RSSdo you think should zardari fail, that the next government — either sharif or military — will suddenly get bailed out by either china and/or saudi arabia, and cancel their IMF package (pay them back early) ? talk about change of geopolitical influence !!!
A little off subject (but not much):
Why didn’t China give Pakistan the loan that the latter needed, thus forcing them to go to the IMF ?
It would seem to have been a perfect opportunity for China to a)gain more leverage with Pakistan and b)win a geopolitical battle against the US.
Did the US pressure China not to offer the loan ? Did they offer China inducements for not offering the loan ?
Thanks in advance.
The young American Jew is not like his grandparents. They are just as fun loving and lazy as any other. This is the result of a lack of perceived persecution that use to keep the group together. In the major cities, half of the young people leave the tribe through intermarriage. This is human nature. The Rabbis changed the rules some time ago to define a Jew as coming from the mother, so the Jewish man would marry a Jewish woman, instead of a woman outside of the tribe. Read the Bible. In David’s time, the men had an eye for good looking women outside of the tribe(like all men). Now days, the young people just laugh at the Rabbi’s words.
Instead of the old folks liberal ideas of race and ethnic divisions, let us change it to go by economic class. According to liberal thought, intelligence is equally distributed throughout all economic classes, so higher education admissions should be by economic class, and not the old divisive ideas of race and ethnic background. After all, affirmative action programs are institutionalized racism and racial profiling.
Not exactly true. The present centralization dates to the First Republic and was consolidated under the First Empire. The Bourbon Versailles monarchy was "absolutist" only in that the king managed to govern and command loyalty from all the provinces without calling the legislative body for some 175 years. In reality the king did not have nearly so much purely discretionary power, relative to his subjects, as the President does in the Fifth Republic. The historiography of Belloc or Kuenheldt-Leddhin on the beginning of the French Revolution as a return to ancient liberties is simply wrong. For a Christian, a conservative or a subsidiarist, there was *nothing* holy about the French Revolution. About the best that can be said for it is that something was going to happen to rectify the gap between the lingering formal power of the landed aristocracy and the collapse of their real economic clout in favor of the up-and-coming industrial bourgeoisie. What actually happened was not good.
France has been an extremely centralized country/culture since at least Louis XIV. It’s a lousy place to be an outsider, but a cool country in which to be an insider.
If you read De Tocqueville “The Ancien Regime and the Revolution” he makes the precise point that the centralization occurred from the time of Louis XIV and the revolution swept away the last vestiges of he feudal titles etc., but the centralization continued through to his time during the 2nd Empire of Louis Napoleon. The distribution of power between the king himself and the functionaires could be questioned. So I do not disagree with your basic point, but I would say, via De Tocqueville, that Steve Sailer’s sentence is correct.
JEW
Is there a way to translate these videos to English? or did I miss that info?