this day.

    Muslims began raiding Sicily in 652, and ruled it from 827 to 1091.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquest_of_Sicily

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clio
    Calabria, which was never conquered by the Saracens, has essentially the same climatic conditions as Sicily, where I saw wild papyrus growing in sizeable quantities two years ago.
    , @Clio
    Papyrus, which grows in sundry Italian provinces today, mainly in Sicily and Calabria...

    https://books.google.ch/books?id=krPwAg8jNOoC&pg=PA24&lpg=PA24&dq=papiro+in+calabria&source=bl&ots=MuVwUdi7pj&sig=jAsQEmGrO76sQfNe-d3Eg-GtPM0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjev8Cv95rMAhVL7xQKHXMsCNc4ChDoAQgdMAE#v=onepage&q=papiro%20in%20calabria&f=false

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. guest says:

    I liked Submission a lot better than I thought I would, especially after I started reading it and was awash in boring sex. I understand that there was a point to the boredom and vulgarity, but I’ve never understood why stories have to be themselves boring and vulgar to make that point. That why I don’t enjoy realism. I’ve also never been into decadence, though I am decadent myself. Maybe because I’m decadent.

    It got good near the end, when an actual plot kicked in. His conversation with the Islamicized professor was good, and reminded me of similar scenes in various dystopias. What it lacked were concrete reasons why he couldn’t fall back into Christianity, for instance. There’s the monetary and career incentives, but he didn’t need money and didn’t seem interested in position. The church may be dead for most people of his kind, but he went so far as to go back to that monastery, and there was a distinct lack of internal reason for conversion to Islam. Except the sex, perhaps.

    Maybe it’s okay that it isn’t explained. We can’t explain why the West is losing faith in itself. It’s just happening. Going to Islam’s side could be less of a conversion than a resigning to the winners.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Casey
    Nice comment. I sense in you a remnant. I'm decadent as well, but knew that book wasn't worth reading by the way the author looks. No offense to ugly people, but we must not trust their art, ever. That was the wisdom of the greeks. And the first point Nietzsche made about Socrates was that he was well known to be hideous. Because of him, Socrates, we can't make sense of irony its so omnipresent. We can't make sense of ourselves in a sense. A hideous person must be humble, and irony escapes that obligation, and disguises the escape with false humility.

    Anyways, the only way to make sense of that book is to assume its ironic. But who can say for sure? Well that's the point.
    , @anon

    Maybe it’s okay that it isn’t explained. We can’t explain why the West is losing faith in itself. It’s just happening.
     
    Blatant lie.

    The entire media has been actively attacking the traditional West non-stop since at least the 1960s.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. Kat Grey says:

    Let me put it bluntly White Europeans need to start having unprotected marathon sex with each other..otherwise they will cease to exist. Simple maths.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew
    "Let me put it bluntly White Europeans need to start having unprotected marathon sex with each other..otherwise they will cease to exist. Simple maths."

    I keep saying it. I feel like Russell the crop duster guy in "Independence Day" who has been trying to convince people for years that aliens really exist.

    When Europeans had lots of unprotected sex and made lots of a babies they conquered the world and were over 1/3 of its population.

    Just saying.

    If we are truly so valuable like you folks like to say, then you should get busy making more of us like I have.
    , @Andrew
    What is funny is that after 1915, a Mediterranean Union already existed. Britain, France, and Italy were close allies.

    Britain ruled over Egypt, Palestine, and Cyprus.

    France had formally incorporated Algeria as part of France and was colonizing it, and also ruled Tunisia, Morocco, Syria, and Lebanon.

    Italy held Libya and Rhodes and essentially dominated Albania and Greece.

    Yugoslavia was a recently created client state of these countries.

    The only pieces missing were neutral Spain and Turkey, and with Turkey it wasn't for lack of trying (see the Treaty of Sevres).

    The difference of course is that the European control of the MENA Islamic lands in the early 1900's was on European terms, while the union sought now is supposed to be on Islam's terms and lead by Islamic colonization of Europe.
    , @Jack D
    I dunno - in the past when too many Europeans were crowded into one space they started to bite each other like too many rats in a cage. For a while the Americas provided a release valve but after that they unleashed genocidal wars for lebensraum on each other.

    I think the root of European nihilism is their realization that after their civilization produced the Sistine Chapel and Mozart, it then produced the V-2 and Zyklon-B (while modern music and architecture is a mess). After Christopher Wren the builder of London you get Bomber Harris the unbuilder of Dresden . You can't blame people for throwing in the towel when they see that their civilization has driven itself into a dead end.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. backup says:

    The scholar Edward Said took this point further, writing in his book Orientalism in 1978 that Islam had defined Europe culturally, by showing Europe what it was against. Europe’s very identity, in other words, was built in significant measure on a sense of superiority to the Muslim Arab world on its periphery.

    I very much doubt that. Mediaeval Europe is a cross over between Germanic habits – It’s emphasis on loyalty turning to courteousness – and Roman institutions. Furthermore, mediaeval Christian philosophy did not care all that much about mundane politics. Europe indeed was deeply Christian and the crusades were considered a holy task. But looking at the lack of enthusiasm in defending the Outremer once the Muslim started to reconquer it Europe did not consider it the heart of her existence.

    Imperialism proved the ultimate expression of this evolution: Early modern Europe, starting with Napoleon, conquered the Middle East, then dispatched scholars and diplomats to study Islamic civilization, classifying it as something beautiful, fascinating, and—most crucial—inferior.

    European imperialism mostly affected Asia, the America’s and Africa. One must recall that the Ottoman empire rules the Middle East. Apart from the Napoleontic intermezzo the West has had hardly any imperialistic influence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Kaplan is just a lying *** ****.

    that Islam had defined Europe culturally, by showing Europe what it was against. Europe’s very identity, in other words, was built in significant measure on a **sense of superiority** to the Muslim Arab world on its periphery.
     
    and

    Imperialism proved the ultimate expression of this evolution: Early modern Europe, starting with Napoleon, conquered the Middle East (snip) —and, most crucial—**inferior**.
     
    He's deliberately trying to twist the story of Arab conquest and slave raiding into one of European racism.

    The entire media pours out this kind of cultural warfare 24/7.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. Anonym says:
    @Cwhatfuture

    Beyond its stark, clearly articulated message, Islam’s very militancy makes it attractive to the downtrodden. It is the one religion that is prepared to fight
     
    Islam's holy book is utterly incoherent, virtually non-understandable. Islam doesn't fight, it breeds. When it comes up against anyone else really prepared to fight, it cringes. Islam's militancy - that is the propensity for bullying - makes it attractive to the stupid, the criminal and the in-bred. China, Burma, Israel - any nation really that stands up to their sociopathy - does as it wishes with the great Islamic nation.

    Islam’s holy book is utterly incoherent, virtually non-understandable.

    I disagree. The reason why so many Islamic terrorists are engineers is that sometimes it takes an engineer to RTFM.

    I have read a translation and it made a lot of sense to me. If you want to spread your religion over time, it makes a lot of sense the way the Muslims do it. At first appear innocuous. Gradually get more aggressive until you can afford to put to the sword those whose territory you covet, or they convert, or they pay you a tax to fund your further adventures. Apostates are killed, that goes some way to solve the free rider problem.

    Of course, a society that focuses on war and spoils of war to the virtual exclusion of all else is bound to have lackluster science and economic growth. It won’t even have an effective modern military, for that very reason. Islam is basically the embodied religion of 14 year old male desires. That’s not to say it isn’t dangerous or something to keep out of our countries.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde

    Islam’s holy book is utterly incoherent, virtually non-understandable.

    I disagree. The reason why so many Islamic terrorists are engineers is that sometimes it takes an engineer to RTFM.
     
    The Koran is easy to understand because it is the briefest holy book. So its the most easily memorized and recited (spit back) in the original Arabic which is the only thing going in madrassahs. Obama got precisely this kind of Arabic language Koran education in Indonesia for two hours per week.
    In the Muslim world there are Koran memorization/recitation competitions. In Arabic of course no matter where they take place. No need to understand what you reciting. It is memorized phonetically. Brainwashed 10 and 12 year olds can do this.
    The hypnotized never lie- Pete Townsend.
    , @cwhatfuture
    I agree with your analysis of Islam but definitely not of the Koran, which I have read. The English of translations may be understandable to you, because the translators make it so. Even so, the Koran, is mind numbingly repetitive, references Bible stories with no explanation, lacks any literary beauty in any translation I have read (every character speaks in exactly the same voice - Noah, Joseph, Jesus - all sound exactly the same) and it is hair raising when it comes to speaking about violence to be dealt to the unbelievers. Shakespeare is 1000 times more eloquent and can be translated without any problem. But besides for that, look at what most modern non-Muslim scholars of Islam say:

    The Koran claims for itself that it is 'mubeen,' or 'clear,' but if you look at it, you will notice that every fifth sentence or so simply doesn't make sense. Many Muslims—and Orientalists—will tell you otherwise, of course, but the fact is that a fifth of the Koranic text is just incomprehensible. This is what has caused the traditional anxiety regarding translation. If the Koran is not comprehensible—if it can't even be understood in Arabic—then it's not translatable
     
    That is from Karl-Heinz Ohlig at University of Saarland. It has long been noted that the religious vocabulary of the Koran is Aramaic but others have stated that entire passages were imperfectly translated from the Aramaic and that is why they make no sense.

    Or this from Patricia Crone (who was at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton) and Michael Cook, a professor now at Princeton


    [The Qur'an] is strikingly lacking in overall structure, frequently obscure and inconsequential in both language and content, perfunctory in its linking of disparate materials, and given to the repetition of whole passages in variant versions. On this basis it can plausibly be argued that the book is the product of belated and imperfect editing of materials from a plurality of traditions.
     
    Most Muslims cannot read the Koran as modern Arabic is a very different language from Koranic Arabic, not to mention the Muslims who are not Arabs at all. They just memorize it and then listen to whatever their "religious leaders" tell them, which in large part are exhortations to kill the infidel.
    , @anon
    However it's a very good manual for a kind of tidal warfare.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. Andrew says:
    @TomSchmidt
    The relevant book here is Mohammed and Charlemagne, Revisited, about how Arab cutting of trade networks created the Dark Ages (favorite factoid: cutting the supply of papyrus led to a collapse in commerce in France, as there was no cheap way to keep accounts. The author points out that French royal archives from before the 7th century are on papyrus.). Emmet Scott also points out that Arab herders, unused to agriculture, allowed their flocks to graze newly-planted fields, eating the new supply of wheat, causing a collapse in agriculture and population. The denuded fields washed into the Mediterranean and formed the Younger Fill.

    Of course, Mohammed might never have existed if the Christian Roman Empire of 550AD hadn't focused so much on fighting other (Arian) Christians and had instead proselytized so that Medina and Mecca had been Christian cities. That was their charge, and they preferred to sit in Constantinople and live in luxury instead.

    “Of course, Mohammed might never have existed if the Christian Roman Empire of 550AD hadn’t focused so much on fighting other (Arian) Christians and had instead proselytized so that Medina and Mecca had been Christian cities. ”

    There were numerous Christian throughout Arabia at the time of Mohammad and they had been there for hundreds of years at that time. They were under the Patriarch of Seleucia-Cstesiphon in the Persian Empire, and thus part of what was call “The Catholic Church of the East” as opposed to the “Catholic Church of Rome.” The remnants of these Christians are the Christians of Assyria and Kerala.

    The Christian Church in the Roman Empire ~AD 550 was convulsed with trying to reconcile the Monophysites, who formed the majority of the Christians in Egypt, Syria, and Armenia (i.e. the entire border of the Empire with its main rival – Persia) to the official faith of the Catholic Church (Chalcedonianism). In doing this, it was also separating itself from the autonomously governed Church province inside the Persian Empire, so it would hardly have been sending missionaries into areas controlled by or under the influence of the Parthians.

    The fighting against other Christians, as you put it, was the successful effort to liberate Africa, Italy, Spain, and the Mediterranean islands from the rule of the German tribes. I suppose that you can call the Arians Christian in a technical sense, in the same way that Unitarians and Mormons are (those are the two faiths closest to Arianism). These were of course rich provinces full of Romans involuntarily separated from the Empire. I don’t think I understand why you think Justinian’s reuniting the Empire was not an important task. The Empire wasn’t going to become stronger by losing these provinces forever.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    One favorite discovery in this area was this article by Razib Khan about lost "Christian" lands:

    in the decades before Islam much of the traditionally Byzantine Near East had been under Persian rule....Christianity remained the dominant religion of most of the lands under Muslim rule for at least two centuries after the Arab conquests at a minimum. The Patriarch of the Church of the East between 780 and 823, Timothy, presided over a Christian international network which stretched from the Euphrates to China! Timothy’s missionaries were active in Central Asia, China, Tibet, and India. Mesopotamia was the heartland of his church, but most of the former Persian lands hard large Nestorian minorities, who remained in place while the Zoroastrians slowly disappeared. Jenkins makes the case that Timothy’s Church of the East was the largest of his day, superior in numbers to the Western Church headed by the Bishop of Rome. Remember than in 800 much of Germany was only marginally Christianized, while Scandinavia and almost all of Eastern Europe remained fully pagan.
     
    As far as being "liberated" from German tribes, Tainter, in The Collapse of Complex Societies makes the point that the standard of living in the West ROSE after the collapse of the Western empire, as the costs of running a useless government in Rome/Milan/Ravenna were removed, and that the real collapse in Italy was set in motion by Justinian's wars of (temporary) reconquest. It's a strange liberation that brings poverty, destruction, and centralized control with it. But it did get the Arians briefly to utter "E pur si muove" for a few decades, under their breath.

    Justinian was handed a strong empire with a full treasury. Then he married a whore who wore the pants in the family but bore him no children. To prove his manhood to that whore he spent the treasure piled up by his predecessor and sent Belisarius (who he later undermined) to spend lives and treasure momentarily adding provinces. In so doing, he weakened his empire for the fight against Persia and eventually Islam (and Scott thinks that Islam 's armies were in fact the Parthians; the book is worth a read), but did pay for some nice mosaics in Ravenna, far from where the iconoclasts could destroy them when the East lost control over Ravenna.

    Had Justinian been a holy man, with a holy wife, he might have known this:
    Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. Clyde says:

    But European continentalism is unthinkable because it’s tantamount to European racialism, which is the worst thing in the world. The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.

    And here I thought this continentalism was the whole point of the EU. What we have is a rump continentalism that refuses to defend itself (see the infamous photo all their female defense ministers) except for the brave peripherals such as Hungary, Macedonia and other Balkans fence builders. Serious fences backed up by active military and police. Austria is also about to “fence off” a crucial mountain border crossing from Muslim inundated Italy.

    The best defense is a good border fence. Talk is cheap for the Merkels and similar EU hacks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon

    And here I thought this continentalism was the whole point of the EU.
     
    The EU thinks destroying the existing nation states is a necessary condition for that but the methods they are using to destroy the nation-states are destroying the continent.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. Andrew says:
    @Anonymous
    Herodotus distinguished groups such as the "Keltoi" from the Greeks. He didn't write about them as "Europeans".

    The Carthaginians were originally from the eastern Mediterranean and had colonies in North Africa and Iberia and Southwestern Europe. When Hannibal and Carthage waged war against Rome, they had Iberian, Celtic, and other European allies against the Romans.

    The Romans waged war against Britons, Gauls, and Germans with Arab and African soldiers.

    Europe as a geopolitical-cultural bloc really emerges in the Medieval period out of the Catholic Church.

    “Europe as a geopolitical-cultural bloc really emerges in the Medieval period out of the Catholic Church.”

    This definition of Europe essentially identifies it as “Francia” which can be defined exactly as the non-Roman and non-Russian part of the European landmass.

    The cultural contrast already existed at the time of Alexander the Great as a distinction between Germano-Celtic areas in the north and west and Greco-Roman and Carthaginian areas in the south and east, so it is not an invention of the Catholic Church. The only thing the Catholic Church did was to define its exact outline – the ethno-cultural fault between the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic running between Serbia and Croatia, around the Carpathian mountains, up the Bug and down the Narva River, and splitting the Finnic peninsula from Russia. Also, within the Catholic part, the “Otherness” of what later became the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies” and together with the former Muslim areas of Spain and the rest of Catholic Europe was also always apparent and remains so to this day.

    The same approximate dichotomy existed between the Merovingians and Justinian’s Empire, between Charlemagne and the Muslims and East Romans, and the Hapsburgs and France together versus the Ottomans and Russians.

    Ancient Germans and Celts did not get a chance to write much preserved history, so whether or not the were a geopolitical-cultural bloc from the start is not well known although trade patterns would tend to indicate it. They certainly acted like one as soon as they conquered the western part of the Empire – recognizing themselves as one united nation and the Romans as an “other”.

    The differences in thinking of northwest Europe from Mediterranean Europe, near Asia and North Africa has been contrasted repeatedly throughout history.

    Read More
    • Replies: @celt darnell
    No -- anonymous is correct. There was no "Europe" in ancient times. The Romans, for example, did not regard the Ancient Britons as somehow more closely akin to them than the Ancient Egyptians.

    Nor did the Ancient Greeks see "Europe" as a clearly defined geographic area containing a group of culturally connected peoples (Europe could mean, for example, anything north of Greece -- meaning the Greeks didn't see themselves as "European").

    That kind of thinking was unknown in Ancient times -- their world view was very different to ours.

    Even so, to claim "Europe" is a creation of the medieval era is a bit of a stretch. The medieval church dealt in "Christendom" rather than "Europe" and, given they expected Christ to triumph, they saw all geographic barriers to Christendom as temporary.

    "Europe" in its modern interpretation dates from around the Reformation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. Andrew says:
    @Maj. Kong
    Imperialism, as leftist academics describe it, is rooted in Marx's view of it. Marx thought capitalism needed more markets, so it sought colonies. Subsequent communists thought that the fall of imperialism via 'wars of national liberation' would expose the foundations of capitalism, leading to the World Revolution.

    When it comes to Islam, there is no desire for an elite Muslim minority to 'civilize' a population of kuffar barbarians. The entire society is to become a Sunni caliphate that speaks Arabic, with a substantial influx of foriegn Y chromosomes. Furthermore, Islam wants the same World Revolution.

    While it isn't pure communism, it has enough to keep the fellow travelers on board.


    *My personal view is that any sympathy and potential conversion to Islam from the right-of-center would come from the Shi'a direction. The Shia clerical system is aristocratic and clearly defined, and the Shia have the nation of Iran, "land of Aryans".

    “*My personal view is that any sympathy and potential conversion to Islam from the right-of-center would come from the Shi’a direction. The Shia clerical system is aristocratic and clearly defined, and the Shia have the nation of Iran, “land of Aryans”.”

    You are exactly right. The Shia are much closer in thinking to traditional Catholic and Orthodox religion and culture than the Sunni.

    Rightists in America have been blinded to this by the fierce rivalry of Iran and Hezbollah with Israel and America since the Iranian revolution and the slavish subservience of American rightists to Israeli policy goals.

    The Syrian war, however, has exposed this reality by contrasting the Alawite/Shia/Druze/Christian Assad regime with the barbarism of ISIS (and frankly of Saudi Arabia), which is the full reality of Sunni Islam down through the ages. There aren’t many people on the right who have any sympathy for the civilization that ISIS and the Saudis want to create and impose on us. On the other hand, I think many people could see themselves being able to get along with the Shia if a man like Assad were in charge.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. If this hasn’t been sent to you yet… It’s got Unz, Sailer, Brimelow (no Derb?) in the dock. A real “motley rabble of saucy boys!” Happy Patriots’ day everyone.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR

    “The fact that Unz sprinkles money around to a range of viewpoints doesn’t make it OK to finance hate speech,” Park said.
     
    Definition of hate speech: anything a leftist disagrees with
    , @Brutusale
    Object lesson in why the John Henry Gazette, once valued at $1.1 billion, is now worth $70 million, most of which is the property value of the land the paper occupies.
    , @Tracy
    Cool. Free publicity. You go, Steve!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. Pat Casey says:
    @guest
    I liked Submission a lot better than I thought I would, especially after I started reading it and was awash in boring sex. I understand that there was a point to the boredom and vulgarity, but I've never understood why stories have to be themselves boring and vulgar to make that point. That why I don't enjoy realism. I've also never been into decadence, though I am decadent myself. Maybe because I'm decadent.

    It got good near the end, when an actual plot kicked in. His conversation with the Islamicized professor was good, and reminded me of similar scenes in various dystopias. What it lacked were concrete reasons why he couldn't fall back into Christianity, for instance. There's the monetary and career incentives, but he didn't need money and didn't seem interested in position. The church may be dead for most people of his kind, but he went so far as to go back to that monastery, and there was a distinct lack of internal reason for conversion to Islam. Except the sex, perhaps.

    Maybe it's okay that it isn't explained. We can't explain why the West is losing faith in itself. It's just happening. Going to Islam's side could be less of a conversion than a resigning to the winners.

    Nice comment. I sense in you a remnant. I’m decadent as well, but knew that book wasn’t worth reading by the way the author looks. No offense to ugly people, but we must not trust their art, ever. That was the wisdom of the greeks. And the first point Nietzsche made about Socrates was that he was well known to be hideous. Because of him, Socrates, we can’t make sense of irony its so omnipresent. We can’t make sense of ourselves in a sense. A hideous person must be humble, and irony escapes that obligation, and disguises the escape with false humility.

    Anyways, the only way to make sense of that book is to assume its ironic. But who can say for sure? Well that’s the point.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. Bettega says:

    Someone needs to tell Kaplan that the Pirenne Thesis, though compelling, has been disproved by current research among historians such as Bryan Ward-Perkins who show that, yes, the German migrations really destroyed the Roman Empire.

    Not that this would change anything Kaplan believes, he is just peddling a pseudo-historical basis for his desire of submitting Christian Europe to Islam. These Kaplans hate us so much we can’t even comprehend it and they want to destroy us.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  109. Andrew says:
    @Anonymous
    In the final analysis, Kaplan is actually questioning the right of Europeans to exist.
    - that is what all the flowery overblown rhetoric and cod scholarship reduces down to.

    Now, the 'right to exist' is a curious term. At the most basic, fundamental level, it is *the* principle behind all life on this planet be it microbiological, vegetable or animal, since the very first replicators emerged from that much hypothesized 'soup' billions of years ago.

    It is also the guiding principle of absolutely every human societal construct from the family, to the tribe, to the nation to Microsoft and Apple, and even iSteve and Steve posters daring to sound their voices.

    So, Robert Kaplan is in, effect, calling for the voluntary extinction, nay, negation, of the primordial impulse of this existential universe, as manifest in its highest bearers.


    Even a flea fights for its life.

    “In the final analysis, Kaplan is actually questioning the right of Europeans to exist.”

    I.e. the rallying cry of PEGIDA and AfD “Wir sind das Volk!”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. Clyde says:
    @Anonym
    Islam’s holy book is utterly incoherent, virtually non-understandable.

    I disagree. The reason why so many Islamic terrorists are engineers is that sometimes it takes an engineer to RTFM.

    I have read a translation and it made a lot of sense to me. If you want to spread your religion over time, it makes a lot of sense the way the Muslims do it. At first appear innocuous. Gradually get more aggressive until you can afford to put to the sword those whose territory you covet, or they convert, or they pay you a tax to fund your further adventures. Apostates are killed, that goes some way to solve the free rider problem.

    Of course, a society that focuses on war and spoils of war to the virtual exclusion of all else is bound to have lackluster science and economic growth. It won't even have an effective modern military, for that very reason. Islam is basically the embodied religion of 14 year old male desires. That's not to say it isn't dangerous or something to keep out of our countries.

    Islam’s holy book is utterly incoherent, virtually non-understandable.

    I disagree. The reason why so many Islamic terrorists are engineers is that sometimes it takes an engineer to RTFM.

    The Koran is easy to understand because it is the briefest holy book. So its the most easily memorized and recited (spit back) in the original Arabic which is the only thing going in madrassahs. Obama got precisely this kind of Arabic language Koran education in Indonesia for two hours per week.
    In the Muslim world there are Koran memorization/recitation competitions. In Arabic of course no matter where they take place. No need to understand what you reciting. It is memorized phonetically. Brainwashed 10 and 12 year olds can do this.
    The hypnotized never lie- Pete Townsend.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. @iSteveFan
    OT - I saw an old 1980 episode of the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson on antenna TV. Dr. Paul Erlich was a guest. This guy was talking to Johnny about overpopulation. He talked about the USA being overpopulated at 220 million people and the world at 4 billion. He discussed that we had no need for anything over 140 million, our population during WW2.

    Interestingly he discussed the recent phenomenon of Mexican immigration and how we would have to choose between births by natives or immigrant admissions. He said to keep the population at zero growth, you'd have to sacrifice a birth for every immigrant admitted. Or you'd have to cut back an immigrant for every native birth. It was interesting to hear people discuss the issue without fear.

    Of course 36 years later and the USA now has over 325 million people and the world is over 7 billion. And Mexican immigration is still front and center.

    I'd like to hear what Ehrlich thinks now. Of course he was way off on oil. He kept telling Johnny we had only 20 years left of oil.

    I remember the fear of overpopulation back in the day. It predates the ozone layer, nuclear winter and global warming fears. Given the population forecasts from the UN, I’m surprised there hasn’t been more opposition to mass immigration from baby boomers who grew up with Erlich’s ideas.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. Andrew says:
    @Kat Grey
    Let me put it bluntly White Europeans need to start having unprotected marathon sex with each other..otherwise they will cease to exist. Simple maths.

    “Let me put it bluntly White Europeans need to start having unprotected marathon sex with each other..otherwise they will cease to exist. Simple maths.”

    I keep saying it. I feel like Russell the crop duster guy in “Independence Day” who has been trying to convince people for years that aliens really exist.

    When Europeans had lots of unprotected sex and made lots of a babies they conquered the world and were over 1/3 of its population.

    Just saying.

    If we are truly so valuable like you folks like to say, then you should get busy making more of us like I have.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kat Grey
    I have done my part but so many whites put off having kids until their thirties. A generation ago couples started having children in their late teens and early twenties. Back in the 1980s the average Irish family was about seven kids. Now the young people are emigrating with African and Chinese immigrants taking their place.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. bomag says:
    @Anon
    vibrant chemistry.

    http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2016/04/12/annie-dookhan-released-prison/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annie_Dookhan

    Quite a story: a fake citizen with fake credentials does fake work at a state lab, and her supervisors say nothing; no doubt in service to racial sensibilities.

    It is time to rephrase Blackstone: “It is better that one hundred mistakes go free than to correct one vibrant.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    Notice how the left favors presumption of guilt in cases of rape.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. Andrew says:
    @Kat Grey
    Let me put it bluntly White Europeans need to start having unprotected marathon sex with each other..otherwise they will cease to exist. Simple maths.

    What is funny is that after 1915, a Mediterranean Union already existed. Britain, France, and Italy were close allies.

    Britain ruled over Egypt, Palestine, and Cyprus.

    France had formally incorporated Algeria as part of France and was colonizing it, and also ruled Tunisia, Morocco, Syria, and Lebanon.

    Italy held Libya and Rhodes and essentially dominated Albania and Greece.

    Yugoslavia was a recently created client state of these countries.

    The only pieces missing were neutral Spain and Turkey, and with Turkey it wasn’t for lack of trying (see the Treaty of Sevres).

    The difference of course is that the European control of the MENA Islamic lands in the early 1900′s was on European terms, while the union sought now is supposed to be on Islam’s terms and lead by Islamic colonization of Europe.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. backup says:
    @Hippopotamusdrome


    Imperialism proved the ultimate expression of this evolution: Early modern Europe, starting with Napoleon, conquered the Middle East

     

    So did the Romans (who gave us the base for the word 'imperialism'), and before them the Greeks. Also, the Mongols, Arabs, Persians and Assyrians.

    Furthermore, after Napoleon the Ottomans ruled it until 1918. I don’t remember Kaplan being so sloppy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Jay says:
    @Leftist conservative

    Significant migration is inevitable as long as other parts of the world are crappier and faster growing than Europe and Europe unilaterally ideologically disarms itself of having any concept of the right of collective self-defense. Yet, the experience of Israel, which is geographically much more vulnerable to migration flows than is Europe, shows that all it takes for a modern state to defend itself against hegira is self-confidence.

     

    kids in Israel have not had their heads crammed full of anti-Israeli propaganda. Whereas in america and western europe white kids are told that whites are the demons of history and that immigrants and nonwhites are good and holy. Just coincidentally, that propaganda makes white kids grow up to be ashamed of their race. And just coincidentally that reservoir of white guilt makes it easier for the corporations to get more immigrants into america and western europe. And just coincidentally that surplus pool of workers and consumers suppresses wage growth and increases sales, which increases corporate profits.

    Oh, wait. I am sorry. I am on unz.com, and everyone here (except me) seems to believe that the goal of the elite regarding immigration is just to get more Democrat/Liberal voters and dependent welfare state clients, and that the GOP/conservatives are just too stupid to figure out what the liberals are doing. Yeah, that sounds good.

    Ranters are rarely accurate in their characterizations, nor logically precise. Tone is a good indicator of content.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Leftist conservative
    another cruz fan
    , @AndrewR
    Accuracy is to ideologues what garlic is to vampires.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. AndrewR says:
    @Jenner Ickham Errican
    If this hasn’t been sent to you yet… It’s got Unz, Sailer, Brimelow (no Derb?) in the dock. A real “motley rabble of saucy boys!” Happy Patriots’ day everyone.

    “The fact that Unz sprinkles money around to a range of viewpoints doesn’t make it OK to finance hate speech,” Park said.

    Definition of hate speech: anything a leftist disagrees with

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. @anonymous
    "So while the Church prohibited usury, they had their own methods for raising the funds. "

    You might also think of the monks who pretty much terra-formed much of Europe, drained the swamps, dug the wells, built many of the fields, and built the waterwheels, as a form of direct investment in people, no money needed.

    Of course, they were mostly working their own land only, not the ordinary villages where the serfs and peasants lived. Monks (monastic orders) lived in total isolation apart from townspeople as well as rural villagers. Over time, of course, the monasteries became more open to outside influences. Many monasteries made wine (in Germany they brewed beer) and did other forms of manual labor to support themselves. Of course as time continued to pass this helped increase the wealth of the larger monasteries which became an additional source of wealth for the Church as an institution.

    Point being, the monasteries didn’t directly invest in ordinary villages or infant towns. For the most part they invested in their own monasteries (lands owned directly by the Church, which further increased the value of the Church’s property).

    Why do you think Henry VIII sacked the monasteries in 1536? Because they were a source of vast wealth that wasn’t going directly to the state but to the Church.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Man From K Street

    Of course, they were mostly working their own land only, not the ordinary villages where the serfs and peasants lived. Monks (monastic orders) lived in total isolation apart from townspeople as well as rural villagers... Point being, the monasteries didn’t directly invest in ordinary villages or infant towns. For the most part they invested in their own monasteries (lands owned directly by the Church, which further increased the value of the Church’s property).
     
    Some amateur historians among Steve's commentariat shouldn't be let out without a chaperone. This is so wrong as to stupefy anyone with a passing knowledge of English social history in the period in question. "Ordinary villages and infant towns" were sitting on and part of the monastic lands. What do you think, the tonsured monks were doing all the plowing, sowing, harvesting themselves? Oh, and not just agriculture--all that light industry powered by waterwheels, weaving, dyeing, etc. They were the managerial cadre on each estate, and as such had day-to-day contact with every stratum of laypeople in each estate. They came from those laypeople too, as the abbots, abbesses and other higher-ups were talent scouts looking to recruit and educate the smart kids (women too) on their lands to climb the ladder, regardless of non-noble birth.
    The closeness of monastic clergy and lay people meant that the Dissolution of the Monasteries was an unmitigated social disaster for nearly everybody. The monasteries were, essentially, the social safety net in pre-welfare state England. All the negative social indicators--crime, vagrancy, illegitimacy, malnutrition--even illiteracy (despite the printing press and the vernacular liturgy)--skyrocketed from 1536 to almost the end of the 16th century. A major part of Elizabethan governance was trying to devise various "Poor Laws" to cope with the tsunami of social dysfunction and slum sprawl that resulted. The Dissolution was like the "Great Society" of the 1960s in terms of unintended consequences.

    Why do you think Henry VIII sacked the monasteries in 1536? Because they were a source of vast wealth that wasn’t going directly to the state but to the Church.
     
    Which Henry pissed away on stupid wars in France and other court extravagances to the point where the money gained was gone in less than 20 years. The English government was insolvent for most of the rest of the century.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. Wilkey says:
    @Anonymous
    As I've said many times before, Steve, EU laws *mandate* that anyone, anyone at all, who washes up on EU shores and is able to utter the word 'asylum' is invited straight into the EU, and it is, in fact, a criminal offence to refuse him entry, let alone trying to dissuade him, peacefully or otherwise.

    As long as this madness continues - and there is absolutely no sign of it ever changing - the 'migrant crisis' - more like 'gullibility crisis' - will thrive prosper.

    And you have to wonder what threat the vote on June 23 poses to this order. If the UK chooses to leave (assuming the election isn’t rigged) what feints in the direction of local control will the EU make in order to keep their EUmpire together?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    Brexit? Simply won't be permitted. The domino effect would be awesome.
    For example, Poland's unemployment rate (nudging 20%) halved after Accession and the Germans and French wouldn't let them in as workers, so guess where they went? All 600,000 of them. And Baltics (not the nice ones, they all stayed home, it appears). Not to mention the current wave of young Iberians, Italians, and French, on top of the perennial crowds of Irish. Even Greeks. Grand lads and lasses the lot of them, but things really are beginning to creak at the seams.
    And UK is a net contributor, with loads of offshore resources (not including exporting child benefit and other insanities).
    Rigged it will be, if Project Fear II fails to cow the serfs and proposed gerrymandering like letting children vote is rejected.
    , @Anonymous
    The sad fact is that the EU High Command, ie Angela Merkel could have avoided the brexit referendum altogether by simply granting Britain's sovereign right to control immigration back to Britain.
    Merkel simply refused. She stated -'I'd rather have Britain leave the EU than to restrict the right of free movement'.

    This is the same woman who invited half of the ummah into Germany.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. If Muslims become a majority and politically take over, it is very likely the newly-Islamic governments of Europe will turn against Israel and attempt to destroy it. Do the diversity-promoting Jews of Europe (like Barbara Spectre) not realize this?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kat Grey
    Spectre is mostly likely a pro-Palestinian, self-hating Jew just like Ireland's Ronit Lentin. She teaches at Dublin's prestigious university Trinity College and is an avowed advocate of the replacement of the indigenous Irish by non-white immigrants.
    , @anon
    My guess is they think they can control middle-easterners easier because of the history of co-existence in Moorish Spain (and because they're dumber ).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_age_of_Jewish_culture_in_Spain

    They'll find out why they were wrong afterwards but twill be too late then.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. @Anonymous
    In the final analysis, Kaplan is actually questioning the right of Europeans to exist.
    - that is what all the flowery overblown rhetoric and cod scholarship reduces down to.

    Now, the 'right to exist' is a curious term. At the most basic, fundamental level, it is *the* principle behind all life on this planet be it microbiological, vegetable or animal, since the very first replicators emerged from that much hypothesized 'soup' billions of years ago.

    It is also the guiding principle of absolutely every human societal construct from the family, to the tribe, to the nation to Microsoft and Apple, and even iSteve and Steve posters daring to sound their voices.

    So, Robert Kaplan is in, effect, calling for the voluntary extinction, nay, negation, of the primordial impulse of this existential universe, as manifest in its highest bearers.


    Even a flea fights for its life.

    ..Kaplan is…calling for the voluntary extinction…of the primordial impulse of this existential universe.

    Because believing we’ve a right to live, like anyone else, is Not Who We Are.

    We’re better than that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. Leftist conservative [AKA "Make Unz.com Great Again"] says: • Website
    @Jay
    Ranters are rarely accurate in their characterizations, nor logically precise. Tone is a good indicator of content.

    another cruz fan

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jay
    Not at all. I will write in "Trump" if he is not on my ballot. I would happily vote for a Trump/Sanders ticket.

    I just don't like your tone.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. Jay says:
    @iSteveFan
    OT - I saw an old 1980 episode of the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson on antenna TV. Dr. Paul Erlich was a guest. This guy was talking to Johnny about overpopulation. He talked about the USA being overpopulated at 220 million people and the world at 4 billion. He discussed that we had no need for anything over 140 million, our population during WW2.

    Interestingly he discussed the recent phenomenon of Mexican immigration and how we would have to choose between births by natives or immigrant admissions. He said to keep the population at zero growth, you'd have to sacrifice a birth for every immigrant admitted. Or you'd have to cut back an immigrant for every native birth. It was interesting to hear people discuss the issue without fear.

    Of course 36 years later and the USA now has over 325 million people and the world is over 7 billion. And Mexican immigration is still front and center.

    I'd like to hear what Ehrlich thinks now. Of course he was way off on oil. He kept telling Johnny we had only 20 years left of oil.

    In 1979, Ehrlich coauthored the book, The Golden Door, about illegal Mexican immigration, and in it advocated a North American Union with free movement of people. So The Population Bomb was only intended to suppress the reproduction of Caucasians, who then would be replaced by Meztizos. Ehrlich of course was aware that natural habitats in Mexico had been almost completely destroyed; even the roosting sites of Monarch Butterflies are being clear-cut.

    Ehrlich is not the only Ashkenazi who has put Caucasian replacement ahead of the North American environment. David Gelbaum, although responsible for preserving substantial acreages in California, made a 100 million dollar donation to the Sierra Club contingent upon its changing its anti-immigration policy to one of neutrality. Since then (1996) no conservation organization has dared to discuss the link between immigration and environmental degradation. See the details here http://www.thesocialcontract.com/artman2/publish/tsc_24_4/tsc_24_4_walker.shtml

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. Jay says:
    @Leftist conservative
    another cruz fan

    Not at all. I will write in “Trump” if he is not on my ballot. I would happily vote for a Trump/Sanders ticket.

    I just don’t like your tone.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Leftist conservative
    tone is so important. One must maintain the proper conservative sensibilities. Do be a good man and fetch some Grey Poupon. The Good Life has the proper tone. A snifter of brandy and a good cigar along with The Financial Times.

    Tuppence, properly invested. And the proper tone. Always.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxyB29bDbBA
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. @Clio

    about how Arab cutting of trade networks created the Dark Ages favorite factoid: cutting the supply of papyrus led to a collapse in commerce in France, as there was no cheap way to keep accounts. The author points out that French royal archives from before the 7th century are on papyrus.

     

    This is complete nonsense; papyrus grows in Sicily to this day.

    Did Sicily have a system for the production of papyrus, the cross-threaded “paper” of the ancient world? As “Drake” points out, Muslim raids in Sicily might have cut off trade between there and
    France; the bigger issue is whether Sicily produced any cheap paper at all.

    I found the anecdote interesting because I thought that the same thing could happen to business and accounts in the West today: one EMP that wipes non-paper records and we are down for years. Maybe never to restore.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    IIRC, Greg Cochran suggested that one set of early 20th Century encyclopedia Brittanica would be sufficient info to rebuild most tech.
    , @Clio
    Here's a link to an encyclopaedia from 1820 describing papyrus growing wild in Calabria. (It doesn't really today, perhaps because the rivers have been straightened.)

    https://books.google.ch/books?id=2VAPAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA562&lpg=PA562&dq=papyrus+calabria&source=bl&ots=HqaL2N-m5I&sig=CXkWREa4DYC50jrAq_jpKP2AAPE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi1_sOS7JjMAhVIShQKHbcsDLcQ6AEIIzAD#v=onepage&q=papyrus%20calabria&f=false
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. This is a side-note, but I’ll rush to redeem Kipling from inclusion in this list of august but arguably naïve figures of Orientalist artistry:

    Or, perhaps, to know the cabdrivers of Rotherham and Malmo is to become disillusioned with the pleasant Orientalist fantasies of Delacroix, Kipling, Mozart, Verdi, and Byron?

    I think that Kipling understood India as well as someone with a fairly open mind and moderately rich experience of the country could be expected to. Perhaps a century of explosive population growth and misgoverance has made the subcontinent more chaotic, but the country of Kim was still pretty recognizable when I travelled around in 2003.

    Most of the people on this site probably aren’t going to a lot of kids’ movies, but for what it’s worth, I loved the new version of The Jungle Book, and thought it was quite true to the spirit of Kipling’s original even if it is based nominally on the 1967 cartoon. (https://spottedtoad.wordpress.com/2016/04/17/the-jungle-book/ )Manohla Dargis’s negative NYTimes review was a masterpiece of know-nothingism: “It also feels strangely removed from our moment,” from the woman who thought that “Trainwreck” was great cinema; she also made the hilarious allegation that “The Law of the Jungle” was intended to be a metaphor for *British rule*, when it’s perfectly obvious that, to the limited extent that the Jungle Book is about colonialism, Mowgli is the British, trying to learn the “Laws” of the Indian social Jungle.

    Read More
    • Replies: @celt darnell
    I've noticed Kipling tends to bring out the know-nothings...

    Will also follow your recommendation and catch the film. Thanks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. Kat Grey says:
    @Andrew
    "Let me put it bluntly White Europeans need to start having unprotected marathon sex with each other..otherwise they will cease to exist. Simple maths."

    I keep saying it. I feel like Russell the crop duster guy in "Independence Day" who has been trying to convince people for years that aliens really exist.

    When Europeans had lots of unprotected sex and made lots of a babies they conquered the world and were over 1/3 of its population.

    Just saying.

    If we are truly so valuable like you folks like to say, then you should get busy making more of us like I have.

    I have done my part but so many whites put off having kids until their thirties. A generation ago couples started having children in their late teens and early twenties. Back in the 1980s the average Irish family was about seven kids. Now the young people are emigrating with African and Chinese immigrants taking their place.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. @Andrew
    "Of course, Mohammed might never have existed if the Christian Roman Empire of 550AD hadn’t focused so much on fighting other (Arian) Christians and had instead proselytized so that Medina and Mecca had been Christian cities. "

    There were numerous Christian throughout Arabia at the time of Mohammad and they had been there for hundreds of years at that time. They were under the Patriarch of Seleucia-Cstesiphon in the Persian Empire, and thus part of what was call "The Catholic Church of the East" as opposed to the "Catholic Church of Rome." The remnants of these Christians are the Christians of Assyria and Kerala.

    The Christian Church in the Roman Empire ~AD 550 was convulsed with trying to reconcile the Monophysites, who formed the majority of the Christians in Egypt, Syria, and Armenia (i.e. the entire border of the Empire with its main rival - Persia) to the official faith of the Catholic Church (Chalcedonianism). In doing this, it was also separating itself from the autonomously governed Church province inside the Persian Empire, so it would hardly have been sending missionaries into areas controlled by or under the influence of the Parthians.

    The fighting against other Christians, as you put it, was the successful effort to liberate Africa, Italy, Spain, and the Mediterranean islands from the rule of the German tribes. I suppose that you can call the Arians Christian in a technical sense, in the same way that Unitarians and Mormons are (those are the two faiths closest to Arianism). These were of course rich provinces full of Romans involuntarily separated from the Empire. I don't think I understand why you think Justinian's reuniting the Empire was not an important task. The Empire wasn't going to become stronger by losing these provinces forever.

    One favorite discovery in this area was this article by Razib Khan about lost “Christian” lands:

    in the decades before Islam much of the traditionally Byzantine Near East had been under Persian rule….Christianity remained the dominant religion of most of the lands under Muslim rule for at least two centuries after the Arab conquests at a minimum. The Patriarch of the Church of the East between 780 and 823, Timothy, presided over a Christian international network which stretched from the Euphrates to China! Timothy’s missionaries were active in Central Asia, China, Tibet, and India. Mesopotamia was the heartland of his church, but most of the former Persian lands hard large Nestorian minorities, who remained in place while the Zoroastrians slowly disappeared. Jenkins makes the case that Timothy’s Church of the East was the largest of his day, superior in numbers to the Western Church headed by the Bishop of Rome. Remember than in 800 much of Germany was only marginally Christianized, while Scandinavia and almost all of Eastern Europe remained fully pagan.

    As far as being “liberated” from German tribes, Tainter, in The Collapse of Complex Societies makes the point that the standard of living in the West ROSE after the collapse of the Western empire, as the costs of running a useless government in Rome/Milan/Ravenna were removed, and that the real collapse in Italy was set in motion by Justinian’s wars of (temporary) reconquest. It’s a strange liberation that brings poverty, destruction, and centralized control with it. But it did get the Arians briefly to utter “E pur si muove” for a few decades, under their breath.

    Justinian was handed a strong empire with a full treasury. Then he married a whore who wore the pants in the family but bore him no children. To prove his manhood to that whore he spent the treasure piled up by his predecessor and sent Belisarius (who he later undermined) to spend lives and treasure momentarily adding provinces. In so doing, he weakened his empire for the fight against Persia and eventually Islam (and Scott thinks that Islam ‘s armies were in fact the Parthians; the book is worth a read), but did pay for some nice mosaics in Ravenna, far from where the iconoclasts could destroy them when the East lost control over Ravenna.

    Had Justinian been a holy man, with a holy wife, he might have known this:
    Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Much later, Byzantium was severely weakened when it was pillaged by the Crusaders on their way to liberate Jerusalem from the Arabs. So much for solidarity among Christians. If you analyze the root cause of the crisis in Europe now, it is the fact that its native population was decimated by two world wars - again Christian against Christian, white against white. Surely the losses in the Civil War were one reason for the great immigration in the late 19th century and the great migration of blacks to the North. White people are their own greatest enemies - they only get beaten by others in the 11th round, after they have fought 10 rounds beating each other up first. Because both sides are smart and evenly matched, white people wars tend to be protracted and devastating as they grind on and on and each side comes up with ever more effective weapons and tactics but then the other side counters, like a chess match between two grandmasters at the same level.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. Kat Grey says:
    @Hapalong Cassidy
    If Muslims become a majority and politically take over, it is very likely the newly-Islamic governments of Europe will turn against Israel and attempt to destroy it. Do the diversity-promoting Jews of Europe (like Barbara Spectre) not realize this?

    Spectre is mostly likely a pro-Palestinian, self-hating Jew just like Ireland’s Ronit Lentin. She teaches at Dublin’s prestigious university Trinity College and is an avowed advocate of the replacement of the indigenous Irish by non-white immigrants.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "Spectre is mostly likely a pro-Palestinian, self-hating Jew just like Ireland’s Ronit Lentin. "

    And on what basis do you claim that? Is there any evidence for your assertion? I am not aware of any. The only thing of which one can be sure is that she is anti-gentile and anti-European.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. Leftist conservative [AKA "Make Unz.com Great Again"] says: • Website
    @Jay
    Not at all. I will write in "Trump" if he is not on my ballot. I would happily vote for a Trump/Sanders ticket.

    I just don't like your tone.

    tone is so important. One must maintain the proper conservative sensibilities. Do be a good man and fetch some Grey Poupon. The Good Life has the proper tone. A snifter of brandy and a good cigar along with The Financial Times.

    Tuppence, properly invested. And the proper tone. Always.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. biz says:
    @George
    "Rather than the Chancellor of Germany stabbing the other nations of Europe in the back on a whim"

    Europeans allowed and encouraged wars in Libya, Syria and Afghanistan to name a few. The so called refugee crisis was caused by these wars, and giving the refugees somewhere to go makes maintaining the wars possible. It really is not the camp of the saints situation. The refugee crisis is at minimum a by product of European foreign policy. A foreign policy that has not changed.

    Anytime Germany wants the refugees to go home all they have to do is rebuild the damage they helped produce. While the US Marshal plan is portrayed as do gooding, it reduced the flow of refugees to the US and help reduce the threat of communist take overs in Europe.

    You have repeated a common but false talking point.

    The migrants streaming into Europe are not refugees fleeing war. First of all, if any were, they ceased to be refugees the minute their feet touched the ground safely in Turkey. Any movement beyond that was to seek economic benefit. But more importantly, the ‘fleeing war’ explanation does not account for the high number of refugees from Eritrea and other places without a war on, and certainly without a war that can be blamed on the West.

    Read More
    • Replies: @George
    The migrants filled up Lebanon and Turkey already. So they are forced to look further, for example Germany even Sweden. It is not clear what the problem with Russia is, migrants travel through Russia to Scandinavia. But it doesn't matter, the decisions being made are made on the basis of economics, not what is fair.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. @Anonymous
    Ehrlich made a bunch of dumb, apocalyptic predictions that made him famous but hurt his cause by failing to materialize:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/01/us/the-unrealized-horrors-of-population-explosion.html

    No one was more influential — or more terrifying, some would say — than Paul R. Ehrlich, a Stanford University biologist. His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” sold in the millions with a jeremiad that humankind stood on the brink of apocalypse because there were simply too many of us. Dr. Ehrlich’s opening statement was the verbal equivalent of a punch to the gut: “The battle to feed all of humanity is over.” He later went on to forecast that hundreds of millions would starve to death in the 1970s, that 65 million of them would be Americans, that crowded India was essentially doomed, that odds were fair “England will not exist in the year 2000.” Dr. Ehrlich was so sure of himself that he warned in 1970 that “sometime in the next 15 years, the end will come.” By “the end,” he meant “an utter breakdown of the capacity of the planet to support humanity.”
     

    odds were fair “England will not exist in the year 2000.”

    So he was 50 years Early?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    In the great leftist tradition of being half correct (the useless half), Ehrlich correctly foresaw that the UK (and elsewhere West) was endangered, but got the cause--and therefore the prescription--exactly backwards. The UK wasn't going to succumb to too many Brits, it was going to succumb to too few Bits and too little Britishness.

    Anyhow, as pointed out previously on this page by Jay, the fact that Ehrlich followed The Population Bomb with The Golden Door arguing for unrestricted immigration from environment-ravishing societies pretty well suggests he was arguing in bad faith the entire time anyway.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. Brutusale says:
    @Hunsdon
    I am ever so glad that Western civilization has these Ashkenazi moral guideposts to chart our course and point out our failings. I just don't know where we'd be without them.

    It does get tedious. When Jewish friends get going about life in these United States, I whip out my cell and say “El Al ticket counter, please!”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Heh. I have a Bronx-born Jewish friend who loved to regale me with tales of how horrible the mean, nasty American white people were and are to the innocent, humble black people. I used to try to rebut, temper and contextualize his arguments, but he always had more energy for this kind of thing than I did, so I finally just let him go on uninterrupted until he said everything he had to say and he took my lack of rebuttal for assent. Offhandedly, I said, "And that's why you just moved to the whitest zip code in the country," and then changed the subject.

    I haven't heard white supremacy complaint since.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. Bill B. says:
    @Smitty
    The Dracula myth is an allegory for Christian-Islamic conflict, so it's not as if time slowed the basic dynamic of having Muslim neighbors (they tend to stay psycho, bloodthirsty, and ignorant of the concept of truces or treaties). On another note why is Edward Said not considered a Western intellectual? His books are very Euro-white in their structure, befitting a past chairman of the MLA -- despite the terrorist-sounding acronym, not an outft that blows up buses, at least not yet. Ed was an Anglican educated at a Quaker prep school and IIRC played piano... And not really in the Jerry Lee Lewis style either

    why is Edward Said not considered a Western intellectual? His books are very Euro-white in their structure, befitting a past chairman of the MLA — despite the terrorist-sounding acronym, not an outft that blows up buses, at least not yet. Ed was an Anglican educated at a Quaker prep school and IIRC played piano… And not really in the Jerry Lee Lewis style either

    Why is “Ed” considered much at all? He was a charlatan and bigot who attempted to derail the West’s ability to understand the Arab world at a particularly crucial moment in history. His peculiarly insidious polemics played an important role in the left’s abandonment of the white working classes for an infatuation with ‘brown people’ as holy beings holding unimpeachable motives.

    That fact that he sucked hard and hypocritically at the teat of Ivy League largesse indicates neither sophistication nor affinity.

    If by Anglican prep school you are referring to his fabled attendance at St. George’s School in Jerusalem then Commentary in 1999 established that he had never lived there and had been brought up by his father in Cairo.

    My respect for the Egyptian actor Omar Sharif went up when “Ed” claimed that he had been bulled by him at Victoria College in Cairo.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Why is “Ed” considered much at all? He was a charlatan and bigot who attempted to derail the West’s ability to understand the Arab world at a particularly crucial moment in history. His peculiarly insidious polemics played an important role in the left’s abandonment of the white working classes for an infatuation with ‘brown people’ as holy beings holding unimpeachable motives.
     
    Said is an embodiment (or rather--concentrated reflection) of Islam's failure, which is a fact of life. He knew damn well, that Christendom, what it achieved, was superior and by a mile to anything Islam could, can and will be able to offer. Most importantly, including today, it is the military field where it really matters. The problem with Western "elites" is that they are mostly good in sophistry at the expense of the truth and knowledge. Said was an embodiment of inferiority complex.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. Yak-15 says:
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Yeah, hold it, hold it. Many of those High Middle Ages Cathedrals were financed not by usury nor patrons, but by the Church via theology (the Indulgences, which helped pave the way for Lutherism in particular). The Catholic Church during the Middle Ages was the one institution that consciously attempted to build itself on the ruins of the Roman Empire in the West, at least stylistically. As an organization, over time it became very wealthy and owned near 25% of the total land in Western Europe. In addition to its vast wealth it was a major bureaucracy and had its own cannon law and religious courts in most Western nations, provinces, etc. And of course the Church had its own type of fundraising even then (Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales shows a late 14th century pilgrimage to the shrine of Thomas Becket; his Tomb/shrine was a major source of fundraising for the Church in Medieval England.) So while the Church prohibited usury, they had their own methods for raising the funds.

    Just sayin.

    From the start, Islam had an identity, and it was Arabian as Mohammed declared the Arabians to be the most perfect of peoples. All other tribes were allowed to come along for the ride, but they would always be considered inferior culturally and racially to the Arabs. After all, their most holy prophet was Arabian and he was the closest to god.

    I agree with this statement. Kaplan argues that nationalism is the problem. But it’s not. Nationalism is the solution. Recreating an Egyptian or Iraqi identity separate and above their tribal and religious identity is the best possible solution. Nasser and similar MENA dictators dealt with religious extremism harshly. If only they had banned consanguineous marriage!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. Brutusale says:
    @Jenner Ickham Errican
    If this hasn’t been sent to you yet… It’s got Unz, Sailer, Brimelow (no Derb?) in the dock. A real “motley rabble of saucy boys!” Happy Patriots’ day everyone.

    Object lesson in why the John Henry Gazette, once valued at $1.1 billion, is now worth $70 million, most of which is the property value of the land the paper occupies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    At $70 million, he probably overpaid and couldn't get his money back now. The Philadelphia Inquirer in recent years went thru a series of sales and bankruptcies and each time the valuation was lower and lower until in the last round the rich guys who bought it in the previous round donated it to a charitable foundation (at least they got a tax writeoff). Most dead tree media (actually at this point even web media like Salon) has NEGATIVE value. If the value of an enterprise is the discounted present value of its future profit stream and an enterprise has nothing but red ink in its foreseeable future then it ain't worth nothin'. Even if there are valuable assets such as a building, their value is offset by liabilities such as pension fund claims.

    You can argue which is the cause and which is the effect, but since newspapers are no longer a viable business there's no downside to them becoming partisan newsletters. In fact, this may be a survival strategy - once you are a non-profit, you can solicit donations from your fellow leftists the same as PBS.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. Mr. Anon says:
    @Sailer has an interesting life
    I think Sailer is missing the point here. Kaplan, if you read his earlier works, seems to also think geopolitically and not just from an ethno-nationalist point of view. He is taking note of the four main players in a large geopolitical reshuffle and writing about how it will affect what is known as Mediterranean Europe and its former colonies.

    The four main players, to my amateur eyes are:
    1) Northern Europe
    2) Mediterranean Europe
    3) North Africa
    4) Sub-Saharan Africa.

    The countries in the for categories are neither exhaustive nor exclusively of one or the other. Rather they are a spectra.

    Steve mentioned how nationalism could be an effective deterrent against the hegira.

    "One striking Dog That Does Not Bark is the word that never gets mentioned by those saying Europeans can’t go back to nationalism because that will lead to the resumption of wars among Europeans countries: continentalism. Why not encourage Europeans to unify in self-defense against hegira? Rather than the Chancellor of Germany stabbing the other nations of Europe in the back on a whim, why not encourage European states to work together to build perimeter defenses of the Continent?"

    The problem with this is that Europe as a whole is too utterly divided to work together. Just think of how talk of Northern Italy wanting to break away from Southern Italy pops up every few years.

    Northern europe (UK, Germany, France) gets the benefits of the EU.

    Mediterranean Europe, ie The PIGS (Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain), do not benefit as much.

    Germany is the economic powerhouse of the EU and thus has political power. But France wants more power than Germany despite not having as much economic clout. So France has to arrange the situation so that it gets to be top dog. Which is why talk of the Mediterranean Union or whatever was started.

    The MU consists of countries that share the Mediterranean sea. Any union requires some sort of economic trade. But trade alone without considering political will of your partners is a source of danger. This is why the whiter countries of the MU will take steps to affect the situation of the North African countries of the MU. Italy seems to be doing this with assassinations of the leaders of the boat migrant gangs.

    So let's see if I can summarize it simply.

    Because Mediterranean Europe wants a better deal than what it is getting from Northern Europe, talk of some sort of Mediterranean Union will proceed. This means having some sort of deal with North African countries for trade. This means some form of cultural exchange. I am not saying that cultural exchange is a good thing. Rather that it happens as a side effect of economic exchange.

    One the plus side. If the MU goes ahead, I imagine that deals similar to Quadaffy Duck will be struck to ensure that Sub Saharan Africans don't flood into europe.

    Apologies for any inclarities in writing. I just quickly put this together.

    “I just quickly put this together.”

    It shows too. It is, like everything you write, insipid drivel. Leave this site to people who have something interesting to say, which category does not include bloviating idiots like you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. Marcus says:
    @Anonymous
    Herodotus distinguished groups such as the "Keltoi" from the Greeks. He didn't write about them as "Europeans".

    The Carthaginians were originally from the eastern Mediterranean and had colonies in North Africa and Iberia and Southwestern Europe. When Hannibal and Carthage waged war against Rome, they had Iberian, Celtic, and other European allies against the Romans.

    The Romans waged war against Britons, Gauls, and Germans with Arab and African soldiers.

    Europe as a geopolitical-cultural bloc really emerges in the Medieval period out of the Catholic Church.

    Correct, it was “Christendom,” not “Europe.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. Mr. Anon says:
    @Kat Grey
    Spectre is mostly likely a pro-Palestinian, self-hating Jew just like Ireland's Ronit Lentin. She teaches at Dublin's prestigious university Trinity College and is an avowed advocate of the replacement of the indigenous Irish by non-white immigrants.

    “Spectre is mostly likely a pro-Palestinian, self-hating Jew just like Ireland’s Ronit Lentin. ”

    And on what basis do you claim that? Is there any evidence for your assertion? I am not aware of any. The only thing of which one can be sure is that she is anti-gentile and anti-European.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @TomSchmidt
    Did Sicily have a system for the production of papyrus, the cross-threaded "paper" of the ancient world? As "Drake" points out, Muslim raids in Sicily might have cut off trade between there and
    France; the bigger issue is whether Sicily produced any cheap paper at all.

    I found the anecdote interesting because I thought that the same thing could happen to business and accounts in the West today: one EMP that wipes non-paper records and we are down for years. Maybe never to restore.

    IIRC, Greg Cochran suggested that one set of early 20th Century encyclopedia Brittanica would be sufficient info to rebuild most tech.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Not really. The devil is in the details. If you read the 1911 edition (now in the public domain and available online) it would give you say an outline of the steel making process but actually building a steel mill from that description would be quite another matter. Not to mention all of the technological developments since then - vacuum tubes and radio were in their infancy and solid state electronics, electronic digital computers and television did not exist at all. The jet engine and the liquid fuel rocket were in the future, etc.

    I'm not sure BTW, that it would really be possible to wipe out all digital records by EMP or even nuclear war. There is a lot of stuff that is kept in salt mines, etc. where it is immune from anything except a direct nuclear hit. EMP can erase magnetic media but a lot of stuff is stored on optical media (CDs or DVDs).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. Jack D says:

    Except for Israel.

    Enough already. Over 20% of the population of Israel (even within its pre-67 borders) is and has always been Arab. In Germany, even with all the Merkel nonsense , the projection for 2030 is 7% Muslim.

    There is one difference though – Israel’s non-Muslim population is reproducing at above replacement rate. At 3 children per Jewish woman (vs. 1.38 per German woman) it is the highest in the developed world. Thus Israel will be able to win, or at least hold its own, in the war of the cradle.

    It’s not the Joos fault that Europeans have stopped reproducing. A bunch of hypocritical neo-cons didn’t do this to you. If you want to see the source of your problems, look in the mirror.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iSteveFan

    Thus Israel will be able to win, or at least hold its own, in the war of the cradle.
     
    How does it do this and still maintain a nation that is not severely overcrowded? She will either have to expel the Arabs or expand her territory.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Enough already."

    Who are you to say "Enough already"? Your reply is disingenuous. What was at issue was the re-imposition of Islam. It is being re-imposed in Europe through muslim immigration. It is not being re-imposed in Israel; the roughly 20% of Israel's population may be growing by natural increase, but it is not immigrating.
    , @anon
    While the Western media is owned and dominated by people who support pro-natal policies and anti-immigration policies for Israel but actively seek to prevent the same in the West you can't win this argument - it's open and shut.

    Hence the argument itself being disallowed by the media.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. Bill B. says:

    I don’t buy Kaplan’s argument. This is the old Islam has always been part of Europe bollocks again.

    Thought experiments about how Islam might, repeat might, have caused Europe to get its act together are interesting. Henri Pirenne etc.

    But if the presence of Islam ululating across the Mediterranean for centuries has been so important why does it not figure more strongly in European culture. Europeans have historically shown little interest in Islam beyond the urgent requirements of resistance around the periphery.

    Certainly the loss of easy access to the MENA region had consequences but it is hard to imagine Europe’s intellectual life being dramatically different if things had been otherwise.

    Kaplan is continually on the lookout for a juicy geopolitical bandwagon to which he can attach screeds of cut-and-paste history larded with ‘revealing’ anecdotes. He forgets in this case that Islam until very recently was something largely irrelevent and rather crude in the minds of most Europeans.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  143. Marcus says:

    Look, the ancient world recognized geographic and cultural differences among Europe, Asia, and Africa. Herodotus’ seminal history of the Persian wars is built, of course, around a (no doubt biased and tendentious, yet highly relevant) distinction between Asian despotism and European liberty.

    Steve, the Greco-Romans probably felt more in common with the Phoenicians, Anatolian peoples, Egyptians, etc. (there was always significant cultural exchange throughout the Med) than with wild Scythians or Gauls. They did have something of an early “noble savage” view of the northern peoples for their fierce independence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    I think it's true that originally there was a Mediterranean civilization that included north Africa and the middle east and until the middle ages the northern periphery was mostly just tacked on to that civilization.

    Where Kaplan is lying is where he is pretending Islam was part of that Mediterranean civilization rather than the conqueror of the eastern and southern quadrants of that civilization.

    The recreation of the civilization Kaplan is talking about would require the exact opposite of what he is promoting i.e. a crusade to take back all those lost lands from Islam.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. @Steve Sailer
    And it still doesn't seem to have happened in Turkey after 90 years.

    Having spent time there, I’d argue it did happen in the cities, as well as smaller towns that had a strong presence of culture and the arts. Although the state has always straddled between being a dictatorship and a democracy, there was still a truly secular, modern-minded dominant culture. That’s no small thing when you consider that Istanbul alone is as large or larger than many European countries. It has noticeably regressed terribly in the last few years. I’m not convinced Erdogan’s government is to blame; it’s a chicken/egg question. A key thing to understand about Turkey is that such cities and towns are facing the exact same problems with immigrant communities (from rural areas) that places like Brussels and the West in general have with Muslim immigrants.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Yes, what happened in Turkey was that the rural, conservative Islamic areas, having made their demographic transition later, won the war of the cradle. Just like Quebec went from being an English ruled province with a mostly English speaking secularist big city (Montreal) and a rural religious Catholic French population to one where the French overwhelmed the English influence by virtue of numbers and took over and Frenchified the big city too . In Turkey they were all the same religion and spoke the same language but the headscarf crowd beat out the barehead group.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. We could make all sorts of arguments for why the emergence of Christendom is a natural, organic phenomenon. We could use the word “emergence” to win over libertarians. But it doesn’t matter at the end of the day. What matters is answering the question: “who owns European countries?” and “what policies make a country nice to live in?”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  146. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @Jefferson
    "The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.

    Might this be a reason why Russia is so hated?"

    Russians are not very Christian religious. They are as Godless as Western Europeans.

    Has anybody here ever met a Russian bible thumper? A Russian version of Rick Warren?

    Has anybody here ever met a Russian bible thumper? A Russian version of Rick Warren?

    You, evidently, have a very perverted view of how most Russians (including secular ones) view and practice spirituality. Try to implement Sharia in Russia. It is possible in Europe, though.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. Jack D says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    IIRC, Greg Cochran suggested that one set of early 20th Century encyclopedia Brittanica would be sufficient info to rebuild most tech.

    Not really. The devil is in the details. If you read the 1911 edition (now in the public domain and available online) it would give you say an outline of the steel making process but actually building a steel mill from that description would be quite another matter. Not to mention all of the technological developments since then – vacuum tubes and radio were in their infancy and solid state electronics, electronic digital computers and television did not exist at all. The jet engine and the liquid fuel rocket were in the future, etc.

    I’m not sure BTW, that it would really be possible to wipe out all digital records by EMP or even nuclear war. There is a lot of stuff that is kept in salt mines, etc. where it is immune from anything except a direct nuclear hit. EMP can erase magnetic media but a lot of stuff is stored on optical media (CDs or DVDs).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. @unpc downunder
    Unfortunately Europe is a bit short on Charles Martels right now, but there is a feisty pixie with a Phd in chemistry. Perhaps in combination with Saint Marine she can produce a bit of politically incorrect alchemy and stall the invasion:

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/interview-with-frauke-petry-of-the-alternative-for-germany-a-1084493.html

    Interesting interview. Impressive woman vs unabashedly hostile interviewer.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @Bill B.

    why is Edward Said not considered a Western intellectual? His books are very Euro-white in their structure, befitting a past chairman of the MLA — despite the terrorist-sounding acronym, not an outft that blows up buses, at least not yet. Ed was an Anglican educated at a Quaker prep school and IIRC played piano… And not really in the Jerry Lee Lewis style either
     
    Why is "Ed" considered much at all? He was a charlatan and bigot who attempted to derail the West's ability to understand the Arab world at a particularly crucial moment in history. His peculiarly insidious polemics played an important role in the left's abandonment of the white working classes for an infatuation with 'brown people' as holy beings holding unimpeachable motives.

    That fact that he sucked hard and hypocritically at the teat of Ivy League largesse indicates neither sophistication nor affinity.

    If by Anglican prep school you are referring to his fabled attendance at St. George's School in Jerusalem then Commentary in 1999 established that he had never lived there and had been brought up by his father in Cairo.

    My respect for the Egyptian actor Omar Sharif went up when "Ed" claimed that he had been bulled by him at Victoria College in Cairo.

    Why is “Ed” considered much at all? He was a charlatan and bigot who attempted to derail the West’s ability to understand the Arab world at a particularly crucial moment in history. His peculiarly insidious polemics played an important role in the left’s abandonment of the white working classes for an infatuation with ‘brown people’ as holy beings holding unimpeachable motives.

    Said is an embodiment (or rather–concentrated reflection) of Islam’s failure, which is a fact of life. He knew damn well, that Christendom, what it achieved, was superior and by a mile to anything Islam could, can and will be able to offer. Most importantly, including today, it is the military field where it really matters. The problem with Western “elites” is that they are mostly good in sophistry at the expense of the truth and knowledge. Said was an embodiment of inferiority complex.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. berserker says:
    @Anonymous
    Sarkozy pushed for this idea - a "Mediterranean Union":

    " Sarkozy pushes Mediterranean Union "

    http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0824/p07s02-woeu.html

    The deep blue waters of the Mediterranean Sea connect three continents and 21 countries with a combined population of more than 400 million. But can this vast and diverse region – with Christians, Muslims, and Jews; Africans, Europeans, and Arabs – operate as a coherent political entity?

    That's the idea that French President Nicolas Sarkozy has been touting in his first three months in office. Launching his presidency with big ideas, he's proposed the creation of a "Mediterranean Union" to address common regional issues such as immigration, terrorism, environmental degradation, and economic development. Despite its hazy outlines, the plan appears to be gathering momentum on opposite sides of the sea.
     

    Something else that Sarkozy pushed for is racial interbreeding: https://youtu.be/I8yaiN6ew_g
    - I cannot vouch for the translation.
    - I am sure he will be the first to offer his children for the project.

    The Mediterranean Union idea appears to have its origins in the Barcelona Declaration: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=URISERV:r15001

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. Jack D says:
    @Brutusale
    Object lesson in why the John Henry Gazette, once valued at $1.1 billion, is now worth $70 million, most of which is the property value of the land the paper occupies.

    At $70 million, he probably overpaid and couldn’t get his money back now. The Philadelphia Inquirer in recent years went thru a series of sales and bankruptcies and each time the valuation was lower and lower until in the last round the rich guys who bought it in the previous round donated it to a charitable foundation (at least they got a tax writeoff). Most dead tree media (actually at this point even web media like Salon) has NEGATIVE value. If the value of an enterprise is the discounted present value of its future profit stream and an enterprise has nothing but red ink in its foreseeable future then it ain’t worth nothin’. Even if there are valuable assets such as a building, their value is offset by liabilities such as pension fund claims.

    You can argue which is the cause and which is the effect, but since newspapers are no longer a viable business there’s no downside to them becoming partisan newsletters. In fact, this may be a survival strategy – once you are a non-profit, you can solicit donations from your fellow leftists the same as PBS.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. I sincerely hope he is trolling, otherwise what Kaplan proposes is tantamount to cultural and political suicide.

    You’ll know it’s officially “finito” for Western Civ when they erect a mosque on O’Connell Square in Dublin.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  153. Jack D says:
    @TomSchmidt
    One favorite discovery in this area was this article by Razib Khan about lost "Christian" lands:

    in the decades before Islam much of the traditionally Byzantine Near East had been under Persian rule....Christianity remained the dominant religion of most of the lands under Muslim rule for at least two centuries after the Arab conquests at a minimum. The Patriarch of the Church of the East between 780 and 823, Timothy, presided over a Christian international network which stretched from the Euphrates to China! Timothy’s missionaries were active in Central Asia, China, Tibet, and India. Mesopotamia was the heartland of his church, but most of the former Persian lands hard large Nestorian minorities, who remained in place while the Zoroastrians slowly disappeared. Jenkins makes the case that Timothy’s Church of the East was the largest of his day, superior in numbers to the Western Church headed by the Bishop of Rome. Remember than in 800 much of Germany was only marginally Christianized, while Scandinavia and almost all of Eastern Europe remained fully pagan.
     
    As far as being "liberated" from German tribes, Tainter, in The Collapse of Complex Societies makes the point that the standard of living in the West ROSE after the collapse of the Western empire, as the costs of running a useless government in Rome/Milan/Ravenna were removed, and that the real collapse in Italy was set in motion by Justinian's wars of (temporary) reconquest. It's a strange liberation that brings poverty, destruction, and centralized control with it. But it did get the Arians briefly to utter "E pur si muove" for a few decades, under their breath.

    Justinian was handed a strong empire with a full treasury. Then he married a whore who wore the pants in the family but bore him no children. To prove his manhood to that whore he spent the treasure piled up by his predecessor and sent Belisarius (who he later undermined) to spend lives and treasure momentarily adding provinces. In so doing, he weakened his empire for the fight against Persia and eventually Islam (and Scott thinks that Islam 's armies were in fact the Parthians; the book is worth a read), but did pay for some nice mosaics in Ravenna, far from where the iconoclasts could destroy them when the East lost control over Ravenna.

    Had Justinian been a holy man, with a holy wife, he might have known this:
    Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

    Much later, Byzantium was severely weakened when it was pillaged by the Crusaders on their way to liberate Jerusalem from the Arabs. So much for solidarity among Christians. If you analyze the root cause of the crisis in Europe now, it is the fact that its native population was decimated by two world wars – again Christian against Christian, white against white. Surely the losses in the Civil War were one reason for the great immigration in the late 19th century and the great migration of blacks to the North. White people are their own greatest enemies – they only get beaten by others in the 11th round, after they have fought 10 rounds beating each other up first. Because both sides are smart and evenly matched, white people wars tend to be protracted and devastating as they grind on and on and each side comes up with ever more effective weapons and tactics but then the other side counters, like a chess match between two grandmasters at the same level.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. AndrewR says:
    @Jay
    Ranters are rarely accurate in their characterizations, nor logically precise. Tone is a good indicator of content.

    Accuracy is to ideologues what garlic is to vampires.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Leftist conservative
    sounds like you got all butthurt, sweetie... Did I trigger you? Get thee to your safe space, stat!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. Ed says:
    @Anon
    What would it take to reform Muslim societies to make them compatible with Western civilization?

    To begin with, you would have to end polygamy and cousin marriage, break up the clans,
    outlaw the hijab along with the sequestration of women, and gradually develop representative national institutions that work with, rather than at cross purposes, to the tribal groupings that compose these societies. You would also have to ban the Koran, destroy all the mosques, imprison all imams and jihadis for life, throw the Kaaba stone into the sea and level Mecca to the ground. Madrases would be closed and replaced with a system of secular public education. In place of Islam the original, pure religion of Abraham (hanifya) would be reintroduced as it existed in that part of the world before Muhammad appeared on the scene. As for Muhammad himself, he would be disavowed as an evil false prophet in the same category as Hitler and Mao-Tse Tung.

    Clearly it would take generations, if not centuries, to accomplish these changes. It could only be done under the aegis of an authoritarian central government like the one Ataturk established in Turkey.

    “What would it take to reform Muslim societies to make them compatible with Western civilization?”

    This is @17 but it is a complicated question that gets to the heart of the thread.

    The complexity comes from the commentator, I am assuming from the tone of the rest of the comment, confounding “Muslim” with “Arab” and also “Western civilization” with “modern civilization”. These things go together but are not quite the same.

    To take the Muslim/ Arab distinction first, most Muslims in the world are in fact not Arab. A Westerner can convert to Islam. Bosnia and Albania are examples of Western places that are Muslim, though they are minor weird examples that shows this is barely possible, but unlikely. However, Islam is infused with Arabic culture, and of course its scriptures are written in Arabic, so its easy for both its followers and opponents to confuse the two.

    Arabic culture pre-dates Islam of course, and never was considered to be part of Western civilization or its Hellenic (Greek and Roman) precursor. And in classical times (before Constantine and before Mohamed, with a long transition between the two), the Greeks at least made a distinction between the places that had adopted Greek language and culture, and the different civilizations on the eastern and southern shores of the Med. The Greeks were often allied with Egypt and Lydia in Asia Minor, but antagonistic towards the Persians and the Phonecians in what is now Lebanon and Tunisia. Herodotus wrote about the war against Persia and their Punic fleet. The Arabs were farther away, but definitely within the Persian-Punic orbit, as were incidentally the Jews of that time.

    Rome was not a Greek city, but modeled itself on a Greek city state, and after some back and forth assimilated into Hellenic civilization. The Syrians and Egyptians conquered by Alexander the Great never assimilated, though Greek colonists were sent to both places, and throughout the thousand years these places were under Macedonian control there is a long record of rebellions and support for religious heresies. They welcomed first the Persian and then the Arab armies that arrived in these places in the seventh century. The remaining Christians in these places belong to churches that have separated, for obscure doctrinal reasons, from the Catholic/ Orthodox/ Protestant churches since the fifth century. After the Romans conquered Carthage there were somewhat similar problems with assimilating the former Punic territories in North Africa, to a lessor degree.

    So Kaplan is informed and writes well but is wrong, as is usual with him. The civilizations between Europe and the Near East pre-date Christianity and Islam, and it is the fact that Christianity became associated with the heirs of Greece and Rome (despite mass conversions occurring in Syria and Egypt first), and Islam with the Levant and Persia, that has sharpened the divide between Christianity and Islam, not the other way around. Just looking at their doctrines and ignoring the culture baggage, the two religions have enough overlap that Islam has been described as another Christian heresy.

    Having Arabs join “Western” civilization is unlikely since they have never been part of Western civilization, and this includes the Christian Arabs. With Islam, the problem is all the Arab culture baggage.

    Mohamed was not only an Arab, but unlike Siddharta and unlike Jesus, he had/ kept his connections to powerful tribal figures and became a successful politician. At the end of his life he made a deal with his opponents in the Meccan aristocracy, under which they converted to Islam and allowed Mohamed to go home, in return for taking over his new religion. After the assassination of Mohamed’s son-in-law Ali, the Caliphs for a century were all from the family of Mohamed’s chief opponents in the Meccan aristocracy. It was they who first wrote down the Koran and assembled Mohamed’s sayings (the Hadith) that are not in the Koran.

    Since Mohamed was a practical politician, as were his immediate successors, he was trying to create a function polity with all sorts of rules for behavior. Consider how influential in Christianity Paul’s attempts to meditate disputes within various churches became and its easy to see the problem here. An Islamic version of the reformation would have to drop all of this, basically drop the Hadith and keep the Koran. It shouldn’t be necessary to destroy the religion to the extent that @17 wants. But otherwise the religion comes with lots of Arabic tribal elements.

    I’ve overwritten, but to address the Western/ Modern distinction there are similar considerations. Since Europeans settled the Western Hemisphere and started the Industrial Revolution, the fruits of the Age of Discovery and the Industrial Revolution have been heavily intertwined with Western or European civilization. With non-Western countries like Japan and Turkey, or even mostly Western countries such as Russia and Mexico, its been a recurring debate about whether you can modernize, but separate modernity from Western civilization and get one without the other. Like with Near Eastern civilization and Islam, in principal you should be able to but in practice its almost impossible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Of all of the places that you list, just about the only one that was able to make the full transition to a fully modern high income economy and democratic form of government was Japan, and they were able to accomplish this fully only after we dropped two atomic weapons on them and then promised to keep dropping them for as long as necessary. And even this only worked because they had a long history as a unified hierarchical polity so when the emperor told them to change direction they all turned at the same time - no roadside IEDs against the occupying troops, nothing like that.

    So it's very difficult to apply the Japanese example elsewhere. You could nuke the Saudi Arabians but that wouldn't make them into Japanese. If N. Korea ever collapses, you could see a similar turnaround there, but after that the list of possible future G-7 members gets very short - either they fall short on the economy or on democracy or both. And the Muslim world is probably not on that list. Turkey - maybe, but probably not.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. Jack D says:
    @Kat Grey
    Let me put it bluntly White Europeans need to start having unprotected marathon sex with each other..otherwise they will cease to exist. Simple maths.

    I dunno – in the past when too many Europeans were crowded into one space they started to bite each other like too many rats in a cage. For a while the Americas provided a release valve but after that they unleashed genocidal wars for lebensraum on each other.

    I think the root of European nihilism is their realization that after their civilization produced the Sistine Chapel and Mozart, it then produced the V-2 and Zyklon-B (while modern music and architecture is a mess). After Christopher Wren the builder of London you get Bomber Harris the unbuilder of Dresden . You can’t blame people for throwing in the towel when they see that their civilization has driven itself into a dead end.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    I think the root of European nihilism is their realization that after their civilization produced the Sistine Chapel and Mozart, it then produced the V-2 and Zyklon-B (while modern music and architecture is a mess). After Christopher Wren the builder of London you get Bomber Harris the unbuilder of Dresden . You can’t blame people for throwing in the towel when they see that their civilization has driven itself into a dead end.
     
    MMM, went full-Frankfurt School there, dear fellow.....
    , @Ed
    Jack D's point about Western civilization being in decline are good points, and would explain much of the current situation. One feature of civilizations once decline gets advance is a reluctance to do even basic things to defend the civilization. Even people in the Near East let themselves get pushed around by the British and the French as the Ottoman Empire fell apart.

    Western civilization produced the industrial revolution, starting in the late eighteenth century, and then dominated the globe, but culturally it started going to crap around that time. Historically this isn't that unusual. The Greeks overran the Persian Empire, and the Romans later overran Carthage and the Greeks, but everyone agrees that culturally and politically the Hellenic period (post Alexander) is a mess, and the late Roman Republic if anything is worse. Then you had a long managed decline under the empire. The Arabs did Islam and had their own conquests, but then weren't heard of much after the 9th century. Politically they let themselves get displaced by Turkish immigrants, who at least converted to Islam.

    The theme of running the table and then collapsing internally is a common one historically.

    I also agree that stuff like the Frankfurt School is a symptom.
    , @5371
    Why on earth would anyone not be proud of producing the V-2?
    , @celt darnell
    "Re: I dunno – in the past when too many Europeans were crowded into one space they started to bite each other like too many rats in a cage. For a while the Americas provided a release valve but after that they unleashed genocidal wars for lebensraum on each other."

    Too glib. In the first case, there were still plenty of "release valves" open to Europe up until and even after World War I -- the British settler societies of Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The US was also accepting immigrants en masse prior to World War I. This also leaves aside the Europeanization of Africa in the form of South Africa, Rhodesia, Kenya and elsewhere.

    The Americas were only ever one release valve. Not all of them.

    In the second, the world wars didn't just happen -- let alone because of overpopulation. Certain nations -- Germany, most obviously -- decided to launch wars on their neighbours.

    Lest we forget, the Europeans had fought world wars before -- the Napoleonic wars, for example, that served as impetus for ever greater achievements.

    I'd look at ideology long before I'd look at overpopulation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. Randal says:
    @Anonymous
    Ehrlich made a bunch of dumb, apocalyptic predictions that made him famous but hurt his cause by failing to materialize:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/01/us/the-unrealized-horrors-of-population-explosion.html

    No one was more influential — or more terrifying, some would say — than Paul R. Ehrlich, a Stanford University biologist. His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” sold in the millions with a jeremiad that humankind stood on the brink of apocalypse because there were simply too many of us. Dr. Ehrlich’s opening statement was the verbal equivalent of a punch to the gut: “The battle to feed all of humanity is over.” He later went on to forecast that hundreds of millions would starve to death in the 1970s, that 65 million of them would be Americans, that crowded India was essentially doomed, that odds were fair “England will not exist in the year 2000.” Dr. Ehrlich was so sure of himself that he warned in 1970 that “sometime in the next 15 years, the end will come.” By “the end,” he meant “an utter breakdown of the capacity of the planet to support humanity.”
     

    “England will not exist in the year 2000.”

    ‘I feel like a stranger where I live’

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. iSteveFan says:
    @Sam Haysom
    Yea it's that kind of smug ahistoricism combined with a penchant for on the head ethnocentrcism that has made Orthodox Christian a complete non-starter outside of places that used Church Slavonic or Greek.

    I have a hard time taking seriously a religion whose clergy so eagerly flouts the spirit if not the letter of the law by rushing to get married the day before they are ordained. Orthodoxy is every bit as Protestant as Presbyterianism.

    Orthodoxy is every bit as Protestant as Presbyterianism.

    If Presbyterianism had a million martyrs, maybe.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. iSteveFan says:
    @Jack D

    Except for Israel.
     
    Enough already. Over 20% of the population of Israel (even within its pre-67 borders) is and has always been Arab. In Germany, even with all the Merkel nonsense , the projection for 2030 is 7% Muslim.

    There is one difference though - Israel's non-Muslim population is reproducing at above replacement rate. At 3 children per Jewish woman (vs. 1.38 per German woman) it is the highest in the developed world. Thus Israel will be able to win, or at least hold its own, in the war of the cradle.

    It's not the Joos fault that Europeans have stopped reproducing. A bunch of hypocritical neo-cons didn't do this to you. If you want to see the source of your problems, look in the mirror.

    Thus Israel will be able to win, or at least hold its own, in the war of the cradle.

    How does it do this and still maintain a nation that is not severely overcrowded? She will either have to expel the Arabs or expand her territory.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    What constitutes "overcrowding" ? If you take the population density of say Singapore or HK (or the Gaza Strip for that matter) and apply it to all of Israel it could support many times its current population.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. @TomSchmidt
    The relevant book here is Mohammed and Charlemagne, Revisited, about how Arab cutting of trade networks created the Dark Ages (favorite factoid: cutting the supply of papyrus led to a collapse in commerce in France, as there was no cheap way to keep accounts. The author points out that French royal archives from before the 7th century are on papyrus.). Emmet Scott also points out that Arab herders, unused to agriculture, allowed their flocks to graze newly-planted fields, eating the new supply of wheat, causing a collapse in agriculture and population. The denuded fields washed into the Mediterranean and formed the Younger Fill.

    Of course, Mohammed might never have existed if the Christian Roman Empire of 550AD hadn't focused so much on fighting other (Arian) Christians and had instead proselytized so that Medina and Mecca had been Christian cities. That was their charge, and they preferred to sit in Constantinople and live in luxury instead.

    Book of Kells, Durrow, Echternach etc, wouldn’t have lasted long on papyrus (of which even the godforsaken Picts were at least aware, used as mould slips in coin-forging and other sundry craft purposes).
    Houses of Parliament burnt down in 1834, by overenthusiastic decommissioning of piles of mediaeval tally-sticks by the Exchequer.
    Materials required for personalised inland revenue record?; 1 bush or hedge; 1 knife, axe or billhook; a quantity of fingers (and possibly removal of boots), or pebbles, for calculation.

    Some historians must spend their entire lives in the library as disembodied heads on life support.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. @iSteveFan
    Also, isn't islam part of India? Didn't islam influence India and how its borders were drawn? So why don't the muslims go to India? Didn't islam influence China? Why don't the muslims go to China? And isn't islam closely linked to the modern state of Israel? I mean islam was a part of modern Israel before there even was a modern Israel. Why aren't muslims heading to Israel?

    And of course why aren't they heading to the rich Gulf Arab states? And why aren't the super rich Gulf Arab states not funding a Marshall-type plan to develop the economies of the muslim world?

    No, he wants them to go to Europe, the historical enemy of islam. On what planet would that be a good idea?

    China birth rate 1.55
    EU birth rate 1.6
    China is doomed, dooooomed I tell ye!
    Needs more barely-sentient muslims and africans, pronto. This ought to be a global geopolitical priority.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Fertility rate doesn't tell the whole story - you also have to understand the age distribution of the population. The fertility rate for girls under 12 and women over 50 is zero but if you have a large fertile contingent and increasing lifespan the population will continue to go up for a while as long as the # of births exceeds the # of deaths. China has just announced the end of the one child policy plus they already have a billion plus people.

    Population projections OTOH, can be fairly accurate (although birth rates can change in the long run). It's clear, for example, that the population of Japan is already declining and that each year for the next 2 or 3 decades at least, more Japanese will die than be born. This is not the end of their civilization but it does create certain problems (not so much the decline itself but the fact that there will be so many old people relative to the working population).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. @Andrew
    "Europe as a geopolitical-cultural bloc really emerges in the Medieval period out of the Catholic Church."

    This definition of Europe essentially identifies it as "Francia" which can be defined exactly as the non-Roman and non-Russian part of the European landmass.

    The cultural contrast already existed at the time of Alexander the Great as a distinction between Germano-Celtic areas in the north and west and Greco-Roman and Carthaginian areas in the south and east, so it is not an invention of the Catholic Church. The only thing the Catholic Church did was to define its exact outline - the ethno-cultural fault between the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic running between Serbia and Croatia, around the Carpathian mountains, up the Bug and down the Narva River, and splitting the Finnic peninsula from Russia. Also, within the Catholic part, the "Otherness" of what later became the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies" and together with the former Muslim areas of Spain and the rest of Catholic Europe was also always apparent and remains so to this day.

    The same approximate dichotomy existed between the Merovingians and Justinian's Empire, between Charlemagne and the Muslims and East Romans, and the Hapsburgs and France together versus the Ottomans and Russians.

    Ancient Germans and Celts did not get a chance to write much preserved history, so whether or not the were a geopolitical-cultural bloc from the start is not well known although trade patterns would tend to indicate it. They certainly acted like one as soon as they conquered the western part of the Empire - recognizing themselves as one united nation and the Romans as an "other".

    The differences in thinking of northwest Europe from Mediterranean Europe, near Asia and North Africa has been contrasted repeatedly throughout history.

    No — anonymous is correct. There was no “Europe” in ancient times. The Romans, for example, did not regard the Ancient Britons as somehow more closely akin to them than the Ancient Egyptians.

    Nor did the Ancient Greeks see “Europe” as a clearly defined geographic area containing a group of culturally connected peoples (Europe could mean, for example, anything north of Greece — meaning the Greeks didn’t see themselves as “European”).

    That kind of thinking was unknown in Ancient times — their world view was very different to ours.

    Even so, to claim “Europe” is a creation of the medieval era is a bit of a stretch. The medieval church dealt in “Christendom” rather than “Europe” and, given they expected Christ to triumph, they saw all geographic barriers to Christendom as temporary.

    “Europe” in its modern interpretation dates from around the Reformation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. @Anonymous
    Once upon a time I was thoroughly fascinated by Kaplan and read everything by him I could find.

    In his writings on topics where I had some expertise, I came to believe that for all his large erudition, Kaplan's filter is "is it good for my tribe" and to a lesser extent "is it good for Israel." Facts that don't meet this test were simply ignored, no matter how important they are to understanding the topic.

    And there ended my interest in Kaplan.

    Amen, brother. You’ve summed up his “scholarship” perfectly.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. syonredux says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    Kaplan skips over quite a bit here:

    Europe’s very identity, in other words, was built in significant measure on a sense of superiority to the Muslim Arab world on its periphery. Imperialism proved the ultimate expression of this evolution: Early modern Europe, starting with Napoleon, conquered the Middle East
     
    Islamic imperialism long preceded European imperialism, and then it became sclerotic. Not only did it occupy part of Europe, but it took a vig on the spice trade to Europe. Long before Napoleon, Europeans put a stop the that, and leapfrogged the Islamic World in a flash, thanks to advances in European technology. The timeline is amazing when you think of it:

    1492: Reconquista wraps up with the fall of Grenada.

    1498: Vasco Da Gama reaches India from Portugal.

    1511: Alfonso de Albuquerque conquers Malacca and Portugal begins to take over the spice trade.

    Kaplan skips over quite a bit here:

    Europe’s very identity, in other words, was built in significant measure on a sense of superiority to the Muslim Arab world on its periphery. Imperialism proved the ultimate expression of this evolution: Early modern Europe, starting with Napoleon, conquered the Middle East

    Islamic imperialism long preceded European imperialism, and then it became sclerotic.

    Yeah, Kaplan (for rather obvious reasons) doesn’t want to dwell on things like the Muslim conquest of the Iberian Peninsula, the destruction of the Byzantine Empire, the subjugation of the Balkans, the two sieges of Vienna (1539 and 1683), etc, etc,

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. syonredux says:
    @Jack D
    I dunno - in the past when too many Europeans were crowded into one space they started to bite each other like too many rats in a cage. For a while the Americas provided a release valve but after that they unleashed genocidal wars for lebensraum on each other.

    I think the root of European nihilism is their realization that after their civilization produced the Sistine Chapel and Mozart, it then produced the V-2 and Zyklon-B (while modern music and architecture is a mess). After Christopher Wren the builder of London you get Bomber Harris the unbuilder of Dresden . You can't blame people for throwing in the towel when they see that their civilization has driven itself into a dead end.

    I think the root of European nihilism is their realization that after their civilization produced the Sistine Chapel and Mozart, it then produced the V-2 and Zyklon-B (while modern music and architecture is a mess). After Christopher Wren the builder of London you get Bomber Harris the unbuilder of Dresden . You can’t blame people for throwing in the towel when they see that their civilization has driven itself into a dead end.

    MMM, went full-Frankfurt School there, dear fellow…..

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Frankfurt School is a symptom, not a cause. A place with civilizational confidence would have laughed in their faces or done much worse. Why doesn't Frankfurt School mojo work on the head choppers in Mosul? Did Christianity cause the fall of the Roman Empire or did it move in when praying to the old gods no longer worked? European lions fought with each other and then the jackals came to finish off the wounded animals.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. @Wilkey
    And you have to wonder what threat the vote on June 23 poses to this order. If the UK chooses to leave (assuming the election isn't rigged) what feints in the direction of local control will the EU make in order to keep their EUmpire together?

    Brexit? Simply won’t be permitted. The domino effect would be awesome.
    For example, Poland’s unemployment rate (nudging 20%) halved after Accession and the Germans and French wouldn’t let them in as workers, so guess where they went? All 600,000 of them. And Baltics (not the nice ones, they all stayed home, it appears). Not to mention the current wave of young Iberians, Italians, and French, on top of the perennial crowds of Irish. Even Greeks. Grand lads and lasses the lot of them, but things really are beginning to creak at the seams.
    And UK is a net contributor, with loads of offshore resources (not including exporting child benefit and other insanities).
    Rigged it will be, if Project Fear II fails to cow the serfs and proposed gerrymandering like letting children vote is rejected.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. Jack D says:
    @iSteveFan

    Thus Israel will be able to win, or at least hold its own, in the war of the cradle.
     
    How does it do this and still maintain a nation that is not severely overcrowded? She will either have to expel the Arabs or expand her territory.

    What constitutes “overcrowding” ? If you take the population density of say Singapore or HK (or the Gaza Strip for that matter) and apply it to all of Israel it could support many times its current population.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iSteveFan
    Jack,

    Are you suggesting Israel has more room? If so we have many refugees right on her doorstep that need a safe place. No sense in transporting them all the way to Europe when we have room next door.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. Jack D says:
    @syonredux

    I think the root of European nihilism is their realization that after their civilization produced the Sistine Chapel and Mozart, it then produced the V-2 and Zyklon-B (while modern music and architecture is a mess). After Christopher Wren the builder of London you get Bomber Harris the unbuilder of Dresden . You can’t blame people for throwing in the towel when they see that their civilization has driven itself into a dead end.
     
    MMM, went full-Frankfurt School there, dear fellow.....

    Frankfurt School is a symptom, not a cause. A place with civilizational confidence would have laughed in their faces or done much worse. Why doesn’t Frankfurt School mojo work on the head choppers in Mosul? Did Christianity cause the fall of the Roman Empire or did it move in when praying to the old gods no longer worked? European lions fought with each other and then the jackals came to finish off the wounded animals.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Frankfurt School is a symptom, not a cause.
     
    Bit of both, I would say. And it's always interesting to note how the Frankfurt boys were unmoved by things like the Ukraine Famine, the 1937-38 Great Terror, the Katyn Massacre, etc, etc.

    A place with civilizational confidence would have laughed in their faces or done much worse. Why doesn’t Frankfurt School mojo work on the head choppers in Mosul?
     
    Conversely, why are the Frankfurt acolytes so uninterested in Muslim head-choppers?
    , @anon

    Frankfurt School is a symptom, not a cause. A place with civilizational confidence would have laughed in their faces or done much worse.
     
    The purpose of the Frankfurt school was to destroy civilizational confidence - it's cultural AIDs - and it started small and inconspicuous.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. @Jaakko Raipala
    You have to be a complete idiot or a lying propagandist to claim that World War I was blamed on nationalism since before the war Europe was dominated by multinational empires, not nation-states, and as multinational empires entities like Austria-Hungary and Russia of course demonized all forms of nationalism within them just as much the EU does (or even more, the EU after all isn't sending our nationalists to Siberia yet).

    After the first World War the map of Europe was redrawn from empires to nation-states by *progressives* like Woodrow Wilson and Vladimir Lenin who championed various nationalisms in the empires that they wanted to break up. Nationalism was the progressive ideology that was supposed to prevent another World War from ever happening again - everyone gets their national home-state and with Europe split into dozens and dozens of nation-states instead of a few huge rival empires and alliances there won't be any war escalating into a World War the way things cascaded in 1914.

    In fairness to Anonymous, he’s repeating a line doled out in schools and universities.

    You’re quite correct, but the whole “nationalism caused World War I” is almost conventional wisdom.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Wilkey
    And you have to wonder what threat the vote on June 23 poses to this order. If the UK chooses to leave (assuming the election isn't rigged) what feints in the direction of local control will the EU make in order to keep their EUmpire together?

    The sad fact is that the EU High Command, ie Angela Merkel could have avoided the brexit referendum altogether by simply granting Britain’s sovereign right to control immigration back to Britain.
    Merkel simply refused. She stated -’I’d rather have Britain leave the EU than to restrict the right of free movement’.

    This is the same woman who invited half of the ummah into Germany.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. ” It included North Africa”
    Scipio Europanus; yeah, that Roman guy. Beat Hannibal, the leader of the Europeans. Or the Elephants, or something ..

    The danger with the Kaplan school of trolling is that Poe’s Law simply confirms you, in the minds of the uninitiated and disinterested general public, as a weapons-grade fool.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  172. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Anatoly Karlin
    Re-Houellebecq:

    9/10 Italian schoolchildren would convert to Islam if Islamic state conquered the country.

    The sample is very small, and it's still a fantasy scenario ultiamtely, but it does stir one to reflection...

    Italians. It’s in their nature. Pro-Nazi, anti-Nazi.

    Who’s winning? We go with winners.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. Ed says:
    @Jack D
    I dunno - in the past when too many Europeans were crowded into one space they started to bite each other like too many rats in a cage. For a while the Americas provided a release valve but after that they unleashed genocidal wars for lebensraum on each other.

    I think the root of European nihilism is their realization that after their civilization produced the Sistine Chapel and Mozart, it then produced the V-2 and Zyklon-B (while modern music and architecture is a mess). After Christopher Wren the builder of London you get Bomber Harris the unbuilder of Dresden . You can't blame people for throwing in the towel when they see that their civilization has driven itself into a dead end.

    Jack D’s point about Western civilization being in decline are good points, and would explain much of the current situation. One feature of civilizations once decline gets advance is a reluctance to do even basic things to defend the civilization. Even people in the Near East let themselves get pushed around by the British and the French as the Ottoman Empire fell apart.

    Western civilization produced the industrial revolution, starting in the late eighteenth century, and then dominated the globe, but culturally it started going to crap around that time. Historically this isn’t that unusual. The Greeks overran the Persian Empire, and the Romans later overran Carthage and the Greeks, but everyone agrees that culturally and politically the Hellenic period (post Alexander) is a mess, and the late Roman Republic if anything is worse. Then you had a long managed decline under the empire. The Arabs did Islam and had their own conquests, but then weren’t heard of much after the 9th century. Politically they let themselves get displaced by Turkish immigrants, who at least converted to Islam.

    The theme of running the table and then collapsing internally is a common one historically.

    I also agree that stuff like the Frankfurt School is a symptom.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon

    Jack D’s point about Western civilization being in decline are good points
     

    I also agree that stuff like the Frankfurt School is a symptom.
     
    You're both examples of it in action.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. @Anonymous
    As I've said many times before, Steve, EU laws *mandate* that anyone, anyone at all, who washes up on EU shores and is able to utter the word 'asylum' is invited straight into the EU, and it is, in fact, a criminal offence to refuse him entry, let alone trying to dissuade him, peacefully or otherwise.

    As long as this madness continues - and there is absolutely no sign of it ever changing - the 'migrant crisis' - more like 'gullibility crisis' - will thrive prosper.

    anyone at all, who washes up on EU shores and is able to utter the word ‘asylum’ is invited straight into the EU
    The problem is, no matter how physically in extremis they might be when washed/picked up, they are very very careful not to utter the dread word “asylum”, as that would lead them to be mired (temporarily) in the bureaucracy of whichever raggedy-ass Med/Balkan country they’ve encroached on, and will go to absurd lengths to resist claiming asylum at landfall.
    That part of the EU they’re very definitely not interested in.

    The idea seems to be that only the very furthest reaches of the continent, preferably next to and beyond River Oceanus, in the lands of the Cimmerians and the midnight sun, are worthy of their full attention.
    I blame the parents, stuffing their heads with ancient mythical rubbish.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. Big Bill says:
    @Taco

    Oh, wait. I am sorry. I am on unz.com, and everyone here (except me) seems to believe that the goal of the elite regarding immigration is just to get more Democrat/Liberal voters and dependent welfare state clients, and that the GOP/conservatives are just too stupid to figure out what the liberals are doing. Yeah, that sounds good.
     
    I think most of us here realize it is a two prong attack.

    the left gets their voters/social services customers, corporations get cheap labor.

    Don’t feed the trolls. He obviously doesn’t visit iSteve. He just wants to do a bit of virtue preening.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. syonredux says:
    @Jack D
    Frankfurt School is a symptom, not a cause. A place with civilizational confidence would have laughed in their faces or done much worse. Why doesn't Frankfurt School mojo work on the head choppers in Mosul? Did Christianity cause the fall of the Roman Empire or did it move in when praying to the old gods no longer worked? European lions fought with each other and then the jackals came to finish off the wounded animals.

    Frankfurt School is a symptom, not a cause.

    Bit of both, I would say. And it’s always interesting to note how the Frankfurt boys were unmoved by things like the Ukraine Famine, the 1937-38 Great Terror, the Katyn Massacre, etc, etc.

    A place with civilizational confidence would have laughed in their faces or done much worse. Why doesn’t Frankfurt School mojo work on the head choppers in Mosul?

    Conversely, why are the Frankfurt acolytes so uninterested in Muslim head-choppers?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew
    "unmoved by things like the Ukraine Famine"

    Ah the Holodomor! Which in reality is a fantasy story created in modern form in 1978 about a natural recurring event (crop failure from poor weather) spun mainly by a fantasy people who lived in what was then Poland (the west so-called Ukrainians) when it was supposedly happening in the Soviet Union and meant to deflect attention from their participation in the similarly named Holocaust.

    The invented people who conveniently parachute out of the sky just before WWI:

    https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Ukrainian&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CUkrainian%3B%2Cc0

    The invented event which had essentially never been heard of in English before 1991 or in Russian before 1987:

    https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Holodomor&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CHolodomor%3B%2Cc0

    https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Голодомор&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=25&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CГолодомор%3B%2Cc0

    How could 50 years go by and no one knew what to call this!?! Probably the same way 1000 years of history could go by in Europe and no one ever realized there were a people called Ukrainians.

    "the 1937-38 Great Terror"

    Yes, the lamentable massacre of the Trotskyites! Oh my!

    A great read about this "horror" by a committed Christian anti-Communist Russian emigre:.

    http://thesaker.is/the-controversy-about-stalin-a-basket-of-preliminary-considerations/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. 5371 says:
    @Jack D
    I dunno - in the past when too many Europeans were crowded into one space they started to bite each other like too many rats in a cage. For a while the Americas provided a release valve but after that they unleashed genocidal wars for lebensraum on each other.

    I think the root of European nihilism is their realization that after their civilization produced the Sistine Chapel and Mozart, it then produced the V-2 and Zyklon-B (while modern music and architecture is a mess). After Christopher Wren the builder of London you get Bomber Harris the unbuilder of Dresden . You can't blame people for throwing in the towel when they see that their civilization has driven itself into a dead end.

    Why on earth would anyone not be proud of producing the V-2?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    von Braun aimed for the stars and hit London.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. Jack D says:
    @Ed
    "What would it take to reform Muslim societies to make them compatible with Western civilization?"

    This is @17 but it is a complicated question that gets to the heart of the thread.

    The complexity comes from the commentator, I am assuming from the tone of the rest of the comment, confounding "Muslim" with "Arab" and also "Western civilization" with "modern civilization". These things go together but are not quite the same.

    To take the Muslim/ Arab distinction first, most Muslims in the world are in fact not Arab. A Westerner can convert to Islam. Bosnia and Albania are examples of Western places that are Muslim, though they are minor weird examples that shows this is barely possible, but unlikely. However, Islam is infused with Arabic culture, and of course its scriptures are written in Arabic, so its easy for both its followers and opponents to confuse the two.

    Arabic culture pre-dates Islam of course, and never was considered to be part of Western civilization or its Hellenic (Greek and Roman) precursor. And in classical times (before Constantine and before Mohamed, with a long transition between the two), the Greeks at least made a distinction between the places that had adopted Greek language and culture, and the different civilizations on the eastern and southern shores of the Med. The Greeks were often allied with Egypt and Lydia in Asia Minor, but antagonistic towards the Persians and the Phonecians in what is now Lebanon and Tunisia. Herodotus wrote about the war against Persia and their Punic fleet. The Arabs were farther away, but definitely within the Persian-Punic orbit, as were incidentally the Jews of that time.

    Rome was not a Greek city, but modeled itself on a Greek city state, and after some back and forth assimilated into Hellenic civilization. The Syrians and Egyptians conquered by Alexander the Great never assimilated, though Greek colonists were sent to both places, and throughout the thousand years these places were under Macedonian control there is a long record of rebellions and support for religious heresies. They welcomed first the Persian and then the Arab armies that arrived in these places in the seventh century. The remaining Christians in these places belong to churches that have separated, for obscure doctrinal reasons, from the Catholic/ Orthodox/ Protestant churches since the fifth century. After the Romans conquered Carthage there were somewhat similar problems with assimilating the former Punic territories in North Africa, to a lessor degree.

    So Kaplan is informed and writes well but is wrong, as is usual with him. The civilizations between Europe and the Near East pre-date Christianity and Islam, and it is the fact that Christianity became associated with the heirs of Greece and Rome (despite mass conversions occurring in Syria and Egypt first), and Islam with the Levant and Persia, that has sharpened the divide between Christianity and Islam, not the other way around. Just looking at their doctrines and ignoring the culture baggage, the two religions have enough overlap that Islam has been described as another Christian heresy.

    Having Arabs join "Western" civilization is unlikely since they have never been part of Western civilization, and this includes the Christian Arabs. With Islam, the problem is all the Arab culture baggage.

    Mohamed was not only an Arab, but unlike Siddharta and unlike Jesus, he had/ kept his connections to powerful tribal figures and became a successful politician. At the end of his life he made a deal with his opponents in the Meccan aristocracy, under which they converted to Islam and allowed Mohamed to go home, in return for taking over his new religion. After the assassination of Mohamed's son-in-law Ali, the Caliphs for a century were all from the family of Mohamed's chief opponents in the Meccan aristocracy. It was they who first wrote down the Koran and assembled Mohamed's sayings (the Hadith) that are not in the Koran.

    Since Mohamed was a practical politician, as were his immediate successors, he was trying to create a function polity with all sorts of rules for behavior. Consider how influential in Christianity Paul's attempts to meditate disputes within various churches became and its easy to see the problem here. An Islamic version of the reformation would have to drop all of this, basically drop the Hadith and keep the Koran. It shouldn't be necessary to destroy the religion to the extent that @17 wants. But otherwise the religion comes with lots of Arabic tribal elements.

    I've overwritten, but to address the Western/ Modern distinction there are similar considerations. Since Europeans settled the Western Hemisphere and started the Industrial Revolution, the fruits of the Age of Discovery and the Industrial Revolution have been heavily intertwined with Western or European civilization. With non-Western countries like Japan and Turkey, or even mostly Western countries such as Russia and Mexico, its been a recurring debate about whether you can modernize, but separate modernity from Western civilization and get one without the other. Like with Near Eastern civilization and Islam, in principal you should be able to but in practice its almost impossible.

    Of all of the places that you list, just about the only one that was able to make the full transition to a fully modern high income economy and democratic form of government was Japan, and they were able to accomplish this fully only after we dropped two atomic weapons on them and then promised to keep dropping them for as long as necessary. And even this only worked because they had a long history as a unified hierarchical polity so when the emperor told them to change direction they all turned at the same time – no roadside IEDs against the occupying troops, nothing like that.

    So it’s very difficult to apply the Japanese example elsewhere. You could nuke the Saudi Arabians but that wouldn’t make them into Japanese. If N. Korea ever collapses, you could see a similar turnaround there, but after that the list of possible future G-7 members gets very short – either they fall short on the economy or on democracy or both. And the Muslim world is probably not on that list. Turkey – maybe, but probably not.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. Jefferson says:
    @Martian_Observer
    "Except for Israel …"

    And Japan. "We do not want to find ourselves in the situation of France" - Akira Morita, Director-General of the National Institute of Population and Social Security Research.

    http://www.challenges.fr/monde/asie-pacifique/20160407.CHA7521/le-japon-fait-contre-mauvaise-fortune-immigration.html

    Really the current borderlessness only afflicts the West. The rest of the world are very strict about their borders.

    ““Except for Israel …”

    And Japan. “We do not want to find ourselves in the situation of France” – Akira Morita, Director-General of the National Institute of Population and Social Security Research.

    http://www.challenges.fr/monde/asie-pacifique/20160407.CHA7521/le-japon-fait-contre-mauvaise-fortune-immigration.html

    Really the current borderlessness only afflicts the West. The rest of the world are very strict about their borders.”

    Most Eastern European countries are very strict about their borders, that is why they did not take in too many MENA refugees.

    Most Eastern European countries are very ethnically homogeneous if you exclude the Gypsies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. Big Bill says:
    @iSteveFan

    The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.
     
    Might this be a reason why Russia is so hated?

    Yes. A strong nationalist Christian Western country is anathema.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. Clio says:
    @Drake
    Muslims began raiding Sicily in 652, and ruled it from 827 to 1091.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquest_of_Sicily

    Calabria, which was never conquered by the Saracens, has essentially the same climatic conditions as Sicily, where I saw wild papyrus growing in sizeable quantities two years ago.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. @Spotted Toad
    This is a side-note, but I'll rush to redeem Kipling from inclusion in this list of august but arguably naïve figures of Orientalist artistry:

    Or, perhaps, to know the cabdrivers of Rotherham and Malmo is to become disillusioned with the pleasant Orientalist fantasies of Delacroix, Kipling, Mozart, Verdi, and Byron?
     
    I think that Kipling understood India as well as someone with a fairly open mind and moderately rich experience of the country could be expected to. Perhaps a century of explosive population growth and misgoverance has made the subcontinent more chaotic, but the country of Kim was still pretty recognizable when I travelled around in 2003.

    Most of the people on this site probably aren't going to a lot of kids' movies, but for what it's worth, I loved the new version of The Jungle Book, and thought it was quite true to the spirit of Kipling's original even if it is based nominally on the 1967 cartoon. (https://spottedtoad.wordpress.com/2016/04/17/the-jungle-book/ )Manohla Dargis's negative NYTimes review was a masterpiece of know-nothingism: "It also feels strangely removed from our moment," from the woman who thought that "Trainwreck" was great cinema; she also made the hilarious allegation that "The Law of the Jungle" was intended to be a metaphor for *British rule*, when it's perfectly obvious that, to the limited extent that the Jungle Book is about colonialism, Mowgli is the British, trying to learn the "Laws" of the Indian social Jungle.

    I’ve noticed Kipling tends to bring out the know-nothings…

    Will also follow your recommendation and catch the film. Thanks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. @Anonymous
    Nationalism brought ruin to Europe in the form of WWI with 10 million dead Europeans.

    Racialism brought utter destruction to Europe in the form of WWII with tens of millions of dead Europeans. If the Nazis had gone through with their plan how many Poles and Russians and other racial groups that did not meet the standard would have been wiped out to clear the way for Germans.

    The conclusion for European elites then is that nationalism and especially racialist thinking needs to be smothered to keep Europe and the white race safe.

    Nationalism brought ruin to Europe in the form of WWI with 10 million dead Europeans.

    Racialism brought utter destruction to Europe in the form of WWII with tens of millions of dead Europeans.

    One gets this nonsense all the time, but it’s still nonsense.

    War has existed … forever. It doesn’t require “nationalism”. In the case of the Great War, it was imperialism–the Austro-Hungarian trying to squash Balkan nationalisms and the Russians taking their side that was the launching point. And it was the range and extent of British imperialism colliding with a rising Germany locked out of resources and markets around the world, that led to the full “great power” conflict.

    As for World War II, the evil of the war wasn’t the Nazis “nationalism”, it was there imperialism–rolling their tanks into other countries with the idea of establishing a continental version of the British empire with Germany at the center. If they were just nationalist, idolizing their mythic past, marching around bonfires and such and kept within their borders–like Franco–no one would be talking about it.

    Nationalism is far and away the *best* way anyone has found to organize the world. It does require defined borders that folks agree are legitimate to separate different ethnys. In contrast, imperialism, globalism and “diversity” are sources of continual conflict big and small.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Serbian nationalism started WWI, and German nationalism started WW2. German aggression and expansionism in WW2 was based on and justified according to German nationalism. Francoist Spain was backward, quasi-medieval, and not as nationalistic as Germany.

    Your notion that nationalism simply entails marching around bonfires is completely ahistorical.
    , @Priss Factor
    "Nationalism brought ruin to Europe in the form of WWI with 10 million dead Europeans. Racialism brought utter destruction to Europe in the form of WWII with tens of millions of dead Europeans."

    Nationalism and Racialism brought liberation to the Third World.

    Also, it wasn't nationalism but imperialism that brought about WWI. Germanics and Slavics had disputes over territories and thought imperially than nationally.

    Racialism does no harm if it's national. It is a problem ONLY when it goes imperialist.

    So, imperialism is what messed up nationalism and racialism.

    Also, what did interracialism do to South America? It created a permanent underclass of native peoples. And look at the hellhole that is Brazil. Some wonder interracialism did.
    And Mongols were certainly interracial. So were the Ottomans. That meant lot of plunder and rape.
    And 'anti-racism' of Lincoln's war killed 650,000 of white Americans. In today's numbers, it would have meant 6 million dead.

    Anyway, as horrible as WWI and WWII were, Europe still survived as Europe.

    But if current trends continue under globalism and 'anti-racism', Europe itself can become just an extension of Africa and Muslim world. That is WORSE.

    , @AndrewR
    You are pitiful
    , @Jack D
    The problem is that in order to create pure ethnic monostates where the people can live happily with (and only with) their fellow Slobovians, you have to break (ethnically cleanse) almost as many eggs as it takes to make a collectivist omelet because these pure ethnic monostates never existed in the past - everybody was all mixed up. And even if you achieve (or think that you have achieved ) that Nirvana you might find that the Lower Slobovians think of themselves as different than the Upper Slobovians so you have to keep splitting into ever smaller and less viable micro-states, which tend to turn into corrupt kleptocracies. The local elites love this model because they get to sit on top, but for the average person they may be worse off than before even if they get to sing their own stupid national song now.

    The other model (the Empire) makes a lot of sense to me. Each little ethnic group in the empire can have (limited) self rule in its enclave but the entire empire is one big free trade zone. Each group can specialize in what it does best - the Lower Slobovians can tend their vineyards and the Upper Slobovians can brew beer. The best and the brightest youth from every reach of the empire can relocate to the big cities, especially the imperial capital and make an impact on a big scale. You can have a grand national culture that is important on a world scale. E Pluribus Unum, to coin a phrase.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. Leftist conservative [AKA "Make Unz.com Great Again"] says: • Website
    @AndrewR
    Accuracy is to ideologues what garlic is to vampires.

    sounds like you got all butthurt, sweetie… Did I trigger you? Get thee to your safe space, stat!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. Clio says:
    @TomSchmidt
    Did Sicily have a system for the production of papyrus, the cross-threaded "paper" of the ancient world? As "Drake" points out, Muslim raids in Sicily might have cut off trade between there and
    France; the bigger issue is whether Sicily produced any cheap paper at all.

    I found the anecdote interesting because I thought that the same thing could happen to business and accounts in the West today: one EMP that wipes non-paper records and we are down for years. Maybe never to restore.

    Here’s a link to an encyclopaedia from 1820 describing papyrus growing wild in Calabria. (It doesn’t really today, perhaps because the rivers have been straightened.)

    https://books.google.ch/books?id=2VAPAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA562&lpg=PA562&dq=papyrus+calabria&source=bl&ots=HqaL2N-m5I&sig=CXkWREa4DYC50jrAq_jpKP2AAPE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi1_sOS7JjMAhVIShQKHbcsDLcQ6AEIIzAD#v=onepage&q=papyrus%20calabria&f=false

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. Jefferson says:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Has anybody here ever met a Russian bible thumper? A Russian version of Rick Warren?
     
    You do realize, do you not, that televangelist-style Bible-thumping is a rather late and uniquely Anglospheric heretical innovation? It has nothing to do with what the vast majority of Christians, both East and West, have for thousands of years understood to be Christianity.

    The Russians are Orthodox. Their Christianity has very nearly the same priestly and sacramental system as Roman Catholicism did before the heretical Second Vatican Council and the abomination known as the Novus Ordo Missae. It even has the comparative advantage of not having endured a Protestant Revolt.

    I simply cannot stress how little American Evangelical Protestantism has to do with real Christianity.

    “You do realize, do you not, that televangelist-style Bible-thumping is a rather late and uniquely Anglospheric heretical innovation? It has nothing to do with what the vast majority of Christians, both East and West, have for thousands of years understood to be Christianity.

    The Russians are Orthodox. Their Christianity has very nearly the same priestly and sacramental system as Roman Catholicism did before the heretical Second Vatican Council and the abomination known as the Novus Ordo Missae. It even has the comparative advantage of not having endured a Protestant Revolt.

    I simply cannot stress how little American Evangelical Protestantism has to do with real Christianity.”

    The only things the Russian immigrants I have met here in The U.S care about is alcohol and money. They do not seem to care for Christianity and organized religion in general. They are not big on talking about God and Jesus Christ.

    If someone were to make a list of the top 10 most extremely religious Christian ethnic groups in the world, Russians would definitely not make the list.

    The only way Russia would become a religious nation and not continue to be a Godless Atheist & Agnostic nation would be if Islam took over.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iSteveFan

    The only way Russia would become a religious nation and not continue to be a Godless Atheist & Agnostic nation would be if Islam took over.
     
    Occasionally you make some good comments. But other times you seem completely out of this world. This is a case of the latter. Here is a portion of a military funeral for one of the Russians killed in Syria. Note the soldier carrying the rather large Cross. Would this happen at a US funeral?

    For someone like me who remembers the atheist USSR, it still blows my mind to see Russian military units openly displaying Crosses and receiving blessings from Priests. I am not saying they are the most religious people on earth. But after 70 plus years of Bolshevism they appear to be reclaiming their faith.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Of course, they were mostly working their own land only, not the ordinary villages where the serfs and peasants lived. Monks (monastic orders) lived in total isolation apart from townspeople as well as rural villagers. Over time, of course, the monasteries became more open to outside influences. Many monasteries made wine (in Germany they brewed beer) and did other forms of manual labor to support themselves. Of course as time continued to pass this helped increase the wealth of the larger monasteries which became an additional source of wealth for the Church as an institution.

    Point being, the monasteries didn't directly invest in ordinary villages or infant towns. For the most part they invested in their own monasteries (lands owned directly by the Church, which further increased the value of the Church's property).

    Why do you think Henry VIII sacked the monasteries in 1536? Because they were a source of vast wealth that wasn't going directly to the state but to the Church.

    Of course, they were mostly working their own land only, not the ordinary villages where the serfs and peasants lived. Monks (monastic orders) lived in total isolation apart from townspeople as well as rural villagers… Point being, the monasteries didn’t directly invest in ordinary villages or infant towns. For the most part they invested in their own monasteries (lands owned directly by the Church, which further increased the value of the Church’s property).

    Some amateur historians among Steve’s commentariat shouldn’t be let out without a chaperone. This is so wrong as to stupefy anyone with a passing knowledge of English social history in the period in question. “Ordinary villages and infant towns” were sitting on and part of the monastic lands. What do you think, the tonsured monks were doing all the plowing, sowing, harvesting themselves? Oh, and not just agriculture–all that light industry powered by waterwheels, weaving, dyeing, etc. They were the managerial cadre on each estate, and as such had day-to-day contact with every stratum of laypeople in each estate. They came from those laypeople too, as the abbots, abbesses and other higher-ups were talent scouts looking to recruit and educate the smart kids (women too) on their lands to climb the ladder, regardless of non-noble birth.
    The closeness of monastic clergy and lay people meant that the Dissolution of the Monasteries was an unmitigated social disaster for nearly everybody. The monasteries were, essentially, the social safety net in pre-welfare state England. All the negative social indicators–crime, vagrancy, illegitimacy, malnutrition–even illiteracy (despite the printing press and the vernacular liturgy)–skyrocketed from 1536 to almost the end of the 16th century. A major part of Elizabethan governance was trying to devise various “Poor Laws” to cope with the tsunami of social dysfunction and slum sprawl that resulted. The Dissolution was like the “Great Society” of the 1960s in terms of unintended consequences.

    Why do you think Henry VIII sacked the monasteries in 1536? Because they were a source of vast wealth that wasn’t going directly to the state but to the Church.

    Which Henry pissed away on stupid wars in France and other court extravagances to the point where the money gained was gone in less than 20 years. The English government was insolvent for most of the rest of the century.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. The Mediterranean and Cape shores are the white palms and soles of an otherwise black body.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  189. Jack D says:
    @Expletive Deleted
    China birth rate 1.55
    EU birth rate 1.6
    China is doomed, dooooomed I tell ye!
    Needs more barely-sentient muslims and africans, pronto. This ought to be a global geopolitical priority.

    Fertility rate doesn’t tell the whole story – you also have to understand the age distribution of the population. The fertility rate for girls under 12 and women over 50 is zero but if you have a large fertile contingent and increasing lifespan the population will continue to go up for a while as long as the # of births exceeds the # of deaths. China has just announced the end of the one child policy plus they already have a billion plus people.

    Population projections OTOH, can be fairly accurate (although birth rates can change in the long run). It’s clear, for example, that the population of Japan is already declining and that each year for the next 2 or 3 decades at least, more Japanese will die than be born. This is not the end of their civilization but it does create certain problems (not so much the decline itself but the fact that there will be so many old people relative to the working population).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. @Anonym
    Islam’s holy book is utterly incoherent, virtually non-understandable.

    I disagree. The reason why so many Islamic terrorists are engineers is that sometimes it takes an engineer to RTFM.

    I have read a translation and it made a lot of sense to me. If you want to spread your religion over time, it makes a lot of sense the way the Muslims do it. At first appear innocuous. Gradually get more aggressive until you can afford to put to the sword those whose territory you covet, or they convert, or they pay you a tax to fund your further adventures. Apostates are killed, that goes some way to solve the free rider problem.

    Of course, a society that focuses on war and spoils of war to the virtual exclusion of all else is bound to have lackluster science and economic growth. It won't even have an effective modern military, for that very reason. Islam is basically the embodied religion of 14 year old male desires. That's not to say it isn't dangerous or something to keep out of our countries.

    I agree with your analysis of Islam but definitely not of the Koran, which I have read. The English of translations may be understandable to you, because the translators make it so. Even so, the Koran, is mind numbingly repetitive, references Bible stories with no explanation, lacks any literary beauty in any translation I have read (every character speaks in exactly the same voice – Noah, Joseph, Jesus – all sound exactly the same) and it is hair raising when it comes to speaking about violence to be dealt to the unbelievers. Shakespeare is 1000 times more eloquent and can be translated without any problem. But besides for that, look at what most modern non-Muslim scholars of Islam say:

    The Koran claims for itself that it is ‘mubeen,’ or ‘clear,’ but if you look at it, you will notice that every fifth sentence or so simply doesn’t make sense. Many Muslims—and Orientalists—will tell you otherwise, of course, but the fact is that a fifth of the Koranic text is just incomprehensible. This is what has caused the traditional anxiety regarding translation. If the Koran is not comprehensible—if it can’t even be understood in Arabic—then it’s not translatable

    That is from Karl-Heinz Ohlig at University of Saarland. It has long been noted that the religious vocabulary of the Koran is Aramaic but others have stated that entire passages were imperfectly translated from the Aramaic and that is why they make no sense.

    Or this from Patricia Crone (who was at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton) and Michael Cook, a professor now at Princeton

    [The Qur'an] is strikingly lacking in overall structure, frequently obscure and inconsequential in both language and content, perfunctory in its linking of disparate materials, and given to the repetition of whole passages in variant versions. On this basis it can plausibly be argued that the book is the product of belated and imperfect editing of materials from a plurality of traditions.

    Most Muslims cannot read the Koran as modern Arabic is a very different language from Koranic Arabic, not to mention the Muslims who are not Arabs at all. They just memorize it and then listen to whatever their “religious leaders” tell them, which in large part are exhortations to kill the infidel.

    Read More
    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
    • Replies: @Anonym
    I agree with your analysis of Islam but definitely not of the Koran, which I have read. The English of translations may be understandable to you, because the translators make it so. Even so, the Koran, is mind numbingly repetitive, references Bible stories with no explanation, lacks any literary beauty in any translation I have read (every character speaks in exactly the same voice – Noah, Joseph, Jesus – all sound exactly the same) and it is hair raising when it comes to speaking about violence to be dealt to the unbelievers. Shakespeare is 1000 times more eloquent and can be translated without any problem. But besides for that, look at what most modern non-Muslim scholars of Islam say:

    It has been a decade or so since I read a Koran translation. Back then I looked at a site with three translations, and there were notes on the order of the Sura, abrogation, and such, which is key to understanding how a pious Muslim must act. So, if you want to understand how Islam works, you need to read from the last chapter chronologically to see what is in full effect and make your way to the earliest stuff as you want to see how you should evolve. Since according to the Koran, Mohammad is the perfect man and so you should model your life on his, you should know how he evolved and what he did.

    The 9th chapter (which is second last chronologically), the At-Taubah, is certainly one of the most bloodthirsty chapters. It is pretty clear what Muslims should ultimately aspire to, based on that chapter. If anything else is not clear, just ignore it. I didn't think it was rocket science. Anyone with a brain that can comprehend engineering or law should be able to grasp it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. Romanian says:
    @Hepp
    These historical types are weird. I knew some right leaning history professors who valued patriotism and heroism. But it never seemed to strike them that while French, the British, and Germans killed each other in the name of ruling their own countries, now these same peoples are just handing over their countries to completely alien races.

    Dominique Venner is a good exception. His last work has been translated into English.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hepp
    Thanks, I like the translations of Venner on Counter Currents and just bought the book with the foreword by Gottfried. Hopefully they'll be translating more of his work.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. @Jack D
    I dunno - in the past when too many Europeans were crowded into one space they started to bite each other like too many rats in a cage. For a while the Americas provided a release valve but after that they unleashed genocidal wars for lebensraum on each other.

    I think the root of European nihilism is their realization that after their civilization produced the Sistine Chapel and Mozart, it then produced the V-2 and Zyklon-B (while modern music and architecture is a mess). After Christopher Wren the builder of London you get Bomber Harris the unbuilder of Dresden . You can't blame people for throwing in the towel when they see that their civilization has driven itself into a dead end.

    “Re: I dunno – in the past when too many Europeans were crowded into one space they started to bite each other like too many rats in a cage. For a while the Americas provided a release valve but after that they unleashed genocidal wars for lebensraum on each other.”

    Too glib. In the first case, there were still plenty of “release valves” open to Europe up until and even after World War I — the British settler societies of Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The US was also accepting immigrants en masse prior to World War I. This also leaves aside the Europeanization of Africa in the form of South Africa, Rhodesia, Kenya and elsewhere.

    The Americas were only ever one release valve. Not all of them.

    In the second, the world wars didn’t just happen — let alone because of overpopulation. Certain nations — Germany, most obviously — decided to launch wars on their neighbours.

    Lest we forget, the Europeans had fought world wars before — the Napoleonic wars, for example, that served as impetus for ever greater achievements.

    I’d look at ideology long before I’d look at overpopulation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. “In Michel Houellebecq’s 2015 novel Submission, the new Muslim president of France moves the capital of the E.U. from northerly Brussels to Rome to be closer to the center of a new/old unified realm …”

    FWIW, in Vladimir Solovyov’s 1900 novella A Story of Anti-Christ, the new world-leader (antichrist) character moves the capital of the European world from northerly Berlin to Rome and eventually to Jerusalem to be close to the center of a new/old unified realm …

    Not that I’m suggesting anything here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  194. iSteveFan says:
    @Jack D
    What constitutes "overcrowding" ? If you take the population density of say Singapore or HK (or the Gaza Strip for that matter) and apply it to all of Israel it could support many times its current population.

    Jack,

    Are you suggesting Israel has more room? If so we have many refugees right on her doorstep that need a safe place. No sense in transporting them all the way to Europe when we have room next door.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    I suggest that Israel take its proportionate share (based on land area) vs. the rest of the Muslim world (though really they would be more comfortable in other Muslim lands). If you look at a map of the Islamic world at a large enough scale to take it all in, from Morocco to Indonesia, you need a magnifying glass to find Israel - it's like a little blue speck in a sea of green. It's like Rhode Island on the map of the US - it's too small to actually write "Israel" on top of it - they have to write it in the Mediterranean Sea and draw a line to it. It's really amazing that this little tiny speck is the subject of so much obsession here and elsewhere. Why does no one concern themselves with the immigration policies of Cyprus or Malta or the political views of the pundits of Liechtenstein?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. @sflicht
    Steve, I've been reading Bacevich's latest, so I'm having trouble preventing myself from overfitting to recent history. Nonetheless, the uptick in migration from Africa to Europe seems suspiciously like a direct consequence of ramped up US engagement in Africa -- to wit, the rising stature of AFRICOM within the Pentagon establishment, and the gradual escalation of drone warfare in Nigeria, Mauritania, Somalia, etc. And it doesn't necessarily have to be an *intended* consequence. One should at least consider the possibility that incompetent planners in Arlington VA failed to anticipate an eminently predictable demographic effect of meddling with regional power structures in the Mahgreb and the sub-Sahara. Perhaps grand narratives about the West and Islam with respective capital letters W and I are less important than people not wanting to be droned.

    So, let me get this straight. Bacevich (or whoever) thinks that sub-saharan Africans’ fear of drone strikes is causing them to migrate towards the the drone operators? Is that correct?

    Read More
    • Replies: @sflicht
    I would say "yes, sort of". I don't attribute this view to Bacevich or anyone else. I merely observe that (a) the drone war in the sub-Sahara motivates people to emigrate, while (b) emigration to Europe provides opportunities unavailable elsewhere even if it exposes migrants to certain risks. It seems fallacious to conflate "Europe" with "towards the drone operators", if the drone operators are in fact based in the US/UK relatively far from migrant destinations in Italy or Germany.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. Steve, I think Kaplan’s giving you your answer–yet again–to the question you posed a month back about whether ethnocentric centrist Jews could be brought around.

    Personally, i’d love to have Jews breed in and throw in with the white gentile population and support it. They are a smart people, and if doing say physics or medicine and kept as far away from politics and social science as possible, they make valuable contributions. (Or alternatively just going all in on Jewish identity, moving to Israel, and enjoying being in your own nation an ally of the West having their own nations.)

    But it just ain’t gonna happen. (The breeding partially, but the support, no.) Push comes to shove most Jews are just deeply ideologically committed to the idea that all societies much be “open”–meaning penetrable and exploitable by Jews. Japan, China, Korea not being open … just sort of annoying. But any thought that European societies are entitled to have closed borders–heck by owned and run for the benefit of their citizens–just sends them into spasms of blither PC rages or incoherence. Common culture? In geographic entities? These are the very concepts and the very people–that Jews resisted and refused to mix with in their 2000 years of separatism, and trans-national tribalism.

    Here’s Kaplan:

    Although the idea of an end to history—with all its ethnic and territorial disputes—turns out to have been a fantasy, this realization is no excuse for a retreat into nationalism. The cultural purity that Europe craves in the face of the Muslim-refugee influx is simply impossible in a world of increasing human interactions.

    You’ll note he doesn’t even bother arguing here–because he has no good argument–he just asserts.

    Of course, there’s no need for an “excuse”, nor is nationalism a “retreat”. I’d argue it’s fairly demonstrably the *best* way to organize peoples and the world. It’s worked incredibly well for the Brits, the French, Americans, Germans, Japanese, Koreans, now the Chinese. It’s *the* way to have peace and prosperity. You just have to get to agreed borders and reject destabilizing imperialism–like we saw from the Spanish, the Dutch, the British, French, the Germans and Japanese during the war, and unfortunately even from we Americans in the Philippines. In fact, that’s precisely how you achieve peace–you stay *out* of other people’s business.

    This idea that you can’t have pure nations in “a world of increasing human interactions” is just stupid. Toyota has plants all over the US. The kids and I toured a Mercedes plant outside Tuscaloosa ten years back. You can have profitable interactions just fine with separate cultures\races\civilizations and defined borders.

    It’s actually much akin to why my little patch of suburbia is such a nice place. We all have our own houses with our own yards. Everyone knows what they own. I don’t bang my neighbor’s wife, nor he mine. As a result of “established borders” we could have friendly relations, and the kids grew up running all over the place. We have a neighborhood Christmas party at our house, block parties in the street–a biggie bonfire at the 4th of July. We can borrow stuff from each other–i don’t even own a working lawn mower. Good fences make good neighbors.

    Jews just are not going to admit that their model, their experience–transnational tribalism–is anomalous and an *inferior* model for organizing the world. Most people across geography and history have been around people like them–same race, language, culture–and much prefer that. (At the boundaries … there is conflict. ) People don’t actually like being bossed around–dictated to–by a racially or cultural different overclass. With nationalism you can have republics, representative, democracy, civil rights, the joys of shared culture, community harmony and peace and prosperity. In contrast the Jewish diversitopia model, suppresses republicanism, gives you a bullying overclass, an intrusive state bureaucracy, speech codes, political allocation of everything, continual cultural contention (schools, communities, neighborhoods, nations), reduced community and atomization. It’s just unpleasant. It’s inferior. But admitting that pretty darn obvious fact, messes up the Jewish narrative of being the multicultural heroes by their separatism and refusing to assimilate with the local populations.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    Kaplan is articulating the opinion of the business class that he catered to while at Stratfor. The German business class is right behind Merkel over the immigrants, and they are not so many Jews in Germany that they greatly affect policy. merkel made a sudden U-turn over the decision to take a million immigrants a year for reasons of her own which are probally not altruistic in relation to other European countries. Consider:-

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-germany-insight-idUSKCN0RD0JU20150913

    For some, it is hard to reconcile Merkel’s generous approach to the refugees with her hard line on bailing out Greece, where she has sometimes seemed to bow to public opinion and put German interests above all else.
     

    , @Jack D
    The mono-ethnic nation state was the exception, not the rule in Europe until the 19th century. Most Germans did not live in a place called "Germany" nor Italians in "Italy", nor Poles in"Poland" - these places simply did not exist. Even after Poland was reborn after WWI, it was not a mono-ethnic mono-religious state. In addition to its large Jewish minority, there were large groups of Lithuanians, Germans, Ukrainians/Ruthenians, etc. most of whom had their own religions too. The "pure" Polish mono-ethnic mono-religious state that was born after WWII is the exception, not the usual situation and one that was not optimal. One of the principles of HBD (to me at least) is that different ethnic groups are good at different things. Blacks may not make the greatest accountants but they sure can play ball. The English were great at running a Navy but their cooking sucked. Etc. Having a multi-ethnic state allowed everyone to do what they were best at - the old comparative advantage thing. Even Russia had large foreign minorities that occupied certain ecological niches - French and Swiss jewelers and watchmakers, etc. Likewise in Mexico you have Mennonite involved in the dairy industry. Etc. Even Japan always operated under strong Chinese cultural influence and their religion came all the way from India. Just about the only truly "pure" place is North Korea - not a great model.

    American white people of a certain age from the North and outside of big cities (note that this is a pretty qualified group) can remember an America that was a whitopia - Leave it to Beaver, Father Knows Best Land, where you never had to lock your doors (and even that was a Potemkin village - the father that knew best was probably cheating with his secretary on the side and Mrs. Cleaver was nipping at the cognac). But that was just a moment in time - a few decades before, the prairies were just as full of strange foreigners but they were Swedes and Norwegians and Poles and Slavs. You can't pick 1959 in Winnetka, IL and say THAT was the real America - that was just one facet of a multi-faceted and every changing jewel.

    , @Diversity Heretic
    Well said, sir! This is one of the most cogent explanations for why Jews, who would appear to be inherently conservative, seem to have the effect of undermining coherent nationalism. Perhaps the older practices of confining them to ghettos and excluding them from public office and teaching (Code of Justinian) while leaving them free to practice their religion and order their own communities, had some merit. In the larger community, but not truly of the larger community, is a tenuous position and once people like that gain influence, the direction in which they will tend to drive public policy may not be desirable for the larger community. This observation is more characteristic of other minorities, but they tend not to be as influential.
    , @Expletive Deleted

    People don’t actually like being bossed around–dictated to–by a racially or cultural different overclass.
     
    Layz'n'german, I give you ... Ireland, or Euskadi or any amount of Balkans. Sardinians? Sicilians? Mediaeval Dutchmen?
    I wonder if Bobby K has the stones to face down the sheer demented bloody-mindedness of most European "tribes" in the wild, and the pervasive lex talionis and deadly feud? Centuries and centuries, clinging like limpets and to hell with the bodycount.
    Unlike his own crew of lightfingered perpetual tourists who inevitably end up peeing off even the management (never mind the staff, towards whom they are routinely verbally abusive) of whichever establishment they occupy. Self-entitlement is a truly dreadful curse.
    , @anon
    Yes.

    Their way of thinking grew out of not having their own country so it's understandable how it came about but their anti-nationalism (for everyone else) is totally destructive.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. Sean says:

    The EU is a way of creating a few big companies to replace many small ones, hence European corporations will enjoy continental economies of scale. The less avowed motive is to deny access to the EU market (one common market regulation within Europe acts as a barrier to the rest of the world), Germany is the greatest beneficiary of the EU single European currency area because it lets them destroy the competition. Greece is just the first to have the life squeezed out of it.

    The EU was supposed to solve the German Question Ulrich Beck an eminent sociologist called Chancellor Angela Merkel a calculating “Mer­kiavelli”, who had successfully Germanised the continent. Currently, Germany is cocooned by friendly countries on all borders.

    The wars Kagan alludes to were wars to stop Germany . The single currency EU has kept Europe from war according to Merkel. Germany fears the consequences of its increasing dominance will be like last time and they abandoned even nuclear power to seem harmless (the previous Mer­kiavelli U-turn). So the immigrant crisis, which is largely a creation of her second U-turn, fits into a pattern of trying to disarm the nationalism of Germany’s traditional foes.

    Kagan is doubtless correct that intense security competition would start up if the other EU countries became more and not less sensitive to their declining power. Kagan is an admirer of John Mearshiemer who thinks the safest thing for Europe would be would be Germany armed with nuclear weapons. Germany’s economic and ideological aggression will have to be defeated before that can happen.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  198. @iSteveFan

    How Islam Created Europe
     
    This quote reminded me of a similar quote written a few months back that was covered in an iSteve post. Someone in the NYT (I think) declared that islam has always been a part of America and that islam in effect contributed to the Founding of America. They were suggesting that since some slaves were muslim, and since a couple more muslims washed up on shore, that the muslims were part of the Founding and that the US and islam are inseparable. I might be misquoting, but that is the gist of what I recall.

    Anyway this headline seems similar. It is written in such a way as to portray islam as part and parcel with Europe. My guess is that it is being done like the earlier comment on islam and America to weaken the will of the people to resist further immigration into the USA and Europe of muslims. After all if they created the US and Europe, we can't keep them out.

    Of course the guy's description about islam and Europe also let's the astute reader read between the lines and realize that islam has really been at war with Europe for centuries with a goal of conquering it all. But I imagine the author knows that the racism slur can pretty much guarantee that no one will take away that message.

    BTW, isn't Turkey trying to get in the EU by playing the same card? They say that the Turks have been a part of Europe for centuries and played a crucial role in their history. Of course they don't dwell on the fact that their role was one of outside occupier and slave taker.

    “Someone in the NYT (I think) declared that islam has always been a part of America and that islam in effect contributed to the Founding of America. ”

    I think the “Someone” you refer to was Obama, who has been spouting this “Islam has always been a part of America” hooey for a while. And yes, his NYT courtiers love to reprint it. And yes, it is transparently false. And yes, he is almost certainly saying it to try to normalize Islamic infiltration and occupation. And yes, Kaplan’s also false Islam-is-part-of-Europe meme is probably for the same purpose.

    To be fair, the most reductionist interpretation of the Obama/Kaplan Islam-was-always-part-of- thesis is sort of true, … Islam has always been part of America/Europe in the same sense that malaria has always been a part of the tropics, or that gravity has always been part of the space program. You know, “Yes, but not in a good way.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @AnotherDad

    Nationalism brought ruin to Europe in the form of WWI with 10 million dead Europeans.

    Racialism brought utter destruction to Europe in the form of WWII with tens of millions of dead Europeans.
     
    One gets this nonsense all the time, but it's still nonsense.

    War has existed ... forever. It doesn't require "nationalism". In the case of the Great War, it was imperialism--the Austro-Hungarian trying to squash Balkan nationalisms and the Russians taking their side that was the launching point. And it was the range and extent of British imperialism colliding with a rising Germany locked out of resources and markets around the world, that led to the full "great power" conflict.

    As for World War II, the evil of the war wasn't the Nazis "nationalism", it was there imperialism--rolling their tanks into other countries with the idea of establishing a continental version of the British empire with Germany at the center. If they were just nationalist, idolizing their mythic past, marching around bonfires and such and kept within their borders--like Franco--no one would be talking about it.

    Nationalism is far and away the *best* way anyone has found to organize the world. It does require defined borders that folks agree are legitimate to separate different ethnys. In contrast, imperialism, globalism and "diversity" are sources of continual conflict big and small.

    Serbian nationalism started WWI, and German nationalism started WW2. German aggression and expansionism in WW2 was based on and justified according to German nationalism. Francoist Spain was backward, quasi-medieval, and not as nationalistic as Germany.

    Your notion that nationalism simply entails marching around bonfires is completely ahistorical.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  200. Jack D says:
    @ReaderfromGreece
    Having spent time there, I'd argue it did happen in the cities, as well as smaller towns that had a strong presence of culture and the arts. Although the state has always straddled between being a dictatorship and a democracy, there was still a truly secular, modern-minded dominant culture. That's no small thing when you consider that Istanbul alone is as large or larger than many European countries. It has noticeably regressed terribly in the last few years. I'm not convinced Erdogan's government is to blame; it's a chicken/egg question. A key thing to understand about Turkey is that such cities and towns are facing the exact same problems with immigrant communities (from rural areas) that places like Brussels and the West in general have with Muslim immigrants.

    Yes, what happened in Turkey was that the rural, conservative Islamic areas, having made their demographic transition later, won the war of the cradle. Just like Quebec went from being an English ruled province with a mostly English speaking secularist big city (Montreal) and a rural religious Catholic French population to one where the French overwhelmed the English influence by virtue of numbers and took over and Frenchified the big city too . In Turkey they were all the same religion and spoke the same language but the headscarf crowd beat out the barehead group.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  201. Sean says:
    @AnotherDad
    Steve, I think Kaplan's giving you your answer--yet again--to the question you posed a month back about whether ethnocentric centrist Jews could be brought around.

    Personally, i'd love to have Jews breed in and throw in with the white gentile population and support it. They are a smart people, and if doing say physics or medicine and kept as far away from politics and social science as possible, they make valuable contributions. (Or alternatively just going all in on Jewish identity, moving to Israel, and enjoying being in your own nation an ally of the West having their own nations.)

    But it just ain't gonna happen. (The breeding partially, but the support, no.) Push comes to shove most Jews are just deeply ideologically committed to the idea that all societies much be "open"--meaning penetrable and exploitable by Jews. Japan, China, Korea not being open ... just sort of annoying. But any thought that European societies are entitled to have closed borders--heck by owned and run for the benefit of their citizens--just sends them into spasms of blither PC rages or incoherence. Common culture? In geographic entities? These are the very concepts and the very people--that Jews resisted and refused to mix with in their 2000 years of separatism, and trans-national tribalism.

    Here's Kaplan:

    Although the idea of an end to history—with all its ethnic and territorial disputes—turns out to have been a fantasy, this realization is no excuse for a retreat into nationalism. The cultural purity that Europe craves in the face of the Muslim-refugee influx is simply impossible in a world of increasing human interactions.
     
    You'll note he doesn't even bother arguing here--because he has no good argument--he just asserts.

    Of course, there's no need for an "excuse", nor is nationalism a "retreat". I'd argue it's fairly demonstrably the *best* way to organize peoples and the world. It's worked incredibly well for the Brits, the French, Americans, Germans, Japanese, Koreans, now the Chinese. It's *the* way to have peace and prosperity. You just have to get to agreed borders and reject destabilizing imperialism--like we saw from the Spanish, the Dutch, the British, French, the Germans and Japanese during the war, and unfortunately even from we Americans in the Philippines. In fact, that's precisely how you achieve peace--you stay *out* of other people's business.

    This idea that you can't have pure nations in "a world of increasing human interactions" is just stupid. Toyota has plants all over the US. The kids and I toured a Mercedes plant outside Tuscaloosa ten years back. You can have profitable interactions just fine with separate cultures\races\civilizations and defined borders.

    It's actually much akin to why my little patch of suburbia is such a nice place. We all have our own houses with our own yards. Everyone knows what they own. I don't bang my neighbor's wife, nor he mine. As a result of "established borders" we could have friendly relations, and the kids grew up running all over the place. We have a neighborhood Christmas party at our house, block parties in the street--a biggie bonfire at the 4th of July. We can borrow stuff from each other--i don't even own a working lawn mower. Good fences make good neighbors.

    Jews just are not going to admit that their model, their experience--transnational tribalism--is anomalous and an *inferior* model for organizing the world. Most people across geography and history have been around people like them--same race, language, culture--and much prefer that. (At the boundaries ... there is conflict. ) People don't actually like being bossed around--dictated to--by a racially or cultural different overclass. With nationalism you can have republics, representative, democracy, civil rights, the joys of shared culture, community harmony and peace and prosperity. In contrast the Jewish diversitopia model, suppresses republicanism, gives you a bullying overclass, an intrusive state bureaucracy, speech codes, political allocation of everything, continual cultural contention (schools, communities, neighborhoods, nations), reduced community and atomization. It's just unpleasant. It's inferior. But admitting that pretty darn obvious fact, messes up the Jewish narrative of being the multicultural heroes by their separatism and refusing to assimilate with the local populations.

    Kaplan is articulating the opinion of the business class that he catered to while at Stratfor. The German business class is right behind Merkel over the immigrants, and they are not so many Jews in Germany that they greatly affect policy. merkel made a sudden U-turn over the decision to take a million immigrants a year for reasons of her own which are probally not altruistic in relation to other European countries. Consider:-

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-germany-insight-idUSKCN0RD0JU20150913

    For some, it is hard to reconcile Merkel’s generous approach to the refugees with her hard line on bailing out Greece, where she has sometimes seemed to bow to public opinion and put German interests above all else.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tracy

    and they are not so many Jews in Germany that they greatly affect policy
     
    You're making the assumption that there has to be a large number of a population for them to have a great effect. That's not so. Jews are 2% of the population in the U.S., for ex.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    "In sum, “the West” emerged in northern Europe (albeit in a very slow and tortuous manner) mainly after Islam had divided the Mediterranean world."

    Wasn't the Mediterranean world significantly divided during late Antiquity due to the Emperor Constantine moving the Empire's capital from Rome to...Constantinople? Also, unless Kaplan discusses it in the Atlantic article, he seems to have just entirely bypassed the role that the Eastern (Orthodox Christian) Byzantium Empire had in dividing the Mediterranean world not so much between North and South, (Europe vs Africa) but between East vs. West, (Europe, in both its directions). If Western Europe experienced a Dark Ages and regressed into barbarism for several centuries, it was just as primitive when compared to Byzantium (Eastern Europe and Middle East) as it was with the Islamic Caliphate of the same time.

    And, for the first few centuries, the Byzantine empire was still much stronger than Islam, [culturally; militarily; etc] at least until ca.850, or 900AD.

    Funny how Kaplan just ignores that part. Does sound like its a larger part to make the Islamic invasion of Europe a more acceptable thing along the lines of "Resistance is futile, and submission is inevitable."

    “In sum, “the West” emerged in northern Europe (albeit in a very slow and tortuous manner) mainly after Islam had divided the Mediterranean world.”

    Sounds like projection, guilty consciences and all that.
    I feex for you, effendi, very cheap

    “In sum, “Israel” emerged in the Near East (albeit in a very slow and tortuous manner) mainly after the British Empire and France had divided the Mediterranean world”

    and is now irrevocable, and an eternal fixture, just like “the West” ought to be, if they do as they are told …

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. Jack D says:
    @AnotherDad
    Steve, I think Kaplan's giving you your answer--yet again--to the question you posed a month back about whether ethnocentric centrist Jews could be brought around.

    Personally, i'd love to have Jews breed in and throw in with the white gentile population and support it. They are a smart people, and if doing say physics or medicine and kept as far away from politics and social science as possible, they make valuable contributions. (Or alternatively just going all in on Jewish identity, moving to Israel, and enjoying being in your own nation an ally of the West having their own nations.)

    But it just ain't gonna happen. (The breeding partially, but the support, no.) Push comes to shove most Jews are just deeply ideologically committed to the idea that all societies much be "open"--meaning penetrable and exploitable by Jews. Japan, China, Korea not being open ... just sort of annoying. But any thought that European societies are entitled to have closed borders--heck by owned and run for the benefit of their citizens--just sends them into spasms of blither PC rages or incoherence. Common culture? In geographic entities? These are the very concepts and the very people--that Jews resisted and refused to mix with in their 2000 years of separatism, and trans-national tribalism.

    Here's Kaplan:

    Although the idea of an end to history—with all its ethnic and territorial disputes—turns out to have been a fantasy, this realization is no excuse for a retreat into nationalism. The cultural purity that Europe craves in the face of the Muslim-refugee influx is simply impossible in a world of increasing human interactions.
     
    You'll note he doesn't even bother arguing here--because he has no good argument--he just asserts.

    Of course, there's no need for an "excuse", nor is nationalism a "retreat". I'd argue it's fairly demonstrably the *best* way to organize peoples and the world. It's worked incredibly well for the Brits, the French, Americans, Germans, Japanese, Koreans, now the Chinese. It's *the* way to have peace and prosperity. You just have to get to agreed borders and reject destabilizing imperialism--like we saw from the Spanish, the Dutch, the British, French, the Germans and Japanese during the war, and unfortunately even from we Americans in the Philippines. In fact, that's precisely how you achieve peace--you stay *out* of other people's business.

    This idea that you can't have pure nations in "a world of increasing human interactions" is just stupid. Toyota has plants all over the US. The kids and I toured a Mercedes plant outside Tuscaloosa ten years back. You can have profitable interactions just fine with separate cultures\races\civilizations and defined borders.

    It's actually much akin to why my little patch of suburbia is such a nice place. We all have our own houses with our own yards. Everyone knows what they own. I don't bang my neighbor's wife, nor he mine. As a result of "established borders" we could have friendly relations, and the kids grew up running all over the place. We have a neighborhood Christmas party at our house, block parties in the street--a biggie bonfire at the 4th of July. We can borrow stuff from each other--i don't even own a working lawn mower. Good fences make good neighbors.

    Jews just are not going to admit that their model, their experience--transnational tribalism--is anomalous and an *inferior* model for organizing the world. Most people across geography and history have been around people like them--same race, language, culture--and much prefer that. (At the boundaries ... there is conflict. ) People don't actually like being bossed around--dictated to--by a racially or cultural different overclass. With nationalism you can have republics, representative, democracy, civil rights, the joys of shared culture, community harmony and peace and prosperity. In contrast the Jewish diversitopia model, suppresses republicanism, gives you a bullying overclass, an intrusive state bureaucracy, speech codes, political allocation of everything, continual cultural contention (schools, communities, neighborhoods, nations), reduced community and atomization. It's just unpleasant. It's inferior. But admitting that pretty darn obvious fact, messes up the Jewish narrative of being the multicultural heroes by their separatism and refusing to assimilate with the local populations.

    The mono-ethnic nation state was the exception, not the rule in Europe until the 19th century. Most Germans did not live in a place called “Germany” nor Italians in “Italy”, nor Poles in”Poland” – these places simply did not exist. Even after Poland was reborn after WWI, it was not a mono-ethnic mono-religious state. In addition to its large Jewish minority, there were large groups of Lithuanians, Germans, Ukrainians/Ruthenians, etc. most of whom had their own religions too. The “pure” Polish mono-ethnic mono-religious state that was born after WWII is the exception, not the usual situation and one that was not optimal. One of the principles of HBD (to me at least) is that different ethnic groups are good at different things. Blacks may not make the greatest accountants but they sure can play ball. The English were great at running a Navy but their cooking sucked. Etc. Having a multi-ethnic state allowed everyone to do what they were best at – the old comparative advantage thing. Even Russia had large foreign minorities that occupied certain ecological niches – French and Swiss jewelers and watchmakers, etc. Likewise in Mexico you have Mennonite involved in the dairy industry. Etc. Even Japan always operated under strong Chinese cultural influence and their religion came all the way from India. Just about the only truly “pure” place is North Korea – not a great model.

    American white people of a certain age from the North and outside of big cities (note that this is a pretty qualified group) can remember an America that was a whitopia – Leave it to Beaver, Father Knows Best Land, where you never had to lock your doors (and even that was a Potemkin village – the father that knew best was probably cheating with his secretary on the side and Mrs. Cleaver was nipping at the cognac). But that was just a moment in time – a few decades before, the prairies were just as full of strange foreigners but they were Swedes and Norwegians and Poles and Slavs. You can’t pick 1959 in Winnetka, IL and say THAT was the real America – that was just one facet of a multi-faceted and every changing jewel.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Matra
    (and even that was a Potemkin village – the father that knew best was probably cheating with his secretary on the side and Mrs. Cleaver was nipping at the cognac).

    So the media, especially Hollywood, have been telling us over and over again for decades. For some reason it is important to them that everyone believes that Pleasantville was actually full of hypocrisy and unseen suffering. We can't have Middle Americans (or Middle Englanders or the normal people of any other Western country) believing their own memories or what their parents told them.

    , @AnotherDad
    Jack you've just, serially
    -- made my point
    -- not understood what i wrote
    -- made my point even more strongly

    In rough order, trying not to go book length:

    --> Steve, i think we can add JackD, along with Kaplan to the list of Jews unable to get over their Jewish ideology and declining your invitation to be sensible and help save the West

    -->

    Most Germans did not live in a place called “Germany” nor Italians in “Italy”, nor Poles in”Poland” – these places simply did not exist ...
     
    Everyone here is aware that modern nation state formation was a process and not ancient. But then i never suggested anything different. What i wrote was this:

    Most people across geography and history have been around people like them–same race, language, culture–and much prefer that.
     
    Sorry, but that's just ... true. Historically, most people lived on the land, in villages of people of the same ethnicity (language, religion, culture). Yeah, in some places a village 10 miles down the road, might have another dialect. 50 miles away across some river or sea or mountain range, people might speak an entirely different language and perhaps be a truly different ethny. That's how most people lived their lives, in their village, with people of the same ethnic group, language, religion, culture, customs. And the next village down the road would be pretty similar. Perhaps even with some relatives as mating was local and DNA would diffuse slowly out, throughout the ethnic group. (More sticky, of course, crossing linguistic or ethnic dividing lines.). City life was simply not the human norm--cities were generally population sinks! And serious diversity only existed where the local power enforced it. Jews, an endogamous trans-national tribe with a separatist ideology to specifically not mix\breed with their local non-Jewish fellows are wild out-liers. Their experience is not the general human experience.

    What the modern nation state allows is to have "community"--an ethny with a shared language and culture--at the scale for modern industrial and commercial enterprise. That's what has made it so great! People can still appreciate their own local cultural practices and traditions. But if they can extend their loyalty out a bit to their fellows who are basically the same race, language and culture, then they are part of something with a much bigger scale, with bigger opportunities ... yet still something that is special, that is *theirs*--a nation.

    -->

    One of the principles of HBD (to me at least) is that different ethnic groups are good at different things. Blacks may not make the greatest accountants but they sure can play ball.
     
    Jack, now you're just doing self-parody. How many ball playing spots are available? Heck the Jesuits had me read "The Cruel Deception" (Sports Illustrated IIRC) in religion class back in '71. What you're really saying here is blacks get to be field hands and ditch diggers.

    Look, everyone gets why Jews like your idea. It's basically the Indian caste system. Jews (Ashkenazi) are legitimately maybe 2/3 of a standard deviation above the white mean. So Jews get to be financiers, lawyers, lobbyists, professors, businessmen, journalists--basically call the shots and collect the loot. But guess what ... no one else likes it! Heck, even the Indians who are the most culturally "adapted" to a caste system, don't like it! The tribes, untouchables, lower and now even middle castes all want *reservations*. They're telling you to stuff your comparative advantage up your ... whatever ... they want some of those Jewish type jobs (often held by Brahmins in India) for *their* people.

    Even the Africans, who honestly are "not ready" for modern industrial society (struggle to come up with enough of a smart fraction to run things), tossed their white colonial bosses out. And there's been no clamor for whites to come back, even though they'd do a better job running those places then Africans. People don't like to sit at the back of the bus. They particularly don't like to have to sit at the back of their *own* bus with some other group of people in front. Seriously Jack, get a clue. People want their *own* children to have a good shot at being the doctor, the lawyer, the businessman, the professor. They don't want to think ... well my people were born to be ditch diggers. They don't give a shit about your "comparative advantage".

    -->

    American white people of a certain age from the North and outside of big cities (note that this is a pretty qualified group) can remember an America that was a whitopia – Leave it to Beaver, Father Knows Best Land, where you never had to lock your doors ...
     
    Jack, now you are *really* making my point.

    Yes, that period was a unique time. (Though i'd argue with you about just how diverse America historically was.) It was formed by 40 years of immigration control which had rendered--maybe "melted" is better--America's white gentile population (Jews again holding themselves aloof) into something that was just sort of "American".

    But in trying to bash it, you've made my point. What do people remember about it? They remember it being *really nice*!

    Essentially America had shed a bunch of its immigration induced diversity with its conflicts and amalgamated itself into something more like a European nation state, with a much more reasonably coherent national population--English speaking, common culture and traditions--except with bigger cars, houses and yards! It was a freaking golden age!

    Limited immigration, less diversity, one people, common language and culture=>darn nice. I think you pretty much nailed it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. @AnotherDad
    Steve, I think Kaplan's giving you your answer--yet again--to the question you posed a month back about whether ethnocentric centrist Jews could be brought around.

    Personally, i'd love to have Jews breed in and throw in with the white gentile population and support it. They are a smart people, and if doing say physics or medicine and kept as far away from politics and social science as possible, they make valuable contributions. (Or alternatively just going all in on Jewish identity, moving to Israel, and enjoying being in your own nation an ally of the West having their own nations.)

    But it just ain't gonna happen. (The breeding partially, but the support, no.) Push comes to shove most Jews are just deeply ideologically committed to the idea that all societies much be "open"--meaning penetrable and exploitable by Jews. Japan, China, Korea not being open ... just sort of annoying. But any thought that European societies are entitled to have closed borders--heck by owned and run for the benefit of their citizens--just sends them into spasms of blither PC rages or incoherence. Common culture? In geographic entities? These are the very concepts and the very people--that Jews resisted and refused to mix with in their 2000 years of separatism, and trans-national tribalism.

    Here's Kaplan:

    Although the idea of an end to history—with all its ethnic and territorial disputes—turns out to have been a fantasy, this realization is no excuse for a retreat into nationalism. The cultural purity that Europe craves in the face of the Muslim-refugee influx is simply impossible in a world of increasing human interactions.
     
    You'll note he doesn't even bother arguing here--because he has no good argument--he just asserts.

    Of course, there's no need for an "excuse", nor is nationalism a "retreat". I'd argue it's fairly demonstrably the *best* way to organize peoples and the world. It's worked incredibly well for the Brits, the French, Americans, Germans, Japanese, Koreans, now the Chinese. It's *the* way to have peace and prosperity. You just have to get to agreed borders and reject destabilizing imperialism--like we saw from the Spanish, the Dutch, the British, French, the Germans and Japanese during the war, and unfortunately even from we Americans in the Philippines. In fact, that's precisely how you achieve peace--you stay *out* of other people's business.

    This idea that you can't have pure nations in "a world of increasing human interactions" is just stupid. Toyota has plants all over the US. The kids and I toured a Mercedes plant outside Tuscaloosa ten years back. You can have profitable interactions just fine with separate cultures\races\civilizations and defined borders.

    It's actually much akin to why my little patch of suburbia is such a nice place. We all have our own houses with our own yards. Everyone knows what they own. I don't bang my neighbor's wife, nor he mine. As a result of "established borders" we could have friendly relations, and the kids grew up running all over the place. We have a neighborhood Christmas party at our house, block parties in the street--a biggie bonfire at the 4th of July. We can borrow stuff from each other--i don't even own a working lawn mower. Good fences make good neighbors.

    Jews just are not going to admit that their model, their experience--transnational tribalism--is anomalous and an *inferior* model for organizing the world. Most people across geography and history have been around people like them--same race, language, culture--and much prefer that. (At the boundaries ... there is conflict. ) People don't actually like being bossed around--dictated to--by a racially or cultural different overclass. With nationalism you can have republics, representative, democracy, civil rights, the joys of shared culture, community harmony and peace and prosperity. In contrast the Jewish diversitopia model, suppresses republicanism, gives you a bullying overclass, an intrusive state bureaucracy, speech codes, political allocation of everything, continual cultural contention (schools, communities, neighborhoods, nations), reduced community and atomization. It's just unpleasant. It's inferior. But admitting that pretty darn obvious fact, messes up the Jewish narrative of being the multicultural heroes by their separatism and refusing to assimilate with the local populations.

    Well said, sir! This is one of the most cogent explanations for why Jews, who would appear to be inherently conservative, seem to have the effect of undermining coherent nationalism. Perhaps the older practices of confining them to ghettos and excluding them from public office and teaching (Code of Justinian) while leaving them free to practice their religion and order their own communities, had some merit. In the larger community, but not truly of the larger community, is a tenuous position and once people like that gain influence, the direction in which they will tend to drive public policy may not be desirable for the larger community. This observation is more characteristic of other minorities, but they tend not to be as influential.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  205. Priss Factor [AKA "Polly Perkins"] says:

    Isn’t EU already ruled by an alien people?

    Take a wild guess.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  206. @AnotherDad
    Steve, I think Kaplan's giving you your answer--yet again--to the question you posed a month back about whether ethnocentric centrist Jews could be brought around.

    Personally, i'd love to have Jews breed in and throw in with the white gentile population and support it. They are a smart people, and if doing say physics or medicine and kept as far away from politics and social science as possible, they make valuable contributions. (Or alternatively just going all in on Jewish identity, moving to Israel, and enjoying being in your own nation an ally of the West having their own nations.)

    But it just ain't gonna happen. (The breeding partially, but the support, no.) Push comes to shove most Jews are just deeply ideologically committed to the idea that all societies much be "open"--meaning penetrable and exploitable by Jews. Japan, China, Korea not being open ... just sort of annoying. But any thought that European societies are entitled to have closed borders--heck by owned and run for the benefit of their citizens--just sends them into spasms of blither PC rages or incoherence. Common culture? In geographic entities? These are the very concepts and the very people--that Jews resisted and refused to mix with in their 2000 years of separatism, and trans-national tribalism.

    Here's Kaplan:

    Although the idea of an end to history—with all its ethnic and territorial disputes—turns out to have been a fantasy, this realization is no excuse for a retreat into nationalism. The cultural purity that Europe craves in the face of the Muslim-refugee influx is simply impossible in a world of increasing human interactions.
     
    You'll note he doesn't even bother arguing here--because he has no good argument--he just asserts.

    Of course, there's no need for an "excuse", nor is nationalism a "retreat". I'd argue it's fairly demonstrably the *best* way to organize peoples and the world. It's worked incredibly well for the Brits, the French, Americans, Germans, Japanese, Koreans, now the Chinese. It's *the* way to have peace and prosperity. You just have to get to agreed borders and reject destabilizing imperialism--like we saw from the Spanish, the Dutch, the British, French, the Germans and Japanese during the war, and unfortunately even from we Americans in the Philippines. In fact, that's precisely how you achieve peace--you stay *out* of other people's business.

    This idea that you can't have pure nations in "a world of increasing human interactions" is just stupid. Toyota has plants all over the US. The kids and I toured a Mercedes plant outside Tuscaloosa ten years back. You can have profitable interactions just fine with separate cultures\races\civilizations and defined borders.

    It's actually much akin to why my little patch of suburbia is such a nice place. We all have our own houses with our own yards. Everyone knows what they own. I don't bang my neighbor's wife, nor he mine. As a result of "established borders" we could have friendly relations, and the kids grew up running all over the place. We have a neighborhood Christmas party at our house, block parties in the street--a biggie bonfire at the 4th of July. We can borrow stuff from each other--i don't even own a working lawn mower. Good fences make good neighbors.

    Jews just are not going to admit that their model, their experience--transnational tribalism--is anomalous and an *inferior* model for organizing the world. Most people across geography and history have been around people like them--same race, language, culture--and much prefer that. (At the boundaries ... there is conflict. ) People don't actually like being bossed around--dictated to--by a racially or cultural different overclass. With nationalism you can have republics, representative, democracy, civil rights, the joys of shared culture, community harmony and peace and prosperity. In contrast the Jewish diversitopia model, suppresses republicanism, gives you a bullying overclass, an intrusive state bureaucracy, speech codes, political allocation of everything, continual cultural contention (schools, communities, neighborhoods, nations), reduced community and atomization. It's just unpleasant. It's inferior. But admitting that pretty darn obvious fact, messes up the Jewish narrative of being the multicultural heroes by their separatism and refusing to assimilate with the local populations.

    People don’t actually like being bossed around–dictated to–by a racially or cultural different overclass.

    Layz’n’german, I give you … Ireland, or Euskadi or any amount of Balkans. Sardinians? Sicilians? Mediaeval Dutchmen?
    I wonder if Bobby K has the stones to face down the sheer demented bloody-mindedness of most European “tribes” in the wild, and the pervasive lex talionis and deadly feud? Centuries and centuries, clinging like limpets and to hell with the bodycount.
    Unlike his own crew of lightfingered perpetual tourists who inevitably end up peeing off even the management (never mind the staff, towards whom they are routinely verbally abusive) of whichever establishment they occupy. Self-entitlement is a truly dreadful curse.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  207. Priss Factor [AKA "Polly Perkins"] says:
    @AnotherDad

    Nationalism brought ruin to Europe in the form of WWI with 10 million dead Europeans.

    Racialism brought utter destruction to Europe in the form of WWII with tens of millions of dead Europeans.
     
    One gets this nonsense all the time, but it's still nonsense.

    War has existed ... forever. It doesn't require "nationalism". In the case of the Great War, it was imperialism--the Austro-Hungarian trying to squash Balkan nationalisms and the Russians taking their side that was the launching point. And it was the range and extent of British imperialism colliding with a rising Germany locked out of resources and markets around the world, that led to the full "great power" conflict.

    As for World War II, the evil of the war wasn't the Nazis "nationalism", it was there imperialism--rolling their tanks into other countries with the idea of establishing a continental version of the British empire with Germany at the center. If they were just nationalist, idolizing their mythic past, marching around bonfires and such and kept within their borders--like Franco--no one would be talking about it.

    Nationalism is far and away the *best* way anyone has found to organize the world. It does require defined borders that folks agree are legitimate to separate different ethnys. In contrast, imperialism, globalism and "diversity" are sources of continual conflict big and small.

    “Nationalism brought ruin to Europe in the form of WWI with 10 million dead Europeans. Racialism brought utter destruction to Europe in the form of WWII with tens of millions of dead Europeans.”

    Nationalism and Racialism brought liberation to the Third World.

    Also, it wasn’t nationalism but imperialism that brought about WWI. Germanics and Slavics had disputes over territories and thought imperially than nationally.

    Racialism does no harm if it’s national. It is a problem ONLY when it goes imperialist.

    So, imperialism is what messed up nationalism and racialism.

    Also, what did interracialism do to South America? It created a permanent underclass of native peoples. And look at the hellhole that is Brazil. Some wonder interracialism did.
    And Mongols were certainly interracial. So were the Ottomans. That meant lot of plunder and rape.
    And ‘anti-racism’ of Lincoln’s war killed 650,000 of white Americans. In today’s numbers, it would have meant 6 million dead.

    Anyway, as horrible as WWI and WWII were, Europe still survived as Europe.

    But if current trends continue under globalism and ‘anti-racism’, Europe itself can become just an extension of Africa and Muslim world. That is WORSE.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  208. Jack D says:
    @iSteveFan
    Jack,

    Are you suggesting Israel has more room? If so we have many refugees right on her doorstep that need a safe place. No sense in transporting them all the way to Europe when we have room next door.

    I suggest that Israel take its proportionate share (based on land area) vs. the rest of the Muslim world (though really they would be more comfortable in other Muslim lands). If you look at a map of the Islamic world at a large enough scale to take it all in, from Morocco to Indonesia, you need a magnifying glass to find Israel – it’s like a little blue speck in a sea of green. It’s like Rhode Island on the map of the US – it’s too small to actually write “Israel” on top of it – they have to write it in the Mediterranean Sea and draw a line to it. It’s really amazing that this little tiny speck is the subject of so much obsession here and elsewhere. Why does no one concern themselves with the immigration policies of Cyprus or Malta or the political views of the pundits of Liechtenstein?

    Read More
    • Replies: @iSteveFan

    Why does no one concern themselves with the immigration policies of Cyprus or Malta or the political views of the pundits of Liechtenstein?
     
    I suppose we would if the ethnic relatives of the Cypriots and Maltese advocated endlessly for open borders in the USA.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. iSteveFan says:
    @Jack D
    I suggest that Israel take its proportionate share (based on land area) vs. the rest of the Muslim world (though really they would be more comfortable in other Muslim lands). If you look at a map of the Islamic world at a large enough scale to take it all in, from Morocco to Indonesia, you need a magnifying glass to find Israel - it's like a little blue speck in a sea of green. It's like Rhode Island on the map of the US - it's too small to actually write "Israel" on top of it - they have to write it in the Mediterranean Sea and draw a line to it. It's really amazing that this little tiny speck is the subject of so much obsession here and elsewhere. Why does no one concern themselves with the immigration policies of Cyprus or Malta or the political views of the pundits of Liechtenstein?

    Why does no one concern themselves with the immigration policies of Cyprus or Malta or the political views of the pundits of Liechtenstein?

    I suppose we would if the ethnic relatives of the Cypriots and Maltese advocated endlessly for open borders in the USA.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  210. Priss Factor [AKA "Polly Perkins"] says:

    Mind controls the body.

    Those who control European minds control European minds.

    European minds have been disabled in racial pride and national preservation. They have been programmed to believe ‘European values’ means erasing European identity and inviting non-Europeans to share in ‘gay marriage’ and worship of Holocaust.

    Most white people are like dogs.

    It is natural for dogs to bark at outsiders and invaders,
    But if the master that controls the dogs order them to stop barking and defer to the invaders, the dogs just comply because they must obey the master.

    The masters decide. When Hitler said USSR is the enemy, it was the eternal enemy. When Hitler said USSR is an ally, it was an ally. When Hitler said USSR must be invaded and destroyed, it had to be attacked and destroyed. Germans had no agency. Just listen to the Fuhrer.
    Now, the GLOB tells Europeans what to think, how to feel, what to do.

    White folks must reject the dog-mode of existence. The master is wicked and vile.
    White folks must go into wolf mode. Wolves follow their natural instincts for survival. They don’t listen to masters.

    It’s best to be dogs under a good master. But when the master is wicked, it’s better to be free of him and be wolves.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous Nephew
    "Those who control European minds control European bodies" is I think what you meant.

    The West's sorry situation today shows the value of intelligence allied to ethnic solidarity most strikingly.

    It's reminiscent of 19th-century India, when a few thousand (either hand-picked or self-selected) Brits ruled a continent of hundreds of millions. Embryonic Indian nationalism wondered how this was possible - why didn't India just rise up and throw them out?

    But the British were cleverer, had better technology, and stuck together. They ruled wherever possible through native proxies, and were adept at funneling cash and honour to the good proxies, while any "bad people", including proxies who forgot who really ruled, were made very public examples of to encourage the others.

    They also faced an ethnically and religiously divided India, and did nothing to discourage that division.

    They were clever enough that when the major part of India (Hindus) did rise up in 1857, they could count on tens of thousands of Muslim and Sikh Indian troops to help them, and make a few more examples.

    "I left that boat and went up-stream, and, when I had reached Arrah and the back-waters behind it, there were no more dead English. The river was empty for a while. Then came one or two dead, in red coats, not English, but of one kind all--Hindus and Purbeeahs--then five and six abreast, and at last, from Arrah to the North beyond Agra, it was as though whole villages had walked into the water. They came out of little creeks one after another, as the logs come down in the Rains. "
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  211. Priss Factor [AKA "Polly Perkins"] says:

    The West…

    from missionaries to submissionaries.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  212. Romanian says:
    @iSteveFan

    —borders artificially drawn by European colonial agents—
     
    Didn't they also artificially draw the borders of modern Israel?

    Is artificial just the word we use for more recent border establishments?

    As far as I remember, with the exception of insular folk in small areas and people divided by almost unpassable natural borders, borders have always been artificial, reflecting dowries, conquests, compromises and so on. The result of the border demarcation, if stable enough, would result in a population adapting to that border, maybe even until the border somehow seems “natural” post-fact.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  213. George says:
    @biz
    You have repeated a common but false talking point.

    The migrants streaming into Europe are not refugees fleeing war. First of all, if any were, they ceased to be refugees the minute their feet touched the ground safely in Turkey. Any movement beyond that was to seek economic benefit. But more importantly, the 'fleeing war' explanation does not account for the high number of refugees from Eritrea and other places without a war on, and certainly without a war that can be blamed on the West.

    The migrants filled up Lebanon and Turkey already. So they are forced to look further, for example Germany even Sweden. It is not clear what the problem with Russia is, migrants travel through Russia to Scandinavia. But it doesn’t matter, the decisions being made are made on the basis of economics, not what is fair.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  214. George says:
    @iSteveFan
    If you are going to say that you have to say that Turkey, the Gulf States, Israel and Russia are all bombing inside Syria, and so they must take in refugees too. To an extent Turkey is, but they are keeping them in tents until they have transportation to Europe. I don't think the Turks are looking at the Syrians as permanent residents. So I don't buy the argument that Europe must take in these people because of their foreign policy.

    Additionally your description doesn't explain the sub-saharans that are streaming into Europe. A lot are coming from nations that are not in war.

    “Russia are all bombing inside Syria, and so they must take in refugees too.”

    Life isn’t fair.

    Germany permitted the Greek financial crisis to go on indefinitely so Greece was unable to stop the migrants.

    Germany saddled Greece with expensive cold war weapons like U Boats.

    Germany permitted the NATO bombing of Syria Libya ect.

    Germany made sure NATO was luxuriously funded but the border agency Frontex got next to nothing. The destruction of Libya and the poor funding of Frontex are mostly responsible for the refugee surge.

    So if Germany was in South America they would be insulated from the crisis they created, but they are not in South America they are in Europe. German policy was worse than a crime it was a mistake. So I have little sympathy for Germany. Their only choice is having a huge middle eastern muslim population or paying reparations and rebuilding at minimum Libya and Syria.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon

    Life isn’t fair.
     
    Well in that case your argument that Europeans should take in millions of invaders on the basis of fairness is invalid.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  215. Priss Factor [AKA "Polly Perkins"] says:
    @anonymous
    "Europe must now find some other way to dynamically incorporate the world of Islam without diluting its devotion to the rule-of-law-based system that arose in Europe’s north, a system in which individual rights and agency are uppermost in a hierarchy of needs. If it cannot evolve in the direction of universal values, there will be only the dementia of ideologies and coarse nationalisms to fill the void. This would signal the end of “the West” in Europe."

    What are "universal values"? There are some, sure, and they are basic. Humans need to eat, humans need to breath, etc.. But at a cultural and civilization level? I don't see it. What does he mean? Has it been defined as anything other than a mommy group-hug?

    Likewise, let's be specific about the "dementia of ideologies and coarse nationalisms". Is free speech a demented ideology? Is that what he means? Why are nationalisms coarse? Is Israeli nationalism coarse or of course?

    "...devotion to the rule-of-law-based system... in which individual rights and agency are uppermost in a hierarchy of needs". Unless you are a white European? Who specifically is going to look out for their rights?

    Is he just flapping around big words that sound good to get well paid by the Atlantic? Or selling a darker agenda?

    If ‘universal values’ are so important, let’s begin with an end to the West favoring Jews and Israel. Western sympathies are far too tribalist. It favors the Jewish tribe over other tribes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  216. Matra says:
    @Jack D
    The mono-ethnic nation state was the exception, not the rule in Europe until the 19th century. Most Germans did not live in a place called "Germany" nor Italians in "Italy", nor Poles in"Poland" - these places simply did not exist. Even after Poland was reborn after WWI, it was not a mono-ethnic mono-religious state. In addition to its large Jewish minority, there were large groups of Lithuanians, Germans, Ukrainians/Ruthenians, etc. most of whom had their own religions too. The "pure" Polish mono-ethnic mono-religious state that was born after WWII is the exception, not the usual situation and one that was not optimal. One of the principles of HBD (to me at least) is that different ethnic groups are good at different things. Blacks may not make the greatest accountants but they sure can play ball. The English were great at running a Navy but their cooking sucked. Etc. Having a multi-ethnic state allowed everyone to do what they were best at - the old comparative advantage thing. Even Russia had large foreign minorities that occupied certain ecological niches - French and Swiss jewelers and watchmakers, etc. Likewise in Mexico you have Mennonite involved in the dairy industry. Etc. Even Japan always operated under strong Chinese cultural influence and their religion came all the way from India. Just about the only truly "pure" place is North Korea - not a great model.

    American white people of a certain age from the North and outside of big cities (note that this is a pretty qualified group) can remember an America that was a whitopia - Leave it to Beaver, Father Knows Best Land, where you never had to lock your doors (and even that was a Potemkin village - the father that knew best was probably cheating with his secretary on the side and Mrs. Cleaver was nipping at the cognac). But that was just a moment in time - a few decades before, the prairies were just as full of strange foreigners but they were Swedes and Norwegians and Poles and Slavs. You can't pick 1959 in Winnetka, IL and say THAT was the real America - that was just one facet of a multi-faceted and every changing jewel.

    (and even that was a Potemkin village – the father that knew best was probably cheating with his secretary on the side and Mrs. Cleaver was nipping at the cognac).

    So the media, especially Hollywood, have been telling us over and over again for decades. For some reason it is important to them that everyone believes that Pleasantville was actually full of hypocrisy and unseen suffering. We can’t have Middle Americans (or Middle Englanders or the normal people of any other Western country) believing their own memories or what their parents told them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Before they starting lying to us and telling us that everything was worse than it was really was, they were lying to us and telling us things were really better than they really were. The Hays Code had very defined rules, such as crime could not pay - you could never tell a story where the bad guy got away with it, or which cast the clergy in a bad light, even if it was a true story. So in conclusion, Hollywood always lies, only the lies change over time.

    I'm sure that somewhere in America there was some perfect family just like on 1950s TV, where no one ever got sick or lost their job or had an argument with their spouse, but I never met them.
    , @anon
    the people denying relentless cultural warfare are the ones doing it the most
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  217. @TomSchmidt
    odds were fair “England will not exist in the year 2000.”

    So he was 50 years Early?

    In the great leftist tradition of being half correct (the useless half), Ehrlich correctly foresaw that the UK (and elsewhere West) was endangered, but got the cause–and therefore the prescription–exactly backwards. The UK wasn’t going to succumb to too many Brits, it was going to succumb to too few Bits and too little Britishness.

    Anyhow, as pointed out previously on this page by Jay, the fact that Ehrlich followed The Population Bomb with The Golden Door arguing for unrestricted immigration from environment-ravishing societies pretty well suggests he was arguing in bad faith the entire time anyway.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  218. @Brutusale
    It does get tedious. When Jewish friends get going about life in these United States, I whip out my cell and say "El Al ticket counter, please!".

    Heh. I have a Bronx-born Jewish friend who loved to regale me with tales of how horrible the mean, nasty American white people were and are to the innocent, humble black people. I used to try to rebut, temper and contextualize his arguments, but he always had more energy for this kind of thing than I did, so I finally just let him go on uninterrupted until he said everything he had to say and he took my lack of rebuttal for assent. Offhandedly, I said, “And that’s why you just moved to the whitest zip code in the country,” and then changed the subject.

    I haven’t heard white supremacy complaint since.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Brutusale
    In the 90s, my Jewish friend who's the biggest promoter of all things NAM proudly owned and lived in a lovely property in the Mission Hill section of Boston, a dicey area hard by Roxbury...until it was time to send his kids to school. He then decamped to tony, 98% white/Asian Weston. And no, he didn't cop to the hypocrisy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  219. Jack D says:
    @Matra
    (and even that was a Potemkin village – the father that knew best was probably cheating with his secretary on the side and Mrs. Cleaver was nipping at the cognac).

    So the media, especially Hollywood, have been telling us over and over again for decades. For some reason it is important to them that everyone believes that Pleasantville was actually full of hypocrisy and unseen suffering. We can't have Middle Americans (or Middle Englanders or the normal people of any other Western country) believing their own memories or what their parents told them.

    Before they starting lying to us and telling us that everything was worse than it was really was, they were lying to us and telling us things were really better than they really were. The Hays Code had very defined rules, such as crime could not pay – you could never tell a story where the bad guy got away with it, or which cast the clergy in a bad light, even if it was a true story. So in conclusion, Hollywood always lies, only the lies change over time.

    I’m sure that somewhere in America there was some perfect family just like on 1950s TV, where no one ever got sick or lost their job or had an argument with their spouse, but I never met them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  220. @Maj. Kong
    Yes you are on unz, not on redstate, nro, the blaze or breitbart.

    Some of us do remember it was Bush and McCain pushing the amnesty bill in 2006-07, and Rubio in 2013.

    Bush and McCain pushing the amnesty bill in 2006-07, and Rubio in 2013.

    Once you convince yourself that you are the cynosure, the rest naturally follows.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  221. @Pat Casey

    Europe as a geopolitical-cultural bloc really emerges in the Medieval period out of the Catholic Church.
     
    Correct, and we should keep saying it, while the Holy Father accrues what moral capital he can (since he literally can't do anything else, policy wise).

    But European continentalism is unthinkable because it’s tantamount to European racialism, which is the worst thing in the world. The worst fear imaginable is that Christendom rediscovers its identity.
     
    I'm glad Steve gave this professorial essay a full treatment, because it (and he) suggest a few points close to the heart, mine I mean.

    Prior to the Reformation, Europe was basically a Roman Catholic Caliphate. The values that it defined itself against were not primarily Islamic or Arabian, but Jewish. (And very quickly those were the values Islam defined itself against, just as it yearned to establish itself as a caliphate, to the extent histories I read haven't been retconned by anti-semites.)

    Those values, back then, were understood to reduce to the sinfulness of usury. And it's always good to remind people that what Shakespeare's Shylock demanded from delinquent debtors was historically accurate: Jewish moneylenders were barbaric bankers.

    The history of Europe is, in a blazing way, the history of how a culture fructifies against and amidst usury. This is exactly what Ezra Pound's Cantos are about. Art sought patrons when it could not seek usurers. Artists created Europe's identity by making Cathedrals that didn't stand a chance to make a profit. If you can derive a rule about history from the cultural monuments that give Europe it's identity as much as the pyramids are yet still Egypts identity, it would be you must cut out the moneymen if you want true identiy; their must be patrons, and those patrons must not assent to Jewish taste. Elsewise you have entertainments, nickelodeons, ect.

    The history of the Islamic caliphate is the history of a people lacking a single identity. And I'd argue that has everything to do with Art too.

    while the Holy Father accrues what moral capital he can (since he literally can’t do anything else, policy wise).

    Really? It looks to me as if he is spending moral capital like a sailor on shore leave. The Pope has dissuaded me of much of my former affection for the Church of Rome built up by JP II and Benedict XVI.

    Read More
    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @Tracy

    Really? It looks to me as if he is spending moral capital like a sailor on shore leave. The Pope has dissuaded me of much of my former affection for the Church of Rome built up by JP II and Benedict XVI.
     
    He's the worst (and I thought things were bad under JPII "the Great"). But don't let a bad Pope drive you away from Christ's Church. Go trad and fughetaboutit.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  222. Andrew says:
    @syonredux

    Frankfurt School is a symptom, not a cause.
     
    Bit of both, I would say. And it's always interesting to note how the Frankfurt boys were unmoved by things like the Ukraine Famine, the 1937-38 Great Terror, the Katyn Massacre, etc, etc.

    A place with civilizational confidence would have laughed in their faces or done much worse. Why doesn’t Frankfurt School mojo work on the head choppers in Mosul?
     
    Conversely, why are the Frankfurt acolytes so uninterested in Muslim head-choppers?

    “unmoved by things like the Ukraine Famine”

    Ah the Holodomor! Which in reality is a fantasy story created in modern form in 1978 about a natural recurring event (crop failure from poor weather) spun mainly by a fantasy people who lived in what was then Poland (the west so-called Ukrainians) when it was supposedly happening in the Soviet Union and meant to deflect attention from their participation in the similarly named Holocaust.

    The invented people who conveniently parachute out of the sky just before WWI:

    https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Ukrainian&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CUkrainian%3B%2Cc0

    The invented event which had essentially never been heard of in English before 1991 or in Russian before 1987:

    https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Holodomor&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CHolodomor%3B%2Cc0

    https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Голодомор&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=25&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CГолодомор%3B%2Cc0

    How could 50 years go by and no one knew what to call this!?! Probably the same way 1000 years of history could go by in Europe and no one ever realized there were a people called Ukrainians.

    “the 1937-38 Great Terror”

    Yes, the lamentable massacre of the Trotskyites! Oh my!

    A great read about this “horror” by a committed Christian anti-Communist Russian emigre:.

    http://thesaker.is/the-controversy-about-stalin-a-basket-of-preliminary-considerations/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Just because a thing does not have a name doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There were always peasants that lived in the borderlands between the eastern part of Poland and the western part of Russia even if they weren't thought of as a distinct nationality and 32-32 famine was driven at a minimum by Soviet incompetence and clumsy implementation of collectivization (e.g. planting unsuitable crops, letting crops rot unharvested in the fields of collective farms) and at worst was intentional. And then it was covered up by the Soviets and not widely known in the West. Whether you give their group and death a label or not, at least 2.5 million people and probably many more starved to death in the western Soviet Union in '32-'33. Calling it the "recent unpleasantness" among "some Soviet citizens" does not make the dead any less dead.

    As for the whether the crop failure was natural, it was really amazing that the territory of the Soviet Union had bad weather every year from 1917 to 1989 but not before or since. There is something about Communism that causes bad weather.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  223. @Steve Sailer
    And it still doesn't seem to have happened in Turkey after 90 years.

    But it did happen under the Shah’s rule in Iran. The key is educating the women. Check the Iranian birth rate. If it were replicated in the Moose Limb world we would be one or two generations away from quiescence.

    OTOH it would not help us defeat our current foremost enemy, the left. Defeat the left, and defeating the Moose Limbs will be manageable if not easy. If we don’t defeat the left, the moose limbs may be the way to bet. I doubt the Mormons can keep up.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  224. sflicht says:
    @Almost Missouri
    So, let me get this straight. Bacevich (or whoever) thinks that sub-saharan Africans' fear of drone strikes is causing them to migrate towards the the drone operators? Is that correct?

    I would say “yes, sort of”. I don’t attribute this view to Bacevich or anyone else. I merely observe that (a) the drone war in the sub-Sahara motivates people to emigrate, while (b) emigration to Europe provides opportunities unavailable elsewhere even if it exposes migrants to certain risks. It seems fallacious to conflate “Europe” with “towards the drone operators”, if the drone operators are in fact based in the US/UK relatively far from migrant destinations in Italy or Germany.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    US Africa Command ("AFRICOM") is based in Germany. Even if it weren't, by moving towards the West/First World, the migrants would be moving culturally, socially and transportationally towards the drone operators.

    Anyway, the drones-are-chasing-the-migrants-here meme is fallacious on its face. According to the HuffPo, drones have killed 2400 people. Given the HuffPo's orientation, this is probably the highest figure they can justify. But even taking it at face value, and assuming (wrongly) that all of these were killed in subsaharan Africa, that would still only be about one in 30,000 people or about 1/10 of the indigenous/endemic murder rate, if it happened all in one year, which it didn't, so it's more like 1/100 of the indigenous/endemic murder rate. In reality of course, most drone strikes are not in Africa, they are in Pakistan, specifically Waziristan, so the actual drone rates in Africa are probably one one-hundredth smaller than even the above figures, and what little there is mainly in Somalia, while the migrants are coming from all over Africa. I think it is fair to say that most traditional village dwellers have a network of familiar acquaintances that is highly local and consists of no more than one or two hundred people. So the odds of anyone in Africa actually knows anyone killed in a drone strike must be something like one in 50,000 or about 0.002%. What is the motive for the other 99.998% who don't know anyone killed in a drone strike? And if drone strikes really drive migration, why isn't the whole province of Waziristan already here? The numbers and the psychology just don't add up.

    Professor Bacevich seems to me to be an intelligent, decent and honorable man. It should be noted that his only son was killed in the Iraq occupation. It is just possible that he has a tiny bit of a chip on his shoulder because of this. And I don't blame him at all. I would too. I even agree with him that the US occupation of Iraq (and Afghanistan) has gone on for too long to no clear purpose. But this has nothing to do with migrants.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  225. @Anon
    vibrant chemistry.

    http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2016/04/12/annie-dookhan-released-prison/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annie_Dookhan

    In my peregrinactions through life, it has come to my notice that Trinidadian’s are pretty much malignant garbage. Think Nikki Minaj.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  226. SPMoore8 says:

    Kaplan’s fundamental problem is that he seems to think that opposition to large scale immigration has to do with opposition to people who look different and have different languages and customs. That’s a bit of it, but I don’t think that much of it.

    The problem is that any concept of “universal values” is not going to work, when the immigrants favor things like FGM, and the hosts do not, when the immigrants carry on blood sports, and the hosts do not, when the immigrants engage in child marriage, and the hosts do not, when the immigrants have attitudes towards small mammals, conceived either as demonic or as food, that the hosts do not, when the immigrants proscribe certain foods or drinks, and the hosts do not, when the immigrants believe they are entitled to carry out honor killings, and the hosts do not, when the immigrants believe various sexual behaviors ranging from loss of virginity to pederasty to same sex behaviors have to be conducted, or not, according to their customs on penalty of death, and the hosts do not, when the immigrants believe the free exercise of their religion involves the use of force or terror, when their hosts do not, etc. etc. etc.

    And, of course, when the immigrants feel no need to assimilate or change their “universal values” to the “universal values” of their hosts.

    Now of course there are some outliers in the West that diverge from the presumed “universal values” of the West (e.g., Mennonites, some Hassidic sects, Romany). But these groups are relatively small, and the divergencies are also small.

    Ultimately, if this level of immigration continues — and I didn’t even speak of “universal values” in terms of politics, family and tribal ties, social organization, etc. — Kaplan will be schooled as to the polymorphous nature of “universal values.”

    One more point worth making: Western whites, especially Western white bourgeois, have small families because of their “universal values” about parental investment and protecting the environment, while many people who comprise these immigrants have completely different “universal values” not only in terms of the prestige of having large families (e.g., 3 wives, 17 children) but also a sort of general thoughtlessness about the consequences of having so many children. Put another way, when the population of Great Britain reaches 200 million, or the population of the United States reaches one billion, that will not only put a severe crimp on any of the multicolored sets of “universal values” but it will also put cause celebres like Climate Change completely in the shade.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  227. Jack D says:
    @5371
    Why on earth would anyone not be proud of producing the V-2?

    von Braun aimed for the stars and hit London.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  228. AndrewR says:
    @AnotherDad

    Nationalism brought ruin to Europe in the form of WWI with 10 million dead Europeans.

    Racialism brought utter destruction to Europe in the form of WWII with tens of millions of dead Europeans.
     
    One gets this nonsense all the time, but it's still nonsense.

    War has existed ... forever. It doesn't require "nationalism". In the case of the Great War, it was imperialism--the Austro-Hungarian trying to squash Balkan nationalisms and the Russians taking their side that was the launching point. And it was the range and extent of British imperialism colliding with a rising Germany locked out of resources and markets around the world, that led to the full "great power" conflict.

    As for World War II, the evil of the war wasn't the Nazis "nationalism", it was there imperialism--rolling their tanks into other countries with the idea of establishing a continental version of the British empire with Germany at the center. If they were just nationalist, idolizing their mythic past, marching around bonfires and such and kept within their borders--like Franco--no one would be talking about it.

    Nationalism is far and away the *best* way anyone has found to organize the world. It does require defined borders that folks agree are legitimate to separate different ethnys. In contrast, imperialism, globalism and "diversity" are sources of continual conflict big and small.

    You are pitiful

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  229. Svigor says:

    I saw an American Orthodox priest during an interview where he said he was sadden by the fact that some of the rudest people towards him have been Evangelicals. He said when he speaks at religious schools they look curiously at his appearance, (beard and garments) and ask him if he believes in the Bible as though he were not even a Christian. He said he often replies, “yes, we believe in the Bible. The New Testament was written by Orthodox Christians.”

    *Clutches Pearls*

    Glad to hear he told them who is superior.

    Nationalism brought ruin to Europe in the form of WWI with 10 million dead Europeans.

    Racialism brought utter destruction to Europe in the form of WWII with tens of millions of dead Europeans. If the Nazis had gone through with their plan how many Poles and Russians and other racial groups that did not meet the standard would have been wiped out to clear the way for Germans.

    The conclusion for European elites then is that nationalism and especially racialist thinking needs to be smothered to keep Europe and the white race safe.

    Internationalism and egalitarianism brought 100m dead, in the form of communism.

    The conclusion for European elites then is that internationalism (or, if you prefer, anti-nationalism) and especially egalitarian thinking needs to be smothered to keep Europe and the white race safe.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  230. Jack D says:
    @Andrew
    "unmoved by things like the Ukraine Famine"

    Ah the Holodomor! Which in reality is a fantasy story created in modern form in 1978 about a natural recurring event (crop failure from poor weather) spun mainly by a fantasy people who lived in what was then Poland (the west so-called Ukrainians) when it was supposedly happening in the Soviet Union and meant to deflect attention from their participation in the similarly named Holocaust.

    The invented people who conveniently parachute out of the sky just before WWI:

    https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Ukrainian&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CUkrainian%3B%2Cc0

    The invented event which had essentially never been heard of in English before 1991 or in Russian before 1987:

    https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Holodomor&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CHolodomor%3B%2Cc0

    https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Голодомор&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=25&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CГолодомор%3B%2Cc0

    How could 50 years go by and no one knew what to call this!?! Probably the same way 1000 years of history could go by in Europe and no one ever realized there were a people called Ukrainians.

    "the 1937-38 Great Terror"

    Yes, the lamentable massacre of the Trotskyites! Oh my!

    A great read about this "horror" by a committed Christian anti-Communist Russian emigre:.

    http://thesaker.is/the-controversy-about-stalin-a-basket-of-preliminary-considerations/

    Just because a thing does not have a name doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. There were always peasants that lived in the borderlands between the eastern part of Poland and the western part of Russia even if they weren’t thought of as a distinct nationality and 32-32 famine was driven at a minimum by Soviet incompetence and clumsy implementation of collectivization (e.g. planting unsuitable crops, letting crops rot unharvested in the fields of collective farms) and at worst was intentional. And then it was covered up by the Soviets and not widely known in the West. Whether you give their group and death a label or not, at least 2.5 million people and probably many more starved to death in the western Soviet Union in ’32-’33. Calling it the “recent unpleasantness” among “some Soviet citizens” does not make the dead any less dead.

    As for the whether the crop failure was natural, it was really amazing that the territory of the Soviet Union had bad weather every year from 1917 to 1989 but not before or since. There is something about Communism that causes bad weather.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  231. Jack D says:
    @AnotherDad

    Nationalism brought ruin to Europe in the form of WWI with 10 million dead Europeans.

    Racialism brought utter destruction to Europe in the form of WWII with tens of millions of dead Europeans.
     
    One gets this nonsense all the time, but it's still nonsense.

    War has existed ... forever. It doesn't require "nationalism". In the case of the Great War, it was imperialism--the Austro-Hungarian trying to squash Balkan nationalisms and the Russians taking their side that was the launching point. And it was the range and extent of British imperialism colliding with a rising Germany locked out of resources and markets around the world, that led to the full "great power" conflict.

    As for World War II, the evil of the war wasn't the Nazis "nationalism", it was there imperialism--rolling their tanks into other countries with the idea of establishing a continental version of the British empire with Germany at the center. If they were just nationalist, idolizing their mythic past, marching around bonfires and such and kept within their borders--like Franco--no one would be talking about it.

    Nationalism is far and away the *best* way anyone has found to organize the world. It does require defined borders that folks agree are legitimate to separate different ethnys. In contrast, imperialism, globalism and "diversity" are sources of continual conflict big and small.

    The problem is that in order to create pure ethnic monostates where the people can live happily with (and only with) their fellow Slobovians, you have to break (ethnically cleanse) almost as many eggs as it takes to make a collectivist omelet because these pure ethnic monostates never existed in the past – everybody was all mixed up. And even if you achieve (or think that you have achieved ) that Nirvana you might find that the Lower Slobovians think of themselves as different than the Upper Slobovians so you have to keep splitting into ever smaller and less viable micro-states, which tend to turn into corrupt kleptocracies. The local elites love this model because they get to sit on top, but for the average person they may be worse off than before even if they get to sing their own stupid national song now.

    The other model (the Empire) makes a lot of sense to me. Each little ethnic group in the empire can have (limited) self rule in its enclave but the entire empire is one big free trade zone. Each group can specialize in what it does best – the Lower Slobovians can tend their vineyards and the Upper Slobovians can brew beer. The best and the brightest youth from every reach of the empire can relocate to the big cities, especially the imperial capital and make an impact on a big scale. You can have a grand national culture that is important on a world scale. E Pluribus Unum, to coin a phrase.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iSteveFan

    The problem is that in order to create pure ethnic monostates where the people can live happily with (and only with) their fellow Slobovians, you have to break (ethnically cleanse) almost as many eggs as it takes to make a collectivist omelet because these pure ethnic monostates never existed in the past –...
     
    Actually Jack the eggs had already been broken. For years European peoples fought over boundaries to carve out their ethnic enclaves. Along the way there was ethnic cleansing and all the nasty things you described.

    The problem now is that all of that suffering to create defined borders and nations is being thrown away right in front of our eyes. Future generations will have to go through the same painful process that their ancestors did because of what the people of today are allowing.

    The other model (the Empire) makes a lot of sense to me. Each little ethnic group in the empire can have (limited) self rule in its enclave but the entire empire is one big free trade zone. Each group can specialize in what it does best – the Lower Slobovians can tend their vineyards and the Upper Slobovians can brew beer.
     
    Empires always end. And empires are always abusive to those who don't want to be ruled. As far as Lower Slobovians tending their vineyards and Upper Slobovians brewing beer, we don't need empires to achieve this. Didn't Ricardo suggest that England could concentrate on wool and Portugal on wine? I don't recall him suggesting that in order for that to happen they both had to be under the rule of the same empire.
    , @anon

    because these pure ethnic monostates never existed in the past – everybody was all mixed up
     
    obvious nonsense - pure ethnic mono "states" didn't exist but more or less unmixed ethnies (which became the basis for those states) existed everywhere separated by geography - obviously - as that is how separate ethnies develop in the first place.

    The other model (the Empire) makes a lot of sense to me. Each little ethnic group in the empire can have (limited) self rule in its enclave but the entire empire is one big free trade zone.
     
    Let me guess - except Israel right?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  232. iSteveFan says:
    @Jefferson
    "You do realize, do you not, that televangelist-style Bible-thumping is a rather late and uniquely Anglospheric heretical innovation? It has nothing to do with what the vast majority of Christians, both East and West, have for thousands of years understood to be Christianity.

    The Russians are Orthodox. Their Christianity has very nearly the same priestly and sacramental system as Roman Catholicism did before the heretical Second Vatican Council and the abomination known as the Novus Ordo Missae. It even has the comparative advantage of not having endured a Protestant Revolt.

    I simply cannot stress how little American Evangelical Protestantism has to do with real Christianity."

    The only things the Russian immigrants I have met here in The U.S care about is alcohol and money. They do not seem to care for Christianity and organized religion in general. They are not big on talking about God and Jesus Christ.

    If someone were to make a list of the top 10 most extremely religious Christian ethnic groups in the world, Russians would definitely not make the list.

    The only way Russia would become a religious nation and not continue to be a Godless Atheist & Agnostic nation would be if Islam took over.

    The only way Russia would become a religious nation and not continue to be a Godless Atheist & Agnostic nation would be if Islam took over.

    Occasionally you make some good comments. But other times you seem completely out of this world. This is a case of the latter. Here is a portion of a military funeral for one of the Russians killed in Syria. Note the soldier carrying the rather large Cross. Would this happen at a US funeral?

    For someone like me who remembers the atheist USSR, it still blows my mind to see Russian military units openly displaying Crosses and receiving blessings from Priests. I am not saying they are the most religious people on earth. But after 70 plus years of Bolshevism they appear to be reclaiming their faith.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  233. iSteveFan says:
    @Jack D
    The problem is that in order to create pure ethnic monostates where the people can live happily with (and only with) their fellow Slobovians, you have to break (ethnically cleanse) almost as many eggs as it takes to make a collectivist omelet because these pure ethnic monostates never existed in the past - everybody was all mixed up. And even if you achieve (or think that you have achieved ) that Nirvana you might find that the Lower Slobovians think of themselves as different than the Upper Slobovians so you have to keep splitting into ever smaller and less viable micro-states, which tend to turn into corrupt kleptocracies. The local elites love this model because they get to sit on top, but for the average person they may be worse off than before even if they get to sing their own stupid national song now.

    The other model (the Empire) makes a lot of sense to me. Each little ethnic group in the empire can have (limited) self rule in its enclave but the entire empire is one big free trade zone. Each group can specialize in what it does best - the Lower Slobovians can tend their vineyards and the Upper Slobovians can brew beer. The best and the brightest youth from every reach of the empire can relocate to the big cities, especially the imperial capital and make an impact on a big scale. You can have a grand national culture that is important on a world scale. E Pluribus Unum, to coin a phrase.

    The problem is that in order to create pure ethnic monostates where the people can live happily with (and only with) their fellow Slobovians, you have to break (ethnically cleanse) almost as many eggs as it takes to make a collectivist omelet because these pure ethnic monostates never existed in the past –…

    Actually Jack the eggs had already been broken. For years European peoples fought over boundaries to carve out their ethnic enclaves. Along the way there was ethnic cleansing and all the nasty things you described.

    The problem now is that all of that suffering to create defined borders and nations is being thrown away right in front of our eyes. Future generations will have to go through the same painful process that their ancestors did because of what the people of today are allowing.

    The other model (the Empire) makes a lot of sense to me. Each little ethnic group in the empire can have (limited) self rule in its enclave but the entire empire is one big free trade zone. Each group can specialize in what it does best – the Lower Slobovians can tend their vineyards and the Upper Slobovians can brew beer.

    Empires always end. And empires are always abusive to those who don’t want to be ruled. As far as Lower Slobovians tending their vineyards and Upper Slobovians brewing beer, we don’t need empires to achieve this. Didn’t Ricardo suggest that England could concentrate on wool and Portugal on wine? I don’t recall him suggesting that in order for that to happen they both had to be under the rule of the same empire.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  234. @sflicht
    I would say "yes, sort of". I don't attribute this view to Bacevich or anyone else. I merely observe that (a) the drone war in the sub-Sahara motivates people to emigrate, while (b) emigration to Europe provides opportunities unavailable elsewhere even if it exposes migrants to certain risks. It seems fallacious to conflate "Europe" with "towards the drone operators", if the drone operators are in fact based in the US/UK relatively far from migrant destinations in Italy or Germany.

    US Africa Command (“AFRICOM”) is based in Germany. Even if it weren’t, by moving towards the West/First World, the migrants would be moving culturally, socially and transportationally towards the drone operators.

    Anyway, the drones-are-chasing-the-migrants-here meme is fallacious on its face. According to the HuffPo, drones have killed 2400 people. Given the HuffPo’s orientation, this is probably the highest figure they can justify. But even taking it at face value, and assuming (wrongly) that all of these were killed in subsaharan Africa, that would still only be about one in 30,000 people or about 1/10 of the indigenous/endemic murder rate, if it happened all in one year, which it didn’t, so it’s more like 1/100 of the indigenous/endemic murder rate. In reality of course, most drone strikes are not in Africa, they are in Pakistan, specifically Waziristan, so the actual drone rates in Africa are probably one one-hundredth smaller than even the above figures, and what little there is mainly in Somalia, while the migrants are coming from all over Africa. I think it is fair to say that most traditional village dwellers have a network of familiar acquaintances that is highly local and consists of no more than one or two hundred people. So the odds of anyone in Africa actually knows anyone killed in a drone strike must be something like one in 50,000 or about 0.002%. What is the motive for the other 99.998% who don’t know anyone killed in a drone strike? And if drone strikes really drive migration, why isn’t the whole province of Waziristan already here? The numbers and the psychology just don’t add up.

    Professor Bacevich seems to me to be an intelligent, decent and honorable man. It should be noted that his only son was killed in the Iraq occupation. It is just possible that he has a tiny bit of a chip on his shoulder because of this. And I don’t blame him at all. I would too. I even agree with him that the US occupation of Iraq (and Afghanistan) has gone on for too long to no clear purpose. But this has nothing to do with migrants.

    Read More
    • Replies: @cwhatfuture

    Professor Bacevich seems to me to be an intelligent, decent and honorable man
     
    I believe he is such a man and his books on US defense spending and policy are thoughtful, not emotional, and compelling, at least to me. But I am not aware he has said that US drone strikes are causing emigration. I believe that is a conclusion of the posting party. I could have missed it as I have not read everything he has written. But that is definitely not the focus of his writing.

    I wish any future US President would use Bacevich as an advisor in order to get control over the Pentagon; Bacevich does make a very good case that US defense policy is irrational, does not serve US interests and the Pentagon is out of control.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  235. […] and explodes. Sabotages social trust. Dies in the face of pragmatic nationalism. creates enemies. Submission. Democratized […]

    Read More
  236. Priss Factor [AKA "Polly Perkins"] says:

    I can understand Turkish nationalism in Turkey.

    But why in Germany?

    But nature or nation abhors a vacuum. Since Germans lack German nationalism in Germany, the vacuum is being filled with other nationalisms.

    Same in the US. Since whites can’t have identity, there is all this identity about Israel, homos, black lives matter, La Raza, and etc. Nature or Nation abhors a vacuum.

    https://www.facebook.com/1502230130096376/videos/1599038600415528/?fref=nf

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  237. An article about how Muslims are ruining Europe and all you paleface assholes can talk about are “Da Jews” … I know you are all filled with deep philosophical insights as you canter across your lawns atop your trusty lawn mowing cars, but has it ever occurred to one of you white trash geniuses that it is precisely your (and the rest of the world’s hardcore) antisemitism which has made the Islamic takeover possible … For 50 years these muslim lunatics murdered Jews and Israelis with impunity, and no one told them it was wrong. Suddenly, now that it’s happening in San Bernadino and Brussels, you want the whole world to start crying for you… Say goodbye to your neo-Nazi white fantasy land, assholes! I can’t say you weren’t warned … or that you don’t deserve it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @andy russia
    Islam and everything about Islam is repugnant to "normal" (i.e. not super-rich) European Jews as well... Why this strange glee? And what are you? If you're some kind of non-Jewish non-White philosemite, we don't need such intercessors. If you're non-Ashkenazi Israeli (I don't know much about Israeli politics or demography) with some grievance against your Ashkenazi overlords, again, what have "the palefaces", as you call them, to do with it? No one is served if Europe became Muslim, except Muslims. What you say is nihilist.
    , @cwhatfuture

    For 50 years these muslim lunatics murdered Jews and Israelis with impunity
     
    That is the one thing they have not done, murdered Israelis with impunity. Israel has a long memory and longer reach. Sooner or later, the Israelis get them. In the last 50 years very few have gotten away.

    In any event, Islam will wreck Europe. That is bad for everyone, including Americans, including Jewish Americans and including Israelis, regardless of anyone's obsession with Jews.
    , @neutral
    Logically Muslims were not let in by other Muslims, for there were none to start with. The ones that let in Muslims were the ones that rewrote the laws on immigration and they are the ones that forced "universal values" down our throats.
    , @anon

    An article about how Muslims are ruining Europe and all you paleface assholes can talk about are “Da Jews”
     
    You missed out the part where the article is written by a Jew who supports the Islamic takeover of Europe.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  238. @Jack D
    The mono-ethnic nation state was the exception, not the rule in Europe until the 19th century. Most Germans did not live in a place called "Germany" nor Italians in "Italy", nor Poles in"Poland" - these places simply did not exist. Even after Poland was reborn after WWI, it was not a mono-ethnic mono-religious state. In addition to its large Jewish minority, there were large groups of Lithuanians, Germans, Ukrainians/Ruthenians, etc. most of whom had their own religions too. The "pure" Polish mono-ethnic mono-religious state that was born after WWII is the exception, not the usual situation and one that was not optimal. One of the principles of HBD (to me at least) is that different ethnic groups are good at different things. Blacks may not make the greatest accountants but they sure can play ball. The English were great at running a Navy but their cooking sucked. Etc. Having a multi-ethnic state allowed everyone to do what they were best at - the old comparative advantage thing. Even Russia had large foreign minorities that occupied certain ecological niches - French and Swiss jewelers and watchmakers, etc. Likewise in Mexico you have Mennonite involved in the dairy industry. Etc. Even Japan always operated under strong Chinese cultural influence and their religion came all the way from India. Just about the only truly "pure" place is North Korea - not a great model.

    American white people of a certain age from the North and outside of big cities (note that this is a pretty qualified group) can remember an America that was a whitopia - Leave it to Beaver, Father Knows Best Land, where you never had to lock your doors (and even that was a Potemkin village - the father that knew best was probably cheating with his secretary on the side and Mrs. Cleaver was nipping at the cognac). But that was just a moment in time - a few decades before, the prairies were just as full of strange foreigners but they were Swedes and Norwegians and Poles and Slavs. You can't pick 1959 in Winnetka, IL and say THAT was the real America - that was just one facet of a multi-faceted and every changing jewel.

    Jack you’ve just, serially
    – made my point
    – not understood what i wrote
    – made my point even more strongly

    In rough order, trying not to go book length:

    –> Steve, i think we can add JackD, along with Kaplan to the list of Jews unable to get over their Jewish ideology and declining your invitation to be sensible and help save the West

    –>

    Most Germans did not live in a place called “Germany” nor Italians in “Italy”, nor Poles in”Poland” – these places simply did not exist …

    Everyone here is aware that modern nation state formation was a process and not ancient. But then i never suggested anything different. What i wrote was this:

    Most people across geography and history have been around people like them–same race, language, culture–and much prefer that.

    Sorry, but that’s just … true. Historically, most people lived on the land, in villages of people of the same ethnicity (language, religion, culture). Yeah, in some places a village 10 miles down the road, might have another dialect. 50 miles away across some river or sea or mountain range, people might speak an entirely different language and perhaps be a truly different ethny. That’s how most people lived their lives, in their village, with people of the same ethnic group, language, religion, culture, customs. And the next village down the road would be pretty similar. Perhaps even with some relatives as mating was local and DNA would diffuse slowly out, throughout the ethnic group. (More sticky, of course, crossing linguistic or ethnic dividing lines.). City life was simply not the human norm–cities were generally population sinks! And serious diversity only existed where the local power enforced it. Jews, an endogamous trans-national tribe with a separatist ideology to specifically not mix\breed with their local non-Jewish fellows are wild out-liers. Their experience is not the general human experience.

    What the modern nation state allows is to have “community”–an ethny with a shared language and culture–at the scale for modern industrial and commercial enterprise. That’s what has made it so great! People can still appreciate their own local cultural practices and traditions. But if they can extend their loyalty out a bit to their fellows who are basically the same race, language and culture, then they are part of something with a much bigger scale, with bigger opportunities … yet still something that is special, that is *theirs*–a nation.

    –>

    One of the principles of HBD (to me at least) is that different ethnic groups are good at different things. Blacks may not make the greatest accountants but they sure can play ball.

    Jack, now you’re just doing self-parody. How many ball playing spots are available? Heck the Jesuits had me read “The Cruel Deception” (Sports Illustrated IIRC) in religion class back in ’71. What you’re really saying here is blacks get to be field hands and ditch diggers.

    Look, everyone gets why Jews like your idea. It’s basically the Indian caste system. Jews (Ashkenazi) are legitimately maybe 2/3 of a standard deviation above the white mean. So Jews get to be financiers, lawyers, lobbyists, professors, businessmen, journalists–basically call the shots and collect the loot. But guess what … no one else likes it! Heck, even the Indians who are the most culturally “adapted” to a caste system, don’t like it! The tribes, untouchables, lower and now even middle castes all want *reservations*. They’re telling you to stuff your comparative advantage up your … whatever … they want some of those Jewish type jobs (often held by Brahmins in India) for *their* people.

    Even the Africans, who honestly are “not ready” for modern industrial society (struggle to come up with enough of a smart fraction to run things), tossed their white colonial bosses out. And there’s been no clamor for whites to come back, even though they’d do a better job running those places then Africans. People don’t like to sit at the back of the bus. They particularly don’t like to have to sit at the back of their *own* bus with some other group of people in front. Seriously Jack, get a clue. People want their *own* children to have a good shot at being the doctor, the lawyer, the businessman, the professor. They don’t want to think … well my people were born to be ditch diggers. They don’t give a shit about your “comparative advantage”.

    –>

    American white people of a certain age from the North and outside of big cities (note that this is a pretty qualified group) can remember an America that was a whitopia – Leave it to Beaver, Father Knows Best Land, where you never had to lock your doors …

    Jack, now you are *really* making my point.

    Yes, that period was a unique time. (Though i’d argue with you about just how diverse America historically was.) It was formed by 40 years of immigration control which had rendered–maybe “melted” is better–America’s white gentile population (Jews again holding themselves aloof) into something that was just sort of “American”.

    But in trying to bash it, you’ve made my point. What do people remember about it? They remember it being *really nice*!

    Essentially America had shed a bunch of its immigration induced diversity with its conflicts and amalgamated itself into something more like a European nation state, with a much more reasonably coherent national population–English speaking, common culture and traditions–except with bigger cars, houses and yards! It was a freaking golden age!

    Limited immigration, less diversity, one people, common language and culture=>darn nice. I think you pretty much nailed it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    Very good! I wish that I could express it half so well!
    , @Jack D
    Postwar America sort of stumbled into its world leading role and prosperity by accident. They were desperate to win first the world war and then the cold war, so they said, " we'll take ANYONE's help". Before the war you could be snooty and say "we're only hiring white Christian men" (with the result that prosperity was mostly confined to that privileged group and the overall size of the economy was much smaller) but then the war came and they would take ANYBODY with a pulse for any job - Jews (and later Nazis) to work on scientific projects, blacks to fly planes, women to work in factories. And guess what - it worked! If the Manhattan Project had been confined only to clubbable men, it never would have gotten done. The war industries could not have kept up production with only a white male workforce. After the world war was over, there was a certain amount of backsliding but the momentum, sustained by the cold war, was in the other direction.

    Local elites love a setup where they get to run things and exclude anyone who is not "one of us". But, as you admit this is a recipe for mediocrity (or in the case of Africa where the local elites are especially dumb and/or corrupt) or worse. They love to stir up their lower classes with cheap tinpot patriotism but realistically those in the lower classes aren't getting any of those plum jobs for their kids anyway. Maybe the people in Iraq are not clamoring for the British to come back and run things for them, but if they had any sense in their heads they would be (not that the British would take that job anymore). Baghdad went from being a sophisticated modern city to a hell hole with the local "elites" (pronounced "gangsters") in charge. And this same story has been repeated dozens of time across the globe. Even in Germany where the people are hard working and able to sustain an economy, once they got done making themselves pure their universities went from being of first rank in the world to permanent mediocrity (and the American universities who got all their rejects shot to the top). The track record of that kind of nationalism frankly sucks, not just for the minorities who get frozen out of it (or ethnically cleansed) but for everyone except the local elite.
    , @Mr. Anon
    Commenter Jack D routinely makes ethnically self-interested posts and yet will attack any post made by gentiles expressing our belief that we also have the right to act in an ethnically self-interested way. He is deeply and cynically hypocritical and argues in bad-faith.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  239. @joseph trumpeldor
    An article about how Muslims are ruining Europe and all you paleface assholes can talk about are "Da Jews" ... I know you are all filled with deep philosophical insights as you canter across your lawns atop your trusty lawn mowing cars, but has it ever occurred to one of you white trash geniuses that it is precisely your (and the rest of the world's hardcore) antisemitism which has made the Islamic takeover possible ... For 50 years these muslim lunatics murdered Jews and Israelis with impunity, and no one told them it was wrong. Suddenly, now that it's happening in San Bernadino and Brussels, you want the whole world to start crying for you... Say goodbye to your neo-Nazi white fantasy land, assholes! I can't say you weren't warned ... or that you don't deserve it.

    Islam and everything about Islam is repugnant to “normal” (i.e. not super-rich) European Jews as well… Why this strange glee? And what are you? If you’re some kind of non-Jewish non-White philosemite, we don’t need such intercessors. If you’re non-Ashkenazi Israeli (I don’t know much about Israeli politics or demography) with some grievance against your Ashkenazi overlords, again, what have “the palefaces”, as you call them, to do with it? No one is served if Europe became Muslim, except Muslims. What you say is nihilist.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  240. @Almost Missouri
    US Africa Command ("AFRICOM") is based in Germany. Even if it weren't, by moving towards the West/First World, the migrants would be moving culturally, socially and transportationally towards the drone operators.

    Anyway, the drones-are-chasing-the-migrants-here meme is fallacious on its face. According to the HuffPo, drones have killed 2400 people. Given the HuffPo's orientation, this is probably the highest figure they can justify. But even taking it at face value, and assuming (wrongly) that all of these were killed in subsaharan Africa, that would still only be about one in 30,000 people or about 1/10 of the indigenous/endemic murder rate, if it happened all in one year, which it didn't, so it's more like 1/100 of the indigenous/endemic murder rate. In reality of course, most drone strikes are not in Africa, they are in Pakistan, specifically Waziristan, so the actual drone rates in Africa are probably one one-hundredth smaller than even the above figures, and what little there is mainly in Somalia, while the migrants are coming from all over Africa. I think it is fair to say that most traditional village dwellers have a network of familiar acquaintances that is highly local and consists of no more than one or two hundred people. So the odds of anyone in Africa actually knows anyone killed in a drone strike must be something like one in 50,000 or about 0.002%. What is the motive for the other 99.998% who don't know anyone killed in a drone strike? And if drone strikes really drive migration, why isn't the whole province of Waziristan already here? The numbers and the psychology just don't add up.

    Professor Bacevich seems to me to be an intelligent, decent and honorable man. It should be noted that his only son was killed in the Iraq occupation. It is just possible that he has a tiny bit of a chip on his shoulder because of this. And I don't blame him at all. I would too. I even agree with him that the US occupation of Iraq (and Afghanistan) has gone on for too long to no clear purpose. But this has nothing to do with migrants.

    Professor Bacevich seems to me to be an intelligent, decent and honorable man

    I believe he is such a man and his books on US defense spending and policy are thoughtful, not emotional, and compelling, at least to me. But I am not aware he has said that US drone strikes are causing emigration. I believe that is a conclusion of the posting party. I could have missed it as I have not read everything he has written. But that is definitely not the focus of his writing.

    I wish any future US President would use Bacevich as an advisor in order to get control over the Pentagon; Bacevich does make a very good case that US defense policy is irrational, does not serve US interests and the Pentagon is out of control.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Well, you've read more Bacevich than I have, so I'll take your word for it. I actually agree that US actions have something to do with causing migration. We toppled Qaddafi and Mubarak, and are trying with Assad. Whatever their faults, these guys were restraining migration. Now they're gone, thanks to us. Obama gives speeches broadly supportive of Islam, Muslims and migrants, encouraging their consciousness of themselves as a special class that will be protected in the West and vilifying those who oppose their migration. These actions are really helping precipitate the migration tsunami. The odd drone strike, killing fewer than die in a mild Mediterranean squall is irrelevant.

    And I agree that US defense and foreign policy is irrational (unless you hate civilization, liberty, religion and America). The Pentagon seems to me to be unfortunately NOT out of control. It does exactly whatever the White House tells it to do no matter how self destructive or irrational. The problem is in the White House and the wider culture/population that puts the White House people into the White House.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  241. @AnotherDad
    Jack you've just, serially
    -- made my point
    -- not understood what i wrote
    -- made my point even more strongly

    In rough order, trying not to go book length:

    --> Steve, i think we can add JackD, along with Kaplan to the list of Jews unable to get over their Jewish ideology and declining your invitation to be sensible and help save the West

    -->

    Most Germans did not live in a place called “Germany” nor Italians in “Italy”, nor Poles in”Poland” – these places simply did not exist ...
     
    Everyone here is aware that modern nation state formation was a process and not ancient. But then i never suggested anything different. What i wrote was this:

    Most people across geography and history have been around people like them–same race, language, culture–and much prefer that.
     
    Sorry, but that's just ... true. Historically, most people lived on the land, in villages of people of the same ethnicity (language, religion, culture). Yeah, in some places a village 10 miles down the road, might have another dialect. 50 miles away across some river or sea or mountain range, people might speak an entirely different language and perhaps be a truly different ethny. That's how most people lived their lives, in their village, with people of the same ethnic group, language, religion, culture, customs. And the next village down the road would be pretty similar. Perhaps even with some relatives as mating was local and DNA would diffuse slowly out, throughout the ethnic group. (More sticky, of course, crossing linguistic or ethnic dividing lines.). City life was simply not the human norm--cities were generally population sinks! And serious diversity only existed where the local power enforced it. Jews, an endogamous trans-national tribe with a separatist ideology to specifically not mix\breed with their local non-Jewish fellows are wild out-liers. Their experience is not the general human experience.

    What the modern nation state allows is to have "community"--an ethny with a shared language and culture--at the scale for modern industrial and commercial enterprise. That's what has made it so great! People can still appreciate their own local cultural practices and traditions. But if they can extend their loyalty out a bit to their fellows who are basically the same race, language and culture, then they are part of something with a much bigger scale, with bigger opportunities ... yet still something that is special, that is *theirs*--a nation.

    -->

    One of the principles of HBD (to me at least) is that different ethnic groups are good at different things. Blacks may not make the greatest accountants but they sure can play ball.
     
    Jack, now you're just doing self-parody. How many ball playing spots are available? Heck the Jesuits had me read "The Cruel Deception" (Sports Illustrated IIRC) in religion class back in '71. What you're really saying here is blacks get to be field hands and ditch diggers.

    Look, everyone gets why Jews like your idea. It's basically the Indian caste system. Jews (Ashkenazi) are legitimately maybe 2/3 of a standard deviation above the white mean. So Jews get to be financiers, lawyers, lobbyists, professors, businessmen, journalists--basically call the shots and collect the loot. But guess what ... no one else likes it! Heck, even the Indians who are the most culturally "adapted" to a caste system, don't like it! The tribes, untouchables, lower and now even middle castes all want *reservations*. They're telling you to stuff your comparative advantage up your ... whatever ... they want some of those Jewish type jobs (often held by Brahmins in India) for *their* people.

    Even the Africans, who honestly are "not ready" for modern industrial society (struggle to come up with enough of a smart fraction to run things), tossed their white colonial bosses out. And there's been no clamor for whites to come back, even though they'd do a better job running those places then Africans. People don't like to sit at the back of the bus. They particularly don't like to have to sit at the back of their *own* bus with some other group of people in front. Seriously Jack, get a clue. People want their *own* children to have a good shot at being the doctor, the lawyer, the businessman, the professor. They don't want to think ... well my people were born to be ditch diggers. They don't give a shit about your "comparative advantage".

    -->

    American white people of a certain age from the North and outside of big cities (note that this is a pretty qualified group) can remember an America that was a whitopia – Leave it to Beaver, Father Knows Best Land, where you never had to lock your doors ...
     
    Jack, now you are *really* making my point.

    Yes, that period was a unique time. (Though i'd argue with you about just how diverse America historically was.) It was formed by 40 years of immigration control which had rendered--maybe "melted" is better--America's white gentile population (Jews again holding themselves aloof) into something that was just sort of "American".

    But in trying to bash it, you've made my point. What do people remember about it? They remember it being *really nice*!

    Essentially America had shed a bunch of its immigration induced diversity with its conflicts and amalgamated itself into something more like a European nation state, with a much more reasonably coherent national population--English speaking, common culture and traditions--except with bigger cars, houses and yards! It was a freaking golden age!

    Limited immigration, less diversity, one people, common language and culture=>darn nice. I think you pretty much nailed it.

    Very good! I wish that I could express it half so well!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter<