The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Patrick Cloutier Archive
“It Will Come to Blood”
What Spain’s Civil War Can Teach America’s Patriots
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Last weekend’s clash in Portland OR was further evidence that the Alt Right, loosely defined, can field force on the streets—a completely new development in recent American politics (Portland Breathes a Sigh of Relief after Weekend Protester Showdown. But Several Questions Persist About Police Tactics| Police cracked down on only one side—the protesters who threw red-stained tampons at officers while chanting, “All cops are bastards!” by Karina Brown and Rachel Monhanan, Williamette Week, June 6, 2017. [This is a real headline!] Which supports Editor Peter Brimelow’s observation, after the Inauguration Day riots, that “it will come to blood.” The lead-up to Spain’s Civil War provides some pointers to our possible future.

Portland Antifa (by which we mean communists and left-anarchists) had already openly threatened to attack ordinary Republican officials, causing Portland authorities to cancel a parade, and a hysterical media campaign directed against the Right after a recent murder caused Portland’s Mayor to call for a suspension of the Alt Right’s First Amendment rights. Not surprisingly, Republican officials had publicly discussed using organized security forces, which Main Stream Media of course characterized as “militias” .[Portland Republican says party should use militia groups after racial attack, by Jason Wilson, The Guardian, May 29, 2017]

At a time when a “comedian” can post a photo of herself beheading the President of the United States, it’s not a stretch to think America is coming apart. David Hines, in his remarkable “Days of Rage” Storify, posited that America is already in a “cold Civil War” and on the brink of violence. Critically, Hines highlighted the role established institutions play in supporting domestic terrorists on the Left. He argued the Left will have at least the initial advantage in organized violence.

That seemed indisputable—until recently. Conservative speakers have been regularly shut down on college campuses through violence, with no punishment for rioters. Antifa openly urge people to join armed gun clubs such as the John Brown Gun Club. [Lemons: Lefties with Guns Ready to Rumble with Right-Wing Militias, Says Arizona Anarchist, by Stephen Lemons, Phoenix New Times, April 5, 2017] Right-wing conferences are the victims of bomb threats The MSM habitually sides against the victims. And when Richard Spencer was attacked (repeatedly) on Inauguration Day, the MSM cheered it on. [Attack on Alt-Right Leader Has Internet Asking: Is It O.K. to Punch a Nazi?, By Liam Stack, NYT, January 21, 2017.] With adoring MM coverage, kid gloves from the authorities and heavy institutional support, Antifa were gaining in confidence and a willingness to use violence—until recently.

This pattern has repeated across centuries. In 200 Years Together, Alexander Solzhenitsyn described how Communist revolutionaries in Tsarist Russia were supported by intellectual circles. Their young leadership often came from the privileged classes, including a significant number of Jews. (Curiously, 200 Years Together, while it is available in French and German, has never been published in English, although bootleg translations circulate on the internet.)

Now, however, there seems to be physical resistance from the American Right. Perhaps the most important case: the “Battle of Berkeley” last month, when a loose alliance of conservatives, “Alt-Lite” free speech supporters and Alt-Right activists fought and beat an Antifa attempt to shut down a demonstration. MSM reports suggest Antifa were generally stunned when patriots fought back.

David Hines urges a “National Divorce” before things get worse. I’d argue a “National Divorce” would simply allow the Left a beachhead from which eventually to secure the entire country. And it is unlikely even to work. It seems more likely there will be a larger-scale conflict and political groups willing to use violence will grow larger and more organized.

One of the most likely models of how the polity could collapse into civil strife: the Spanish Civil War. The September/October 2016 edition of Foreign Affairs, a publication of the Council on Foreign Relations, featured a review by Sebastian Faber of Adam Hochschild’s Spain in Our Hearts: Americans in the Spanish Civil War, 1936-1939, profiling the Abraham Lincoln Brigade (or 15th International Brigade), a pro-Communist force which fought for the Republic as “shock troops.”

Abraham Lincoln BrigadeAs Faber notes, then-mayor of San Francisco Gavin Newsom, now a Democratic gubernatorial contender in California, unveiled a monument to the group in 2008 and proclaimed: “The spirit of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade is a legacy we have inherited.” One can even find praise for the Abraham Lincoln Brigade in the publications of Conservatism Inc.

Many “Lincolns” went on to support Civil Rights and other Left-wing causes. Less publicized, they supported Communism as well. It’s not hard to imagine the Snowflakes in the “John Brown Gun Clubs” of today developing into the “International Brigades” of tomorrow—and receiving similar adoring media coverage.

But what of the Right? If the Spanish Civil War were to serve as a template for a second American Civil War, we should examine the two main rightist paramilitary groups in Spain. They were the Carlists , a monarchist group, whose fighters were known as requetés and considered the most fanatical fighters on the Nationalist side, and the right-wing Falange (= Phalanx). They provided an important source of manpower to the Nationalist Army.

On the eve of the Spanish Civil War, the Falangists numbered about 40,000 men. The Carlists had at least 6,000 men in Pamplona, Navarre and are estimated to have had a minimum of 10,000 men. All day long on the second day of the war, conservative farmers streamed to Pamplona to volunteer for the Carlist forces.

In the first days of the fighting, the Nationalists relied heavily on such militias: regular soldiers were often outnumbered. At the outset, the Carlists secured the region of Navarre. One column of 1,400 men, mostly requetés, marched to Saragossa, to reinforce the army garrison and secure the town.

Falangists contributed to the defense of the town of Oviedo, in Asturias. The soldiers and Falangists withstood a siege for months, until relieved in mid-October, 1936. In Toledo, Falangists contributed at least 200 men to the 1,300-man force defending the Alcázar Fortress, which held out, until relieved by Franco in late September, 1936. In August in the Saragossa region, they had at least 2,000 men. In the advance on Madrid, the Falangists contributed a significant portion of the 20,000 men who attacked the city.

Without these highly-motivated militias, it would have been impossible for the Nationalists to succeed in the war against the Leftist government; the rebellion would have collapsed in its first week.

Similarly, should civil war visit America again, it may come down to locally-organized groups of both Left and Right, as the regular U.S. military will be spread thin (and probably divided).

In the Spanish Civil War, militias organized around political factions and regions. In the United States, it seems likely militias on the Right, like some of those which exist today, would be organized legally or quasi-legally along constitutional lines (either by the state constitution or the U.S. Constitution.) This might even go down to the county level.

Of course, there is one major difference. While the MSM and the government tolerates or even celebrates organized Leftist violence, the hammer is always ready to fall on organized forces of the right. [Posse Interruptus, Chateau Heartiste, May 30, 2017]

On an individual level, Western governments often use “exemplary sentencing”—shockingly draconian punishment—to punish Right-wingers, while shrugging at Leftist thugs.

For that reason, as Hines predicted, if there is a second American Civil War, we can expect most of the casualties in the beginning will be on the conservative side.

Finally, there is one other important point: The Right won the Spanish Civil War. Francisco Franco built a great monument to his victory and eventually Spain, saved from Communism, become a democracy. Yet now, the Spanish Left is actually voting to desecrate his grave in the name of Political Correctness. [It’s shameful for Franco’s victims, Spanish MP’s vote to exhume dictator, by Sam Jones, The Guardian, May 11, 2017]

In the end, war is just politics by other means, as Clausewitz said. All war is a media war.

And the battle is never really over.

Patrick Cloutier is the translator of Raciology (reviewed here) and the author of several books of military history.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
Hide 95 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. jim jones says:

    I see that Catalonia is to vote on independence soon, obviously there are still tensions in Spain:

    • Replies: @Ace
  2. The left in the USA, such as it is, favours gun control. The right believes in “only from my cold dead fingers”. I really don’t know what Cloutier is smoking, although his article does lend some support to the idea that this website overlaps with Stormfront in its readership.

  3. Gringo says:

    Stanley Payne’s book, Spain: a Unique History, discusses the causes of the Spanish Civil War. Guess what: the meme that has been pushed for decades, that “The evil Fascists wouldn’t let the DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED leftist government carry out its program- a program which was carried out in accordance with the law and the Constitution” doesn’t quite cut it.
    One hypothesis is that the Civil War began in 1934, with the Socialist insurrection in Asturias, which cost 1,500 lives. The right was in control of the government at the time. Payne dismisses this, but adds that the Socialist insurrection and its aftermath increased the polarization of Spanish society.
    There is also the Breakdown hypothesis, which focuses on what occurred after the election of a left-wing government in 1936. As Payne considers this important, I will not edit out his points.

    The military rebels who began the conflict at first declared almost unanimously that they were taking violent action not to overthrow the Republic but to save the Republic, since the constitution had become a dead letter, and law and order had broken down. Certainly the breakdown of law and constitutional order that had occurred in Spain was unprecedented in any modern European country in peacetime. Unpunished violation of the law took place in at least fourteen areas.

    1. The electoral victory of the Left was later followed by the greatest strike wave in Spanish history, featuring many labor stoppages, in some cases without practical economic goals but rather seeking direct domination of labor relations and of private property, often accompanied by violence and destruction of property.

    2. Illegal seizures of property, especially in the southern provinces, sometimes legalized ex post facto by the government under the pressure of the revolutionary movements. Manuel Tuñón de Lara has calculated that, between illegal seizures and the acceleration of the agrarian reform, approximately 5 percent of all agrarian property in the country changed hands within five months — not a revolution, but a precipitous change.3

    3. A wave of arson and property destruction, particularly in the south.

    4. In addition to the destruction, numerous seizures of churches and church properties in the south and east and in some other parts of the country.

    5. Closure of Catholic schools, provoking a crisis in education, and in a number of localities forcible suppression of Catholic religious activities as well, accompanied by the expulsion of priests.

    6. Broad extension of censorship, with severe limitation of freedom of expression and of assembly.

    7. Major economic deterioration, which has never been studied in detail, with a severe stock market decline, the flight of capital, and in some southern provinces abandonment of cultivation, since the costs of the harvest would be greater than its market value. Hence several southern Socialist mayors proposed the “penalty of remaining” for proprietors, rather than the penalty of exile.

    8. Many hundreds — indeed several thousand — arbitrary political arrests of members of rightist parties.

    9. Impunity of criminal action for members of Popular Front organizations, who were rarely arrested. Occasionally anarchosyndicalists were detained, since they were not members of the Popular Front.

    10. The politicization of justice through new legislation and policies, in order to facilitate arbitrary political arrests and prosecution, and to place the rightist parties outside the law. In spite of the four violent insurrections of leftist parties against the Republic — which had scant counterpart among the rightist parties — none of their members were charged with illegal action in this regard, since justice had become completely politicized, in keeping with the Popular Front program.

    11. Forcible dissolution of rightist groups, beginning with the Falange in March and the Catholic trade unions in May, and moving toward the CEDA and Renovación Española in July. Illegalizing the rightist organizations was designed to create a virtual political monopoly for the leftist parties, first achieved in the trade union groups.

    12. Falsification of electoral procedures and results, which, according to Alcalá-Zamora, passed through four phases. The first was produced by the series of disorders in various provinces on February 16-19, which destroyed a certain number of ballots, produced repeat voting of dubious legality in several locales, and distorted final registration of the votes. The second phase occurred during the run-off elections two weeks later, when, in the face of physical intimidation, the conservative parties withdrew. The third phase was the arbitrary and partisan actions of the Electoral Comission of the Cortes in the second half of March, almost universally condemned by historians, which arbitrarily reassigned a sizable number of seats from the Right to the Left. The fourth phase was the extreme coercion exerted in the new Cortes elections in Cuenca and Granada at the beginning of May, with the arbitrary detention of rightist candidates and activists and severe restriction of rightist activity, producing completely unilateral elections, taken by the opposition to the government as a signal of the end of democratic voting in Spain.4

    13. Subversion of the security forces through reappointment of revolutionary officers and personnel earlier prosecuted for violent and subversive actions. One of these commanded the illegal police squad that kidnapped Calvo Sotelo. Equally notable was the addition of special “delegados de policía,” normally activists of the Socialist and Communist parties named ad hoc as deputy police, though not regular members of the security forces. This followed the precedent of the Hitler government in appointing violent and subversive SA and SS activists as Hilfspolizei in Germany in 1933, and one of these fired the bullet that killed Calvo Sotelo. It should be noted, however, that this procedure was not followed on a massive and systematic scale, as in Germany.

    14. The growth of political violence, although its extension was very unequal in different parts of the country. Some provinces experienced relative calm, while in others there was widespread violence, especially in some of the capital cities. Estimates by researchers of those killed by political violence within five and a half months range from a low of 300 to a high of 444.5

    The assassination of Calvo Sotelo merits further comment. Guardia de Asalto personnel killed and kidnapped him in response to Falangists killing José Castillo, a Spanish Police Guardia de Asalto (Assault Guard) lieutenant. As José Calvo Sotelo was a member of Parliament and a leading spokesman for the right, his killing was considered an escalation. The government’s not arresting Calvo Sotelo’s killers- even more damning when it all knew that government operatives kidnapped and killed him- is considered the trigger that began the Civil War.

    In any event, all the fourteen points are under the heading of unpunished violations of the law.

    A big problem was that the left in power in 1936 was divided in its agenda- some moderate, some extreme. Which reminds me of the MIR pushing violent land takeovers in Allende’s Chile, while the Communists told the MIR to cool it. In both countries, extremists on the left, instead of advancing the revolution they desired, triggered a rightist reaction.

  4. Franco was Death Squad for the Land Owning Class…same as Pinchet….if they both re-appeared on the American scene they would be murdering the Alt Right to the extent that the Alt Right spoke on behalf of The Historic Native Born White American Working Class.

    At the Battle for Blair Mountain…Franco and Pinochet and their reactionary Death Squadrons would have murdered Bill Blizzard and his Army of Coal Miners….

    • Replies: @Chris Bridges
    , @ia
    , @Ace
  5. Seraphim says:

    “During the Spanish Civil War of 1936–1939, and especially in the early months of the conflict, individual clergymen were executed while entire religious communities were persecuted, leading to a death toll of 13 bishops, 4,172 diocesan priests and seminarians, 2,364 monks and friars and 283 nuns, for a total of 6,832 clerical victims, as part of what is referred to as Spain’s Red Terror”.

    That illustrates the anti-christian animus of the ‘Left’ then and what’s ‘left’ of it today. It is defining for the ‘Left’ in general.

    • Agree: Ace
    • Replies: @Gringo
  6. Civil wars hardly ever are civil.
    In two ways, wars between citizens are barbaric, ferocious, and always foreign countries interfere.
    This was also the case in the USA Civil War.

    The Spanish Civil War was the clash between nationalism and communism, the west, including GB and USA, but mainly Hitler and Mussolini, against Stalin.
    GB sent the plane to the Cape Verdian islands to bring Franco to the Canarian islands, Hitler’s Junckers ferried troops from Morocco to Spain.

    The Syrian civil war of course is war between the west, including Israel, and Russia.

    I do not see a USA civil war, a revolution is possible, what then army and police will do, I do not know.
    Killing one’s own citizens never was easy.

    Civil war in Europe seems far more probabable, in France is has already begun, Muslims against non Muslims.
    In NE Germany a western city has been built, on a military excercise base, to simulate city warfare.

    • Replies: @prusmc
    , @John_G
  7. Che Guava says:

    this website overlaps with Stormfront in its readership

    Well, Mr. Unz also republishes interesting material from Counterpunch, so it is difficult to see how you get that impression.

    I find the reference to US leftists joining the John Brown Gun Club etc. interesting, since they generally are opposing the Second Amendment to the US Constitution, and would certainly be repealing it if they had their way plus the power to do it everywhere in that Union of States.

    So, to me, it is an interesting article, and the stated aim of this site is to present a collection of such.

  8. Solzhenicin as a source. So cool.

  9. @Gringo

    Gerald Brenan, ´The Spanish Labyrinth, an Account of the Social and Political Background of the Spanish Civil War’, Cambridge, 1960

    The analysis begins with Spanish gold in the America’s.

  10. David says:

    I’ve mentioned this before, but I think it’s very interesting that Hitler’s Brownshirts were recruited to stop communists from breaking up his rallies. I don’t know if Hitler would have become what he did otherwise, but having to arm oneself to express oneself seems a dangerous way to begin.

    I recommend this six-part BBC documentary on the Spanish Civil War. It’s informative and a beautiful document in its own right.

    • Replies: @Alden
  11. In addition to saving Spain from the horrors of communism, he also spared Spain the horrors of World War 2 (although Spanish volunteers served admirably on the Eastern front). For these reasons he was clearly the greatest wartime leader.

  12. Anonymous [AKA "RJG"] says:

    I can not believe this piece of garbage-grossly inaccurate-“Spain became a democracy”. Have you lost your mind! Franco won and Spain became a dictatorship idiot. He built a monument to himself where his corpse rots. Did you ever hear of Guernica??????? Google it–I do not place anymore value on this site.

    • Agree: Stephen R. Diamond
    • Replies: @sund
  13. @Uebersetzer

    Excuse me, what is your point, if indeed you have one? Coultier isn’t smoking anything. He provided an accurate statement of both historical fact and the current situation in the United States. Your incredibly naïve statement about the Left wanting gun control displays your limitations. The Communists have always supported gun control – their control of the guns. You are nothing but a Marxist troll. I believe you are confused. Go back to HuffPo or Salon.

    • Replies: @Uebersetzer
  14. @War for Blair Mountain

    Please, either learn to write English or stay off the net. The coal miner disputes at Blair Mountain had nothing to do with what is happening in America today and even less with Franco and the Spanish Civil War. Franco quite properly smashed a leftist conspiracy to destroy Spain. Good God! How anyone in 2017 can defend any Marxist crackpots, like the traitors who Franco fought against, is simply incredible. Does the name Stalin ring a bell? The Communist Bloc? Decades of Communist murder and oppression? Go back to your Wobbly meeting, you retrograde leftie.

  15. @Gringo

    Excellent commentary. Franco’s rebellion was an entirely justified response to a treasonous attempt by leftist fanatics to impose a bizarre pseudo-Marxist regime on Spain. The so-called “Spanish Republic” was nothing but chaos and illegally dressed up as a false government. It is ALWAYS morally and legally correct to oppose any Marxist-inspired actions. Full stop.

    • Replies: @ia
  16. Agent76 says:

    June 16, 2016 Supreme Court Ruling: Police Have No Duty to Protect the General Public

    However, did you know that the government, and specifically law enforcement, does not have any duty to protect the general public? Based on the headline and this information, you might assume this is a new, landmark decision. However, it has long been the court’s stance that, essentially, the American people are responsible for taking case of their own personal safety.

    Aug 7, 2013 Did You Know #1 – The Myth of Police Protection

    Did you know that the police have *NO DUTY* to protect you? In this episode of DYK, we examine the myth of police protection by first looking at the popular view of police, then contrasting it with the cases of Jessica Gonzales and Joe Lozita.

  17. “For that reason, as Hines predicted, if there is a second American Civil War, we can expect most of the casualties in the beginning will be on the conservative side.”

    Let us hope so. If the initial casualties are leftists then the MSM will make sure that the “Martyrs” are glorified, have candlelight vigils for, get constant virtue signaling for years, eventually get a monument (and possible national holiday), and enter the history books to indoctrinate kindergarteners with the glory of the fallen comrades of la révolution. If the initial casualties are rightists, the MSM and the left will be relatively silent because they know they will have lost the “moral high ground”. Even though there is no legitimate morality on the left.

  18. @Chris Bridges

    The Spanish Peasants had very good reasons to revolt against the Oligarchs in Spain. The Battle for Blair Mountain is very relevant to the issue of Oligarch rule in the US in 2017.

    You use the terms like “Marxist” and “Communist” that renders these terms analytically useless.

    Franco was a hit man for the Land Owning Oligarchs in Spain. And he used a North African Rape-Pillage and Plunder Mohammadan Rape Army to attack The Spanish Working Class….To quote Franco’s recruitment pitch the the North African Muzzies “WE ARE ALL SPANISH!!!”…Diversity is a Blessing 1930’s Fascist Spain version…

    The Nazis and Franco were enablers of The Muslims. I fully support the complete destruction of the Nazi War Machine by Stalin’s Army…no f…..g apologies.

    No one should have any doubt that Anne Coulter’s late father Mining Company Death Squad Organizer John Coulter would have enthusiastically employed the likes of Franco and Pinochet to use Death Squadron Violence against the striking coal miners

    There is a lot more I can say…but I wait for your Alt Right twerp-that-you-are response….

  19. @Chris Bridges

    I am from the UK, so I do make certain assumptions about Americans which may not be well-founded. i.e. that a lot of the gun enthusiasts are potential Charles Whitmans and politically of the right as well. However, going from the Internet I don’t see Trots in America, not very numerous anyway. walking around with guns, it tends to be people who think the Democratic National Convention is the Comintern – ie. very, very right-wing indeed.
    Do tell me right-wing people in America think the M-16 is a highway. Allay my prejudices 🙂

    • Replies: @Ace
  20. @Che Guava

    Well, since I’ve just been called a “Marxist troll” and someone earlier suggested I was a Jew, I think you can see why I might have concerns on this site, and the Stormfront comparisons do not seem an exaggeration.

    • Replies: @Che Guava
  21. Franco was an able general and a clever political tactician, but that’s about it. His big mistake was to adopt Chicago-school neoliberalism, auctioning off his country to (mostly) foreign investors. Sadly, everything else he claimed to fight for–patriotism and Christianity–is now just as dead in Spain as it is everywhere else in western Europe. The only part of his legacy that yet lives is neoliberalism, which is a huge part of the reason why Franco and the Falangistas have such an image problem in contemporary Spain: people associated him with low wages and high rents.

    Moral of the story: if the alt-right ever takes power, they should ditch neoliberalism and embrace national socialism.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
  22. Antifa is composed of anti-white-Christian victim cult groups who the federal government labels diversity.

    Victim cult civil rights are really illicit federal entitlements that the federal government labels inclusiveness.

    If the US constitution were enforced as it is written, particularly the 9th and 10th amendments, Antifa would be suppressed by law.

    Antifa are not anarchist, they are totalitarian Bolsheviks trying to impose victim cult supremacy onto the US.

    For example, feminist victim cultists who are supposedly oppressed by men currently receive the following illicit federal entitlements:


    1. Affirmative Action for women
    2. Generous 8A government set-aside business contracts for female owned businesses
    3. No required military service or selective service for women
    4. Government anti-discrimination laws for women
    5. Title VII and Title IX laws for women
    6. Rape shield laws protect female liars in court
    7. Generous government benefits for single mothers
    8. Men get screwed in child custody cases
    9. Taxpayer financed Abortion on demand
    10. Government sponsored homeless and rehab shelters for women
    11. All health insurance policies require universal coverage for female-specific problems
    12. Ridiculous feminine political correctness studies and speech codes in public colleges and universities and government offices
    13. National Women’s history month
    14. Sexual harassment laws for women
    15. Special Violence against Women Laws
    16. Most cushy government jobs employ women
    17. Equal Pay Act of 1963 for women
    18. Lowered physical standards by law for female policemen and firemen and soldier
    19. Female-only institutions allowed by law, male-only institutions outlawed
    20. Battered woman defense allowed in first degree murder court cases
    21. Hate speech laws protecting women and other federal protected class groups
    22. Women are a majority of voters in a totalitarian democracy
    23. Men pay 96% of all alimony, women pay 4%
    24. Paycheck Fairness Act
    25. Paid family and maternity leave for women
    26. Single Payer Health Insurance for Women and Children
    27. Living Wage for women, increased federal minimum wage
    28. Enhanced Social Security benefits for women with children
    29. Federal Health Insurance for illegal alien women
    30. Federal Funding for Planned Parenthood
    31. Mandatory universal health insurance plan coverage for women’s issues, including affordable contraception, preventive care, child care, and safe and legal abortion
    32. Foreign wars and intrigues to promote female entitlements across the globe
    33. Special federal and state monitoring and enforcement of laws prohibiting violence against women
    34. Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
    35. 98% of homeless are men

    • Replies: @ia
  23. Che Guava says:

    Do not worry, those people were likely just reacting to your words.

    Heat kitchen etc.

    Anybody posting here knows that our host is of jewish descent, and is the strong supporter of free speech, you may check his long-running series on suppressed US history.

    I was knowing many before, but also, many that are new to me.

  24. The revolt against Democratic Party genocidal race-replacement post-1965 Immigration Policy can not commence unless NBA-NFL Negro ball is turned off forever…..and ever…….

    How bad is the situation?…Google a photo of any engineering department in India….then google a photo of engineering departments in the US….you can’t yell which country is which by a photo comparison….But some imbeciles on the Alt Right…Richard Spencer and Paul Kersey….want to have endless-mind-numbing-the-eyes-glaze-over-discussions and debates about IQ test score psychometrics….thereby, forever and ever, never getting around to exposing the role that Hindu “Americans” are playing in the Democratic Party’s open and deliberate policy of cleansing America of Native Born White American Males in the Engineering fields….and some of these Hindu “Americans” are members of a well known Hindu Fascist Party and they are Trump voters and donors to Trump’s 2016 POTUS campaign…

    • Replies: @rw95
    , @ia
    , @joef
  25. Miro23 says:

    [Long comment warning]

    I think that this article is relevant, and like another commenter said, Stanley Payne is a good source. His book “The Spanish Civil War” looked at the whole conflict from start to finish and comes to some interesting conclusions.

    His view is that;

    “Electoral democracy had obviously come to an end well before the beginning of the civil war, which may be seen as a consequence, certainly not the cause, of this breakdown”

    And he expanded on it;

    “Conditions in Spain between February and July 1936, which eventually produced the civil war, were unique in the history of 20th century European States in peacetime, for nowhere else did a parliamentary government preside over an equivalent breakdown of law and order without the stress of external crisis. The elections had been won, however dubiously by an alliance of the moderate left and the revolutionaries. Because the latter refused to participate in any but a revolutionary regime, the new government was formed by a minority coalition of left Republicans, led by Azaña.”

    And he explains its disfunctionality;

    “Even though the authority of this government steadily declined, it would remain the key actor for the next 5 months, with responsibility for guiding the country and avoiding breakdown or civil war. It failed to meet these responsibilities because its priorities were, first, to maintain an exclusively all leftist government that rejected any compromise with the centre of moderate right and, second, to avoid any break with the revolutionaries because their support was necessary to remain in power. The Republic’s first historian, the noted Catalan journalist Josep Pla, termed the strategy Azaña’s “ideological Kerenskyism” referring to the Russian prime minister who fell to the Bolsheviks.”

    It’s clear that the traditional right was on the defensive.

    P38. The mass illegal occupation of land in Badajoz by 60.000 farm workers legalized by the government.

    P39. Government inaction while Catholic schools were closed, taken over or burned down.

    All cheered on by the Communist press.

    P39. Naming revolutionary militants as auxiliary police.

    P 43. “Azaña acknowledged an increase in violence and disorder but glossed over it by arguing that violence was ‘deeply rooted in the Spanish character’ …. as though the government had little or no responsibility to enforce the law.”

    And the editor of Barcelona’s “La Vanguardia” wrote 12th June 1936:


    “Fascism is, in the case of France and Spain, the sinister shadow projected across the land by Democracy itself, when its internal decomposition turns to anarchy. The more the rot spreads, the more fascism expands.”

    Payne catches the idea that the left absolutely saw Bolshevism as the irresistible wave of the future.

    Like he said, “A fundamental mistake of all the left, was their total scorn for the right, which they judged to have been rendered impotent by historical change. They devoutly held this belief, and only found out how inaccurate it was when it became too late (for them).”

    The centrist Miguel Maura wrote about it in a series of articles in the Madrid daily “El Sol” between June 18th and 27th:

    “… Jacobin committees of the Popular Front, whose disorders and excesses are legalized by the mayors and specially appointed presidents of provisional boards, a veritable Bolshevist plague that is devastating the country. Peaceful citizens live with the sensation that laws are a dead letter and that arson, assaults, destruction of property, insults, murders and aggressions against the armed forces no longer count in the penal code for those who wear a red and blue shirt (United Socialist Youth) or the insignia of the hammer and sickle. The clenched fist is safe conduct and talisman for the greatest excesses”.

    And towards the end,

    “The second (round of violence) was that of a thirty-year-old retired infantry officer, either a member or a sympathizer of the Falange, who had been kidnapped and stabbed thirty-three times. The government responded as usual, not with a vigorous search for the perpetrators, but with the further arrests of Falangists, as though they were responsible for killing their own members and sympathizers.”

    The right opposition finally gelled with the kidnap and murder of rightist parliamentarian Calvo-Sotelo, leading Spain’s elite troops in Spanish Morocco to opt for rebellion, although not the navy or about half the mainland based military and security forces (Civil Guard, Assault Guards and police) who supported the left and crushed the revolt in places like Madrid and Barcelona.

    Payne writes about the reaction of the leftists to the rebellion:

    “A minority of the braver and more idealistic leftists formed militia units to combat the rebels, but most devoted themselves to seizing control of economic affairs and indulging in an orgy of arrests, attacks on churches, murders en masse, arson and pillage in general.”

    And the reaction of much of the Spanish population:

    “… while the horrors of the violent revolution on the march swung the sympathies of most of the middle and lower middle classes, and nearly all Catholic society, to the side of the insurgents, giving them mass support in some parts of the country.”

    And as Franco’s insurgency gained power his forces closed in on Madrid:

    “… the Communists, Socialist and anarchists who controlled the Junta agreed on the ‘immediate execution’ of all ‘fascist and dangerous elements’ among the prisoners, without even a summary trial and by mass Soviet style executions.” Prisoners were taken on one way bus journeys to killing sites such as Paracuellos de Jarama outside the capital to be added to mounds of unburied dead around half dug pits (detailed account in Julius Ruiz’s “The Red Terror and the Spanish Civil War”

    There was also the propaganda war:

    “The left sought desperately to hide the revolution and breakdown of democracy in 1936, insisting that the Republican cause represented a legitimate and democratically elected state faced by a fascist insurrection and foreign invasion. This was wrapped in the banner of freedom and enlightenment.” – and largely accepted by the leftist international press.

    “He (John Dos Pasos) rallied to the Republic and was also much sought after by the Comintern, but when he travelled to Spain in 1937, was shaken to find that his closest Spanish friend, the literature professor, José Robles, had apparently been liquidated by the Communists, despite service to the Republican cause. ….. The experience marked the beginning of a profound political change.and in later years Dos Pasos veered to the right, becoming a vociferous anti-Communist.”

    Also, 3.000 other Americans wandered into this mess to heroically fight for the Bolsheviks ( International 5th Brigade) and have been lauded by the American left ever since.

    On the military side:

    By the second half of 1937 “Franco’s army had achieved approximate numerical parity and was better equipped and led”. “…. the Republicans never succeeded in developing adequate junior officers and NCO’s, which remained a key weakness.” and they didn’t help the situation by attacking military officers on their own side. For example, “about half of all naval officers in the Republican zone were killed by the left in the first 6 months, which left their ships without leadership, a problem that handicapped the Republican navy throughout the conflict”.

  26. nebulafox says:
    @Seamus Padraig

    Pinochet did the same thing with the Chicago Boys, the result being that Chilean society became uber-polarized between the have and have-nots. When you look at the forerunner of the Reagan Revolution and neoliberalism, it isn’t Thatcher’s Britain that was the prototype model-it was Pinochet’s Chile. Meanwhile, the protectionist, “selectively capitalist” economies of the Asian Tigers, obeying the call of Friedrich List rather than Adam Smith, boomed.

    There’s a reason that it is called *classical liberal economics*. Actual conservatives-De Gaulle, Eisenhower, A. Hamilton, Bismarck, Disraeli, Theodore Roosevelt-would have a hard time recognizing what the modern GOP calls “conservative”, in foreign policy especially, but also in economics. Unfettered free markets and social justice warrior types go hand and hand, when you think about it, as do economic nationalism and protectionism. The Republican Party can’t figure this out: billionaires obey whatever lets them earn more money, thus they will always be more loyal to their class than their nation, and now more than ever, given this globalized world. Thus, the newer generation of rightists would be very wise to develop a populist economic bent and explicitly split with the free-market fetishizing crony capitalism of the GOP-this could be the key factor that allows for more appeal among younger Americans. But this has to be one of the leading features, not a side point.

    One aside, not really related since I’m still thinking about Indonesia from another thread: though Indonesia’s Berkeley Mafia, responsible for that country’s economic miracle, is often compared to the Chicago Boys, the two groups were really quite different. The Indonesians were a lot less ideological-Ataturk, FDR, Japanese corporatism, Soviet Five Year Plans, Thatcher, they cheerfully borrowed from them all, never mind consistency-and Suharto kept them under tight control in a way Pinochet didn’t. Then again, Chile was (and is) a Western nation in every since of the word, with a long history of democracy and reasonable development before 1973. Whereas 1960s Indonesia was one of the poorest, most strife ridden societies on Earth, ridden with any number of social/communal and economic ills, on the verge of famine-and that was before the ’65/’66 killings started.

    • Replies: @Ace
    , @Seamus Padraig
  27. rw95 says:
    @War for Blair Mountain

    Aren’t you of Irish descent?

    You know you have to go back, right?

  28. @Che Guava

    I find the reference to US leftists joining the John Brown Gun Club etc. interesting, since they generally are opposing the Second Amendment to the US Constitution, and would certainly be repealing it if they had their way plus the power to do it everywhere in that Union of States.

    I think the leftists are pretty sure in their minds that the US Constitution is wrong and only “the right people” should own guns. They are pretty sure that they are “the right people”.

    Like your namesake (hopefully a satire), they (Commies everywhere) all have the same need for violence in their hearts for those who don’t agree with their plans to make everything fair.

    • Agree: Che Guava
    • Replies: @ia
    , @Che Guava
  29. @rw95

    There is no golden rule in immigration policy…and…you….know that very well. I reckon that you be a Hindu “American” who will flush the golden rule down the toilet as soon as your racial kind have managed to vote The Historic Native Born White American Working Class into a violently persecuted racial minority in post-white toilet “American”…

    Why would you even ask me that question since it’s obvious that I am not a White Liberal…

    • Replies: @rw95
  30. Gringo says:

    The Spanish Civil War was a savage killing ground. The killings continued after the Civil War was declared over. Consensus is that the right killed more civilians than the left. However, the left’s killing priests and Barcelona anarchists (who were on the left) – recall Orwell’s Homage to Catalonia- indicates that both sides had bloody hands. And if the left had won, considering the way that Stalin’s people were already directing murders, such as the murders of the anarchists in Barcelona, there is no telling how many the left would have killed had it won. I doubt the number would have been considered trivial.

    I once read that a member of the losing side said there was so much bitterness over the civil war that the country needed the decades-long cooling off period that Franco’s dictatorship provided.

    When I was in high school in the ’60s, my Spanish class had a debate on what would happen to Spain after Franco. As I did the research for my side- debating that democracy would return- I learned more about the Spanish Civil War and its aftermath than the average high schooler in the US. At the time I had not yet read Orwell’s Homage to Catalonia.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @nebulafox
  31. ia says:
    @War for Blair Mountain

    A pox on both your houses (you and Bridges). Neither of you get what’s going on. The current cold but getting hot war isn’t about right or left. That’s just code.

  32. ia says:
    @Chris Bridges

    You remind me of Democrats screaming Nazi at alt-right. I doubt most Dems and antifas have even heard of Marx.

    • Replies: @Stonehands
  33. ia says:
    @Joe Franklin

    Antifa are not anarchist, they are totalitarian Bolsheviks trying to impose victim cult supremacy onto the US.

    I like everything you say except this. We already have feminist victim-cult supremacy which you then correctly list all the ways. They’ve already won. Antifa is supposed to tamp down heresy. They can’t be Bosheviks because Bolsheviks weren’t feminists. Modernists and libertines horrified communists as bourgeois decadence.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  34. ia says:
    @War for Blair Mountain

    Spencer’s not much interested in IQ. I think you’re getting him mixed up with Steve Sailer.

  35. ia says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    and only “the right people” should own guns

    This is an interesting point. The Democrats and feminists are now talking “toxic masculinity.” So, if they start looking like goons and thugs they get very uncomfortable. Can they take that leap? Richard Spencer is beginning to gain some sympathy from Washington Post readers after being driven out of a gym. Feminist selling point from day one is how they are more peaceful than men. Their preferred method is seduction, persuasion, human rights shaming – like slandering white men who want to look out for their own interests as Nazis, and so forth. They rely on a culture of spoiled, pampered babies terrified of driving without seatbelts.

    The 60s radicals actually were more masculine and chance-taking than today’s crop. And the Spanish Civil War was on another order of magnitude more masculine.

    • Replies: @joef
  36. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    The bitterness predated the war; Gil Robles, who is the person who would know best, published a book long after titled “No fue posible la paz“. The left killed a lot more than just “priests and anarchists” — the anarchists being (obviously and as you mention) leftists themselves and among the worst killers, especially early in the war; I quite believe they killed fewer people overall, but, of course, as you say, this is due to their acquiring practically no new territory after July ’36. And many of the rightist killings were of course “revenge” (judicial or otherwise) for leftist killings and other offences in newly reconquered territory. The “member of the losing side” was probably right.

    It should also be remembered that from the liberation of France to about 1950 there was a leftist guerilla waged in Spain with France as an external base that cost another few thousand lives.

  37. @Sergey Krieger

    “Solzhenicin.” It would be handy if there were some sort of name-spell check. I stumble over foreign names as I write and though it’s usually short work to find the correct spelling, it does break up my train of thought. Anyone know of such a utility?

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  38. joef says:

    Radical Leftist (SJW) have caused much mischief in this nation for the last fifty years. The major negative results are economic decline (mostly caused by unserviceable debt in order to pay for the failed concept of having a free lunch), and racial polarization with African Americans. This racial balkanization has given cover for a violent crime problem where African Americans kill more of their fellow national residents than any other group, including terrorist (we suffer from more homicides every year than from 09/11 itself).

    The SJW delights in this because they believe that African Americans (who were ruined by New Left policies) will be their personal army against “White America”. Of course not being very street smart they naively neglect a few facts, mainly that most:
    – – African American criminals like easy targets that do not fight back;
    – – African Americans, who are inclined toward anti white behavior, do not make distinctions between whites, nor any other racial group (where liberals mistakenly believe that they will be recognized as the “good white people”);
    – – African Americans have been so firmly inculcated with the concept of a free lunch that they no longer know how to be productive, chronically complaining about not getting enough (no matter how much we give), and as a result are not generally self sufficient.

    SJW themselves only use force when they have an advantage, and then cry foul when it is used against them (they hate it when their opponents hit back). Most are not hunters, were never in the military, and never had to deal with growing up in a rough inner city neighborhood where violence is almost routine (if somebody did not go to hospital, it wasn’t real violence, thus school yard fights don’t count etc).

    And finally, most SJW are antigun (or do not know how to handle a gun effectively). To counteract the armed populace, the SJW believes that they have the force of government behind them. That is true in regards to politicians, and deep state bureaucrats; however, they are not exactly looked upon fondly by most military personnel, urban city ghetto cops, correction officers, and old school retired police officers. The only thing that prevents their elimination is that the police (that they hate) are made to protect them.

    The only exception to this is that many contemporary federal leo, suburban police, careerist military officers, and troopers, are true believers in our current dysfunctional system (and attempt to ostracize the ones who are not). Their leaders have degraded current policing into glorified government revenue collectors (traffic ticket quotas and civil forfeitures against legit working people) as opposed to deterring violent crime. Unfortunately every time a suburban police dept hands out an excessive amount of frivolous traffic tickets, it also reflects poorly on the city cops who primarily deal with extreme urban ghetto violence (and when city cops finally stand down, it is the city residents, including the ghetto working poor, who suffer the most).

    This economic decline, and social racial balkanization cannot endure indefinitely without spilling over into some type of major disorder. Even though the SJW fantasize about a civil war (race war), that will eliminate their political opposition, it will prove to be their own undoing. The worst thing that can happen to the SJW is a revolution that leads to a failed state condition, without the rule of law, where they lose their protection. Once this happens, the soft SJW will be eliminated by those who had enough of there destructive social/economic meddling. Maybe then we can return to normalcy (we did not ask for this; it is the SJW who pushed for this outcome).

  39. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Stormfront’s readership also overlaps that of (Jewish paper ) The Forward. What’s your point?

    Both William Pierce and Harold Covington had subscriptions FWIW.

  40. @ia

    The IQ psychometric jibber jabber just sidetracks away from a laser beam focus on the role of Asian “Americans” in the genocidal extermination of Native Born White American Males in Engineering and Medicine….Trying doing this to the Hindus in India…there would be race riots…

    • Replies: @ia
  41. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    We already have feminist victim-cult supremacy

    You kidding?

    Do you really think that is what the conflict is over?

    You really think the US is being destroyed by a bunch, unpleasant female misfits, rather than by the the media, the pornographers, Hollywood, a bought Congress, and the Council on Foreign Relations, all under the direction of the Money Power intent on the destruction of the sovereign, democratic nation state, the genocide of the European peoples, and the institution of global governance by the Money Power?

    • Replies: @ia
  42. ia says:

    I think things got out of hand. It snowballed and got out of control in the 60s. But, yeah, we live in a thoroughly feminized society. Probably, the ball got rolling in the 18th century with total dominance of other races, which begat human rights by self-proclaimed “intellectuals” and status marking aristos like Lord Sandwich, Captain Cook’s patron, who “adopted” one Omai, a south sea islander brought back as a kind of pet.

  43. ia says:
    @War for Blair Mountain

    Foreigners can’t even own property in India. I will say this though, the best dentist I’ve ever had was in New Delhi. He was an artist. Western dentists rely way too much on machinery and technology.

  44. rw95 says:
    @War for Blair Mountain

    You are not an Anglo-Saxon. Therefore you are not an American. Therefore you have to go back.

    I may be leaving, but you won’t be long in following me when and if the mass deportations take place.

  45. prusmc says:
    @jilles dykstra

    It is clear from the antics of Reality Winner TS/SCI that we can anticipate the members of the current Armed Forces either to sit on their hands or enthusiastically embrace the left multi-cultural establishment concerns. True the USAF of which Ms Winner is still a member (reserve) is the most ideologically indoctrinated of the Armed Forces but one can not expect any help for patriot causes anywhere. During the 60’s the police forces were disgusted with the left wing outrages. Not true today when the are armed like Marines taking Faluja but led by politically savy chiefs and higher level officials. Plus there is profitable loot in civil forfieture from property owning people who might oppose the anti-fa media favorites. There was some actual militia sentiment during the early 90’s in Montana and other rural areas but the killing of Randy Weavers wife by the FBI at Ruby Ridge and Janet Reno and ATFE incinerating a compound of bizarre religous outcasts at Waco made it clear that it would result in fatal and sure vengence to raise the specter of anything other than left-leaning dissent. The recent trial and amazing acquital of the wild life refugee occupiers in Oregon is just an fluke; there were two undercover FBI agent-provacatours for each person arrested and one leader was killed in what if he had been a minority been a world-class suspicious justified homicide. There is no potential Francisco Franco in this country but plenty of Beria wannabes.9

  46. Seraphim says:
    @Sergey Krieger

    The new style of discrediting Solzhenitsyn is amusing. Cool.

  47. ia says:

    Best to retake centers of power by stealth over the long term.

  48. Che Guava says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Of coursd my uname is parodic, but I have read Guevara.

    I am amused by new poster Joe Stalin’s eponym,

    Unlike Ernesto, Josef was a serious person.

    For new posters, we could have a whole menagerie.

    Fidel Castrato. Vlad the Impaler Lenin. Hairy Swamp of the East (literal translation of Mao’s nom de guerre).

    I’d use a couple of those myself, but one thing the mods here are strict about, fixed uname or anon.

    Although Priss got away with it for a few weeks last summer(^_^).

    • Replies: @Che Guava
  49. Alden says:

    I would not believe a word of any BBC documentary. I’m sure it’s anti Franco and pro communist.

  50. Alden says:

    Absolutely right. No revolution including the American Revolution against the British has ever happened unless backed by some faction of the elite.

    In America all the elites are against White Americans.

  51. @rw95

    Who do you think is gonna be doing the deportin’ ,me boyo?

    • Replies: @rw95
  52. @prusmc

    The American military has its own commissars to ensure ideological purity, much like the old Red Army did, no doubt.

    • Replies: @joef
  53. Ace says:
    @jim jones

    Simple-minded graffiti is ubiquitous and some of the coherent stuff is right out of the 30s – yay syndicalism, boo corporate blood suckers.

    Monument in Madrid to commie labor pukes.

    Lots of people not with the program, I think.

  54. Ace says:
    @War for Blair Mountain

    For some reason, Pinochet disapproved of being ambushed by commie scum armed by Castro. He went after the commies in a way that they​ found very unpleasant. They got a taste of their own medicine.

    God bless Pinochet.

  55. Ace says:

    You read too many comic books. Charles Whitmans? Jesus, get a grip.

  56. Ace says:

    “Free-market fetishizing crony capitalism of the GOP” makes no sense​. Crony capitalists do not want free markets. They want insider deals with their government partners.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
  57. @nebulafox

    Could not agree more! Protectionism, nationalism and a certain degree of economic solidarity do indeed go together. Nationalism should be more than just symbology, more than just a lot of flag-waving.

    The Republican Party can’t figure this out: billionaires obey whatever lets them earn more money, thus they will always be more loyal to their class than their nation, and now more than ever, given this globalized world.

    Well, they’re paid not to figure it out. As Upton Sinclair once said, “It is very difficult to get a man to see your point when his salary depends upon not seeing it.”

  58. DanCT says:

    The intentions of the Left in America today are as homicidal as those of their predecessors in revolutionary France or Russia. As Conrad pointed out a century ago, all the rest is empty talk masking their lust for homicidal vengeance against their betters. If this isn’t clear from their apoplectic calls to exterminate white men of European ancestry, nothing is.

  59. rw95 says:
    @Father O'Hara

    The old stock Anglo-Saxon/Scots-Irish (who are not the ethnic Irish)/Dutch Americans who are actually descended from the founding fathers, and who are the “posterity” mentioned in the Constitution.

    On the bright side, Ireland has become quite civilized in the last few decades. It shouldn’t be too rough an existence.

    You better hope the multinational corporations don’t leave, though.

  60. RCon says:

    Here’s the thing, history shows that currently 99% of ‘terrorism’ domestically in the USA as well as abroad is by Right Wingers. And I’m being generous with the 1%. That glaring inaccuracy, (not to mention the Wingnut demonification of the ‘Other Side’) completely invalidates what looks to be an important observation. I believe that America’s so called ‘conservatives’ control all the houses of state as well as most of the Governorships, yet we’re on the cusp of a Left Wing Takover? Sheesh – take a tranquilizer.

  61. nebulafox says:

    In the sense of “lucrative insider deals for my donors, Randism for the rest of you”.

  62. @RCon

    Here’s the thing, history shows that currently 99% of ‘terrorism’ domestically in the USA as well as abroad is by Right Wingers.

    That is the stupidest thing I’ve read on unz, yet. I mean, the power couple Tiny Duck/Truth are just doing parody, but I’m STILL counting them to give a new commenter a break. Peak Stupidity is not here yet, I guess.

    I’m learning a lot from the back-and-forth arguments of some of the bright people on here about the Spanish Civil War and will get a book out from the library, as recommended. As far as American goes, I’ve been keeping up with the political stuff for 40 years. I don’t like this serious hard-core stupidity displayed by you, RCon – it ruins the unz experience for me. Stop, before you sprain a brain-muscle.

  63. nebulafox says:

    Thanks, Seamus!

    >”Well, they’re paid not to figure it out. As Upton Sinclair once said, “It is very difficult to get a man to see your point when his salary depends upon not seeing it.”

    There certainly is a level of this-what else can explain someone like Betsy DeVos being confirmed?-but on the other hand, you do see a fair amount of true belief among the Rubio and Cruz types. Granted, if your formative experiences were the hothouse years of GDP growth in the Reagan and Clinton years and you are currently a member of the right-wing of the upper-middle class (which boomed tremendously during the Obama years), it isn’t too much of a wonder why you’d favor free market ideology. Especially if you came from a more humble background, if you aren’t inquisitive enough (and most people aren’t), you’d think it always works that way. It worked out well for you, if not necessarily your children.

    But all that aside, the basic fact is that even Ronald Reagan wasn’t “a true conservative” in the sense that McConnell defines it, if you look at his protectionist moves with Japanese auto importers and his refusal to touch Social Security. (Not to mention that the Gipper would be appalled to see the trigger-happy interventionism of the GOP being attributed to him, given his own minimally (pinprick) interventionist policies in the 1980s.) Unfortunately, because of Obama-era Democratic political ineptitude, Republicans now dominate the whole government and are one state legislature away from the 75% majority they need to amend the Constitution, so there is little chance you’ll see an objective evaluation of ideology among the GOP Bonzen.

    >In 200 Years Together, Alexander Solzhenitsyn described how Communist revolutionaries in Tsarist Russia were supported by intellectual circles. Their young leadership often came from the privileged classes, including a significant number of Jews.

    I fail to understand the controversy of this statement-Winston Churchill was willing to state this basic reality as early as the early 1920s. It isn’t anti-Semitic to say so. Many Jews in the Russian Empire (generally speaking, a highly brainy, intellectual bunch that you don’t want to alienate too much) became Bolsheviks because the Tsars were dumb enough to oppress their people. In an era of nationalism which Jews were understandably leery of given their historical experiences, among other reasons, internationalistic left-wing movements generally appealed. (As did, for some, Zionism. Less of a contradiction than you might think, even after it became clear in the early ’50s that the USSR had become quite anti-Semitic and it became clear where Israel would have to go for the Cold War. Until the demographic fueled Likud victories of 1977, Israel was dominated by Ashkenazi Labour politics with heavy socialistic overtones.) If I were your average middle class Jewish intellectual in Russia in 1905, I probably would have been quite attracted to Bolshevism too.

    Unfortunately for them, many of the Jewish Old Bolsheviks, however intelligent they were, made the fatal mistake of underestimating a certain Georgian former bandit advancing through the bureaucracy, dismissing him as an uncultured lout who couldn’t possibly fit into Lenin’s shoes. They got subsequently nailed disproportionately during the purges. The second generation of leaders very seldom come from the revolutionaries, they come from the practical men who followed. (Many Nazis would make a very similar mistake in dismissing Martin Bormann-a similar personality type and even something of an regime analogue ideologically. I suspect the two would have gotten along smashingly over drinks-as just a crude, plodding backroom man over a decade later.)

    Stalin really changed the USSR into a far more traditionally Muscovite place in terms of practical thinking-“socialism in one country”, et all. The USSR under Stalin gave lip service to Leninist ideals and was smart enough to see the use of having a literate populace, unlike the Tsars, but was actually a quite socially conservative place in many regards. At the height of WWII, Stalin was smart enough to co-opt the Orthodox Church and Slavophilic nationalistic themes (far more emotionally resonant for average Russians in the fight against the Teutons than Marx and Engels) into the fight for the Motherland. Most significantly, the Cheka, initially dominated by Jewish intellectuals focused on world revolution and liberation of the workers, became the ethnic Russian dominated NKVD, which might have had a different ideology, but had many (albeit they were *far* more vicious) psychological similarities to the Okhrana in practice. It also became heavily anti-Semitic by the late 1940s, especially (again) within the secret police.

  64. nebulafox says:

    >The Spanish Civil War was a savage killing ground.

    Wasn’t it? I know very little about Spain, but my brother spent a semester there, and he told me that the Spanish Civil War was incredibly vicious, even on civil war standards. Why was it, beyond the usual nasty civil war reasons? Did Spain’s pre-war social structure-I’d imagine the heavy influence of the Catholic Church, etc-exacerbate it.

    >I once read that a member of the losing side said there was so much bitterness over the civil war that the country needed the decades-long cooling off period that Franco’s dictatorship provided.

    Nasty, vicious civil wars tend to do that. Just look at what happened after the Russian and Chinese Civil Wars. (Aside: our intervention in Russia after WWI, which few people remember, might have helped preserve the Bolshevik regime, far from replacing it as intended. They never learn.)

    Speaking from a civil war that had the opposite result, you wear Communist memorabilia in Little Saigons in the US at your peril. RVN flags still regularly hang everywhere. In Vietnam itself, for older people, there are still some tensions and visible differences between Northerners and Southerners. Strangely enough, however, there is no animosity toward Americans (or toward South Koreans, Australians, et all), who are viewed as simply the last in a long line of foreign interventionists who strayed into Vietnam. Nowadays, the Vietnamese government is far more interested in cultivating friendly relations with the US as a counterweight to China (the age old nemesis) than revisiting the past: they are even discussing opening up Cam Ranh Bay in the South to the US Navy. That’s historical irony for you. Granted, Vietnam is also extremely lucky in the sense that it is a much younger country: 2/3s of the populace was born after 1975, and like their Chinese counterparts, they are far more interested in enjoying an increasingly prosperous life under a Western economic model than revisiting the past.

  65. joef says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    The American military has its own commissars to ensure ideological purity

    That is also true for city police departments, and corporations. The main goal of the Republican Party is to promote the vitality of Corporate America. If appealing to political correctness can get corporations good MSM press, to increased profits, they will promote that agenda even more vigorously than the statist in our government (and academia).

    Thus, the Republican party will treat the rest of us as expendable to that cause, and use war talk to distract us from our domestic problems of bad economics and racial balkanization with the whitey hating Afro Americans.

    The corporatist Republicans have become just as much the enemy to the people, that they are suppose to serve, as the statist Democrats. And that is why they will standby and give tacit approval to the Democrats that try to eliminate Trump. It is not so much Trump the man they fear as much as the interest of the voters he represents.

    Big govt socialism has joined forces with big business corporatism, and globalism is their agenda. In return they will make us under employed consumers buying globalized junk from Walmart, while they call us racist.

  66. @Ace

    Allende won the election fair-and-square…Kissinger went into violent temper tantrum..organized the coup that resulted in the murder of Allende. Pinochet….very good relations Israel afterwards….

    In 2017…Kissinger advises the filthy cockroach Israeli Firster Donald Trump on how best to torture Christian Russia over Crimea….

    Look all the names on the Vietnam Memorial….Henery Kissinger’s gift to his adopted Nation.

    America should have been friends with Castro’s Cuba’s…if we had….Miami would be 90-80 percent Native Born White American and English speaking in 2017…for Castro would have slaughtered this gangster fifth column in Cuba which JFK allowed to demographically displace the Native Born White American Majority in South Florida…

    The Cold War was the rock bottom ideological foundation for the passage of the 1965 Nonwhite Legal Immigrant Increase Act=The passage of 1965 Native Born White American Extermination Act..

    If you are an Alt Righter and your view on Franco and Pinchet is the received “wisdom”…the canonical view of the Alt Right on this issue…..then the Alt Right is a Cabal of little fools…and twerps….

    • Replies: @Gringo
  67. Gringo says:
    @War for Blair Mountain

    Allende won the election fair-and-square…Kissinger went into violent temper tantrum..organized the coup that resulted in the murder of Allende.

    Allende won the 1970 Presidential election with a plurality of 36.3% of the vote. Allende never had the support of a majority of Chileans, which became problematic for a President who was trying to institute revolutionary change. Lacking a majority in the legislature, Allende resorted to revolution by decree for much of his program. Believe it or not, revolution by decree does not always go over very well in a democracy. It didn’t in Chile.

    Your Yanqui-centric view of the world, where nothing occurs but at the behest of the Yanqui Colossus, assumes that people outside the US are puppets to be manipulated. On the contrary, they are independent agents.

    José Piñera, the brother of a former President of Chile, has written a good introduction to the Allende years. How Allende Destroyed Democracy in Chile. He also provides links to other relevant documents. For example, consider the Resolution that the Chamber of Deputies passed by a 63% majority vote three weeks before the coup. Following is a summary of the Resolution, but there is also a link to the full text of the Resolution in his article.

    The Resolution, approved by almost two-thirds of the members (63.3 percent), accused President Allende’s administration of 20 concrete violations of the Constitution and national laws. These violations included: support of armed groups, illegal arrests, torture, muzzling the press, manipulating education, not allowing people to leave the country, confiscating private property, forming seditious organizations, and usurping powers belonging to the Judiciary, Congress, and the Treasury. The Resolution held that such acts were committed in a systematic manner, with the aim of installing in Chile “a totalitarian system”.

    Allende considered the Resolution to be an invitation to a coup. From the following summary of the Resolution, one can see how Allende came to that conclusion.

    d) a Plea to the military ministers (Article 15), who were also the commanders-in-chief of the Army, Navy and Air Force, to put “an immediate end” to these serious constitutional violations.

    Pinochet didn’t need a green light from Kissinger, as Pinochet already had a green light from the Chamber of Deputies.

    Most of the politicians who supported the coup, such as former President Frei, and future President Aylwin, assumed that after several months in power, the Armed Forces would call elections. Instead, they had to wait sixteen years for elections. While Frei and Aylwin initially supported the coup, the military regime’s failure to call elections in a timely manner caused them and many other politicians to turn against the military regime.

    If one wants to condemn Pinochet, do so. But bear in mind that Pinochet took power with considerable civilian support – as shown by the Resolution passed with a 63% majority.

    And no, Allende wasn’t murdered.

    Roberto Ampuero, who fled to East Germany after the coup, married the daughter of Castro’s nomenklatura and moved to Cuba. Real Existing Socialism showed Ampuero, a former member of Communist Youth, that there were serious shortcomings in the Cuban model that Allende wanted to follow. Ampuero has written a number of books chronicling his political change, such as his memoir Nuestros años verde olivo. (Our olive green years.) He has written a number of best-selling mysteries , only one of which has been translated into English- The Neruda Case.

  68. @Gringo

    Allende played by the rules…His election as Chile’s president was as least as democratic as the election of Richard Nixon as POTUS…

    • Replies: @Gringo
  69. Allende won the election fair and square in Chile…he got the higher percentage of votes compared the Right Wing Fascist Death Squad Party of Pinochet.

    Pinchet…ITT…Kissinger…the CIA…Nixon…conspired to murder Democracy in Chile….

    Are you expressing the Alt Right view of what happened in Chile back in 1973?

  70. Jake says:

    “I’d argue a “National Divorce” would simply allow the Left a beachhead from which eventually to secure the entire country. And it is unlikely even to work. ”

    Not trusting the Left is not merely wise; it is necessary for survival. I think a given that if there were a peaceful separation that the Blue American Union would plan to attack the Red American States from the get-go.

    Even so, that is the best option. As long as the Red States elect leaders who know the Left and so are prepared, the peaceful divorce can work.

  71. Gringo says:
    @War for Blair Mountain

    His election as Chile’s president was as least as democratic as the election of Richard Nixon as POTUS

    Allende’s election was kosher- the legislature made the decision that the voters could not. In any event, my reference to his 36.3% vote in the election was to point out that as a minority president, he was going to have problems passing his agenda.

    Allende never had the support of a majority of Chileans, which became problematic for a President who was trying to institute revolutionary change. Lacking a majority in the legislature, Allende resorted to revolution by decree for much of his program.

    Which he did- though the legislature did vote for nationalizations of copper and the banking system.

    Allende played by the rules…
    What part of

    accused President Allende’s administration of 20 concrete violations of the Constitution and national laws.

    do you not understand? Anyone who reads that and claims that “Allende played by the rules” has extreme reading comprehension problems. Sixty three percent of the Chamber of Deputies, who had a much better grasp of Chile’s law and Constitution than you or I do, stated that Allende did NOT play by the rules.
    If you want more detail, Piñera provides a link to The Chamber of Deputies Resolution of August 22, 1973.

    6. That to achieve this end, the administration has committed not isolated violations of the Constitution and the laws of the land, rather it has made such violations a permanent system of conduct, to such an extreme that it systematically ignores and breaches the proper role of the other branches of government, habitually violating the Constitutional guarantees of all citizens of the Republic, and allowing and supporting the creation of illegitimate parallel powers that constitute an extremely grave danger to the Nation, by all of which it has destroyed essential elements of institutional legitimacy and the Rule of Law;

    And you tell me that “Allende played by the rules.” Not after he became President, not by a long shot. While “Allende played by the rules” in becoming President, his conduct as President showed that Allende was quite willing to bypass the rules of Chilean law and the Constitution if doing so would advance his revolutionary agenda. So said the Chamber of Deputies.

  72. @Gringo

    Your quoting the very coup plotters who were colluding with the CIA…ITT….Henry Kissinger-Nixon to violently to violently overthrow the democratically elected Allende Goverment as an Oracle on Chilean Democracy…which ushered in decades….to this day…of neoliberal economics and “democracy”. Pineras is a well paid member of the Cato Institute where he writes papers calling for handing over the Native Born White American Working Class’s SS over to Wall Street.

    There should have been street executions of the likes of Pineras in Chile…and the rest of the Chicago School Boys…along with Pinochet…

    There is most definitely a strong similarity between the coup against Allende in 1973 and the coup against Trump in 2017….a collusion of a Treasonous Opposition party…treasonous Press….and treasonous Intelligence Agency…and treasonous National Police…

    Pineras is the face of economic violence against the Chilean Working Class and the Native Born White American Working Class….

  73. Gringo says:

    Your quoting the very coup plotters who were colluding with the CIA…

    (1) If by “coup plotters” you mean the party apparatus that passed the Resolution: While the Resolution indicated that there was wide support for a coup, you have given no proof that those who passed the Resolution were involved in “coup plotting.” Support for a prospective coup was not the same thing as actually engaging in “coup plotting.” Rather, the Resolution gave the military a green light.

    If by “coup plotters” you are referring to José Piñera: in 1973 he was a 25-year-old grad student at Harvard, which is far down the totem pole for “coup plotting.” It is absurd to claim that a Harvard grad student, over 5,000 miles away from Chile at the time of the coup, was involved in “coup plotting.” You are telling me Pinochet was that much of a nebbish to see the need to have the involvement in the coup of a 25-year-old grad student 5,000 miles away from Chile? 🙂

    Moreover, you have given no proof whatsoever about “colluding with the CIA.” For anybody. Allende fans have a lot of of difficulty dealing with the fact that a majority was opposed to Allende’s agenda, and that there was widespread support in Chile for the coup. Isabel Allende’s paternal grandfather supported the coup. Salvador Allende was her father’s first cousin- and a relative who interacted a lot with Isabel when she was a child. That indicates how divided Chile was. Allende fans scream “CIA” in an attempt to ignore all that.

    (2) The Resolution points out Allende’s systematic violations of Chilean law and Constitution. Allende was an out-of-control executive. Being President does not give one the right to operate carte blanche with regard to the laws and Constitution of the country. Do you, like the Chavistas, believe that being President gives one carte blanche with regard to the laws and Constitution?
    (3) While Allende was, as you point out, democratically elected, the also democratically elected Chamber of Deputies passed the Resolution by a strong 63% majority.

    which ushered in decades….to this day…of neoliberal economics and “democracy”
    From 1973 to 2015, GDP per capita (constant 2010 US$) increased 244% in Chile, compared to an increase of 66% for Latin America. From 1973 to 2015, Chile also out-performed Latin America in improving health care. From 1973 to 2015, Chile’s Life Expectancy went from 8th to 1st in Latin America. From 1973 to 2015, Chile’s Infant Mortality rate went from 9th to 2nd in Latin America.
    That indicates to me Chile has benefited from what you call “neoliberal economics.” For the last 27 years, Chile has been a democracy, without your quotes.

    And if you believe that the “democratically elected” Allende had democracy as a long-term goal, then consider why the plan proposed in 1973 for changing education in Chile was based on East Germany’s educational system. So much democracy in East Germany, right?

    For those who consider Allende to have been committed to democracy, consider these Allende quotes from journalist Georgie Ann Geyer’s autobiography, Buying the Night Flight. [ page 97]

    “Would a one-party state be good for Chile?” I asked him.
    And he answered, thoughtfully but surely, “No…no, not right away. It will take a while.”…..
    “If you are elected, will there be elections again?” I asked him. He paused. “You must understand,” he said, carefully but revealingly, “that by the next elections, everything will have changed.”

    The “democratically elected” Allende thought a one -party state would eventually be good for Chile. How many people who are committed to democracy think a one-party state will be good for a country?

    I suggest you read James Whelan’s Out of the ashes. Life, death and transfiguration of democracy in Chile, 1833-1988. Free for the downloading.

  74. @ia

    You remind me of Democrats screaming Nazi at alt-right.

    You’d better believe the alt- rt is part Nazi. [ and growing everyday!]

    The Jew media are like piranhas, they don’t know when to quit.

    White people are finished carrying all the dead wood in this nation. We’re not going to pay for our own replacements.

    The quislings on Capitol Hill will continue to sow the whirlwind with their vomitous allegations until this evil witches brew explodes and the real Heroes emerge on der Tag.

    • Replies: @IA
  75. @prusmc

    I seem to remember two sloppy snipers paralyzing the whole east coast for months….Jus’ sayin’

  76. IA says:

    Blacks and Muslims voted about 94% Hillary. They both hate Jews. I think about 64% of college-educated white women voted for Hillary. (I may be wrong here but a lot voted for her and organized the women’s looney bin march in Washinton.) There’s a lot of votes out there besides Jews.

    • Replies: @Stonehands
  77. @IA

    C’mon man… the blacks, homos, and brainwashed college faggots are the shock troops for the Jew World Order.

    P.S. The muslims are auxilleries as well.

  78. IA says:

    Jews have been around for centuries and were kept at bay. Women and blacks were under control for thousands of years. Do you seriously believe ridding the West of Jews is going to stop women, queers and blacks from screeching about their “rights?”

  79. joef says:

    The 60s radicals actually were more masculine and chance-taking than today’s crop.

    That is only slightly true… they planted bombs while in hiding places, ambushed from behind, and cried foul when violence was reciprocated against them, during their demonstrations. This is the typical cowardly behavior from the New Left SJW types. And one thing that they and radical afro americans have in common is that they like an unfair advantage before committing themselves to a fight; otherwise they run and hide behind the skirts of the MSM and lawyers to protect them. What is true about the above statement is that the current generation of SJW is even softer.

    And the Spanish Civil War was on another order of magnitude more masculine.

    That is a more accurate observation. Unfortunately these hippie degenerate flower children should have been eliminated back in the 1960s, before they entered the reigns of management, of this nation, in the 1990s. Since then they have become so entrenched that its almost impossible to correct without a civil war, or a great awakening. Since this ilk is so egocentric, we probably can discount the chance of a great awakening ( which requires some introspection, and admission of ones own mistakes).

    The biggest of this leftist hypocrisy is that if a civil war happens (besides wanting afro americans to randomly kill whitey) they will want the police/military to protect them from the rest of us. They do not even understand that their demand for protection, from organizations that they hate & tormented, may be withdrawn. And without said protection, their leftist government will be nothing but a toothless tiger; and then the poor SJW is going to actually have to fight it out for themselves against those who will fight back unhindered…and then its payback time.

  80. joef says:
    @War for Blair Mountain

    There is a difference: It is true that the New Left is using other races to push their own leftist agenda against Whites. However, Asians and Hispanics motivation is generally to try to improve their living conditions. In contrast, many Afro Americans want to live perpetually off welfare, having firmly inculcated the leftist free lunch agenda. Even if some particular Asian or Hispanic hates whitey, most of them do not act it out, as opposed to the fact that the majority of afro americans do hate whitey, and violently act it out (or want to act it out).

    The leftist have corrupted the afro americans mind so much that if there were ever a civil war in this nation, it would also degenerate into a race war with afro americans by default (way to go to the leftist who created this mess… the blood is clearly on your hands for this … the rest of us are held hostage to the necessity to protect ourselves, from this leftist social experiment run wild … but it is the leftist who created the conditions for this to happen).

  81. @Ace

    God bless Pinochet.

    Meh … Pinochet and Franco were just neoliberals given to fits of flag-waving.

  82. @RCon

    I believe that America’s so called ‘conservatives’ control all the houses of state as well as most of the Governorships, yet we’re on the cusp of a Left Wing Takover?

    As the Trump interlude has amply demonstrated, formally occupying public office, in and of itself, does not really correlate with meaningful political control over policy.

  83. @joef

    Asians “Americans” are actively imvolved in the destruction of thousands of years of acquired Native Born White American Tech…Scientific…Medical…experience…..this is very much in the realm of genocide…

    Your larger point is that you reduce America to an economic proposition Nation ……a framework that justifies Comrade Gringo’s Cuban friends…Pinochet enthusiasts….ethnically cleansing the Historic Native Born White American Majority Working Class out of South Florida…..and it justifies importing our first Hindu Brahman Princess POTUS Kamala Harris’s highly racialized-Hindu-Sihk Democratic Party Voting Bloc from India….

    You know Kamala Harris…right?…the Senator from Greater India….California…. currently stomping on the balls of Jeff Sessions who is a stand in for millions of Trump’s White Male Trump Bro Voters…

    • Replies: @joef
  84. @Seamus Padraig

    Bingo!!!!….you sir have nailed it….That’s just another way of saying that Franco and Pinochet were anti-Nationalist Traitors…yet some of the little twerps on the Alt Right are enamoured of these two filthy cockroaches…

    For Comrade Gringo…. such WONDERFULL Socialist Policies as Nationalization of Industries when the appropriate circumstances arise for doing so…. and Social Security are a violation of the Fascist Rights “DIVINELY” inspired interpretation of the Chilean and US Constitution…therefore collude with ITT…Henry Kissinger and the CIA to destabilize Chilean Society…

    I wish Allende had been the thug that Gringo makes him out to be…for then Allende would have sent in Nationalist Death Squads to exterminate Pinochet and his neo-liberal Chicago Milton Friedman little cockroach economist Pineras in a soccer stadium…It was Allende’s commitment to the Chilean Constitution that was the very thing that drove him to his Suicide when the Pinochet Fascist Neo-Liberal Death Squads had him surrounded…..

    Allende was a Nationalist who pursued a independent path of economic development….and this was his great crime in the mind of War Criminal Henry Kissinger….The Coup proceeded forward….and continues this day in Chile….Chile is back on the neoliberal plantation….

    • Agree: Seamus Padraig
    • Replies: @Gringo
  85. joef says:
    @War for Blair Mountain

    A few differences:

    Kamala Harris does not represent all of Greater India, and to subscribe a collective guilt to Indians because of her is the same thing that leftist try to do to Whites (eg the leftist collective guilt nonsense such as white privilege) We hate it when the leftist and afros use collective guilt against us Whites, so I suggest we don’t use the same techniques against others.

    Now the fact of Asians acquiring knowledge is not equivalent to an act of destruction & genocide. And their actual goal is to gain knowledge, not destruction. As far as giving away the knowledge and work visas, you can blame the White corporatist/globalist for that one in their traitorous pursuit of cheap labor. Asians are not looking to hurt us, but are merely pursuing economic opportunity in an employment rat race that the corporatist/globalist created.

    The same can be said of Hispanics from Central & South America, and Mexico. Their main goal is trying to increase their economic prosperity (not genocide); it is the corporatist/globalist/leftist who are letting them in at our expense. Even the mainland hispanics who are heavily into the drug trade are here to sell their product, not genocide (they are smart enough to not want to commit genocide and decrease their own customer base). Even for the ones who hate whitey, they love money more. The exception is inner city Caribbean Hispanics, who over the generations, have incorporated many bad afro american cultural attributes (and so have many White millennials).

    Now living in urban BosWash area most of my life (Boston, Hartford, Bronx, Brooklyn, Newark, Philly, Baltimore, DC is mostly a variation of the same theme), I never raised up my guard walking through an Asian, or Hispanic neighborhood, fearing a random attack involving deadly force, just for being White. However, afro americans have been thoroughly inculcated with leftist hating whitey ideology, and would randomly attack Whites just for being White. And one of the primary afro american cultural traits is hating whitey (which is why many of them are jonesing for a race war, even if it means they will starve to death without us).

    They are also inculcated with wanting something for nothing (free lunch), and are more inclined to robbery to get “whats mines (sic)”. They even hate whitey so much, they will even robb their own white drug user customers, against their own rational self interest (essentially robbing their own customer base). I would never see that from Hispanic drug dealers, and in fact afro american robbers were usually beaten to unconsciousness, if they robbed a Hispanic drug dealers’ customer (they wanted their white customers do be returning customers). Hispanic drug dealers are about making money, and would hurt/kill those who interfere with their drug trade, afros attack because of racial animosity.

    You make good points, but you also express theoretical ideology, that somewhat opposes empirical experience (academic arguments vs the real world).

  86. Gringo says:
    @War for Blair Mountain

    I wish Allende had been the thug that Gringo makes him out to be…
    All I did was document what Allende said and did. You have not refuted any of the documented points I made about Allende. You used the word “thug” to describe Allende, not I. Perhaps Allende wasn’t the great guy you believed him to be, after all.

    It was Allende’s commitment to the Chilean Constitution that was the very thing that drove him to his Suicide

    One minor point. In comment #69, you stated that Allende was murdered. Now you state that Allende committed suicide. Can’t keep your story straight, can you?

    Consider what the Supreme Court of Chile said about Allende’s alleged “commitment to the Chilean Constitution.”

    In 1973 the Supreme Court reproached him for assuming powers belonging to that body, which resulted in an acrimonious exchange of letters. Thus, on May 26, 1973, in protesting at the administration’s refusal to comply with a judicial decision, the Supreme Court addressed the President in a unanimous decision: “This Supreme Court is obliged to express to Your Excellency, once again, the illicit attitude of the administrative authority in its illegal interference in judicial matters, such as putting obstacles in the way of police compliance with court orders in criminal cases; orders which, under the existing law of the country, should be carried out by the police without obstacles of any kind. All of this implies an open and willful disregard for judicial verdicts, with complete ignorance of the confusion produced in the legal order by such attitudes and omissions; as the court expressed to Your Excellency in a previous dispatch, these attitudes also imply not just a crisis in the rule of law, but also the imminent rupture of legality in the Nation.”

    Allende’s response indicated that he would follow the law and Constitution when he damn well pleased.

    In a time of revolution, political power has the right to decide, at the end of the day, whether or not judicial decisions correspond with the higher goals and historical necessities of social transformation, which should take absolute precedence over any other consideration; consequently, the Executive has the right to decide whether or not to carry out the verdicts of the Judicial Branch.”

    Both the legislature and the Supreme Court considered Allende to have violated the laws and Constitution of Chile. In this statement Allende openly admitted that given the choice between advancing his agenda and following the laws and Constitution of Chile, he would choose his agenda. So much for Allende’s alleged “commitment to the Chilean Constitution.”

    At the same time, the issue of the coup and the law was a bit like trying to square a circle. How do you stop Allende from running roughshod over the Constitution, but do so in a legal manner? Apparently many in Chile believed that was not possible- thus the coup. Had Allende followed the laws and Constitution of Chile- and he admitted would he do so only if doing so would advance his agenda- the coup would not have occurred.

    Part of the problem that Allende faced was that far leftists inside his coalition and outside his coalition pushed Allende’s program faster than was politically prudent. The MIR- outside the Popular Unity coalition- pushed illegal, armed takeovers of farm land in southern Chile. The consequence was a collapse of agricultural production and an increasing use of scarce foreign exchange on food imports. Not very prudent. While Allende may not have been behind the land takeovers in the South, he recognized them as fait accompli.

    From Collier & Slater’s A History of Chile, 1808-2002.

    As things turned out, however, many of the president’s difficulties came as much from his own coalition as from his adversaries. A crucial factor here was that while Allende and many of his followers sincerely believed that socialism (albeit in a very comprehensive form) could be built on the solid foundations of the Chilean democratic tradition, there were many others among his followers who wished to go outside (or as they would have said, “beyond”) that tradition altogether. They were the heirs of the heady radicalization of the 1960s. As Hugo Cancino has pointed out, in a very detailed study of this period, “a wide section of the Chilean Left . . . , from the mid-1960s, began to experience a process of estrangement from Chilean reality, assuming the most orthodox, canonized, formalized versions of Marxism-Leninism.”2 As Cancino also wisely says, the Chile of 1970 was not the Russia of 1917.
    This contradiction between Allende’s own objectives (the essence of the “Chilean road to socialism” in its only meaningful sense) and the radical demands of the militant “ultras” within (and alongside) the coalition, who could mobilize significant rural and urban constituencies, was to provoke many of the dilemmas of the UP government. Their revolutionary aims were utopian and far-reaching. There were even those among the most militant who held the apocalyptic belief – such beliefs tend to become self-fulfilling – that it would be better for the future of the Left and of socialism if Allende “fell by an act of force,” as some of them told an American observer in 1971 – “we are trying to create a situation of disorder and chaos to provoke the reactionaries into a coup d’etat. ´ ”3

    We all know how that worked out. Interestingly enough, there were some leftists in Spain in 1936 who had a similar point of view. Similar results, also.

  87. Che Guava says:
    @Che Guava

    Your uname is also good, I bought old paperbacks of Mad when it was great (before I was born) at second-hand bookshops, so I understand.

  88. John_G says:
    @jilles dykstra

    Ultimately, Syria is a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Russia intends to to keep it’s port there and the US is simply virtue signalling and trying to save face for jumping feet first into the Arab Spring without thoroughly considering the task.

  89. Anonymous [AKA "Sister_Imp"] says:

    When a political party calls for Second Amendment Solutions, it’s certain it will come to blood.

    Conservatives are just surprised that Second Amendment Remedies can be aimed in both directions.

    • Replies: @joef
  90. joef says:

    1st: Guns is not just a second amendment issue, it is also a 4th amendment issue with the govt wanting to remove personal property without due process, for crimes the citizen gun owner did not themselves commit (similar to civil forfeitures).

    2nd: Second amendment is about self defense, not sniping people from afar who you disagree with.

    3rd: Leftist have been inciting this type of behavior from the beginning (eg riots, and planting bombs against innocents)

    4th: Leftist do not like to fight directly without some type of unfair advantage. They promote & want a civil war as long as the other side is disarmed

    5th: Leftist prevent others from fighting back by the use of the courts/MSM/academia/politicians/prosecutors.

    6th: If the second amendment was aimed both ways in a civil war like fashion, the soft leftist would lose

  91. Achmed E Newman- you are 100% right. The hate I see (in my 66 years) has always been from the Left. I studied the Spanish Civil War- I would bet that 90% of the Left have no idea what really went on in Spain in the 1930s.
    These lefties act from emotion and a sense of entitlement- they are the head pigs in Animal Farm and tormenters in Lord of the Flies.
    There are many reasons that 99% of us rural types will never give up our guns and if it is to protect ourselves from anarchist city types as in Portland then so be it. The mayor of Portland seems to enjoy the lefties hate. The mayor has never seen what war is-he is another urban know-it-all.
    I have spent over half my life around Marines and soldiers and I feel that over 75% would not put up with leftist hate and destruction. It may be higher than 75% of veterans and active duty service members who would protect all peoples from terror inflicted by the violent left.
    If the Anarchist groups were to pull their antics and violence on Army infantry and especially Rangers then these Anarchists would get beat to a pulp. These Anarchists and lefties that own the press and urban governments better think twice about messing with people that have a respect for law and order, and after what so many soldiers and Marines went through in urban warfare in Iraq, it behooves these hate artists of the right to pick their fights against the weak. These lefties are cowards and they have the MSM on their side. If they want to hurt decent people and veterans decide to fight the Anarchists and other lefties, these Vets will never give in. Once most males have been pushed near the breaking point in violent wars and other non war but similar situations they will fight to the death.
    The hate of the Left in the 60s and 70s was really bad. I have never forgotten what they are like-just like the Bolsheviks in 1917 Russia.

    • Replies: @joef
  92. joef says:
    @Lost American

    I often wonder how the leftist SJW expects to win without the cooperation of veterans, military, and big city police (who all mostly dislike the leftist agenda, especially at various times being their political victims)? Todays leftist only like to fight if the other side is not allowed to fight back.

    They probably believe that they can dupe afro american radicals to do the fighting for them. However there are some problems with this:
    Radical Afros do not make distinctions when it comes to hating whitey;
    Radical Afros will not fight unless they have some type of unfair advantage;
    Radical Afros are mostly self serving, and will not be willing to risk their own lives for some leftist whitey idea.

    So we are back to square one again, on how do the leftist expect to win a civil war? And that is probably why they are not pushing for a shooting civil war (and do not need the 2nd amendment) because they know they would lose if the shots started to be fired in anger. Thus, they only can win with a political solution, supplemented by MSM/academic propaganda (and that is why they get so hysterical, because they are really frightened that one day the rest of us may really have enough of them).

Current Commenter

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 have been licensed to 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 Patrick Cloutier Comments via RSS
Our Reigning Political Puppets, Dancing to Invisible Strings
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Talk TV sensationalists and axe-grinding ideologues have fallen for a myth of immigrant lawlessness.