What a wonderfully edgy comment – is Israel the ‘Promised Land’ or a future prison to be…

It seems that everyone, both left and right, has a very unrealistic estimation of the Brexit process, and they take each new development far too seriously.

Three years ago, the vote was for Brexit, and the elites then decided against that – and that was that.

Everything since then has been shadow-puppetry to give the illusion of a fight, all to keep the proles convinced of the verisimilitude of the system. Not just the counter-Brexit intrigues, but all the seemly positive, pro-Brexit developments, all done just to appear as though something was happening by puppets who knew they were supposed to fail, and willing to do so to keep their places at the trough.

Boris Johnson is just the latest conman. He’s an egotistical, attention-seeking buffoon – even less a crusader type than Trump. He was probably well aware, ahead of time, of the actions brought about to ‘thwart’ him. His type doesn’t care about playing the game so long as they ‘get the top job’.

The English are really the greatest con men in the world. They’ve been doing this same song and dance for centuries (it’s all about the people/ democracy/good government/ representation/parliament/religious freedom… whatever) and yet people just keep falling for it.

A fact which often seems lost in the Western media is that it’s ‘their damned country’.

The Chinese State has every right to administer Hong Kong however it wishes – and that includes a very mild equalisation of laws for a city that seems to have grown arrogant in its special privileges.
Any agreement supposedly had with the British is irrelevant since the handover was never predicated on such agreements, nor would any current reality be subject to it now.

In fact the real law of nations (the real one governing statesmen, not the pretty words written down) suggests supporting a rebellion in another Great Power is an extremely hostile act, demanding an at least symmetric response – it would not be unreasonably be considered an act of war in certain circumstances.

You mean challenge them over the Empire they, in the process, gave up any way.

Perhaps things are not as they first appear.

Don’t be quick to denounce the idea of the communist occupation as a net benefit.

The countries of Eastern and central Europe were in a deep freeze for almost 50 years, and at the end seem to be exceptionally resistant to Cultural Marxism and the other degeneracies of Liberalism (at least as far European countries go).

The West got better cars and less boring television – I sense the trade off was not equivalent when you think they may have kept the old European spirit ready, in-stasis instead.

Yes, when the Soviets invaded and became bosom buddies with National Socialist Germany there was no corresponding declaration of war on them by the Allies.

Since a world war was clearly not on behalf of the Poles, so it makes one ask what it was really over?

The good Mr Vitchek has previously complained he can’t publish in the West.

Well of course – when it comes to viciously anti-European ‘others’ who want to play savior to all the darkies, we’re all full up.

Perhaps he needs to give up that US citizenship (which of course he just to happens to have) and go back to Russia where he can spew out his anti-west vitriol to his heart’s content, and in good faith.

But his people like to move between cultures and double deal, don’t they.

Yes, the new modern actors are better trained and know all the tricks.

But they have no presence – no weight of personality. Thus they appear hollow and empty: so strangely more unconvincing than many less skilled actors of the past.

It makes it increasingly difficult to suspend disbelief in modern movies.

Unquestionably, there are many agents on the ground in all these cases, along with their local cadres of foot soldiers (though don’t mistake all of them for card carrying members of intelligence agencies – every game of this sort has more pawns than bishops).

However, these things cannot progress without local elites who change sides because they sense a wind blowing.

The notable thing in particular with Venezuela and Hong Kong is that their people are on the ground going through the actions like textbook – yet they have zero traction in any real terms. The elites who matter have no interest in indulging this nonsense.

If not for concerns about more direct American responses, both these examples would have been ended quickly and decisively.

I remember the first true ‘colored revolution’ back in Serbia in 2000. So unexpected, but with that wonderful ‘end of history’ air about it. Of course your could trace the antecedents back to the overthrow of communism in Eastern Europe in 89, and power shifts in the Asian Financial Crisis.

The reason this all worked for so long was that this was the western Liberal-Capitalism (no choice on a package deal) seems the dominant paradigm of the times, and national elites just reasoned it as a necessary sharing of power.

Especially since the Arab Spring it’s been as an increasingly zero sum game between more nationalist elites and the globalist comprador class. At this point it’s probably seen very much more as fight or die.

This may be a turning point where every intrigue of this sort is met with increasingly virulent resistance, in every nation and on every plane.

It’s a destructive cycle.

The only thing though they seem to learn from it as a collective is to try and go even harder at it next time. Thus, with a certain poetic quality to it, the Anglo peoples who crushed the Germans for them are now been punished and destroyed even more severely than the Germans ever were.

This thing cannot escalate like this indefinitely – a conclusion will come where matters will settled one way or another.

Well, rather conveniently the same people are ultimately responsible for the immigration crisis and the rising war danger.

An epic military reversal may bring a greater reckoning to said cryptocracy than any conceivable number of elections. However, a broken people in broken cities may not be able to take advantage of such a political opening, so be careful what you wish for.

The US likes to get up close to its enemies, but gets very upset when their enemies’ influence gets up close to it.

However, in raw power terms Greenland is a long way from China and uncomfortably close to the US and its Canadian puppet – no amount of Chinese money is likely to change that calculation.

Given the escalating global situation, Trump’s attempted purchase is so pertinent it could only have been based on military advice.

Most people don’t seem to be aware that the greatest threat to the US homeland is not ballistic missiles, but masses of cheaper, long-range cruise missiles. In the inevitable war with the Eurasian powers Russia is well place to bombard the continental US with missile from air and sea launch points in the arctic (the polar flight paths are the most direct).
The US is much more vulnerable than Russia since most US airbases are further South than their Russian equivalents, and American cities and facilities completely lack any integrated air defence system. Imagine tens or hundreds of thousands of intercontinental cruise missile raining down in waves, making the Blitz seem like a light shower (and that’s the kind of scale the next war will have).

Since Russia’s main arctic military infrastructure is in the North West of the country, the main flight paths should cross right over or near Greenland. If there’s to be successful detection and interception of such an assault that’s where the defence zone will have to be. Perhaps some officers are looking ahead and seeing the danger.

Of course, when war comes, I expect that America will immediately ‘appropriate’ Greenland regardless of legalities.

We need to take the example of the ancients and demonstrate a far more pragmatic approach to the Divine.

We’re certainly not obligated to give worship to a traitorous Abrahamic God – just because the weakness of our ancestors (and sheer inertia) dumped him on us.

Security is not what Jews are ever really seeking – that’s merely a deceptive rationalization.

What they want is domination, and the license in seeking that is unlimited when it’s justified as ‘self-protection’ after all.

This quest for power is more and more manifested in humiliation – where the victim with a foot crushing his head must beg forgiveness for his ‘persecutions’.

As always, the best slaves are those who don’t know they’re wearing chains.

Agonies of epistemology aside, there are real Truths in this world

If the radical Right and the radical Left agree in their judgements of what lies between, perhaps they are getting to this.

Apparently +1 and a -1 can equal a whole in some cases.

Someone who was a former Nazi would never give such a faggoty response.

‘Moderate discussion.’

Whatever else they may be, a Nazi is a person of hard opinions and will.
Black, white – yes, no – good, evil – live, die.
That doesn’t change with a change of ideology.

Someone who never had the will to be a Nazi should not claim to be one – now or then.

And they should never ask for ‘moderate discussion’.

Even in a rigged system taking such a passive step as withdrawing completely from politics is a morally self-destructive step. The game is not over.

The real condemnation though, is for those who go for the same safe political choices when they know full well they are mendacious servants of the status quo. One can not exercise power if they are not ready to destroy that over which they have power, regardless of the consequences.

If people went for radical choices in politics (even if they individually achieved little) it might help capsize the whole rotten vessel.

This is getting a little bit ‘we was kangz’ tier.

The crusaders invaded the Levant to steal technical secrets and that was the foundation of western supremacy, or some such?

One can respect the inventions of different civilizations without turning history into an enormous conspiracy theory. There are not shady figures in masks behind trees waiting to steal tech for unsuspecting foreigners.

If the West is to respect other cultures perhaps they can respect its own immense, if mixed, achievement as well.

However, a christian priest turned muslim is perhaps not one given to look at things objectively.

Stole what from whom?

If the First Crusade was theft, Islam must have had that bulletproof ‘finders keepers’ provision?

The advancement of Germany, France, the Low Countries and the Italian states was not based on colonial income from outside Europe. Great Britain may have made a good profit from Empire, but they hardly appropriated steam engines and ironclads from India or Jamaica.

Contrary to the mythology of the left, Empires come from power – not the other way round.

When the power goes so does the Empire, regardless of populations governed or the size of imperial tithes.

I second this.

This is not the path the West would have chosen if its peoples actually had any choice in the matter.

The central thread that this Empire is about to end is very true.

However, the Saker rather obnoxiously combines a left-wing diatribe on the evils of the Occident with a strange Russian-orthodox, ‘clash of he civilization’, weltanschauung.

A nation of saints does not suddenly find itself possessing half a continent, and there is no shortage of peoples on the edge of Russia ready to gripe upon it weight and conduct (as with any great power).

Similarly, the Han race did not suddenly become sapient in an empty China. These states were Empires and expanded as Empires, and were not somehow victims oppressed by a uniquely evil West. Almost without saying, the same goes for an Islam that has always expanded with steel and blood.

This brings us to his completely absurd conclusion that somehow history ends when this empire ends. There will only be self-interested nations existing in equilibrium. Once again hegemony and Empire are uniquely western evils, and no other power would ever exercise its ambitions in the resultant vacuum.

No, history will go on, and the grand dance will continue.