“ In this sense, Zemmour’s situation strikes me as analogous to Trump’s in 2016.”

In the end, Zemmour will hardly fare better than Trump. All politicians are just the puppets of the PTB. Dieudonne and Soral are two of my most admired Frenchmen; their scepticism with respect to Zemmour could very well be motivated by the persecution that they both suffered at the hands of CRIF. Napoleon gathered the Sanhedrin to resolve the Jewish question in France and failed. I doubt that Zemmour’s Jewishness will be much of an asset at this impossible endeavour. Like everywhere in the West under Zionist domination, there will be two standards for freedom of speech: one for the Jews who can express anything they want and another for the goys, be they Soral, Dieudonne, E. Michael Jones , Michael Hoffman, Guillaume Durocher or any other commoner, who all have to apply self censorship or face the consequences.

Soral and Dieudonné are hostile. Others – Jean-Yves Le Gallou, Renaud Camus, indeed several RN cadres defecting to Zemmour – are favorable.
 

Three months before France's presidential vote, Jerome Riviere made a blunt calculation: Marine Le Pen, long the leader of the traditional far-right, had lost her anti-establishment edge and veered too close to the mainstream to win the election.

He defected and rallied behind the campaign of Eric Zemmour, the writer-turned-presidential challenger whose nationalist agenda echoes the one-time aspiration of former U.S. President Donald Trump to "Make America Great Again". Riviere, who was Le Pen's top lawmaker in the European Parliament before he jumped ship earlier this month, said Le Pen had become too soft on immigration and compromised the party's tough eurosceptic stance with her tack towards the mainstream.

"Eric Zemmour says things as they are. It's black or white, he doesn't use shades of grey to describe reality," Riviere, now vice president of Zemmour's Reconquete (Reconquest) party, told Reuters. His defection illustrates how Le Pen's strategy to make her party more acceptable to traditional centre-right voters is alienating core supporters and has left her out-flanked further to the right by Zemmour's burst into the political arena.

Meanwhile, conservative candidate Valerie Pecresse's own talk on immigration, identity and security has toughened at a time political discourse in France drifts to the right. The result is that Le Pen, 53, is being squeezed from both sides. Le Pen, Zemmour and Pecresse are all vying to win a second round runoff spot in April's elections, with President Emmanuel Macron currently leading opinion polls and expected to take the other runoff place.
 

Darwinism is a speculative theory how species might have evolved from one another, backed by no evidence whatsoever (as Darwin acknowledged), and disproved by modern genetics (as Darwin would have acknowledged, being less dogmatic than his sectarian disciples). It is no more descriptive or scientific than lamarckism or vitalism, or any other theory based on phylogenetic classification. And, as said Stephen Jay Gould in 1980, "the synthetic theory [neo-Darwinism], ... as a general proposition, is effectively dead, despite its persistence as textbook orthodoxy.” Besides, it is largely responsible for the moral destruction of the White race. To me, your article, at least, has clarified this last point. I wish you would read and consider seriously my arguments in "Blood and Soul": https://www.unz.com/article/blood-and-soul/
This debate over Darwinism is, I think, of utmost importance.

"The ancients" routinely killed off a lot of their girl children. The Greeks of Sparta killed the lower classes for sport. [See: Helot Revolt.)

Replies: @Jack McArthur

I believe the main cause of the vitriol is America's advanced stage of diversity. Especially, the fact that it has more blacks.

As I see it, white leftists are not evolved to live in a diverse environment, and their natural egalitarian impulses just make them go crazy when exposed to diversity. Skin color is something that is always on display - I don't think there was anything like it before; you can buy a man in rags new clothes, or feed a hungry man, but you cannot buy a man a new skin. (some qualification here, as it is possible or was possible before mass communications, for limited, local cultural adaptations, like in the South, if they had a long history.) Sometimes, when statues are being taking down, it almost seems like a sea of angry (leftist) white faces.

Though, I will allow that there may be several minor effects, that make the situation worse without a color angle. (Mississippi often isn't as woke, though the situation there may be tense) :

1.) The perception, more than the reality, that Fox News is ideologically committed to the Right on a corporate level. Or The Wall Street Journal, etc.
2.) The fact that several power centers are located in America. Like, cultural production via Hollywood. Or the MIC, or arguably America has a larger news-media footprint.
3.) two-party system
4.) larger outlay in universities
5.) a stronger Jewish influence than any other country, after Israel. And on a power level, undoubtedly greater than Israel.

Replies: @Almost Missouri

Very interesting. What would you say makes the culture wars seemingly so much vitriolic in America than in other Western countries?
 

"What would you say makes the culture wars seemingly so much vitriolic in America than in other Western countries?"
The worst Class polarisation in the 1st world, which is then, for Elite benefit, camoflauged behind various "culture war" issues.

What would you say makes the culture wars seemingly so much vitriolic in America than in other Western countries?
 

Replies: @Based Lad

America seems to have a greater number of really extremist types than other cultures, perhaps it is the Jewish influence I don't know. Americans could be really, really good, like gods almost, but others could be really, really evil. This conclusion struck me greatly on overseas travel in the past.

Consider as an example the Cold War and the extremist right wing anti-communist type of American. This type was extraordinary to behold and not found anywhere else on the planet.

"Most will not like to think about biopolitics at all, but the question will inevitably be posed: who will survive and thrive?"

It appears that those who will survive and thrive in the modern era are the globohomos.

There are fundamental factors:

1. Is a proposition nation
2. Religious ultra-diversity
3. Puritanism-ultrasecularism schizophrenia, probably a result of 2
4. Is a product of a culture war itself
5. Low assimilationist pressure (this is a surprise, but the only way America avoided the current bullshit is not by having ridiculous assimilationist pressures, but having a hilariously exclusive immigration system despite the high population growth it gained from it)

And acute/current/temporary ones:
1. Insane polarization
2. Global hegemon status
3. Ludicrous influx of foreigners at a rate that can't be assimilated

These can all be solved, but at horrific costs. The ethnic issues would require Soviet style internal passports and deportations to desolate states like Alaska, Wyoming or West Virginia and making sure every black family is so far from another they can't make meaningful contact and be forced to disappear in every possible way

All the "diversity." Duh. Even "white people," not counting Jews, have very diverse origins. Even the English do. Read Albion's Seed.

But mainly it comes down to Jews and blacks. Deadly combo for any country.

It's just Divide and Rule imposed by an oligarchy with very strong class consciousness against serfs who have had their class consciousness beaten and brainwashed out of them, to the extent that they worship the parasites who exploit them mercilessly, and really imagine that they will be rich, too, one day. And as I listened to a black employee of Amazon explaining why she voted against unionisation in Alabama warehouses, it came readily to mind that centuries of slavery and oppression really leave their marks on groups and individuals in craven submissiveness.

Thanks, that was interesting. I'm still perplexed by left-wing pro-Zionism though (which is a real phenomenon that seems to be underappreciated, since many mainstream conservatives like to go on about alleged left-wing antisemitism). I kind of get why normie "conservatives" and the like are pro-Israel, they want to seem respectable, feel a sort of vicarious nationalism towards Israel (since their own has become illegitimate) as a way of getting at Muslims etc. But Israel as an openly nationalist state should be totally anathema to the values of the modern left. Yet there still seem to be plenty of gentile left-wingers who somehow seem to frame Zionists as a persecuted minority deserving of sympathy, and ignore all the things Israel actually does with its settlements programme (one would have to be stupid at this point to still believe Israel is seriously working towards a 2-state solution...nor do the Israelis obviously have any intention of granting citizenship rights to occupied Palestinians). Paradoxically I get the impression that Israel has actually become more popular with left-wingers compared to 20 years or so ago, despite the collapse of the Israeli left and the increasing distance in time of the Holocaust. I find that difficult to understand.

In France, things seem much more dependent on these ethnic lobbies’ relationship with the ruling party. Their influence seems much more insecure.
 

We, also, have had 9/11 replicas many times over, every time a politician tried to deviate from the Israeli line. The 2015 series of bloody terrorist massacres occurred after the French parliament envisaged applying a timid form of boycott on products from Israeli colonies in occupied Palestine.

Stating that the Zionist lobby in France is somewhat less powerful than the Zionist lobby in the USA is laughable. France is no less an Israeli colony now, just for slightly different reasons .

Thilo Sarrazin was delighted when he read the Danish news****.
Mette Frederiksen is the head of the Danish government and she does what she says. European immigration is a factor but can be handled appropriately, I'd think.

Ahh - Swiss grass-root news from lefties living there: They don't attack me personally for my positions as they did before - and: They say that a consensus is building up in Switzerland, that immigration has to be regulated (=cut back) in order to keep the country on track. - Even in the left-leaning daily Tages-Anzeiger (the most read in Switzerland by a long shot) you can read, that open borders are no goal in itself - and that the discussion thereof should be de-ideologized. The union-wing of the left makes the point, that open borders bring down wages (that can't be overestimated not least because lots of union leaders and spokespersons are secondos - kids of immigrants - and have thus a strong standing in the Swiss public).



***** the German Social Democrats are still trying to throw him out - but what shall they do in the Socialist International with their icon (A Social Democratic Women President!) Mette Frederiksen? - They are really stuck! I like that.

Contrast Sweden! But how good are the actual policies in Denmark?
 

Replies: @Dieter Kief, @RadicalCenter

While I see where you are coming from, I have to strongly disagree:
The Humanities and Social Sciences can't prove, via empirical evidence, the bulk of what they preach. It's all opinion based with a smattering of evidence that may or may not have been manufactured ages ago. Some professor came up with something that sounds reasonable, without verifiable evidence, and it becomes an accepted fact to be repeated endlessly to the next crop of students who suck it up as gospel.

If Historians are still debating issues, then call me up when you arrive at a conclusion and you can prove what you say.

Economists are outright frauds. They can't even do a decent autopsy on an economy that's tanked. Their advice is anything their client (bank, gov't, corporation, etc) wants to hear. They are the whores willing to defend any position that will pay them a stipend.

Political Science - the name alone yells fraud as there's no science in it.

Gender studies, sociology, psychology, etc are all opinions and those opinions are wrecking the society because the terminally stupid believe what those faux experts have to say.

It goes beyond just the Humanities and Social Sciences. Even the STEM fields have been polluted by opinionated nonsense. Cosmology sees black holes, neutron stars, dark matter, dark energy, etc and gets to spend billions on colliders looking for unicorns. Space missions to comets have verifiable evidence that comets are blacker than coal burned rocks devoid of water and ice but the dirty snowball nonsense is still pushed on to the public.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but when those opinions are published as truth to be digested by all, then that's a problem.

History would be a wonderful thing, if it were only true.
Leo Tolstoy

Replies: @silviosilver, @animalogic, @Emslander, @Bert, @Anonymous, @anon

I must disagree about the idea that there is considerable debate amongst historians - there is, but only in a narrow range. There is plenty of information on things that do not touch the main drivers, it gives the false impression of debate. Like when a parent tries to get their kid to go to sleep by offering the false choice: 'do you want to go to bed with the red blanket or the blue one?'

For example: the recent Syrian civil war. The government had a policy of maximizing population growth, they criminalized the sale and possessions of contraceptive, all dissenting views were eliminated, and they got the population to quadruple from 5 million to 20 million in 36 years. But before it could octuple, the aquifers ran dry and things fell apart - and no, rainfall was consistent, there was no meteorological drought.

So in Syria there is massive debate: was it the Russians? The Israelis? The Americans? ISIS? Or "Global Warming'? But nothing at all about the simple logical fact that with a massively growing population and trending constant rainfall, the idea of 'global warming' is a lie. So not too much information per se: a great deal of information yes but also massive blind spots, not enough of the IMPORTANT information.

Remember, information in its purest form is just noise, like static on a radio. It is knowledge of the important factors that is key, and this is often lacking.

Replies: @Anon53

Dear Mr. Durocher,

To understand why you intuitively recoil at Lil' Bill's thought-disprocess, look no further than the conning tower atop the first molehill in south america flying the banner "Home of the Brave Loudmouth Who For Sake of Protection Lives Among the Peons."

Bill 'specially loves pontificating over any story he thinks allows him to denigrate what's left of the United States--that is, when he and his hyena buddy Fred Reed aren't otherwise occupied with handing out "I Told You So" cards, or clamoring joyously over the intended wishbone of America's total destruction.

Read here an honest rant from Bill's bleak home of like minded sycophants hindered with the same genealogical cowardice as lil' Bill, wherein he tells us what it means to have "balls"

"I’m cautious enough to get out of the way should nukes start to fly due to the US constantly pissing off China and Russia. The US military hasn’t won a war since WW-II and even in that one, Russia did most of the fighting with the US taking the bulk of the credit. . .My calculations say I’m doing more than you are because you haven’t the balls to do what I’ve already done."
 

I'd add some sort of aesthetic competence and the insights of (social) psychology and - oh: Philosophy.
And - to make the circle complete: Some kind of bodily - exercise.

1) Typically there is considerable debate among historians. There isn’t, on most issues, just one narrative but a debate. The problem usually isn’t that you’re getting only one story, but many, and cannot come to any firm conclusion but “who knows?”
 

A way to avoid the problem, is to write history using primarily contemporary sources/documentation in an open minded way. For example:

Stanley G. Payne "The Spanish Civil War" Cambridge University Press 2012 or David Irving's "Hitler's War" Hodder& Staughton Ltd. 1977 and "Warpath" Michael Joseph Ltd. 1978

Also everything done by Oleg Khlevniuk using Russian state archives (for example "Master of the House: Stalin and His Inner Circle" Yale University Press 2008).

Original sources are effective because they can seriously interfere with the dominant propaganda. For example, by showing the "Holocaust" to be such a feeble travesty of history that it has to be legally elevated to religious status with questioning defined as criminal heresy ( and that's in supposedly enlightened free speech Western democracies).

It's as easy for humans to be silly, or unable to think critically, objectively, and with a wide horizon, whether their minds have a humanities or science bias.
Surely the most common weak points of the two groups aren't exactly the same, but mostly, yes.

It's unavoidable to run, frequently too, into comments saying only science matters, or demanding, more or less self-awarely, that humanities should be functional to technical/scientific goals.
It's the other side of the coin where people who believe themselves thinkers, artists, open-minded, fire words against "Trumpers", "fascists", and set categories of people or specific individuals.

Tolerant (really open-minded, that is), intellectually curious (really intellectual, that is) people will always be on short count. Especially among the socially-visible, and culturally "authoritative" ranks and files, which include the academic environment. Where power comes into play, neither real scientists, thinkers, or artists can be really at ease, it's not the place for them.

You too have biases, "horizon limits", and the like, which, I'd guess, you aren't aware of.
Like when you write on Christianity, and handle it as a tool in a workshop, who must help you do your job, serve the goals you like, or get out of the way (and disappear from both your workshop, and your horizon). Never does it cross your mind that it could be something else than you imagine, and that the "Christianity" you blame because you judge it not conducive to your political and social likes has nothing to do with actual Christianity, just unjustly borrowing a real faith's name.
You should blame what some do using the name "Christianity" for those troubles (or perceived troubles), not Christ and its teaching, and who genuinely follows them.

great comment, and great article! I appreciate how you pointed out that reading history helps us discover our place in the great tapestry that is life.

China and the EU each have more consumers than the U.S., but their purchasing power on international markets (and those of European business and governments) are inferior because nominal GDP.
 

I respectfully disagree. US nominal GDP is very much intertwined with the financial economy and not the real economy. When it comes to selling actual goods - overall the EU and China are both bigger. Look at cars as an example. The US nominal GDP is trillions above China. Yet many millions more cars are sold in China than the US. Real tangible goods. The EU is a little different because of the different countries... But overall it holds true.
Both the EU and China are larger trading blocks than the US as well - because they are both larger markets.

Carolingian Europe would certainly have been more viable than adding ever more members of dubious worth (imo Romania and Bulgaria with all their organized crime and corruption should never have been admitted...also too many of their gypsies have taken the chance to move to Western Europe. And if one is honest Spain, Portugal and Greece are pretty useless too). But since the EU is nowadays to be supposed to be all about spreading liberal values, not about anything actually rooted in history or culture (let alone biology), one can't of course argue for such exclusion.
And unfortunately Carolingian Europe isn't exactly what it once was either and increasingly populated by people of non-European origin.

Though whether it is desirable will also depend on one’s values and priorities.
 

Replies: @Anonymous, @Guillaume Durocher

Third rate Gobineau.

Ultimately it doesn't matter what the borders look like as long as we are dominated and colonized by the USA. When Jews in America can dictate what Europeans are allowed to say, what do borders matter to them? The German government arrests its own citizens for 'holocaust denial', the law of the victors of WW 2. Its mortal enemies dictate its history books and its mainstream culture; enslavement is the norm, true freedom an impossibility. We live in a state in which every degradation and insult against its own people is not only permitted by the state, but a sign of good conduct of its citizens. But insult a 'protected group' and you become unpersoned. And every alien, imported ideology which is full of hatred for Europe and its people becomes political mainstream. BLM being the last cultural revolution export from the Great Satan.

Do we have a domestic cultural industry rooted in our own history and genuine European values to rival and out-compete Hollywood and Netflix? No.

Do we have European companies which control the flow of internet information with laws that guarantee our freedom of speech? No.

Do we have an economic enthusiasm and capabilities only somewhere near China? No.

Common European foreign policy independent from the USA and Israel? No.

And there is something new identitarians do not seem to understand: there are no nations anymore! There is no America. There is no unified Europe. There is no rising China (which America's real elite built up in the first place). There is no Russia. There is a global system of systems, the global capital system and its cosmopolitan elite; a global class of people. Larry Fink and Klaus Schwab are the same category. These are a people that know no homeland, let alone a fatherland. That jet today to Paris and tomorrow to New York, then to Shanghai and another day to London. Those are a people that are at home everywhere and nowhere. And the people will follow them as human resources. While a Merkel owes more allegiance to the Open Society Foundation, or only the headlines of the New York Times than to any notion of organic German history that wasn't already synthesized into absolute evil by its worst enemies. The mentor of Klaus Schwab was Henry Kissinger, that of Joschka Fischer was Madeleine Albright.

We have a trans-Atlantic and in reality already global elite of Davos and Bilderberg; Polish, Hungarian and Russian nationalism are pure illusions. Poland and Hungary are tolerated, for now, because they are irrelevant! And very, very kosher. Even in China I cannot see a true anti-thesis and real competitor for an entirely different world order. Power games by Sheldon Adelson and Huawei, or the Trump admin and Macron not once have challenged the primary paradigms and foundational principles of this world order. Neither has Brexit. All of these governments, ultimately, are nothing but the managerial class of the real and permanent elite. There is a vision for the world... and you're not in it!

How many divisions do the identitarians have? In which major European country is any group ready and truly capable to take on the global institutions of power and come out victories? Golden Dawn? Ricoed and jailed. Sebastian Kurz? Honored guest at AIPAC and ally to Moshe Kantor. Macron? Rothschild banker. Nordic Resistance Movement? Can't even keep their bitchute channel. The New Right, Alt-Right? It's all just podcasting and blogging by people who have no institutional power and no political influence, but get occasionally used by foreign ics, all talk and some media events. Sellner didn't gain the AfD a single %. Instead the AfD, Zionist in the first place, and by copying the US retard right, lost on all fronts. From years of Alt-Right and Identitarian activity absolutely nothing has materialized. Not one policy was changed. Not one non-European was kept out. And not one war was stopped. The culture? Hegemonic leftist-liberal globalism. Not one truly meaningful institution was established, of just the size of Fox News while our mortal enemies control all of the state media.

I know of a time when Europe was truly sovereign and we could speak of European world politics. When there was a group ready to take on the world, if it had to be and with the army, the system and the faith to carry it. Maybe the most advanced state in the entire world with some of the best engineers and soldiers it had ever seen. 92% of Americans were against participating in WW 2. And yet the masters of media and money and of real political influence managed to get millions of Americans and its entire military machine to fight at the side of Stalin to the death and kill and kill and kill until it was done. The ruins of Berlin in 1945 do tell a story, the story of the people who are truly in power and who are in power today and have only gotten stronger.

Again right this moment German citizens are in jail, jailed by their in name only own government, by decree of a foreign, hostile power, for nothing but speech. In the case of Horst Mahler a more severe sentence than rapists and most murderers receive. And as long as only that is the case, moving fantasy borders around, is like moving phantom divisions. The old right has mostly given up and are waiting for a collapse that never comes. Conservatives root for the king of Israel. Nazbol types foolishly root for China: ask Tibet how ethno-nationalists or "ethno-pluralists" are doing there. And the European identitarians and political New Right have no answers, no solutions, not even a real strategy! Except as a European tool to be used and discarded by Bannon, Dugin, Likud or the Kushners, I suppose. But they ended defeated, demonized and ultimately outlawed like the old post war NS which they looked down upon. Although Hans Ulrich Rudel and the DVU had achieved more than Dugin fanboy Sellner ever will. While the tower of Babel of the Bernard Baruch and Coudenhove-Kalergi EU grows and is here to stay. Unsurprisingly in growing alliance with communist China. While Bibi and Kushner create Middle Eastern facts. It is honestly shocking how utterly weak the right has become and how gullible the masses.

All I can see is a great kabuki theater to give the plundered and disenfranchised masses the illusion of choice and participation, as they are being replaced, and that leaves room for snake oil salesmen of all flavors. Including the New Right which was in many instances a big scam by failed existences. Including people I actually had reason to have hopes in, like Frauke Petry. And who of us is even truly ready to die for something he believes in? And for what? From Otto Skorzeny to shamefully posting merchant and coomer memes, utterly terrified of being doxxed? It's pathetic!


Hitler was defeated, but Europe lost the war.

Replies: @Guillaume Durocher

The EU pretended to be the Way of the Future in 2000 with the Lisbon agenda: « make Europe, by 2010, the most competitive and the most dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world ». This embarrassing episode for the EU has been memory-holed. I suspect the European Green Deal will last a bit longer but end the same way.

There are some grumblings from local media figures, but I do not pay them much attention for various reasons.


They emphasize the idea that Transylvania having more control over its affairs would be more prosperous. There is a claim of better governance there in the now, which is not sufficiently warranted to justify the hypothesis that some sort of autonomy would lead to much better outcomes as opposed to the likely costs and heartaches. In my opinion, this is another instance of the narcissism of small differences. There are just as many corruption scandals, instances of ill spent money and so on. What there is, in fact, is another degree of the West to East shift in governance quality to related to the historical Ostsiedlung, patterns of earlier urbanization, higher literacy, higher prosperity with investment in culture. The first printed Romanian texts came from Transylvania. But it is gradual, just like Western Romania seamlessly crosses over into Eastern Hungary in economic terms. Basically, it is all a function of historical distance from Germany, moderated by terrain and pre-existing infrastructure (which is why the Carpathians were a political border for so long, in many ways, including Transylvania not becoming integrated in the Ottoman Empire like South and East Romania, but also like Eastern Hungary, or not getting ripped to shreds by mongols).

Why I think autonomist talk exists and persists, despite the inexistent traction at higher level and among the normies:
- Firstly, a change of tactics from Hungary and its "agents" (some of whom are useful idiots) once they realized that autonomy for Szekely Land would be highly unlikely. Afterwards, there was a switch to the multicultural blend of Transylvania, a unique Transylvanian identity that earlier Hungarians local leadership sought to preserve and which Romania betrayed by allegedly not adhering to its covenant in Alba Iulia with the minorities (which Romanians insist consisted of political representation, and cultural, educational and administrative rights in their own language wherever present beyond a certain percentage, not of autonomy). That Transylvania is unique is true, but heavy magyarization policies starting in the mid 19th century (aimed at everybody, including Germans) show the lie of it. Including policies that were quickly resumed after the Diktat of Vienna, when Northern Transylvania was awarded by our ally, Nazi Germany, to our ally, Hungary.
- So, now, Romanian think tanks and the MFA speak of attempts by Hungary to create a situation of co-sovereignty in Transylvania (or de-sovereignization of Romania) not just through cultural and economic involvement, which is not per se objectionable to the milksops in Bucharest, but done without consultation, agreement and approval from the national authorities as if it were not the territory of another sovereign. One interesting example is the Kos Karoly Plan (a turn of the century Hungarian supremacist, respectable enough in my eyes, but now being whitewashed into a flaming liberal for multiethnic Transylvania), which became the umbrella strategy for economic involvement in Romania. Another example are the quite frequent unannounced visits by high ranking Hungarian officials to the region, without prior notification or coordination with Bucharest, as well as their declarations. A good article on this can be found here
https://larics.ro/dan-dungaciu-ce-inseamna-de-suveranizarea-romaniei-in-transilvania-o-clarificare-pentru-presa-de-la-budapesta/
Whatever faults anyone might find with it, remember that this is an internal group of the Romanian Academy, so they are likely representative of what is being said inside Romanian institutions.
- The money pumped by Hungary buys a lot of goodwill. Ever since some of the more vociferous protests of the Romanian government, the Romanian minority in the central region has also benefited from agricultural investment etc.
- The persistent idea that governance is MUCH better in Transylvania than elsewhere, attributing its better fortunes to their own merits rather than a privileged geographical position closer to Western markets, the heavy German/Austrian investment that prefers the area due also to the largest still extant network of German language schools from the former Ostsiedlung (a German businessman told me this and my own boss grew up as the only Romanian in a German school and became fluent as a result) and the Romanian state's prioritization of this area for investment in highways and in railways, it being the logical thing to do. There is an up to date map here of highways under construction in Romania http://www.130km.ro/harta.html The Northern Black portions are now being bid on and will soon enter construction as well. The future European railway corridor is another example. One of the most persistent national conspiracy theories is that Hungary (along with Germany and Austria) sabotage efforts aimed at cross-Carpathian infrastructure tying the historical regions together, in order to effect an eventual dismemberment of the country. The Moldovans have expressed very high frustration at the prioritization of Transylvania for infrastructure, especially since connecting the regions via highways is especially difficult. In Moldova, there is the road with the highest number of fatalities in Romania because of how crowded it is.
- Local resentment at the high number of Moldovans (from Romanian Moldova, but also the Republic) moving in because of the low unemployment, higher economic growth etc. Cluj and other areas are some of the hottest and unaffordable real estate markets in Romania. And Cluj had, for a brief while, higher rents than Bucharest, a city officially 6-7 times its size. Transylvania, the whole of it, is becoming more Romanian because of its economic growth, which will happen even to the majority Hungarian counties as they become better connected. An autonomous or federal subject Transylvania is basically Canada, and can impose a sort of binationalism which, in Canada, led to an overrepresentation of the French among the elites (being the more likely bilinguals) and the reversal of Anglicization trends in cities like Montreal.
- The usual douchebaggery between neighboring regions, just like neighboring cities and neighboring villages

Why I think the talk will just stay that way:
- Transylvanians are overrepresented among Romanian political and business elites. The current mayor of Cluj was the former Prime Minister. The current President is from Sibiu. Including the very many minorities (not just Hungarian) who hold or have held power at the level of the Romanian state. There are three types of elites - those who are satisfied with the status quo (most in Romania), those who want a bigger stage for their careers and their egos (the EU federalists) and those who want to amplify their power by having a smaller pond in which they will be the bigger fish (the autonomists, who are in the extreme minority, and the decentralists, who are quite numerous but want to see a lot more financial power devolved at local and county levels, not to have their own Parliaments and Presidents). This latter group is made up of local elites, but not just ethnic elites, also the "local barons" who have increased their power within the national parties (Liviu Dragnea is a Southern local baron transplanted to national politics). You can tell the local barons by having a grip on machine politics at city and commune level, by having business interests in construction, agriculture, animal rearing, tourism, and by either being uneducated, or being educated in fields like agronomy, engineering, oil etc. UDMR has failed at securing autonomy because it has steadily been absorbed into Romanian national politics as a near constant governing partner. They are local elites who have become national elites. UDMR gained the richest Romanian ministry in the current coalition government (the Ministry for Development).
- UDMR is seen as a fifth column for Hungary, with its leader flying to Budapest for talks with Orban right after the recent elections. However, under the surface, there is resentment at Budapest throwing its weight around and thinking its money makes them their boss. The money may be icing on the cake, but the cake is provided by the Romanian state, especially in the poor Hungarian areas, which are heavy net tax recipients. An indication of this was the former UDMR leader, Marko Bela (apparently on the outs with Orban), writing an op-ed in the Hungarian press (in Hungary) in which he warned that they should take their minds off of Transylvania and seek a better economic partnership with Romania through real cooperation with Bucharest. Writing this article is a sort of third rail, because every Hungarian liberal I have met is resentful at Fidesz's electoral strength through its vote farms in the surrounding countries, especially Romania. UDMR will get more inducements, including symbolic gestures like the recent abandonment of the initiative to make the 4th of June (Trianon) a national holiday in Romania.
- Romanians talk shit about each other, especially in public (I admire Bulgaria for how it presents itself to Europe like its shit does not stink - you will not catch Bulgarian euro-parliamentarians proposing Art. 7 sanctions against their own country like one Romanian liberal did). But there is an essential, atavistic, ethnic solidarity that sadly does not translate into real elite rearing and policy making but does make for excellent survival reflexes. Getting the country torn asunder will make even Romanian liberals cross-eyed, though they will start by saying that adding another layer of bureaucracy is not the way, Romania needs top down reform through central institutions, the "provinces" are too underdeveloped and immature as polities etc etc. All true, but all excuses for a visceral dread of getting torn apart which was learned the hard way.
- Resentment at the Hungarians. Essentially, the big mouthed Moldovans and Wallachians don't really care about the Hungarians as long as the country is safe and the perceived insults are minimized. The quiet, unflappable and diligent Transylvanians, while admiring the Hungarians as their former overlords (but even more for the Austrians), have a deep distrust of them as a group (not as individuals). They still remember how they could not have churches in town, how 1848 saw the last vestiges of serfdom removed, how their ancestors could not build stone houses and were sold with the land, and how their grandfathers got beat up and renamed Istvan after the Diktate of Vienna. To this day, aside from the Gypsies, the weirdest names in Romania are found in Transylvania, where a habit was formed to give people awful and old fashioned names that could not be magyarized - Romeliu, Flavius, Ieronim, Decebal, Traian. Sure, they are a minority, but still much more common than elsewhere. Moving the passions of Balkans politics to provincial level through autonomy in this complicated area is stupid beyond belief. They would have terrorist groups in a few years. It is bad enough for the state to keep finding Hungarian wannabe paramilitaries training in Romania. Imagine when our guys get in on the action, especially, since, by Communist design (and military pragmatism concerning the vulnerable East and West), the Hungarian regions are surrounded by military bases which today host our special forces. Therefore, the region is also full of military retirees. No region in Romania has quite the same volatile mix as Transylvania. Of course, it is not at Balkans level, but it has been, to the surprise of many, a very quiet country. Another Romanian conspiracy theory is that Romania was slated for the same dismemberment as Yugoslavia after 1989 but had better diplomacy in the end.
- Every time the autonomist thing picks up steam, something happens to crap on it and remind people of the past. One example is the trend of former Hungarian noblemen claiming back land from the Romanian state which was never confiscated by the Communists, but by the Kingdom during a period of agrarian reform. Romania has very generous and open ended policies regarding full restitution of property to all legitimate descendants (much better than Hungary ever had), but there is some sort of loop hole or unaddressed issue whereby these people are getting back property which their ancestors had already been compensated for. Romania had two big precommunist agricultural reforms (expropriation for distribution to landless peasants) - one during the union of Wallachia and Moldova, in 1863-1864 aimed at church land (Romania only gained a Patriarchate in the 1920s and a quarter of the arable land of the country belonged to Greek controlled churches). The second was in 1921 (actually the year of land distribution, the reform had been in the making since before the war and the unification) and was aimed at all big landowning families, the Royal Family and the subjects of foreign princes. In Transylvania, that meant Hungarian landowners, many of them noble. The peasants that received property were three quarters Romanian, one quarter Hungarian, about half a million families in total. The Hungarian noblemen took the state to international court and Romania was forced in Paris to pay 100 tonnes of gold over what had already been paid, following which the case would be considered closed. An article is here
https://adevarul.ro/locale/alba-iulia/afacerea-necurata-optantilor-unguri-ardeal-fost-tarata-romania-procese-internationale-grofi-conti-detinut-proprietati-aici-1_5571aad6cfbe376e35f61f6f/index.html
Now, after Communism, somehow, the descendants of the Hungarian landowners are claiming back the land, rather than the peasants from whom the Communists took it in the first place. Imagine the headlines in the national media - "the grof returns", grof being the local version of graf and is basically an obscenity to Romanian ears (it resembles the sound the pig makes, which might not be an accident; in our irreverent streak, the word sleahta, which has common roots with the Polish slazchta nobility, means a group of rogues and ne'er-do-wells). It's probably somewhat like "massa" sounds to American Blacks and how they use it.
- Aside from the great starfish itself, Bucharest, Transylvania (or rather, its cities) is the big skimmer of the national cream, is the big beneficiary of whatever infrastructure investment the government manages to get right. The country's talent, workers and ideas that do not go abroad go there. While people are always upset with the slow pace of things (but let's remember our economy is at least 8 times bigger than it was in 1992, with 16% less population), the status quo is pretty good to a lot of people in the elite categories. Why risk it for something you don't even truly believe in?

Hope it illuminates more than it obscures. Sorry for the long post.

As for Prussia, I never really understood Cioran there. If anything, we would be Habsburg and look towards Austria. Sure, by comparison to the Balkans, many people look positively Prussian. But I think I am not mistaken in saying that Austria represented, at least through its own propaganda, a softer and more liberal germanism than the Prussian militarism that was later pegged as the spiritual ancestor of the Nazis (finished reading Iron Kingdom recently). The main difference was, of course, in how society was structured. The really old Prussianism was based on the East-Elbian Junckers like Bismarck, big conservative landowners who begat a military elite and a certain ethos. We did not have that in Transylvania, the Germans were a quite small and mostly urban minority, and, if some resemblance could be found in the big landowners there, like the guys I mentioned in my other post, it certainly did not apply to the Romanians. Some things definitely rubbed off on them but I think Cioran was just tooting his own horn by appealing to the epitome of efficiency as contrasted to Balkan slovenliness. Vienna was the good cop in the Austro-Hungarian "buddy act", especially the idea of the rich, sophisticated, urban, refined Vienna as a model, as well as its role as an enlightened arbiter to which the Romanians could appeal for rights and for emancipation. To this day, there is a Habsburg nostalgia and idealization among many people I spoke with. We were always too intimate with the Hungarians to view them in the same way.
As for the region's liberalism, it comes with the older pattern of urbanization. The components of Romania were not just under different imperial influences and sometimes bootheels, but literally also under different social hierarchies and patterns of social relations. The cities you cited (and more beside them) are also much closer, in geographic and in real terms, to the economic dynamo of Central Europe and always have been. The real question is why the Royals never thought to move the capital to Alba Iulia or Brasov (Kronstadt in German, from its latin name, Corona, literally Crown). Maybe they did not have time. Had they moved the capital, the pattern would be even more striking without Bucharest in the South at its current size (attained during Communism).

During the Austro-Hungarian occupation of Transylvania most Romanians lived in the rural areas.
Even though they were the majority, they didn't have the same rights as the Szekelies, the Hungarians or the Saxons did. They were second hand citizens. In the Saxon towns the Romanians were allowed to enter only if they paid a special tax, but under no circumstance they were allowed to walk on the pavement (they had to walk on the road) or spend the night there. The Hungarians even passed laws forbidding Romanians to give Romanian names to their children or to use stone or mortar when building their houses.

The ghettoization exists in the areas were the Hungarians are the majority (Harghita&Covasna). There the Romanians are very much discriminated against and they could even get in trouble if they speak Romanian.

An occurrence that is generally glossed over, was the policy of forced Magyarisation undertaken by the Hungarians in Transylvania after its annexation to the Kingdom of Hungary in 1867 (the only period when Transylvania 'belonged' to Hungary), which resulted in a growing opposition from the absolute Romanian majority which militated for the autonomy of Transylvania, and in the growing 'nationalist' drive to unite with the Romanian 'Old' Kingdom of all the Romanians of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, a desire expressed since the Revolution of 1848 and fulfilled at the end of WW1. The parents of both Corneliu Codreanu and Ion Moța have been Romanian Orthodox 'irredentist' fighters from Transylvania and Bukovina.
The Magyars in Transylvania became overnight from an oppressing minority, an 'oppressed, discriminated' minority by a 'xenophobic, racist, antisemitic' Romania, agitating with fervor for the revision of the 'System of Versailles', therefore attracting the sympathies and support of the Nazis, Italian Fascists and Catholics. One shouldn't be surprised that this anti-Romanian and anti-Orthodox animus animated the Soros' 'open society' NGOs and his payees (even among Romanian oh-so-'European' intellectuals).

I don't know why he said it. Most probably it was a figure of speech. He was a christian and he was the kind of guy who loved children and animals (I believe he raised almost 10 dogs). He wouldn't have hurt a fly. Not even his worst enemies expected him to shoot anybody if he would have had the chance to do it. But he had a big mouth and the ones who hated him knew how the exploit this weakness of his.

There is no ghettoization of Hungarians. In fact the opposite is the problem for Hungarian nationalists. Hungarians assimilate all too well, in urban areas there are tons of interethnic marriages and most of the time the resulting children identify as Romanian (as it's both practically and psychologically easier to side with the majority).

This is one of the reasons why heavily Hungarian-majority cities in 1920 like Oradea and Cluj now have clear Romanian majorities. In 1920 of the top 10 cities in Transylvania none had a Romanian majority, whereas now they all have Romanian majorities, and except for Targu Mures, Hungarians aren't even close in the rest.

As for gypsies, ironically they aren't the issue they used to be (the worst was arguably the 1980s and 90s). There are several reasons: a lot of them (including the more energetic/criminal-prone among them) are now in the West, there is more welfare, thus they don't need to resort to petty crime as much, there are simple jobs like cashiers that they can perform, and also a lot of them have been pushed (through various legal schemes by local politicians) from the cities back into the countryside, where they form enclaves which don't really bother Romanians. Better nutrition has likely helped their IQ and looks somewhat as well, though I'm not 100% on this one. But theoretically, the Flynn effect should work on them as well.

Replies: @Guillaume Durocher, @Romanian

Thank you Guillaume. I feel privileged to receive a reply from you. I do enjoy your articles -on this site and elsewhere. I really didn't know what the situation was concerning Hungarians in Romania. Yes, Gypsies are quite the treat wherever they wind up. We have them here in New York, but they are lost in the vibrancy of so many other groups. The only thing I can say about them from a long ago interaction is that you would not want them in your bar if you owned one.

” Romania can only be ruled only with the machine gun” Yeah, but why did he said that? What was he talking about? What was the context? Probably he was talking about coruption. This kind of retoric is not something unsual for a writer and a poet, which he was.

You should know that Recorder is the Romanian version of TYT. This says it all.

Replies: @Guillaume Durocher, @Dacian Julien Soros

Sorry to emote but you really always have struck me as a Jew in spirit and the satanic bilge you find interesting confirms it but then again some Greeks also claimed a relationship with Jews being "family" (Hyksos perhaps) no matter the hatred for the Greeks in the bible. Its is not an intellectual thing but rather of the spirit, You could read and discuss for all eternity and never get it.

And promoted by high IQ people who con the simple into doing what is evil and contrary to nature.

Abortion is merely the last resort, most people take use of other forms of birth controll prior to needing a abortion. Some people may be more prone to use abortion as birth controll for reasons such as cultural norms and self discipline.

Thanks much sir, Through googling Chapoutot, I came up with "The Politics of Despair" authored by Fritz Stern. I'll give that a try.

- IOW, you still cannot present the requested proof for your claimed "great scale of Nazi atrocities", so you dodge.

- I remind you, Gillaume, that it's your mentioned "historians" who claim that millions upon millions of Jews & ‘others’ human remains exist in known locations, yet there are no such human remains.

you said: "I am of course open to alternative sources and accounts."

- OK then, good for you, here is just one of your "great Nazi atrocities" utterly debunked, once again, no claimed human remains:

Babi Yar: The [alleged] Einsatzgruppen 'Killings': https://www.unz.com/article/babi-yar/
!! Excavation Result: No Human Remains of alleged 34,000 Jews as claimed at Babi Yar !! In fact, no remains period.': https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11314
79th anniversary of 'Babi Yar Massacre' Fraud: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13562
plus
What Happened to Jews Sent to the Aktion Reinhardt Camps?: by John Wear : https://www.unz.com/article/what-happened-to-jews-sent-to-the-aktion-reinhardt-camps/
much more at:
https://www.unz.com/topic/holocaust/feature/
More where those came from.

"The East is different, just have a look at the annihilation of the elite and population policies in occupied Poland."
 

THE RECONSTRUCTION OF FRANCE: MARSHAL PETAIN'S POLICIES, 1940-1942, AS EVALUATED BY AMERICAN JOURNALISTS AND SCHOLARS
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/215275781.pdf

At the time of the French defeat, too short a time had elapsed since the beginning of the war for a general assessment to develop regarding German occupation patterns or to predict the effects of the German occupation on the conquered states; only from the case of Poland could conclusions be drawn. In some respects, the situation of Poland bore similarities to that of France. Both countries had German minorities and had received territories from Germany in the Treaty of Versailles which were by culture and language German. Poland therefore could serve as a precedent for the French government as it groped for clues regarding German policies after conquest. While Germany's annexation of its pre-World War I territory in Poland had been expected, nobody anticipated the destruction of the Polish elite and the expropriation, expulsion, and resettlement of one million Poles. International law was violated. While annexation in the case of total conquest and in the absence of a functioning government was permissible, the expropriation of private property was not.
 

Replies: @Colin Wright, @Colin Wright

Thank you, Guillaume. (By the way, I'm not "Mrs. Yeager," since that would mean Yeager is my married name. It is my birth name; the Yeager's in my life are my blood relatives.)

Please look at the following sources for a start - I think they would help you understand the larger situation in which the war developed as it did. Very important. The anti-Nazis would have us focus only on what took place after war was unleashed. Once at war, attitudes are hardened. But we must understand why war was unleashed and who wanted it, for what purposes. Yes?

Podcasts
https://carolynyeager.net/hitler-and-slavs
with special attention to Part 3 and 4:
Poland – the Great Pretender https://carolynyeager.net/heretics-hour-hitler-and-slavs-3
How Poland became such a regional troublemaker https://carolynyeager.net/heretics-hour-hitler-and-slavs-4
Ukrainian nationalism
https://carolynyeager.net/heretics-hour-hitler-and-slavs-6

Articles
How the Poles conspired with the Americans to falsely blame Germany for “aggression” against Poland in 1939.
https://carolynyeager.net/gleiwitz-%E2%80%9Cfalse-flag%E2%80%9D-incident-pure-fiction
Poland claims 6 million of its citizens were killed during WWII, half (3 million) of them Jews. This is a lie. https://carolynyeager.net/search-wwii-mass-graves

Auschwitz
https://carolynyeager.net/auschwitz-underground-guided-tour

Poland now demands “reparations”
https://carolynyeager.net/shameless-poles-use-falsified-history-demand-more-money-hard-working-germans

From The Scriptorium
The Polish Atrocities Against the German Minority in Poland
https://wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/atrocities/pagmp000.html
Poland from the Inside
https://wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/polandinside/pfi00.html
Unknown History of the 1939 German-Polish Conflict
https://wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/articles/wrsynopsis.html
Death in Poland: The Fate of the Ethnic Germans
https://wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/deathinpoland/dp00.html
Long Night's Journey Into Day
https://wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/longnightsjourney/lnjid00.html

Soviet Union
https://carolynyeager.net/goebbels-vlasov-irving-question
https://carolynyeager.net/goebbels-vlasov-irving-question-part-2

Guillaume, your reader here, great article, as always.

Here's a Wermacht soldier reminiscing on German atrocities against Polish civilians during the Warsaw Uprising in 1944, Beyond horrifying. In Polish (narrator) and German (subtitles). Hope you'll find it interesting.

"When bodies are on fire, they move. There are noises like moans. Back then I thought they were really still alive. And those flies, worms. How many people were killed in Warsaw? Probably 350 thousand. Yes?"

https://youtu.be/UD-TXVuHjXE

Conditioned a la Pavlov's dog, you said:

"The historians – while virtually all acknowledging the great scale of Nazi atrocities in Poland and the Soviet Union ... "

- But there is no proof of your "great scale of Nazi atrocities".

- If you really believed it you would at least attempt to proof it.

https://www.historiography-project.com/assets/img/cartoons/house_of_cards.gif

Replies: @Guillaume Durocher, @Ugetit

I don’t know what the Total Security Law refers to.
 

Somewhat OT, but do pupils still learn Latin in the French school system or is that seen as too elitist nowadays?

Replies: @Dan Hayes

Unfortunately, much of that ideology is anti-EU civic nationalism.
 

Replies: @Mr. XYZ

Unfortunately, much of that ideology is anti-EU civic nationalism. If Brexit is any indication, that means any Le Pen administration would likely waste a lot of energy theatrically clawing back bits of legal sovereignty from Brussels, with arguably little result.
 

Replies: @Anonymous

Actually the methods we talk about were applied in the first decades of Communism in Romania when Ceausescu was a second plan figure in the Party, by the 'internationalist-anti-fascist' (Comintern) flotsam that occupied key positions in the Party and State and filled the ranks of the Securitate, in majority non-ethnic Romanians (Hungarian Jews, Russian Jews), with grudges against the ethnic Romanians and who were still adepts of the Comintern's plans to partition Romania among its 'worthy' neighbors.
Ceausescu, with all his faults was a peasant, instinctively nationalist and patriot (anathema for the 'globalists' of the 'International Community'). He got rid of many of the internationalists and turned to a 'nationalistic' line which upset the 'anti-fascists' who reverted illico presto to accusations of 'anti-semitism', 'xenophobia', 'persecution of minorities' (the 'West' was incensed by the 'treatment of Hungarian minority'), sentiments deep-seated into the psyche of an unworthy and dysfunctional nation (actually the 'West' has difficulties to recognize that Romanians are a nation) because of the nefarious influence of the Orthodox Church.
Cioran certainly did not advocate the 'extermination' of Romanians. Anyhow, it would be hard to make sense of Cioran not having an inkling about the 'cafe culture' that Cioran frequented assiduously in the inter-war Bucharest: "In Bucharest I met lots of people, many interesting people, especially losers, who would show up at the cafe, talking endlessly and doing nothing. I have to say that, for me, these were the most interesting people there. People who did nothing all their lives, but who otherwise were brilliant".
What is curious (and not so) is that he was assiduously promoted in post-communist Romania by the intellectual mercenaries of the Soros gang.

Agree about La Rochefoucauld. One cannot have illusions about human progress after reading him, a seminal writer in the education of every Buddhist and cheerful nihilist.

British philosopher John Gray manages to combine La Rochefoucauld with a kind of mystic Taoism and is a modern exemplar of the school of cheerful disillusion.

Replies: @Agathoklis

As I mentioned, his books were banned in Communist Romania for their alleged 'anti-Communist' and 'mistico-fascist' content. Now, you know that Communism was equated (officially) with atheism. Reality is that atheism failed in Romania, due of course, to the 'backwardness' of the people and partly to the half-hearted application by the Party of the Soviet modes of 'convincing' people to abandon their deep seated 'obscurantist' modes of thinking (people viewed atheism and communism as an imposition by the Soviet occupants). In short, people remained Orthodox and Orthodoxy's outlook is completely alien to the kind of 'Job's' ruminations to which the 'West' is so adept to, believing that is proof of the heroic courage of man to 'think with his own head'. It actually perceive them as a symptom of the decadence and putrefaction of the 'West' which lost its faith. Orthodoxy takes for granted the answer for Job's ruminations.
But, misinformed about the real exploits of Cioran, they believed the propaganda that he was a 'mistic-obscurantist' (which was in the Party's parlance the essence of Orthodoxy) of the kind that filled to the brim the islands of the Romanian GULAG, to be 're-educated' in atheism.
The disappointment came when they realized that the 'anti-communist', 'mistic' was speaking the same language as the 're-educators' (actually that he spoke it always: "I agree with many of the things I’ve seen here, and I am persuaded that our native good-for-nothingness could be stifled, if not eradicated, by a dictatorial regime. In Romania, only terror, brutality and infinite anxiety could still lead to some change. All Romanians should be arrested and beaten to a pulp; only after such a beating could a superficial people make history" -1933!). That he was not what he was made to be.
It was hard to understand how and why the son of a priest, born and brought up in a region were Orthodoxy was welded with Romanian nationalism, were Orthodoxy was the source of strength, hope and optimism in the future of the nation which just completed its state unity (Romania Mare), for long believed to be a 'fighter' from the 'Free World' for the liberation from the yoke of the atheist communists (scores of people crammed the jails only for suspicion that they had contacts with him) got the burning complex of inferiority that tortured him all his life. Romanians may be a small and insignificant nation, with a small and insignificant culture in the eyes of the West, but they are not in their own eyes and although they are not indifferent when they are treated with the contempt that the West reserves for the 'orientals', 'balkaniks', they don't lose much sleep about it. As a famous French (Raymond Poincaré) who happened to have an experience of Romania before WW1 put it: ""Que voulez-vous, nous sommes ici aux portes de l'Orient, où tout est pris à la légère".

Replies: @SeekerofthePresence, @Guillaume Durocher

See Seraphim #53.

Yes, I definitely think we can be happy, if we accept life as it is and stop trying to be other than we are, and dont take ourselves or the world too seriously!

But this seems to be so far at least, a hard task for humanity. Probably, only individuals at any given time can really do this, although I think some societies can be more influenced by this attitude than others, and more conducive to happiness.

Please continue with your excellent series on the French moralistes. This "skeptical" philosophic tradition is to my mind the most profound in Europe - Neitzsche thought likewise. It attempts to "see through" life, while the Germans, even pessimists like Schopenhauer, are really at bottom superficially optimistic. And forget about the Anglos....

Replies: @James O'Meara, @Guillaume Durocher

Honestly, we've been fucked over so well and truly by The Economist/political establishment, that we have to accept our fate and defeat - as hard as this sounds.

Personally, I'm happy of the fact that I am childless and approaching the autumn of my life. Bringing my kin into this Economist run world is, to me, the ultimate act of evil.

As I mentioned on another thread, the only hope, a forlorn one at that, of the white race is to form a respectful cohabitation with the Chinese masters of the future.

Sorry to depress you all, but I really, truly, honestly can't see another way out of this political/Economist created cataclysm.

Guillaume, I am actually thinking of the Druze in Syria/Lebanon, the Alawites in Syria, the Zoroastrians in Yazd or Yezidi in Nineveh. Over the centuries, the authorities seemed to have tolerated them as long as they stayed in their mountain refuges or isolated desert communities. Of course, there was the occasional massacre or mass rape by an over-zealous Caliph or Pasha but generally they were left alone. Granted, this perhaps not feasible in the modern age.

An amazing article! I wish to live to the 2040s to see this future come into being!

Have you noticed that the term Eurabia has fallen out of use?
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=%2Fm%2F02m17s

My geographical vision of that time:
https://i.postimg.cc/2C9wkNtn/The-World-in-2100-CE-by-Ad-n-i-2.png
The Crusaders of tomorrow are the warriors of Tawheed eager to wrestle Jerusalem out of Shia hands. Only the might of the Turkish and Aryan Empires is the guarantor of peace.

Replies: @Guillaume Durocher

Well, but they did écrasé l’infâme, didn’t they?

How was the Ancien Régime “awful”?
 

Replies: @John Gruskos

Guillaume in your opinion what percentage of France is European/ White ?
I recall Jean Yves Le Gallou estimating France is 80% European would that be accurate also I read that Michelle Tribalat estimated France at 85% European.

Also with regards to 3rd generation immigrants would most of them be Europeans ?

Finally Twitter demographer Cicerone iirc estimated Ethnic French to make up 65% of total births nationwide with Other Europeans another 10%. Any thoughts.

Thanks

Replies: @Some Guy

Pointing out that Onfray is only permitted on television precisely because he preaches passivity instead of resistance is a pretty good refutation.

That's what they in the 1990's about 2020. Anyways Europeans have a history of genocide and ethnic cleansing remember?

We do.

Replies: @Anonymous

Selon Juan Branco (ex-collaborateur de Descoings, c'est lui qui avait révélé l'homosexualité de Gabriel Attal il y a deux ans) , Brigitte Macron aurait, en 2016, payé Mimi Marchand, la paparazzi en chef de Xavier Niel, pour vérifier si son mari était homosexuel. Elle n'aurait trouvé aucune preuve accablante. À mon avis, il est très probable que Macron soit un homosexuel réprimé, et que Brigitte lui serve de figure maternelle.

If I remember correctly, Brigitte was Macron's drama teacher when he was a young lad in high school and she probably still coaches him on his stage and television appearances today.

Beyond all that, doesn't Brigitte's family have money and important connections -- attributes that have been very useful throughout Macron's rise from high school thespian to Rothschild banker to president of the French Republic?

Replies: @Alfred

But wouldn't being gay have been a political plus for Macron? He was never a man of the Right (as far as I've read). Why hide?

Replies: @Servant of Gla'aki

Would you please repair the one great omission I see in your analysis.

You say nothing of the voting power of immigrants and their children and grandchildren. Nor is the time it takes to become a citizen and any qualifications required. The Gulf States aren't threatened by their imported labour forces. Why should democracy open themselves up to change by fertility or ease of becoming voting citizens.

After WW2 Australia made citizenship ridiculously easy to obtain but got away with it and it's selective immigration seems to be continuing its luck.

My formula would be to require 10 or 15 years of net taxpaying and English language proficiency before Anyone in a family became a full citizen with the vote.. indeed my solution to Israel's problem with over fertile Palestinians is to include them in a single state but create a powerful sencond chamber of the Knesset for which only met taxpayers of 15 years standing could vote. That should put the problem off for 100 years.

Yes, La Pen is a flawed and inferior standard barer. France needs a Salvini or even a Meloni type. Both have more carisma and political skills than La Pen.

Usually, I don't care. I have mostly given up explaining Jean Paul to the world or Wilhelm Busch, or Johan Jacob Christoffel von Grimmelshausen. But in the case of Thilo Sarrazin, there is something happening here, and I don't know what it is. I'm baffled and - curious.

You find quite a few articles about an - interesting, ok - author like Jean-Claude Michéa in the German press by Jürg Alwegg in the FAZ and Martina Meister in die weLT for example. The Berlin press revue Perlentaucher wrote about him in April. His latest book has been translated in German and has been published by Matthes & Seitz, no nobody in the German public. - Whereas a writer like Thilo Sarrazin goes almost completely unnoticed in France with one of his five rather brilliant books translated (none of them in English or any other language I'd know of with the one exception of his first book being translated in French. I could name you quite easily a dozen French writers on politics, who are vividly discussed in Germany - the same for the English speaking world of course, - which is something different altogether, ok).

Thilo Sarrazin is the most interesting German writer on politics and economics in the last ten or so years, and he did get across to a huge audience - so this should spark some interest - but it hardly does. As I said: I'm curious, I would really like to understand what is going on here.

Replies: @German_reader

L'allemangne Disparait - Deutschland schafft sich ab (= Germany Does Away with Itself, Steve Sailer) has been translated in French, you're right. But the one I spoke about: Germany Doesn't Need the Euro - no. And there are no other translations of any of his numerous books - all of them great.

- The German publisher DVA, owned by the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, is ashamed of its - by far! - most successful author - that might explain this translation-failure at least in part. There is nobody working in that direction.

I'm sure, his books will be translated though, just because there's nobody around who would be as good in analyzing the economy (and society, and politics) of modern-day Europe (and Germany - and Angela Merkel (best essay about Merkel I've come across so far - by Thilo Sarrazin in: Angela Merkel - Eine kritische Bilanz, hrsg. von Phlipp Plickert, München 2017).

Replies: @Guillaume Durocher

Surely, the greatest ever son of Gallia - Napoleon - was an Italian man.

You forgot to include Breton, which is enjoying a resurgence of interest in France's Brittany. My wife's late father spoke fluent Breton.

Here is a very interesting article by a very brilliant guy I didn´t even know about. It´s about two different conceptions of universalism and their radically different consequences. It was written in response to a comment by Eric Zemmour on the topic. I am sure you will find it interesting:

http://www.autochtonisme.com/2020/01/la-france-et-l-universel-une-reponse-a-eric-zemmour.html

Comme bonus, voilà un article très intéressant du même type sur le Katechon, les cosmogonies des différentes religions, etc:
http://www.autochtonisme.com/2019/02/effondrement-civilisationnel-et-katechon.html

Also, it would be interesting to see your thoughts on the controversy Soral-Zemmour. Many claim (Jérôme Bourbon, for instance) that Zemmour is just a zionist agent and even that he´s as thick as thieves with BHL (!). I strongly tend to think that Zemmour is sincere. I know, this is too "franco-français". But one of the main subjects of the Unz Review is Jewish Power, so why not write about that?
Also, I think it´s terrible that Soral seems to have resigned himself to massive afro-muslim presence in France. In his view, all we have to do is get rid of Jewish Power (les fauteurs de guerre), and the Muslim and Christian French (!) children of Abraham will live a paradise of vivre-tous-ensemble characterised, you guessed it, by "equality and reconciliation". I normally agree with or at least can see where Alain Soral is coming from. But this is so retarded and incoherent that it lends credence (at least superficially) to claims that he is some kind of Iranian (?) agent of influence (all the more likely if we consider that the man barely has any money and the French state takes every penny he earns to give it to Jewish organisations). He made very revealing comments in response to a question by a listener in Soral répond. The said listener brought up the question of the great replacement and possible violence down the line. But Soral immediately avoided the question (after saying that, yes, migration had been a great mistake and that Mélenchon would have to stop it if he were serious about the social question) and started attacking the Jews (of course), going so far as to say that bringing up the question of migration was useful in Le Pen´s time (because it was "preventive"), but not now (you see, once you have millions of foreigners in France, it´s too late, and complaining about it turns you into a fauteur de guerre like Zemmour). With him, it´s all about thwarting the Jews, with the interest of France coming in at a distant second place.

Replies: @Guillaume Durocher

Guillaume, Italian Jews have most often the name of the city they come from (Pontecorvo is in SE Lazio). Many of them are named Ferrara or Ferrari, as Ferrara was the center of Jewish life in the 1500 (they abandoned the city after the 1574 earthquake). Others have their family name ending in certain ways.

Tangential to all this, in 1992 I had the pleasure and honor to have dinner with the brother, Bruno Pontecorvo. He was already very weak from Parkinson, and needed assistance to move around. Nevertheless, he spoke at length, with barely audible voice, perhaps due to my evident interest.

Brief summary of what Bruno did: a Fermi student, he started lines of neutrino research that led to four Nobel prizes (actually more, as some were awarded to more than one person). But in 1948 he defected to the USSR where he participated in the program that led to the soviet atom bomb. Needless to say, he never was awarded a Nobel he easily deserved (in the same discussion, he mentioned in passing that Fermi should have won 8, and Occhialini, 2).

But we also touched on other subjects, including the 1948 defection, and his cultural origins. I have no doubt that the family is/was communist first, and Jewish second. By 1992, he also admitted that he had become disillusioned with the USSR sometime in the 1970, but still had beliefs of how a society should be organized. Iris representation of what Gillo did is very much on target. The whole film is the product of an ideology that regards colonialism as the original sin. It does use true facts and prioritizes them over other facts.

Replies: @Iris

The American Indians were not annihilated by the Whites. Their population has tripled in the last 300 years. Several Indian autonomous territories known as reservations are larger than France. The tribal governments are supported by the federal government. As individuals each Indian gets a government check every month. It’s not considered welfare. It’s something like a perpetual hereditary mortgage payment for the lands taken by the American government from their tribe since 1790. They are both American citizens and tribal members.

They’re all over the country. For instance, there are 12 tribal autonomous territories Reservations in New York State, within a short drive from America’s largest city.

Replies: @Anonymous, @anonymous

Likewise, you could say some similar things about the modern French. Their achievements are Islamic mass migration, homosexuality, smoking, French 'philosophy', homosexuality, pederasty, record breaking Smurf festivals, homosexuality, homosexuality; and guess what, homosexaulity.

The Alt-Right will never achieve anything when their so called writers/thinkers like Durocher peddle Nordicist theories that are easily refuted by science.

Replies: @anon, @dimples, @Dave Bowman

Civilisation was diffused from Mesopotamia, as each peoples acquired that learning they displaced the previous dominant culture. So Greeks supplanted the Levantines, the Romans them and then the Germans and Nordics after that. Early on, due to the climate, survival was the priority for the Northern peoples, however technological advances enabled a more diversified lifestyle in due course. Warmer climates are now doing better as air conditioning makes productive enterprise possible.

Replies: @Guillaume Durocher, @Anon

But there is little genetic overlap. It is ironic how the latest genetic research is upending Nordicist infantile fantasies often peddled by people like you, Guillaume. For example, we now know with a high level of confidence that modern Greeks are actually more northern than ancient Greeks due to probably some Slavic intrusion 1400-1200 years ago. The ancient's skin were probably a little darker and definitely had mostly black/brown eyes and hair based on ancientDNA samples.

Replies: @Guillaume Durocher, @Malla

Indeed.
 

As things happened, there was far too much bad blood between the French and the Algerians by 1962. The Europeans realized by then their alternative was “the suitcase or the coffin.”
 

https://crc-internet.org/our-doctrine/national-restoration/algerian-war/4-rebellion-accomplices.html

"The FLN was a movement that came from the Organisation spécial (OS; Special Organisation), the terrorist branch of Messali Hadj’s Marxist movement : the “ Mouvement pour le Triomphe des Libertés Démocratiques ” (MTLD; Movement for the Triumph of Democratic Liberties). Shortly before, in the spring of 1954, twenty-two activists of the OS had decided to split away and chose a directory : the “ Committee of Nine ”. These men proclaimed themselves the historical leaders of the FLN. The Front inherited from the OS its revolutionary character and its method : terror. It always excluded Communists to avoid having to submit to them, but nevertheless it kept their methods and their Marxist dialectic. The FLN also used the ulemas to rouse the peasant masses to fanaticism and to justify the acts of slaughter that they would commit in the name of Islam. Finally, the “ Union Démocratique du Manifeste Algérien ” (UDMA; Democratic Union of the Algerian Manifesto) led by Ferhat Abbas, also contributed to the expansion of the FLN by stirring up the Muslim middle-class and awakening French public opinion to its claims."

...snip....

"THE PHILIPPEVILLE MASSACRE
For French Muslims, nothing was more unnatural than this bloody rebellion. There is nothing more opposed to historical truth than a massive uprising of the Algerian people against colonial France.

The FLN leaders could but take note of this strong reluctance that their co-religionists showed towards them. Zighout Youssef, the rebel leader in the area (or wilaya) of North Constantine, a fanatical supporter of jihad, understood that it would be necessary to dig a gulf of blood between Muslims and Europeans so as to create an irreparable situation and to make any rapprochement between the two communities forever impossible. On August 20, 1955, in Philippeville, 51 Muslins and 71 Europeans, the elderly, women and babies included, had their throats slit, were disembowelled or dismembered. And what can be said of the El Hadia slaughter on the same day ? Dreadful... The police intervened but were unable to prevent reprisals by the Europeans, who were tried beyond endurance. 1,273 deaths were registered. Europeans were gripped by fear and Muslims with resentment.

For the FLN, it was a victory. It then had to enlarge the wound by organising other acts of pillage and slaughter. In May 1957, it had been responsible for 1,800 cases of arson on farms, slitting the throats of or stealing 80,000 head of cattle, and the destruction of 12,000,000 grapevines. The FLN wanted first to kill Europeans and the Muslims whose spirit of justice and qualities of heart were factors that contributed to harmony existing between the communities. This conduct would acquire such an official character that in 1959 Krim Belkacem, who became the FLN’s “ Minister of War ”, declared cynically to journalists : « Assassination is proof of the preparation and the aptitude of new recruits : a new recruit must kill at least one colonialist or known traitor ». Such was the infernal mechanism that the FLN set in motion."

"The suitcase or the coffin " is a propaganda slogan initiated by the terrorist organisation the OAS and perpetuated by colonialists. Despite the extremist propaganda conveyed by guillaume durocher and the likes of him, which want make us believe that all the french had left Algeria, the truth is that after 1962 more than 200.000 french stayed in Algeria. And some till this day are still leaving in Algeria.
This is fully documented in Pierre Daum book "without suitcase or coffin".
(https://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/2008/05/DAUM/15870)
If you want to understand what happened in Algeria during the french rule look at what is happening now in palestine.