The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPat Buchanan Archive
Is America Up for a Second Cold War?
🔊 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

After the 19th national congress of the Chinese Communist Party in October, one may discern Premier Xi Jinping’s vision of the emerging New World Order.

By 2049, the centennial of the triumph of Communist Revolution, China shall have become the first power on earth. Her occupation and humiliation by the West and Japan in the 19th and 20th centuries will have become hated but ancient history.

America will have been pushed out of Asia and the western Pacific back beyond the second chain of islands.

Taiwan will have been returned to the motherland, South Korea and the Philippines neutralized, Japan contained. China’s claim to all the rocks, reefs and islets in the South China Sea will have been recognized by all current claimants.

Xi’s “One Belt, One Road” strategy will have brought South and Central Asia into Beijing’s orbit, and he will be in the Pantheon beside the Founding Father of Communist China, Mao Zedong.

Democracy has been rejected by China in favor of one-party rule of all political, economic, cultural and social life.

And as one views Europe, depopulating, riven by secessionism, fearful of a Third World migrant invasion, and America tearing herself apart over politics and ideology, China must appear to ambitious and rising powers as the model to emulate.

Indeed, has not China shown the world that authoritarianism can be compatible with national growth that outstrips a democratic West?

Over the last quarter century, China, thanks to economic nationalism and $4 trillion in trade surpluses with the United States, has exhibited growth unseen since 19th-century America.

Whatever we may think of Xi’s methods, this vision must attract vast numbers of China’s young — they see their country displace America as first power, becoming the dominant people on earth.

What is America’s vision? What is America’s cause in the 21st century? What is the mission and goal that unites, inspires and drives us on?

After World War II, America’s foreign policy was imposed upon her by the terrible realities the war produced: brutalitarian Stalinist domination of Eastern and Central Europe and much of Asia.

Under nine presidents, containment of the Soviet empire, while avoiding a war that would destroy civilization, was our policy. In Korea and Vietnam, Americans died in the thousands to sustain that policy.

But with the collapse of the Soviet Empire and the breakup of the USSR, it seemed that by 1992 our great work was done. Now democracy would flourish and be embraced by all advanced peoples and nations.

But it did not happen. The “end of history” never came. The New World Order of Bush I did not last. Bush II’s democracy crusade to end tyranny in our world produced disasters from Libya to Afghanistan.

Authoritarianism is now ascendant and democracy is in retreat.

Is the United States prepared to accept a world in which China, growing at twice our rate, more united and purposeful, emerges as the dominant power? Are we willing to acquiesce in a Chinese Century?

Or will we adopt a policy to ensure that America remains the world’s preeminent power?

Do we have what is required in wealth, power, stamina and will to pursue a Second Cold War to contain China, which, strategic weapons aside, is more powerful and has greater potential than the Soviet Union ever did?

On his Asia tour, President Trump spoke of the “Indo-Pacific,” shorthand for the proposition that the U.S., Japan, Australia and India form the core of a coalition to maintain the balance of power in Asia and contain the expansion of China.

Yet, before we create some Asia-Pacific NATO to corral and contain China in this century, as we did the USSR in the 20th century, we need to ask ourselves why.

ORDER IT NOW

Does China, even if she rises to surpass the U.S. in manufacturing, technology and economic output, and is a comparable military power, truly threaten us as the USSR did, to where we should consider war to prevent its expansion in places like the South China Sea that are not vital to America?

While China is a great power, she has great problems.

She is feared and disliked by her neighbors. She has territorial quarrels with Russia, India, Vietnam, the Philippines, Japan. She has separatists in Tibet and Xinjiang. Christianity is growing while Communism, the state religion, is a dead faith. Moreover, the monopoly of power now enjoyed by the Communist Party and Xi Jinping mean that if things go wrong, there is no one else to blame.

Finally, why is the containment of China in Asia the responsibility of a United States 12 time zones away? For while China seeks to dominate Eurasia, she appears to have no desire to threaten the vital interests of the United States. China’s Communism appears to be an ideology disbelieved by her own people, that she does not intend to impose it on Asia or the world.

Again, are we Americans up for a Second Cold War, and, if so, why?

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, “Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”

Copyright 2017 Creators.com.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, China 
Hide 44 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Issac says:

    Fear not Pat, for the lofty heights of America’s political class have a one-party state in mind and it is just around the demographic corner.

    Read More
    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
    /pbuchanan/is-america-up-for-a-second-cold-war/#comment-2081915
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. One man’s authoritarianism is another’s law-and-order.

    Hey, Pat. The Chinese are occasional aggressors, but for the most part, they are merchants. The biggest complaint of many countries with large overseas Chinese populations is that they dominate local commerce. Look at Singapore, not that they complain, because the overseas Chinese run the place. What if the Chinese goal for all of this is merely more global commerce?

    You should be more worried about the rise of authoritarianism back home and the ever-increasing aggressive posturing and actual attacks overseas to distract from and at the same time justify it.

    Read More
    • Agree: Godfree Roberts
    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Quite true. Many of the Roman historians in the empire stage looked back with horror at the chaos of the Republic, or, certainly, the late Republic. The emperors may not have been great all the time but at least there was order.

    Regarding China, also agreed, where's the territorial aggression that people talk about. Yeah, China want states around them that understand who's boss, but compared to the United States, China most definitely minds its own business.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. The non-whiteness of the Chinese seems to limit the US State Dept’s hatred of them, and makes war much less likely. It looks as if the US will continue to focus on undermining and destroying Russia & Europe. And since this is not a vital Chinese interest, the Chinese will let them do it.

    Read More
    • Agree: Rurik
    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    I hate to bring it up because it is tiresome, but does China interest the Jews. It doesn't seem that influential Jews care much about China, so my guess is that the U.S. won't get too involved. OTOH, Jews care a lot about Europe and the Middle East, so my guess is that the U.S. will focus a lot of energy and attention on Russia, Eastern Europe and the Middle East.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. “Democracy has been rejected by China in favor of one-party rule of all political, economic, cultural and social life.”

    Nonsense! China rejected our application of democracy and developed a superior one. https://www.unz.com/article/selling-democracy-to-china/.

    There’s more than one way to skin a cat and their way seems to work better than ours.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. Jason Liu says:

    There is no reason why the future has to be confrontational. If the west did not constantly push democracy and western values on China, there wouldn’t be much tension at all. That’s by far the biggest thorn in China’s side, both for the government and people. Lose the moral preening shit and relations between east and west can be cordial, even cooperative.

    As to zero-sum scenarios regarding economic dominance, a multipolar world was always inevitable. Dominance by any one power is a historical anomaly, and bound to be temporary. China is willing to accept the existence of rival powers both present and future (such as India), even at its own expense. There simply is no other choice.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. KenH says:

    Chinese authoritarians don’t subject their peoples to a massive invasion by non-Chinese and non-orientals. In “free and democratic” America, Europe and the U.K., the hapless white majorities are subjected to an unprecedented onslaught of primitive and violent third worlders that will eventually destroy their nations and quite possibly them. So I think I’ll take Chinese “authoritarianism” over what we have in the West if that means whites might survive.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Chinese authoritarians don’t subject their peoples to a massive invasion by non-Chinese and non-orientals."

    Clearly you do not know history. The Europeans barged in, most notably the English with their Opium Wars of the 1840's. By 1890, Great Britain, France, and others had exclusive spheres of influence within China. The Chinese merely wanted to be left along and enable traders to purchase their wares and leave. Instead, the Invade The World And Invite The World left their mark.

    "In “free and democratic” America, Europe and the U.K., the hapless white majorities are subjected to an unprecedented onslaught of primitive and violent third worlders"

    [Laughs] today's white Americans and Europeans do not generally fit your description, nor are the newcomers meeting your criteria.

    So, what makes YOU other than some hapless and sappy white man? How are YOU "better" and "all-knowing"?

    "that will eventually destroy their nations and quite possibly them."

    What could eventually ruin the human race, you mean, is our penchant for greed and our current knack to forgo compromise.

    "So I think I’ll take Chinese “authoritarianism” over what we have in the West if that means whites might survive."

    Well, you would be in the minority. Thankfully, we normies are not on board with that "solution".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. MEexpert says:

    Unless the US learns to control or cut off the head of the two-headed snake (Israel and Saudi Arabia), the Cold War II will turn into WW III.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. Corvinus says:
    @KenH
    Chinese authoritarians don't subject their peoples to a massive invasion by non-Chinese and non-orientals. In "free and democratic" America, Europe and the U.K., the hapless white majorities are subjected to an unprecedented onslaught of primitive and violent third worlders that will eventually destroy their nations and quite possibly them. So I think I'll take Chinese "authoritarianism" over what we have in the West if that means whites might survive.

    “Chinese authoritarians don’t subject their peoples to a massive invasion by non-Chinese and non-orientals.”

    Clearly you do not know history. The Europeans barged in, most notably the English with their Opium Wars of the 1840′s. By 1890, Great Britain, France, and others had exclusive spheres of influence within China. The Chinese merely wanted to be left along and enable traders to purchase their wares and leave. Instead, the Invade The World And Invite The World left their mark.

    “In “free and democratic” America, Europe and the U.K., the hapless white majorities are subjected to an unprecedented onslaught of primitive and violent third worlders”

    [Laughs] today’s white Americans and Europeans do not generally fit your description, nor are the newcomers meeting your criteria.

    So, what makes YOU other than some hapless and sappy white man? How are YOU “better” and “all-knowing”?

    “that will eventually destroy their nations and quite possibly them.”

    What could eventually ruin the human race, you mean, is our penchant for greed and our current knack to forgo compromise.

    “So I think I’ll take Chinese “authoritarianism” over what we have in the West if that means whites might survive.”

    Well, you would be in the minority. Thankfully, we normies are not on board with that “solution”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    As I've said before, you're one deft troll. The saybacking, with just the right proportion of taking things out of context or feigning misapprehension, can enrage and engage many UR readers who would never fall for the likes of Tiny Duck. You're the virtual brainwished lunch colleague who hangs tough no matter what, knowing little but believing much, yet presenting enough intelligence and good faith to justify another try a few days later.

    Reading your stuff with this in mind can be entertaining. But no "normie" at your level would so self-describe. Try reading aloud before posting, and you'll echo even better those whom you mock.
    , @Alden
    With slight modifications to make it germane to the article and comments, your comment is just the standard jewish communist anti White talking points that have been around since 1918.

    Do you write for Wikepedia?
    , @Alden
    "By 1890, Great Britain, France, and others had exclusive spheres of influence within China. "

    And by 1800 the diaspora Chinese had spheres of influence in ports all over Europe, especially London, Liverpool, Naples, Marseilles and other ports.

    By 1830 there was a significant Chinese settlement in NYC. By 1855 San Francisco and California's Chinatown had obtained exclusive rights over their territories. It was de facto, not de jure of course.

    Never in the history of California Chinatowns and now in their vast suburban towns and city districts have health, restaurant and food regulations, safety, building zoning and environmental laws ever been enforced including anti slavery laws.

    You should really start looking at what is going on instead of googling wikepedia and repeating its articles.

    I suppose you didn't notice that the article is about the next 40 years or so of China's development. It isn't about a 70 to 80 year situation, 1830 to 1910. China has been a coherent nation and people for at least 4,000 years. A less than hundred years presence of French and British business men is nothing.

    If you live in hillbilly holler and don't have access to a university library, I suggest you contact the Library of Congress and start reading something more than wikepedia and liberal talking points.

    Here is a rather brief resume of China in the 19th century. 1830, Taiping rebellion. Over by 1860 but simmered most of the century. It was a lot like the American Civil War. Southern rebels against the northern national government. Historians claim it was one of the worst wars in history in terms of destruction, 10 million dead and the south and central part destroyed by both the rebels and the government.

    Rebel leader was a Christian who claimed to be Jesus Christ.

    National Government suffered from 2 severely retarded Emperors in a row, father and son. Unfortunately there was no way to remove these men and put in a functional person. The Empressess, the wife of the father and mother of the son did their best.

    Opium War The British didn't just land and army and impose the opium on China. The British ships were miles off shore. Chinese, southern Chinese smugglers went out to the opium ships, off loaded the
    opium and distributed it. If you ever looked at a map of S. China you would see it is a maze of small harbors, rivers, creeks, estuaries, beaches and ideal landing places for smugglers. Using the creeks, bays, estuaries etc, the S. Chinese smugglers and dealers were able to distribute the opium all over China.

    The situation was similar to America's today. We blame other countries for smuggling heroin into the US. Those countries reply if Americans didn't buy it, we wouldn't be able to sell it.

    The 2 retarded Emperors and the Empresses doing the best they could lasted most of the 19th century.
    The mother of the retarded son Emperor was the last Empress, the famous one reviled by the western powers who opposed her.
    Before she died, she made probably the worst decision any ruler has ever made. Ignoring numerous competent middle aged and young princes of the royal family she appointed a 2 or 3 year old toddler as her heir.

    And the royal family and the national government accepted that. They should not have.

    To repeat my point, a 70 or 80 year situation of horrendous civil war, 2 severely retarded Emperors in a row, Chinese smuggling opium into the country the destruction of the 50 years of civil war, did a lot more to harm China than anything the French or British did.

    A country whose national government accepts 2 severely retarded Emperors for most of the 19th century and then allows a 2 or 3 year old to become Emperor in the 20th century is not functional. The biggest cause of the problems was probably the Taiping rebellion that lasted off and on for 50 years.

    Late 18th and early 19th century China was able to control the foreign business men and traders. The Chinese controlled foreigners for centuries before that. Look at Macao, a Portuguese port and territory for 500 years. China controlled Macao and the Portuguese just fine. There was a big Persian trading port in S. China for centuries.

    But by 1830 the situation in China was such that the French, Russians and British obtained their territories, which by the way, were still ultimately under the jurisdiction of the Chinese government.
    , @KenH

    Clearly you do not know history.

    The Europeans barged in
     
    , most notably the English
     
    And clearly, you don't read or understand what you write. The Chinese government and military was too weak from preventing the European powers from "barging in". They weren't inviting masses of non-Chinese into the mainland to demographically displace their indigenous population as Western nations are doing today to their white majorities. Big difference and one you fail to grasp, not surprisingly.

    For all its faults, "authoritarian" China would at least protect its people from an invasion of racial aliens, so its people will endure and survive.


    So, what makes YOU other than some hapless and sappy white man? How are YOU “better” and “all-knowing”?
     
    Not better, but I apply logic and commonsense to things and take my people's side. Something you haven't learned to do because you're anti-white and are still trolling with your usual shitlib talking points.
    , @Anon

    Thankfully, we normies are not on board with that
     
    What? Over a billion Chinese are "abnormal"?
    You miserable racist.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Corvinus
    "Chinese authoritarians don’t subject their peoples to a massive invasion by non-Chinese and non-orientals."

    Clearly you do not know history. The Europeans barged in, most notably the English with their Opium Wars of the 1840's. By 1890, Great Britain, France, and others had exclusive spheres of influence within China. The Chinese merely wanted to be left along and enable traders to purchase their wares and leave. Instead, the Invade The World And Invite The World left their mark.

    "In “free and democratic” America, Europe and the U.K., the hapless white majorities are subjected to an unprecedented onslaught of primitive and violent third worlders"

    [Laughs] today's white Americans and Europeans do not generally fit your description, nor are the newcomers meeting your criteria.

    So, what makes YOU other than some hapless and sappy white man? How are YOU "better" and "all-knowing"?

    "that will eventually destroy their nations and quite possibly them."

    What could eventually ruin the human race, you mean, is our penchant for greed and our current knack to forgo compromise.

    "So I think I’ll take Chinese “authoritarianism” over what we have in the West if that means whites might survive."

    Well, you would be in the minority. Thankfully, we normies are not on board with that "solution".

    As I’ve said before, you’re one deft troll. The saybacking, with just the right proportion of taking things out of context or feigning misapprehension, can enrage and engage many UR readers who would never fall for the likes of Tiny Duck. You’re the virtual brainwished lunch colleague who hangs tough no matter what, knowing little but believing much, yet presenting enough intelligence and good faith to justify another try a few days later.

    Reading your stuff with this in mind can be entertaining. But no “normie” at your level would so self-describe. Try reading aloud before posting, and you’ll echo even better those whom you mock.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "As I’ve said before, you’re one deft troll."

    No, I am a regular commenter here. I don't hit and run post, I point out what I believe are idiosyncrasies, or beyond the pale notions, or misconceptions. But if it makes you feel better to call me a troll, knock yourself out. We. Don't. Care.

    "The saybacking, with just the right proportion of taking things out of context or feigning misapprehension..."

    I'm sure we all at this fine blog, yourself included, take things out of context or feign misapprehension. The difference is that compared to most people here, I look at things from all angles and perspectives. Which makes me labeled a "cuck" or a "white sell out" or a "Churchian".
    It's one thing to hold an opinion, it's another thing to say that opinion is the unequivocal truth, and those who dare question it are other than an American or are a danger to Western Civilization.

    "You’re the virtual brainwished lunch colleague who hangs tough no matter what, knowing little but believing much, yet presenting enough intelligence and good faith to justify another try a few days later."

    Right, because those who are moderate have been somehow duped and thus are woefully misreading situations. Praytell, what makes yourself not brainwashed? What makes you know better than the average person?

    "But no “normie” at your level would so self-describe."

    Of course they would so identify themselves in that manner, you just don't believe it. The problem is those in the middle, who are woke, remain fence sitting and are tepid to jump into the fray to rein in the machinations of the Coalition of the Right Fringe and the Coalition of the Left Fringe. But we are in a modern era of the Salem Witchcraft Trials, with seemingly no end in sight.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Corvinus says:
    @anonymous
    As I've said before, you're one deft troll. The saybacking, with just the right proportion of taking things out of context or feigning misapprehension, can enrage and engage many UR readers who would never fall for the likes of Tiny Duck. You're the virtual brainwished lunch colleague who hangs tough no matter what, knowing little but believing much, yet presenting enough intelligence and good faith to justify another try a few days later.

    Reading your stuff with this in mind can be entertaining. But no "normie" at your level would so self-describe. Try reading aloud before posting, and you'll echo even better those whom you mock.

    “As I’ve said before, you’re one deft troll.”

    No, I am a regular commenter here. I don’t hit and run post, I point out what I believe are idiosyncrasies, or beyond the pale notions, or misconceptions. But if it makes you feel better to call me a troll, knock yourself out. We. Don’t. Care.

    “The saybacking, with just the right proportion of taking things out of context or feigning misapprehension…”

    I’m sure we all at this fine blog, yourself included, take things out of context or feign misapprehension. The difference is that compared to most people here, I look at things from all angles and perspectives. Which makes me labeled a “cuck” or a “white sell out” or a “Churchian”.
    It’s one thing to hold an opinion, it’s another thing to say that opinion is the unequivocal truth, and those who dare question it are other than an American or are a danger to Western Civilization.

    “You’re the virtual brainwished lunch colleague who hangs tough no matter what, knowing little but believing much, yet presenting enough intelligence and good faith to justify another try a few days later.”

    Right, because those who are moderate have been somehow duped and thus are woefully misreading situations. Praytell, what makes yourself not brainwashed? What makes you know better than the average person?

    “But no “normie” at your level would so self-describe.”

    Of course they would so identify themselves in that manner, you just don’t believe it. The problem is those in the middle, who are woke, remain fence sitting and are tepid to jump into the fray to rein in the machinations of the Coalition of the Right Fringe and the Coalition of the Left Fringe. But we are in a modern era of the Salem Witchcraft Trials, with seemingly no end in sight.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS
    Good post, IMHO.

    I suspect you approach all this from a rational point of view, like "I want to learn, think and decide".
    Well.....as you must know, majority of people do not work that way.
    They approach the world from emotional point of view, like "I feel this way and I must do something about it". Like you said:

    But if it makes you feel better to call me a troll, knock yourself out.
     
    And, this is Internet. Anyone can express himself/herself here.
    Hence, 80 % of "Internet communication" is simply emotional exchange. Add to that an ego thing and there you go......95 % is a waste.

    Still, even in all this "online therapy" every now and then one could find an interesting piece of information.
    There are a couple of guys here with something to learn from every now and then.

    Scroll fast down the rest.....

    Like talking in a pub.
    You enjoy your drink, watch the game and speak with guys at your table...tune out the rest.
    Now, I guess the key is to keep one's ego in check, so a bit retrospection is required every now and then.
    All good fun.

    And then next Friday next pub.
    I meant "Internet conversation" place.
    , @animalogic
    "normie" -- what the fuck ? Normie ?? Makes my skin crawl....I used to say "straight" but that was co-oped by ...well you know, years ago. "Normie", Jesus, give me strength....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. polistra says:

    The questions aren’t really questions, the potentials are actuals. China is already the dominant economic power, and we surrendered economically to China 30 years ago. Russia was never a threat. The ‘missile gap’ was fake. We were actually fighting China in Korea and Vietnam, while using Russia as the boogeyman to justify massive wealth transfers to Deepstate. We’re still doing it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. Stick says:

    The most salient lesson for Americans to learn from the 20th Century is never be first to fight. Always be the last to join a fight and bring a truckload of hurt with you.

    Enslaving the US to be the eternal 1 Adam 12 response to every regional bush fire will erode and degrade our strength. Be prepared but be patient.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  13. Rurik says:

    Democracy has been rejected by China in favor of one-party rule of all political, economic, cultural and social life.

    What is America’s vision? What is America’s cause in the 21st century? What is the mission and goal that unites, inspires and drives us on?

    when these United States of America were codified as a republic, the people voting for elected officials were generally highly educated and vested in the republic with property and heritage.

    Today we have armies of illiterate cretins voting for the maximum entitlement-slop in the trough, and a congenital hostility for the heritage of what America used to be.

    when I think of today’s American voting public, I always think of this guy from some movie I saw

    I remember watching this guy as he was eating from a bucket, and thinking to myself ‘damn, that right there is the perfect characterization of the typical American voting public!

    whose only concern is who is going to fill his bucket with more slop

    as long as the typical American voter is deciding elections, then we all better learn to speak Mandarin like Trump’s granddaughter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    You're right. And our young children ARE learning Mandarin already. Gotta prepare them for the world as it more likely will be, not as we'd wish it were.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Alden says:
    @Corvinus
    "Chinese authoritarians don’t subject their peoples to a massive invasion by non-Chinese and non-orientals."

    Clearly you do not know history. The Europeans barged in, most notably the English with their Opium Wars of the 1840's. By 1890, Great Britain, France, and others had exclusive spheres of influence within China. The Chinese merely wanted to be left along and enable traders to purchase their wares and leave. Instead, the Invade The World And Invite The World left their mark.

    "In “free and democratic” America, Europe and the U.K., the hapless white majorities are subjected to an unprecedented onslaught of primitive and violent third worlders"

    [Laughs] today's white Americans and Europeans do not generally fit your description, nor are the newcomers meeting your criteria.

    So, what makes YOU other than some hapless and sappy white man? How are YOU "better" and "all-knowing"?

    "that will eventually destroy their nations and quite possibly them."

    What could eventually ruin the human race, you mean, is our penchant for greed and our current knack to forgo compromise.

    "So I think I’ll take Chinese “authoritarianism” over what we have in the West if that means whites might survive."

    Well, you would be in the minority. Thankfully, we normies are not on board with that "solution".

    With slight modifications to make it germane to the article and comments, your comment is just the standard jewish communist anti White talking points that have been around since 1918.

    Do you write for Wikepedia?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "With slight modifications to make it germane to the article and comments, your comment is just the standard jewish communist anti White talking points that have been around since 1918."

    Thanks, Mr. "I’ve read hundreds of thousands of history books in my life time.” Remember when you made that tall claim and have yet to offer evidence to prove it?

    Let us take a stroll down memory lane. One could assume that besides history books, you have read non-history books. I gather you are retired. So, for fun, let us assume that you are 80 years old AND you began reading at age 4 since you were a prodigy. 76 x 365 = 27740 days of your life. Let us now assume you read 200000 HISTORY books, since that was YOUR claim. 200000 divided by 27740 = 7.20. So, your average number of books a day is 7.

    Considering that the average number of books people read over the course of a year is 12…

    For the sake of argument, let us say the books you read averaged 100 pages, which would be on the low end. That would be 700 pages to read in a day. Consider that the average reading speed is 200-250 words a minute for non-technical material, (roughly 2 minutes per page). But assuming you were that prodigy, I will grant you for non-technical AND technical material, you would average 1 page in two minutes and meaningfully comprehend the information. That would mean 30 pages in 60 minutes/1 hour.

    Do you see where the math is leading us? Had you stated that you read thousands of history books in your lifetime, while highly unlikely, at least this possibility is more digestible than your claim of reading hundreds of thousands of history books.

    As far as this "standard jewish communist anti-White talking points" nonsense, it is downright bizarre some people here to insist that all white people MUST agree on forming organizations, at best, or giving tacit approval, at worst, to "protect their interests", lest they be declared "race traitors". Whites, like any group, make their own conscious decisions about race and culture, and need not be virtue signaled to death regarding their apparent choices that will bring undue harm, nay, genocide. Feel free to voice your opinion on such important matters, but leave the labels at home.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. Alden says:
    @Corvinus
    "Chinese authoritarians don’t subject their peoples to a massive invasion by non-Chinese and non-orientals."

    Clearly you do not know history. The Europeans barged in, most notably the English with their Opium Wars of the 1840's. By 1890, Great Britain, France, and others had exclusive spheres of influence within China. The Chinese merely wanted to be left along and enable traders to purchase their wares and leave. Instead, the Invade The World And Invite The World left their mark.

    "In “free and democratic” America, Europe and the U.K., the hapless white majorities are subjected to an unprecedented onslaught of primitive and violent third worlders"

    [Laughs] today's white Americans and Europeans do not generally fit your description, nor are the newcomers meeting your criteria.

    So, what makes YOU other than some hapless and sappy white man? How are YOU "better" and "all-knowing"?

    "that will eventually destroy their nations and quite possibly them."

    What could eventually ruin the human race, you mean, is our penchant for greed and our current knack to forgo compromise.

    "So I think I’ll take Chinese “authoritarianism” over what we have in the West if that means whites might survive."

    Well, you would be in the minority. Thankfully, we normies are not on board with that "solution".

    “By 1890, Great Britain, France, and others had exclusive spheres of influence within China. ”

    And by 1800 the diaspora Chinese had spheres of influence in ports all over Europe, especially London, Liverpool, Naples, Marseilles and other ports.

    By 1830 there was a significant Chinese settlement in NYC. By 1855 San Francisco and California’s Chinatown had obtained exclusive rights over their territories. It was de facto, not de jure of course.

    Never in the history of California Chinatowns and now in their vast suburban towns and city districts have health, restaurant and food regulations, safety, building zoning and environmental laws ever been enforced including anti slavery laws.

    You should really start looking at what is going on instead of googling wikepedia and repeating its articles.

    I suppose you didn’t notice that the article is about the next 40 years or so of China’s development. It isn’t about a 70 to 80 year situation, 1830 to 1910. China has been a coherent nation and people for at least 4,000 years. A less than hundred years presence of French and British business men is nothing.

    If you live in hillbilly holler and don’t have access to a university library, I suggest you contact the Library of Congress and start reading something more than wikepedia and liberal talking points.

    Here is a rather brief resume of China in the 19th century. 1830, Taiping rebellion. Over by 1860 but simmered most of the century. It was a lot like the American Civil War. Southern rebels against the northern national government. Historians claim it was one of the worst wars in history in terms of destruction, 10 million dead and the south and central part destroyed by both the rebels and the government.

    Rebel leader was a Christian who claimed to be Jesus Christ.

    National Government suffered from 2 severely retarded Emperors in a row, father and son. Unfortunately there was no way to remove these men and put in a functional person. The Empressess, the wife of the father and mother of the son did their best.

    Opium War The British didn’t just land and army and impose the opium on China. The British ships were miles off shore. Chinese, southern Chinese smugglers went out to the opium ships, off loaded the
    opium and distributed it. If you ever looked at a map of S. China you would see it is a maze of small harbors, rivers, creeks, estuaries, beaches and ideal landing places for smugglers. Using the creeks, bays, estuaries etc, the S. Chinese smugglers and dealers were able to distribute the opium all over China.

    The situation was similar to America’s today. We blame other countries for smuggling heroin into the US. Those countries reply if Americans didn’t buy it, we wouldn’t be able to sell it.

    The 2 retarded Emperors and the Empresses doing the best they could lasted most of the 19th century.
    The mother of the retarded son Emperor was the last Empress, the famous one reviled by the western powers who opposed her.
    Before she died, she made probably the worst decision any ruler has ever made. Ignoring numerous competent middle aged and young princes of the royal family she appointed a 2 or 3 year old toddler as her heir.

    And the royal family and the national government accepted that. They should not have.

    To repeat my point, a 70 or 80 year situation of horrendous civil war, 2 severely retarded Emperors in a row, Chinese smuggling opium into the country the destruction of the 50 years of civil war, did a lot more to harm China than anything the French or British did.

    A country whose national government accepts 2 severely retarded Emperors for most of the 19th century and then allows a 2 or 3 year old to become Emperor in the 20th century is not functional. The biggest cause of the problems was probably the Taiping rebellion that lasted off and on for 50 years.

    Late 18th and early 19th century China was able to control the foreign business men and traders. The Chinese controlled foreigners for centuries before that. Look at Macao, a Portuguese port and territory for 500 years. China controlled Macao and the Portuguese just fine. There was a big Persian trading port in S. China for centuries.

    But by 1830 the situation in China was such that the French, Russians and British obtained their territories, which by the way, were still ultimately under the jurisdiction of the Chinese government.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    And by 1800 the diaspora Chinese had spheres of influence in ports all over Europe, especially London, Liverpool, Naples, Marseilles and other ports.

    "By 1830 there was a significant Chinese settlement in NYC."

    Significant? As in hundreds or as in thousands? Because from what I gather, there 325 Chinese in the United States by 1848. Afong Moy came to this city in 1834 as a "shrewd marketing scheme" by two New York based merchants.

    https://www.chsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2011HP_02_Haddad.pdf

    So, what source are you able to offer as to the numbers that would meet the criteria as being "significant"?

    "By 1855 San Francisco and California’s Chinatown had obtained exclusive rights over their territories. It was de facto, not de jure of course."

    No different than any other ethnic group who came to the United States and secured their own ghetto in a particular area of a city. Your point?

    "Never in the history of California Chinatowns and now in their vast suburban towns and city districts have health, restaurant and food regulations, safety, building zoning and environmental laws ever been enforced including anti slavery laws."

    Never, huh. OK, so what particular time period are we talking about here? For what reasons were these regulations and laws other than enforced? If you are going to make a claim here, offer a link.

    See, San Francisco in the early 1850's was a burgeoning mining port city complete with corruption and vigilante justice. So it would be other than surprising during its infancy that people living here would not be subject to such legislation. Now, if you are referring to the when the city began to transform itself from 1860-1890, sure, I could see how city statutes, again given the dominance of machine politics, would be either watered down or not be rigorously enforced...in ALL districts.

    "A less than hundred years presence of French and British business men is nothing."

    It's substantially more than "nothing". Indeed, the Chinese built up a nice trade surplus with the Europeans by the early 1800's, so much so that Great Britain desired to break up their stranglehold on China's accumulation of silver in the process. So the British flooded the Chinese market, with help by profit seeking Chinese merchants, with opium, despite eventual Chinese prohibition of this product. A war followed--China was weakened, and also endured additional political and economic strife as a result. The opium was imposed on China, make no bones about it.

    "To repeat my point, a 70 or 80 year situation of horrendous civil war, 2 severely retarded Emperors in a row, Chinese smuggling opium into the country the destruction of the 50 years of civil war, did a lot more to harm China than anything the French or British did."

    The British and French offered the needle and gave, as the Joker stated so eloquently, "just a little push". There is tremendous culpability on their part here, yet you gloss over their greedy and manipulative behavior.

    "The 2 retarded Emperors and the Empresses doing the best they could lasted most of the 19th century."

    Names? And how do we know they were "retarded"? Is that your description of these leaders or did they clearly have a mental defect?

    "But by 1830 the situation in China was such that the French, Russians and British obtained their territories, which by the way, were still ultimately under the jurisdiction of the Chinese government."

    Try extraterritoriality. Europeans were exempt from abiding by or being subject to Chinese laws. The Chinese did not want foreigners on their soil without their permission.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. peterAUS says:
    @Corvinus
    "As I’ve said before, you’re one deft troll."

    No, I am a regular commenter here. I don't hit and run post, I point out what I believe are idiosyncrasies, or beyond the pale notions, or misconceptions. But if it makes you feel better to call me a troll, knock yourself out. We. Don't. Care.

    "The saybacking, with just the right proportion of taking things out of context or feigning misapprehension..."

    I'm sure we all at this fine blog, yourself included, take things out of context or feign misapprehension. The difference is that compared to most people here, I look at things from all angles and perspectives. Which makes me labeled a "cuck" or a "white sell out" or a "Churchian".
    It's one thing to hold an opinion, it's another thing to say that opinion is the unequivocal truth, and those who dare question it are other than an American or are a danger to Western Civilization.

    "You’re the virtual brainwished lunch colleague who hangs tough no matter what, knowing little but believing much, yet presenting enough intelligence and good faith to justify another try a few days later."

    Right, because those who are moderate have been somehow duped and thus are woefully misreading situations. Praytell, what makes yourself not brainwashed? What makes you know better than the average person?

    "But no “normie” at your level would so self-describe."

    Of course they would so identify themselves in that manner, you just don't believe it. The problem is those in the middle, who are woke, remain fence sitting and are tepid to jump into the fray to rein in the machinations of the Coalition of the Right Fringe and the Coalition of the Left Fringe. But we are in a modern era of the Salem Witchcraft Trials, with seemingly no end in sight.

    Good post, IMHO.

    I suspect you approach all this from a rational point of view, like “I want to learn, think and decide”.
    Well…..as you must know, majority of people do not work that way.
    They approach the world from emotional point of view, like “I feel this way and I must do something about it”. Like you said:

    But if it makes you feel better to call me a troll, knock yourself out.

    And, this is Internet. Anyone can express himself/herself here.
    Hence, 80 % of “Internet communication” is simply emotional exchange. Add to that an ego thing and there you go……95 % is a waste.

    Still, even in all this “online therapy” every now and then one could find an interesting piece of information.
    There are a couple of guys here with something to learn from every now and then.

    Scroll fast down the rest…..

    Like talking in a pub.
    You enjoy your drink, watch the game and speak with guys at your table…tune out the rest.
    Now, I guess the key is to keep one’s ego in check, so a bit retrospection is required every now and then.
    All good fun.

    And then next Friday next pub.
    I meant “Internet conversation” place.

    Read More
    • Agree: Talha
    • Replies: @Anon
    Well, I haven't read this post of Corvy's and it may be perfectly reasonable. For those of us who have read Corvy's offerings in the past or tried to interact politely, though, calling them a troll comes somewhat naturally. Maybe he's changed, but to me at least and probably others it's not worth the trouble to find out, not least because "good fun" is part of the reason to be here.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. nickels says:

    Democracy is a failed concept.
    It is revolutionary in nature.

    Rule is the divine gift to a Monarch.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. Tiny Duck says:

    You people support pedophiles like Roy Moore and that is one of the many reasons you will lose badly in the future.

    Just complete moral bankruptcy

    Leonard Pitts has great commentary on this

    Read More
    • Replies: @fish
    Ohs Tinys....


    Lender “K stata be kickin teh crap outta OK state” Pits
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. KenH says:
    @Corvinus
    "Chinese authoritarians don’t subject their peoples to a massive invasion by non-Chinese and non-orientals."

    Clearly you do not know history. The Europeans barged in, most notably the English with their Opium Wars of the 1840's. By 1890, Great Britain, France, and others had exclusive spheres of influence within China. The Chinese merely wanted to be left along and enable traders to purchase their wares and leave. Instead, the Invade The World And Invite The World left their mark.

    "In “free and democratic” America, Europe and the U.K., the hapless white majorities are subjected to an unprecedented onslaught of primitive and violent third worlders"

    [Laughs] today's white Americans and Europeans do not generally fit your description, nor are the newcomers meeting your criteria.

    So, what makes YOU other than some hapless and sappy white man? How are YOU "better" and "all-knowing"?

    "that will eventually destroy their nations and quite possibly them."

    What could eventually ruin the human race, you mean, is our penchant for greed and our current knack to forgo compromise.

    "So I think I’ll take Chinese “authoritarianism” over what we have in the West if that means whites might survive."

    Well, you would be in the minority. Thankfully, we normies are not on board with that "solution".

    Clearly you do not know history.

    The Europeans barged in

    , most notably the English

    And clearly, you don’t read or understand what you write. The Chinese government and military was too weak from preventing the European powers from “barging in”. They weren’t inviting masses of non-Chinese into the mainland to demographically displace their indigenous population as Western nations are doing today to their white majorities. Big difference and one you fail to grasp, not surprisingly.

    For all its faults, “authoritarian” China would at least protect its people from an invasion of racial aliens, so its people will endure and survive.

    So, what makes YOU other than some hapless and sappy white man? How are YOU “better” and “all-knowing”?

    Not better, but I apply logic and commonsense to things and take my people’s side. Something you haven’t learned to do because you’re anti-white and are still trolling with your usual shitlib talking points.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "The Chinese government and military was too weak from preventing the European powers from “barging in”."

    Now, why was that? By the early 1800's, the Chinese were doing just fine with a nice trade surplus and keeping foreigners at bay. Through the opium trade imposed by the British, along with internal strife as a result of two wars, a civil war, and famine, the Chinese eventually became weakened so that the European wolves could scarf down their flesh and gnaw on their bones.

    "They weren’t inviting masses of non-Chinese into the mainland to demographically displace their indigenous population as Western nations are doing today to their white majorities."

    America's indigenous population were tribal groups, or Indians (feather, not dot).

    "For all its faults, “authoritarian” China would at least protect its people from an invasion of racial aliens, so its people will endure and survive."

    "Authoritarian" China fell to the European invaders. There was no "protection" here.

    'Not better, but I apply logic and commonsense to things and take my people’s side. Something you haven’t learned to do because you’re anti-white and are still trolling with your usual shitlib talking points."

    Right, because any and all whites who have the audacity not to agree with you about what is the "proper" white mindset moving forwards is automatically deemed a "troll" or a "shitlib" or a "race traitor". Which, if you are honest about it, is completely devoid of logic for a white (or for any race for that matter) to make such an accusation.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. @Rurik

    Democracy has been rejected by China in favor of one-party rule of all political, economic, cultural and social life.

    ...

    What is America’s vision? What is America’s cause in the 21st century? What is the mission and goal that unites, inspires and drives us on?
     
    when these United States of America were codified as a republic, the people voting for elected officials were generally highly educated and vested in the republic with property and heritage.

    Today we have armies of illiterate cretins voting for the maximum entitlement-slop in the trough, and a congenital hostility for the heritage of what America used to be.

    when I think of today's American voting public, I always think of this guy from some movie I saw

    https://media.giphy.com/media/4cfV5bkDSYUx2/giphy.gif

    I remember watching this guy as he was eating from a bucket, and thinking to myself 'damn, that right there is the perfect characterization of the typical American voting public!

    whose only concern is who is going to fill his bucket with more slop

    as long as the typical American voter is deciding elections, then we all better learn to speak Mandarin like Trump's granddaughter.

    You’re right. And our young children ARE learning Mandarin already. Gotta prepare them for the world as it more likely will be, not as we’d wish it were.

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

    Democracy is just a modernday religion, only thing missing is a higher spirit, the rest are the same. Like Christianity/Islam, it’s monotheism, it’s unquestionable, and the unbelievers are evil.

    And, imperialism is the primitive version of globalization, built on military power.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  22. geokat62 says:

    Bush II’s democracy crusade to end tyranny in our world produced disasters from Libya to Afghanistan.

    The GWOT may have been pitched as “a crusade to end tyranny in our world,” but make no mistake about it, it was really a front to remake MENA by regime changing those countries deemed hostile to the JS, all in an effort to enhance the security of the villa in the jungle, period.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  23. Corvinus says:
    @Alden
    With slight modifications to make it germane to the article and comments, your comment is just the standard jewish communist anti White talking points that have been around since 1918.

    Do you write for Wikepedia?

    “With slight modifications to make it germane to the article and comments, your comment is just the standard jewish communist anti White talking points that have been around since 1918.”

    Thanks, Mr. “I’ve read hundreds of thousands of history books in my life time.” Remember when you made that tall claim and have yet to offer evidence to prove it?

    Let us take a stroll down memory lane. One could assume that besides history books, you have read non-history books. I gather you are retired. So, for fun, let us assume that you are 80 years old AND you began reading at age 4 since you were a prodigy. 76 x 365 = 27740 days of your life. Let us now assume you read 200000 HISTORY books, since that was YOUR claim. 200000 divided by 27740 = 7.20. So, your average number of books a day is 7.

    Considering that the average number of books people read over the course of a year is 12…

    For the sake of argument, let us say the books you read averaged 100 pages, which would be on the low end. That would be 700 pages to read in a day. Consider that the average reading speed is 200-250 words a minute for non-technical material, (roughly 2 minutes per page). But assuming you were that prodigy, I will grant you for non-technical AND technical material, you would average 1 page in two minutes and meaningfully comprehend the information. That would mean 30 pages in 60 minutes/1 hour.

    Do you see where the math is leading us? Had you stated that you read thousands of history books in your lifetime, while highly unlikely, at least this possibility is more digestible than your claim of reading hundreds of thousands of history books.

    As far as this “standard jewish communist anti-White talking points” nonsense, it is downright bizarre some people here to insist that all white people MUST agree on forming organizations, at best, or giving tacit approval, at worst, to “protect their interests”, lest they be declared “race traitors”. Whites, like any group, make their own conscious decisions about race and culture, and need not be virtue signaled to death regarding their apparent choices that will bring undue harm, nay, genocide. Feel free to voice your opinion on such important matters, but leave the labels at home.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Corvinus says:
    @Alden
    "By 1890, Great Britain, France, and others had exclusive spheres of influence within China. "

    And by 1800 the diaspora Chinese had spheres of influence in ports all over Europe, especially London, Liverpool, Naples, Marseilles and other ports.

    By 1830 there was a significant Chinese settlement in NYC. By 1855 San Francisco and California's Chinatown had obtained exclusive rights over their territories. It was de facto, not de jure of course.

    Never in the history of California Chinatowns and now in their vast suburban towns and city districts have health, restaurant and food regulations, safety, building zoning and environmental laws ever been enforced including anti slavery laws.

    You should really start looking at what is going on instead of googling wikepedia and repeating its articles.

    I suppose you didn't notice that the article is about the next 40 years or so of China's development. It isn't about a 70 to 80 year situation, 1830 to 1910. China has been a coherent nation and people for at least 4,000 years. A less than hundred years presence of French and British business men is nothing.

    If you live in hillbilly holler and don't have access to a university library, I suggest you contact the Library of Congress and start reading something more than wikepedia and liberal talking points.

    Here is a rather brief resume of China in the 19th century. 1830, Taiping rebellion. Over by 1860 but simmered most of the century. It was a lot like the American Civil War. Southern rebels against the northern national government. Historians claim it was one of the worst wars in history in terms of destruction, 10 million dead and the south and central part destroyed by both the rebels and the government.

    Rebel leader was a Christian who claimed to be Jesus Christ.

    National Government suffered from 2 severely retarded Emperors in a row, father and son. Unfortunately there was no way to remove these men and put in a functional person. The Empressess, the wife of the father and mother of the son did their best.

    Opium War The British didn't just land and army and impose the opium on China. The British ships were miles off shore. Chinese, southern Chinese smugglers went out to the opium ships, off loaded the
    opium and distributed it. If you ever looked at a map of S. China you would see it is a maze of small harbors, rivers, creeks, estuaries, beaches and ideal landing places for smugglers. Using the creeks, bays, estuaries etc, the S. Chinese smugglers and dealers were able to distribute the opium all over China.

    The situation was similar to America's today. We blame other countries for smuggling heroin into the US. Those countries reply if Americans didn't buy it, we wouldn't be able to sell it.

    The 2 retarded Emperors and the Empresses doing the best they could lasted most of the 19th century.
    The mother of the retarded son Emperor was the last Empress, the famous one reviled by the western powers who opposed her.
    Before she died, she made probably the worst decision any ruler has ever made. Ignoring numerous competent middle aged and young princes of the royal family she appointed a 2 or 3 year old toddler as her heir.

    And the royal family and the national government accepted that. They should not have.

    To repeat my point, a 70 or 80 year situation of horrendous civil war, 2 severely retarded Emperors in a row, Chinese smuggling opium into the country the destruction of the 50 years of civil war, did a lot more to harm China than anything the French or British did.

    A country whose national government accepts 2 severely retarded Emperors for most of the 19th century and then allows a 2 or 3 year old to become Emperor in the 20th century is not functional. The biggest cause of the problems was probably the Taiping rebellion that lasted off and on for 50 years.

    Late 18th and early 19th century China was able to control the foreign business men and traders. The Chinese controlled foreigners for centuries before that. Look at Macao, a Portuguese port and territory for 500 years. China controlled Macao and the Portuguese just fine. There was a big Persian trading port in S. China for centuries.

    But by 1830 the situation in China was such that the French, Russians and British obtained their territories, which by the way, were still ultimately under the jurisdiction of the Chinese government.

    And by 1800 the diaspora Chinese had spheres of influence in ports all over Europe, especially London, Liverpool, Naples, Marseilles and other ports.

    “By 1830 there was a significant Chinese settlement in NYC.”

    Significant? As in hundreds or as in thousands? Because from what I gather, there 325 Chinese in the United States by 1848. Afong Moy came to this city in 1834 as a “shrewd marketing scheme” by two New York based merchants.

    https://www.chsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2011HP_02_Haddad.pdf

    So, what source are you able to offer as to the numbers that would meet the criteria as being “significant”?

    “By 1855 San Francisco and California’s Chinatown had obtained exclusive rights over their territories. It was de facto, not de jure of course.”

    No different than any other ethnic group who came to the United States and secured their own ghetto in a particular area of a city. Your point?

    “Never in the history of California Chinatowns and now in their vast suburban towns and city districts have health, restaurant and food regulations, safety, building zoning and environmental laws ever been enforced including anti slavery laws.”

    Never, huh. OK, so what particular time period are we talking about here? For what reasons were these regulations and laws other than enforced? If you are going to make a claim here, offer a link.

    See, San Francisco in the early 1850′s was a burgeoning mining port city complete with corruption and vigilante justice. So it would be other than surprising during its infancy that people living here would not be subject to such legislation. Now, if you are referring to the when the city began to transform itself from 1860-1890, sure, I could see how city statutes, again given the dominance of machine politics, would be either watered down or not be rigorously enforced…in ALL districts.

    “A less than hundred years presence of French and British business men is nothing.”

    It’s substantially more than “nothing”. Indeed, the Chinese built up a nice trade surplus with the Europeans by the early 1800′s, so much so that Great Britain desired to break up their stranglehold on China’s accumulation of silver in the process. So the British flooded the Chinese market, with help by profit seeking Chinese merchants, with opium, despite eventual Chinese prohibition of this product. A war followed–China was weakened, and also endured additional political and economic strife as a result. The opium was imposed on China, make no bones about it.

    “To repeat my point, a 70 or 80 year situation of horrendous civil war, 2 severely retarded Emperors in a row, Chinese smuggling opium into the country the destruction of the 50 years of civil war, did a lot more to harm China than anything the French or British did.”

    The British and French offered the needle and gave, as the Joker stated so eloquently, “just a little push”. There is tremendous culpability on their part here, yet you gloss over their greedy and manipulative behavior.

    “The 2 retarded Emperors and the Empresses doing the best they could lasted most of the 19th century.”

    Names? And how do we know they were “retarded”? Is that your description of these leaders or did they clearly have a mental defect?

    “But by 1830 the situation in China was such that the French, Russians and British obtained their territories, which by the way, were still ultimately under the jurisdiction of the Chinese government.”

    Try extraterritoriality. Europeans were exempt from abiding by or being subject to Chinese laws. The Chinese did not want foreigners on their soil without their permission.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Corvinus says:
    @KenH

    Clearly you do not know history.

    The Europeans barged in
     
    , most notably the English
     
    And clearly, you don't read or understand what you write. The Chinese government and military was too weak from preventing the European powers from "barging in". They weren't inviting masses of non-Chinese into the mainland to demographically displace their indigenous population as Western nations are doing today to their white majorities. Big difference and one you fail to grasp, not surprisingly.

    For all its faults, "authoritarian" China would at least protect its people from an invasion of racial aliens, so its people will endure and survive.


    So, what makes YOU other than some hapless and sappy white man? How are YOU “better” and “all-knowing”?
     
    Not better, but I apply logic and commonsense to things and take my people's side. Something you haven't learned to do because you're anti-white and are still trolling with your usual shitlib talking points.

    “The Chinese government and military was too weak from preventing the European powers from “barging in”.”

    Now, why was that? By the early 1800′s, the Chinese were doing just fine with a nice trade surplus and keeping foreigners at bay. Through the opium trade imposed by the British, along with internal strife as a result of two wars, a civil war, and famine, the Chinese eventually became weakened so that the European wolves could scarf down their flesh and gnaw on their bones.

    “They weren’t inviting masses of non-Chinese into the mainland to demographically displace their indigenous population as Western nations are doing today to their white majorities.”

    America’s indigenous population were tribal groups, or Indians (feather, not dot).

    “For all its faults, “authoritarian” China would at least protect its people from an invasion of racial aliens, so its people will endure and survive.”

    “Authoritarian” China fell to the European invaders. There was no “protection” here.

    ‘Not better, but I apply logic and commonsense to things and take my people’s side. Something you haven’t learned to do because you’re anti-white and are still trolling with your usual shitlib talking points.”

    Right, because any and all whites who have the audacity not to agree with you about what is the “proper” white mindset moving forwards is automatically deemed a “troll” or a “shitlib” or a “race traitor”. Which, if you are honest about it, is completely devoid of logic for a white (or for any race for that matter) to make such an accusation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KenH

    “Authoritarian” China fell to the European invaders. There was no “protection” here.
     
    As I said that was then when China was militarily weak. You're struggling with reading comprehension again. If any European power attempted to invade China today the outcome would be very different. American and European nations are militarily strong enough to repel illegal immigrants and "refugees" crashing their borders but refuse to do so since they're stricken with the anti-racist virus thanks to their Jewish occupied governments. China doesn't have that problem.

    Right, because any and all whites who have the audacity not to agree with you about what is the “proper” white mindset moving forwards is automatically deemed a “troll” or a “shitlib” or a “race traitor”.
     
    So says the man who endlessly trolls, attacks, and impugns any white person who doesn't see the world and events through an anti-white/anti-racist prism as you do.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @Corvinus
    "As I’ve said before, you’re one deft troll."

    No, I am a regular commenter here. I don't hit and run post, I point out what I believe are idiosyncrasies, or beyond the pale notions, or misconceptions. But if it makes you feel better to call me a troll, knock yourself out. We. Don't. Care.

    "The saybacking, with just the right proportion of taking things out of context or feigning misapprehension..."

    I'm sure we all at this fine blog, yourself included, take things out of context or feign misapprehension. The difference is that compared to most people here, I look at things from all angles and perspectives. Which makes me labeled a "cuck" or a "white sell out" or a "Churchian".
    It's one thing to hold an opinion, it's another thing to say that opinion is the unequivocal truth, and those who dare question it are other than an American or are a danger to Western Civilization.

    "You’re the virtual brainwished lunch colleague who hangs tough no matter what, knowing little but believing much, yet presenting enough intelligence and good faith to justify another try a few days later."

    Right, because those who are moderate have been somehow duped and thus are woefully misreading situations. Praytell, what makes yourself not brainwashed? What makes you know better than the average person?

    "But no “normie” at your level would so self-describe."

    Of course they would so identify themselves in that manner, you just don't believe it. The problem is those in the middle, who are woke, remain fence sitting and are tepid to jump into the fray to rein in the machinations of the Coalition of the Right Fringe and the Coalition of the Left Fringe. But we are in a modern era of the Salem Witchcraft Trials, with seemingly no end in sight.

    “normie” — what the fuck ? Normie ?? Makes my skin crawl….I used to say “straight” but that was co-oped by …well you know, years ago. “Normie”, Jesus, give me strength….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. KenH says:
    @Corvinus
    "The Chinese government and military was too weak from preventing the European powers from “barging in”."

    Now, why was that? By the early 1800's, the Chinese were doing just fine with a nice trade surplus and keeping foreigners at bay. Through the opium trade imposed by the British, along with internal strife as a result of two wars, a civil war, and famine, the Chinese eventually became weakened so that the European wolves could scarf down their flesh and gnaw on their bones.

    "They weren’t inviting masses of non-Chinese into the mainland to demographically displace their indigenous population as Western nations are doing today to their white majorities."

    America's indigenous population were tribal groups, or Indians (feather, not dot).

    "For all its faults, “authoritarian” China would at least protect its people from an invasion of racial aliens, so its people will endure and survive."

    "Authoritarian" China fell to the European invaders. There was no "protection" here.

    'Not better, but I apply logic and commonsense to things and take my people’s side. Something you haven’t learned to do because you’re anti-white and are still trolling with your usual shitlib talking points."

    Right, because any and all whites who have the audacity not to agree with you about what is the "proper" white mindset moving forwards is automatically deemed a "troll" or a "shitlib" or a "race traitor". Which, if you are honest about it, is completely devoid of logic for a white (or for any race for that matter) to make such an accusation.

    “Authoritarian” China fell to the European invaders. There was no “protection” here.

    As I said that was then when China was militarily weak. You’re struggling with reading comprehension again. If any European power attempted to invade China today the outcome would be very different. American and European nations are militarily strong enough to repel illegal immigrants and “refugees” crashing their borders but refuse to do so since they’re stricken with the anti-racist virus thanks to their Jewish occupied governments. China doesn’t have that problem.

    Right, because any and all whites who have the audacity not to agree with you about what is the “proper” white mindset moving forwards is automatically deemed a “troll” or a “shitlib” or a “race traitor”.

    So says the man who endlessly trolls, attacks, and impugns any white person who doesn’t see the world and events through an anti-white/anti-racist prism as you do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "As I said that was then when China was militarily weak."

    As a result of outside interference and internal struggles. You're struggling with cause and effect again.

    "American and European nations are militarily strong enough to repel illegal immigrants and “refugees” crashing their borders but refuse to do so since they’re stricken with the anti-racist virus thanks to their Jewish occupied governments."

    American and European nations do not have "Jewish occupied governments". That is all a figment of your imagination.

    "So says the man who endlessly trolls, attacks, and impugns any white person who doesn’t see the world and events through an anti-white/anti-racist prism as you do."

    Feel free to believe in what you believe in. It's just that when you unilaterally declare white people who do not prescribe to your beliefs as being "cucks", "race traitors", or "Jew lovers", then you are going off the rails on a crazy train.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. KenH says:

    Again, are we Americans up for a Second Cold War, and, if so, why?

    Well I’m not and I’m going to go out on a limb and say more than 50% of Americans aren’t, but we won’t be consulted and voting won’t change anything. If a cold war with China will serve the global interests of Jewry then that’s what we’ll get. Donald J. Trump already has an invisible dog collar so forget about MAGA or America first.

    Read More
    • Agree: Cloak And Dagger
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. fish says:
    @Tiny Duck
    You people support pedophiles like Roy Moore and that is one of the many reasons you will lose badly in the future.

    Just complete moral bankruptcy

    Leonard Pitts has great commentary on this

    Ohs Tinys….

    Lender “K stata be kickin teh crap outta OK state” Pits

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. Corvinus says:
    @KenH

    “Authoritarian” China fell to the European invaders. There was no “protection” here.
     
    As I said that was then when China was militarily weak. You're struggling with reading comprehension again. If any European power attempted to invade China today the outcome would be very different. American and European nations are militarily strong enough to repel illegal immigrants and "refugees" crashing their borders but refuse to do so since they're stricken with the anti-racist virus thanks to their Jewish occupied governments. China doesn't have that problem.

    Right, because any and all whites who have the audacity not to agree with you about what is the “proper” white mindset moving forwards is automatically deemed a “troll” or a “shitlib” or a “race traitor”.
     
    So says the man who endlessly trolls, attacks, and impugns any white person who doesn't see the world and events through an anti-white/anti-racist prism as you do.

    “As I said that was then when China was militarily weak.”

    As a result of outside interference and internal struggles. You’re struggling with cause and effect again.

    “American and European nations are militarily strong enough to repel illegal immigrants and “refugees” crashing their borders but refuse to do so since they’re stricken with the anti-racist virus thanks to their Jewish occupied governments.”

    American and European nations do not have “Jewish occupied governments”. That is all a figment of your imagination.

    “So says the man who endlessly trolls, attacks, and impugns any white person who doesn’t see the world and events through an anti-white/anti-racist prism as you do.”

    Feel free to believe in what you believe in. It’s just that when you unilaterally declare white people who do not prescribe to your beliefs as being “cucks”, “race traitors”, or “Jew lovers”, then you are going off the rails on a crazy train.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Corvinus
    "Chinese authoritarians don’t subject their peoples to a massive invasion by non-Chinese and non-orientals."

    Clearly you do not know history. The Europeans barged in, most notably the English with their Opium Wars of the 1840's. By 1890, Great Britain, France, and others had exclusive spheres of influence within China. The Chinese merely wanted to be left along and enable traders to purchase their wares and leave. Instead, the Invade The World And Invite The World left their mark.

    "In “free and democratic” America, Europe and the U.K., the hapless white majorities are subjected to an unprecedented onslaught of primitive and violent third worlders"

    [Laughs] today's white Americans and Europeans do not generally fit your description, nor are the newcomers meeting your criteria.

    So, what makes YOU other than some hapless and sappy white man? How are YOU "better" and "all-knowing"?

    "that will eventually destroy their nations and quite possibly them."

    What could eventually ruin the human race, you mean, is our penchant for greed and our current knack to forgo compromise.

    "So I think I’ll take Chinese “authoritarianism” over what we have in the West if that means whites might survive."

    Well, you would be in the minority. Thankfully, we normies are not on board with that "solution".

    Thankfully, we normies are not on board with that

    What? Over a billion Chinese are “abnormal”?
    You miserable racist.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @peterAUS
    Good post, IMHO.

    I suspect you approach all this from a rational point of view, like "I want to learn, think and decide".
    Well.....as you must know, majority of people do not work that way.
    They approach the world from emotional point of view, like "I feel this way and I must do something about it". Like you said:

    But if it makes you feel better to call me a troll, knock yourself out.
     
    And, this is Internet. Anyone can express himself/herself here.
    Hence, 80 % of "Internet communication" is simply emotional exchange. Add to that an ego thing and there you go......95 % is a waste.

    Still, even in all this "online therapy" every now and then one could find an interesting piece of information.
    There are a couple of guys here with something to learn from every now and then.

    Scroll fast down the rest.....

    Like talking in a pub.
    You enjoy your drink, watch the game and speak with guys at your table...tune out the rest.
    Now, I guess the key is to keep one's ego in check, so a bit retrospection is required every now and then.
    All good fun.

    And then next Friday next pub.
    I meant "Internet conversation" place.

    Well, I haven’t read this post of Corvy’s and it may be perfectly reasonable. For those of us who have read Corvy’s offerings in the past or tried to interact politely, though, calling them a troll comes somewhat naturally. Maybe he’s changed, but to me at least and probably others it’s not worth the trouble to find out, not least because “good fun” is part of the reason to be here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    Thank you.

    My take (#9) is that Corvinus is a troll in the correct sense of that term: a commenter who is trying to elicit replies and doesn’t necessarily believe what he says. C is much better than most at leading others to believe they’re in a good faith discussion, and enjoys seeing how long his faux foe will keep swinging.

    My further belief is that C in fact agrees, at least broadly, with people such as KenH. But on this site, Establishmentarian bait catches more fish.

    Finally, C also in this way can mock those in real life that frustrate his efforts to have a bona fide argument.

    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    I've dealt with Corny more than my fair share, and I came to the simple conclusion that one way or the other, he's dishonest.

    I have no problem that he disagrees with me and God knows that I love a good back and forth, especially with a knowledgeable playmate who really could change my thinking, but that's not Corny. Call him what you will, he's not here for an honest discussion, which is kind of the whole point.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. KenH says:

    As a result of outside interference and internal struggles. You’re struggling with cause and effect again.

    Cause and effect has nothing to do with it. You’re struggling with basic logic and reasoning. Again.

    American and European nations do not have “Jewish occupied governments”.

    No, you’re just willfully blind to the facts. http://www.bnaibrith.org/europe1.html

    Jewish power and influence in America is well known and self evident.

    That is all a figment of your imagination.

    No, but white privilege, white racism and white supremacy is a figment of yours.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  34. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Anon
    Well, I haven't read this post of Corvy's and it may be perfectly reasonable. For those of us who have read Corvy's offerings in the past or tried to interact politely, though, calling them a troll comes somewhat naturally. Maybe he's changed, but to me at least and probably others it's not worth the trouble to find out, not least because "good fun" is part of the reason to be here.

    Thank you.

    My take (#9) is that Corvinus is a troll in the correct sense of that term: a commenter who is trying to elicit replies and doesn’t necessarily believe what he says. C is much better than most at leading others to believe they’re in a good faith discussion, and enjoys seeing how long his faux foe will keep swinging.

    My further belief is that C in fact agrees, at least broadly, with people such as KenH. But on this site, Establishmentarian bait catches more fish.

    Finally, C also in this way can mock those in real life that frustrate his efforts to have a bona fide argument.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    finally finally, Corvie is an old fart bored out of his gord, the only books in the place are the hitherto untouched New American Encyclopedia he bought for the kids in the last century, his wife is off playing mah jong with the goils and neglected to stock the 'frig with his fav 6 pack. hence the disgruntlementaciousness.
    , @KenH
    I'm very familiar with Corstinkus and just like toying with him for a little while. He does not argue in good faith and just trolls everyone with the usual SJW talking points and spin. He loves to muddy the discourse with half truths, logical fallacies and outright falsehoods.
    , @Corvinus
    Of course I argue in good faith. I am here to keep you on your toes and offer counter arguments. But if it makes you feel better to call me a troll, then go right ahead. That is the curse of the normie.

    "My further belief is that C in fact agrees, at least broadly, with people such as KenH."

    And you would be decidedly wrong in that assessment.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Once again, Paddy mentions the American trivial numbers of dead through US aggression but no concern for the millions slaughtered in Korea and Vietnam and the hundreds of thousands in Central and South America by the Washington filth.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  36. @The Alarmist
    One man's authoritarianism is another's law-and-order.

    Hey, Pat. The Chinese are occasional aggressors, but for the most part, they are merchants. The biggest complaint of many countries with large overseas Chinese populations is that they dominate local commerce. Look at Singapore, not that they complain, because the overseas Chinese run the place. What if the Chinese goal for all of this is merely more global commerce?

    You should be more worried about the rise of authoritarianism back home and the ever-increasing aggressive posturing and actual attacks overseas to distract from and at the same time justify it.

    Quite true. Many of the Roman historians in the empire stage looked back with horror at the chaos of the Republic, or, certainly, the late Republic. The emperors may not have been great all the time but at least there was order.

    Regarding China, also agreed, where’s the territorial aggression that people talk about. Yeah, China want states around them that understand who’s boss, but compared to the United States, China most definitely minds its own business.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @Simon in London
    The non-whiteness of the Chinese seems to limit the US State Dept's hatred of them, and makes war much less likely. It looks as if the US will continue to focus on undermining and destroying Russia & Europe. And since this is not a vital Chinese interest, the Chinese will let them do it.

    I hate to bring it up because it is tiresome, but does China interest the Jews. It doesn’t seem that influential Jews care much about China, so my guess is that the U.S. won’t get too involved. OTOH, Jews care a lot about Europe and the Middle East, so my guess is that the U.S. will focus a lot of energy and attention on Russia, Eastern Europe and the Middle East.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @anonymous
    Thank you.

    My take (#9) is that Corvinus is a troll in the correct sense of that term: a commenter who is trying to elicit replies and doesn’t necessarily believe what he says. C is much better than most at leading others to believe they’re in a good faith discussion, and enjoys seeing how long his faux foe will keep swinging.

    My further belief is that C in fact agrees, at least broadly, with people such as KenH. But on this site, Establishmentarian bait catches more fish.

    Finally, C also in this way can mock those in real life that frustrate his efforts to have a bona fide argument.

    finally finally, Corvie is an old fart bored out of his gord, the only books in the place are the hitherto untouched New American Encyclopedia he bought for the kids in the last century, his wife is off playing mah jong with the goils and neglected to stock the ‘frig with his fav 6 pack. hence the disgruntlementaciousness.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. @Anon
    Well, I haven't read this post of Corvy's and it may be perfectly reasonable. For those of us who have read Corvy's offerings in the past or tried to interact politely, though, calling them a troll comes somewhat naturally. Maybe he's changed, but to me at least and probably others it's not worth the trouble to find out, not least because "good fun" is part of the reason to be here.

    I’ve dealt with Corny more than my fair share, and I came to the simple conclusion that one way or the other, he’s dishonest.

    I have no problem that he disagrees with me and God knows that I love a good back and forth, especially with a knowledgeable playmate who really could change my thinking, but that’s not Corny. Call him what you will, he’s not here for an honest discussion, which is kind of the whole point.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    In reality, I am being honest in what my perception of the world and how I articulate that perception.
    Now what is other than honest is your insistence that you are willing to "change your thinking". That would require significant deprogramming on your part, as well as admitting that your past line of thinking was rife with confirmation bias and wild generalizations. But if it makes you feel better to call me dishonest, knock yourself out.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. KenH says:
    @anonymous
    Thank you.

    My take (#9) is that Corvinus is a troll in the correct sense of that term: a commenter who is trying to elicit replies and doesn’t necessarily believe what he says. C is much better than most at leading others to believe they’re in a good faith discussion, and enjoys seeing how long his faux foe will keep swinging.

    My further belief is that C in fact agrees, at least broadly, with people such as KenH. But on this site, Establishmentarian bait catches more fish.

    Finally, C also in this way can mock those in real life that frustrate his efforts to have a bona fide argument.

    I’m very familiar with Corstinkus and just like toying with him for a little while. He does not argue in good faith and just trolls everyone with the usual SJW talking points and spin. He loves to muddy the discourse with half truths, logical fallacies and outright falsehoods.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Corvinus says:
    @anonymous
    Thank you.

    My take (#9) is that Corvinus is a troll in the correct sense of that term: a commenter who is trying to elicit replies and doesn’t necessarily believe what he says. C is much better than most at leading others to believe they’re in a good faith discussion, and enjoys seeing how long his faux foe will keep swinging.

    My further belief is that C in fact agrees, at least broadly, with people such as KenH. But on this site, Establishmentarian bait catches more fish.

    Finally, C also in this way can mock those in real life that frustrate his efforts to have a bona fide argument.

    Of course I argue in good faith. I am here to keep you on your toes and offer counter arguments. But if it makes you feel better to call me a troll, then go right ahead. That is the curse of the normie.

    “My further belief is that C in fact agrees, at least broadly, with people such as KenH.”

    And you would be decidedly wrong in that assessment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon

    I am here to keep you on your toes
     
    But if you don't expect to change his thinking, how are you going to do this?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. Corvinus says:
    @Citizen of a Silly Country
    I've dealt with Corny more than my fair share, and I came to the simple conclusion that one way or the other, he's dishonest.

    I have no problem that he disagrees with me and God knows that I love a good back and forth, especially with a knowledgeable playmate who really could change my thinking, but that's not Corny. Call him what you will, he's not here for an honest discussion, which is kind of the whole point.

    In reality, I am being honest in what my perception of the world and how I articulate that perception.
    Now what is other than honest is your insistence that you are willing to “change your thinking”. That would require significant deprogramming on your part, as well as admitting that your past line of thinking was rife with confirmation bias and wild generalizations. But if it makes you feel better to call me dishonest, knock yourself out.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon

    But if it makes you feel better to call me dishonest, knock yourself out.
     
    Evidently it makes you feel better to call CSC dishonest. Why is this?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Corvinus
    In reality, I am being honest in what my perception of the world and how I articulate that perception.
    Now what is other than honest is your insistence that you are willing to "change your thinking". That would require significant deprogramming on your part, as well as admitting that your past line of thinking was rife with confirmation bias and wild generalizations. But if it makes you feel better to call me dishonest, knock yourself out.

    But if it makes you feel better to call me dishonest, knock yourself out.

    Evidently it makes you feel better to call CSC dishonest. Why is this?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Corvinus
    Of course I argue in good faith. I am here to keep you on your toes and offer counter arguments. But if it makes you feel better to call me a troll, then go right ahead. That is the curse of the normie.

    "My further belief is that C in fact agrees, at least broadly, with people such as KenH."

    And you would be decidedly wrong in that assessment.

    I am here to keep you on your toes

    But if you don’t expect to change his thinking, how are you going to do this?

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

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pat Buchanan Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?