The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Douthat in NYT: "Merkel Must Go"
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the New York Times:

Germany on the Brink
Ross Douthat JAN. 9, 2016 511 COMMENTS

… But prudence requires doing everything possible to prevent it. That means closing Germany’s borders to new arrivals for the time being. It means beginning an orderly deportation process for able-bodied young men. It means giving up the fond illusion that Germany’s past sins can be absolved with a reckless humanitarianism in the present.

It means that Angela Merkel must go — so that her country, and the continent it bestrides, can avoid paying too high a price for her high-minded folly.

 
Hide 194 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. This is from the opening of A.J.P. Taylor’s “The Course of German History.” For those of us who worry that recent events suggest the end of Western Civilization it is somewhat reassuring, in that that recent events conform to a familiar pattern, though it’s admittedly a small comfort — like knowing that a suicidal drunk has gone through a cycle like this before…:

    “The history of the Germans is the history of extremes. It contains everything except moderation, and in the course of a thousand years the Germans have experienced everything except normality…’German’ has meant at one moment a being so sentimental, so trusting, so pious, as to be too good for this world; and at another a being so brutal, so unprincipled, so degraded, as to be not fit to live. Both descriptions are true…”

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Reads like a continuation of anti-German war propaganda. Including a justification to kill Germans en masse.
    , @dried peanuts
    yes but it was always germans we were talking about. Now we are moving to biological level replacement. If we look at the etch-a-sketch population destruction and movement of ww2 and after, konigsberg and breslau are no longer german, lwow/lviv is no longer polish etc. Now we are doing that in mainland germany. And we are not replacing germans with nice tractable poles either.
    , @SFG
    I always wonder how much of this is English prejudice, kind of like the belief Asians aren't creative...

    I mean, Germany's had a very turbulent history, and it wasn't even a unified country until 150 years ago or so. You'd expect them to be prone to wars and so on.

    From the German point of view, the rest of Europe Scheissed on them for centuries, then they finally got their act together, lost a war and got stuck with the bill, lost another war and got knocked to rubble...so they decided to be good supranational types and encourage European integration, whereupon they get blamed for being the last responsible member of the union.

    I wouldn't mind if they just slammed shut all their borders. Usually people are worried about Germany when they start sending Germans *over* their borders. ;)
    , @Eustace Tilley (not)
    Typical English propaganda (and one must admit they know which buttons to push to sway American opinion; now the yuppies are gobbling up Downton Abbey). The Germans "were being[s] so brutal, so unprincipled...as to be not fit to live" to the English, who imported foodstuffs from Ireland at the height of the Famine, who invented concentration camps during the Boer War (for the Afrikaner women and children), who forced opium addiction down the throats of the Chinese, who partitioned India?

    There is much documentation to support the contention of historians- both Indian and English- that Saint Winston of Blenheim deliberately starved between 3 and 5 million Indians in the Great Bengal Famine of 1943. Oh...you've never heard of it? I'm not surprised. Read more at:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_famine_of_1943

    Noam Chomsky quotes Adolf Hitler as writing in Mein Kampf that Britain won World War I because she won the "propaganda war". Chomsky agrees with Hitler on this point.
    , @Eustace Tilley (not)


    Where is the flag of England?
    Go sail where the rich galleons come
    With their shoddy and wasted cotton,
    And beer and Bibles and rum.
    Seek the land where brute force hath triumphed
    And hypocrisy hath its lair.
    And your question will thus be answered
    For the flag of England is there!

    - The Butcher's Apron by the Wolfe Tones

    , @Anonymous Nephew
    And that opening page continues

    "One looks in vain in their history for juste milieu (“middle way” or “happy medium”), for common sense - the two qualities that have distinguished France and England. Nothing is normal in German history except violent oscillations.
     
    , @Anonymous
    Re the continuation of Taylor's words by Anonymous Nephew:

    The oscillation back to the Right is now certain, and I for one can't wait.
    , @Anonymous
    "The Hun is either at your boot or your throat" -- Winston Churchill
    , @Mr. Anon
    Taylor was a doctrinaire leftist - a longtime communist and then laborite. His opinions aren't really that interesting, nor indeed should they be considered authoritative in any way.
  2. Problem isn’t Merkel.

    Her ilk are beholden to the globo-masters who control stuff like NYT.

    The GLOB must go.

    As long as the GLOB remains, Merkel will be replaced by just another muppet.

    • Replies: @This Is Our Home

    Problem isn’t Merkel.

    Her ilk are beholden to the globo-masters who control stuff like NYT.

    The GLOB must go.

    As long as the GLOB remains, Merkel will be replaced by just another muppet.
     
    The article you're posting on directly contradicts your comment!
    , @Massimo Heitor

    Problem isn’t Merkel.

    Her ilk are beholden to the globo-masters who control stuff like NYT.
     
    The linked NYT article is calling for a removal of Merkel, closing of borders, and deportation of existing migrants. Are those the globo-masters? OK, Ross Douthat is the one exception NYT writer to break the mold and criticize mass immigration.

    Merkel is not a lone voice supporting using the European governments to eliminate biological European ethnic groups. But she is one of them. And she needs to be removed from office. Surprisingly, she formerly sharply criticized multi-culturalism.

    I also find her insistence on incoming foreigners learning German puzzling. After you eliminate the majority German ethnic group in Germany who will support keeping the language as a keepsake artifact of an eliminated ethnic people?
  3. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    It means giving up the fond illusion that Germany’s past sins can be absolved with a reckless humanitarianism in the present.

    Is it an illusion? If letting in so many migrants in could be described as implementing a race mixing agenda then the result is real. It will mean the Final Counter-Solution to Nordicism.

    • Replies: @Ed
    There is little "race mixing" now & that's actually making the problem worse. Germany needs to start deportations of single men but it won't.
    , @Colleen Pater
    I hope youre just being too clever and not serious but it occurs you might be a jew with a grudge which being irish I can identify with except of course the irish never did any harm to the english. But back to your logic it could also be considered yet another ethnic holocaust in germany, or it could be thought as a reinvigoration of antisemitism in Germany.
    I suppose if my hunch is correct you will challenge my JQ allusion. I like jews personally but I find your politics coupled with your outsized influence pernicious to the point of existential destruction to western peoples. Almost none of you can really fully own this. If you had used your considerable talents to uphold western civilization and its peoples we would not be on the verge ww3.
  4. Douthat: “When immigration proceeds at a steady but modest clip, deep change comes slowly, and there’s time for assimilation to do its work. That’s why the Muslim population in Europe has been growing only at one percentage point a decade; it’s why many of the Turkish and North African immigrants who arrived in Germany and France decades ago are reasonably Europeanized today.”

    I guess he’s gotta throw a bone to the PC police, doesn’t he?

    It doesn’t matter whether the change comes “slowly” or rapidly. Islamization, rapidly or slowly, is bad for Europe.

    • Replies: @Rob McX

    I guess he’s gotta throw a bone to the PC police, doesn’t he?
     
    That's probably the price of being given an MSM platform.

    "...many of the Turkish and North African immigrants who arrived in Germany and France decades ago are reasonably Europeanized today.”
     
    After Bataclan, London's 7/7, and countless other such attacks, I'd hate to think what a Muslim population that escaped being "Europeanized" could achieve.
    , @iSteveFan

    That’s why the Muslim population in Europe has been growing only at one percentage point a decade; it’s why many of the Turkish and North African immigrants who arrived in Germany and France decades ago are reasonably Europeanized today.
     
    If they were assimilating they would no longer be muslim. At best they'd have converted to Christianity, at worst they'd be secularist.
  5. What’s encouraging is that not has the Times allowed Douthat on its site, but to read the most popular comments. The vast majority of them – especially the most highly rated ones – are against the immivasion. I’ve followed the immigration debate for quite some time. Ten years ago comments would have been far closer to 50/50. People are starting to get fed up up with political correctness and the anarchy on our borders.

  6. The Germans include the highest achievers of history–but those achievers are only a micro percentage of the vast population, which is itself a giant hive mind of conformity and control freakism.

    Germans are State Worshipers like the Chinese and Japanese. Something about the math/science skew in IQ generates a bottomless love of authority.

    These peoples are trapped in the vicious cycle of following their crazy leaders off the cliff. Merkel is just the latest lunatic.

    American internet comments on Merkel don’t comprehend the German psyche. They will dutifully go along with their Fuerher until the pain becomes excruciating.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Unlike white Americans who were all up in arms when it became clear that they'd soon be a minority in their own country...
    , @scoops
    so true! my grandfather told me years ago us germans were smart as hell! but they will follow any nut into the fires of hell! that's why my great grandfather left that sewer in the late 1800s!
  7. Even with all th good news for the alt right in the rest of Europe, in Germany everything looks hopeless. Merkel has a 58% approval rating.

    Even in the unlikely event a popular leader like her is deposed by her own party, that would not be enough. The winner of the last election was the center left party. They choose to keep Merkel in office rather than try to form a coalition with the far left/communist Die Linke group. But left wing parties have a majority, so Merkel is as conservative as it gets until 2017 at soonest.

    • Replies: @Broski
    Given the German media's response to the Cologne fiasco, do you really believe the 58% figure? I hear Pol Pot stayed at 100% for a while.
    , @SFG
    How's AfD doing? Seems like a nice way to go further right, and you've got the NPD you can point to and say, 'See, these are the Nazis!'
  8. @Wilkey
    Douthat: "When immigration proceeds at a steady but modest clip, deep change comes slowly, and there’s time for assimilation to do its work. That’s why the Muslim population in Europe has been growing only at one percentage point a decade; it’s why many of the Turkish and North African immigrants who arrived in Germany and France decades ago are reasonably Europeanized today."

    I guess he's gotta throw a bone to the PC police, doesn't he?

    It doesn't matter whether the change comes "slowly" or rapidly. Islamization, rapidly or slowly, is bad for Europe.

    I guess he’s gotta throw a bone to the PC police, doesn’t he?

    That’s probably the price of being given an MSM platform.

    “…many of the Turkish and North African immigrants who arrived in Germany and France decades ago are reasonably Europeanized today.”

    After Bataclan, London’s 7/7, and countless other such attacks, I’d hate to think what a Muslim population that escaped being “Europeanized” could achieve.

  9. Didn’t the point about the sudden change in sex ratios get made by Steve first and expanded upon in the comments?

    Maybe we need to add a flashing siren GIF and MUST CREDIT SAILER banner like Drudge Report scoops.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I think Wilkey and perhaps other commenters were the first to make formal sex ratio analyses.
  10. Douthat is clearly the conservative voice of the New York Times. He must also be an iSteve reader. My only caveat is that, even with time, the unassimilable cannot be assimilated. And the cultural changes resulting from assimilation may degrade the original culture.

    • Replies: @snorlax
    I believe he's linked to Steve a few times. It's genuinely surprising the Times has him on their payroll. (Perhaps so they can ritually defenestrate him at some opportune point in the future).
  11. In courthouse corridors all over the world the cries of criminals’ mothers and grandmothers echo: “my boy would never do that! He wouldn’t hurt a flea! Those girls are liars, they must be crazy or jealous, my boy is innocent!”

    Germany’s so-called “Syrian refugees” are the adopted black sheep of Angela Merkel and Henriette Reker (Cologne’s Mayor) and all the other childless leftist women of Germany. Those women all repeat the eternal phrases of mothers whose sons have earned society’s ire. They will cheerfully sacrifice anyone else to save their sons, even from natural justice.

    Natural selection guarantees this behavior and the fewer children a mother has, the more anxiously she will protect each one. But like any evolved behavior, this protective emotion can be activated sometimes by error. The limbic systems of Germany’s barren women are desperately eager to protect offspring who are not actually there, so they motivate concern for child-substitutes, in this case the young foreign men that German women have morally adopted en-masse.

    Of course every complex phenomenon is driven by more than one factor. Other commenters and our friend Heartiste have suggested that some German women favor the “Syrian refugees” just because they are more virile than German men. There probably is some of that, but I think there is another, related factor at work as well.

    Subconsciously, I believe, Germany’s younger women want to provoke fights between Germany’s men and the “syrian refugees.” Far too many German men are “sitzpinklers” and German women are disappointed, even if they cannot express it in their vocabulary of leftist feminist cliches. Women notoriously like to watch men fight– so they can mate with the winners. Even when they already have mates they want to see them fight to reconfirm their merit (this may be sublimated into “winning a tennis game,” “winning promotion ahead of a rival,” etc.). In both the Great War and WWII the women of England joined the Order of the White Feather and amused themselves by accusing young men of cowardice if they were not in military uniform. Young women in bars encourage young men to brawl. Anthropology books are replete with examples of women egging men into combat.

    Even as many German women see “Syrian refugees” as adopted sons and wish to shield them from the opprobrium of everyone else, another cohort of German women is challenging German men: “Hey, sitzpinkler, prove you are worthy to mate with me! Throw out this challenger, whom I invited into the bar (neighborhood, city, Germany) and with whom I am flirting to make you jealous, or die trying!”

    Many German women, if you ask them, will tell you they would rather mate with a German man, “but,” they say, “there aren’t any good German men, they’re all wimps!” Many of the women of Cologne who voted for Reker and her pro-immigration platform, then went down to the Cathedral square to get groped by MENA’s, are essentially trying to summon up some non-wimpy German men to protect them and, as Heartiste might suggest, give them the tingle which they don’t feel when they look at Ralf Jaeger and all the rest of the SDP eunuchs.

    In this situation the men of Germany can either pull themselves together and regain the respect and affection of their women, or disappear into the mists of history, remembered by no descendants and few foreign historians. German men must cast down Merkel, throw out the “Syrian refugees,” and if they are really smart, import some young foreign women on which German men can get the children which can no longer spring from the shriveled wombs of Germany’s middle-aged women. Let the motherhood-yearning of those women settle onto German nieces and nephews and grandchildren instead of immigrant louts, and put Germany’s remaining young women into healthy rivalry with foreign ingenues for the attention of German men.

    • Agree: This Is Our Home
    • Replies: @anonguy
    In the spirit of who/whom, who is one of Germany's natural economic rivals in high skill/high tech/high value add manufacturing.

    Certainly Japan is.

    So are the crafty Japanese behind this? I'd add that the Japanese are famously against mass migration because they feel it degrades civilization.

    Way back, 80's I believe, MITI forecast a long term decline in American technical prowess because of the increasing population of Latinos and possibly blacks. This forecast specifically noted that Latinos have not demonstrated any ability to build a high tech economy anywhere on a par with U.S., Japan, Europe. IIRC, the report was extremely adamant on the fact that the number was zero as opposed to not many, rather less than U.S., etc. No, zero and no sign of one emerging.

    Created the predictable hue and cry in the West. This was during a period when Japan was beginning to be held to western standards, so there were a number incidents of PC-naive Japan raising a lot of feathers.

    These incidents largely stopped a long time ago quite dramatically. Is it because the Japanese, and more specifically economic planners in Japan, changed their viewpoints with corresponding speed and degree?

    Of course not. They just learned that westerners are super sensitive about talking about this stuff.

    This is a nation of long term business thinking. For instance, many high end Seiko watches include a movement that Seiko says took 28 years to develop. Can you imagine any American company spending 28 years on something, esp. something like a watch movement, before they even sell one of them?

    Think, McFly, think... What's in it for Japan here?

    , @Diversity Heretic
    Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity, but it leaves me thinking that German men are "screwed, blued and tatooed." Do nothing but report immigrant/invader crime to the authorities and hope that they will take the proper steps and women of your own age think you're a wimp and refuse to have your children. Form a gang, hunt down and beat or even kill a few of the immigrants/invaders and the barren menopausal women in charge whose "sons" you've just attacked hurl the full force of the law at you. And if you're a German man who has invested something in education and training to get at least an acceptable job, you have something to lose.

    Proverbial rock and a hard place. My take: the feminization of society is a rapidly unfolding disaster on a number of fronts. I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better controls.

    , @ic1000
    > another cohort of German women is challenging German men: “Hey, sitzpinkler, prove you are worthy to mate with me! Throw out this challenger, whom I invited into the bar (neighborhood, city, Germany) and with whom I am flirting to make you jealous, or die trying!”

    Speaking of intersecting iSteve themes... you are describing catfishing on a national scale.
    , @5371
    [ In ... the Great War ... the women of England joined the Order of the White Feather and amused themselves by accusing young men of cowardice if they were not in military uniform.]

    The women most passionately dedicated to this pastime were the suffragettes.
    , @Threecranes
    Just terrific observations. Your comment is the antidote to and should be mandatory reading for all college-aged men who were forced to undergo gender-sensitivity brainwashing. We men must figuratively and literally push back against noxious women who believe that they are entitled to contribute 50% of the input just because they comprise 50% of the population. Knowledge and competence are aristocratic, not democratic.

    Recently I helped three women push their motorboat off of a sandy beach, where they had carelessly left it to be stranded by an outgoing tide. With them in the stern for ballast, I was able to lever the bow off the beach. One of them commented "One guy is stronger than three women"--which is generally true. One man, with concentrated effort can accomplish more than the diffused strength of three normal women. After I freed their boat, one of them rewarded me with repeated views of her fine breasts as she bent over to play with her dog while we chatted and even though I'm a balding old guy whose engine is sputtering, I certainly enjoyed the view and appreciated the gesture.

    To sum up: strength and competence, gents, women find them irresistible. And if feminists don't, then so what? What have you lost if you offend some barren witches whose favors you will never enjoy anyway?
    , @27 year old
    There might be some truth to this, maybe. But lets check. How hot are the girlfriends of Pegida members? About about the "known hoologans" who allegedly counterattacked against some Pakistanis in Cologne?
    , @SFG
    I'm not sure how much the PUA analysis has relevance here. (Not that it's not useful for getting laid.)

    My limited opinion (and, hey, any Germans want to comment?) is that the ladies are probably affected by compassion for refugees; we'll see if stuff like Cologne changes their minds. The dudes, well, racism is illegal, so you have to be careful.

    If I actually spoke German I'd go over there and start a blog exposing all the stuff they're doing; then when the SJWs come after me I could accuse them of anti-Semitism ;)
    , @Corvinus
    “The limbic systems of Germany’s barren women are desperately eager to protect offspring who are not actually there, so they motivate concern for child-substitutes, in this case the young foreign men that German women have morally adopted en-masse.”

    Please do us all a favor and stop with the pop psychology analysis. If you are going to make these statements, you’re going to have to offer specific evidence rather than CH standard rhetoric.

    “Subconsciously, I believe, Germany’s younger women want to provoke fights between Germany’s men and the “syrian refugees.” 


    Ok, so you are wildly speculating here. Any sociological data to support your hypothesis, or you intellectually flailing?

    
“Far too many German men are “sitzpinklers” and German women are disappointed, even if they cannot express it in their vocabulary of leftist feminist cliches. Women notoriously like to watch men fight– so they can mate with the winners”.

    So, are you married? Have children? If not, it would appear that you haven’t fought enough.

    “Young women in bars encourage young men to brawl. Anthropology books are replete with examples of women egging men into combat.”

    Oh, those books. Praytell, what examples? Please list authors and the results of these studies.

    “Many German women, if you ask them, will tell you they would rather mate with a German man, “but,” they say, “there aren’t any good German men, they’re all wimps!””

    How many German women?

    See, all you have is mere speculation. That's it. There's little of substance to hold on to. You make these statements as if they were accurate without any proof.


    Diversity Heretic—“Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity.”

    Observations, yes. The real test is whether or not they have a factual basis.

    “I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better controls.”

    Assuming that keeping women under control is a strength of ANY society.
  12. I wonder which Anon is Ross. He’s gathering rather the reputation from recasting Sailerian esoterica. Ross: Maybe soon you’ll start linking Steve.

    • Replies: @Broski
    P.S. The article was a superb expression. Possibly history changing.
    , @Anonym
    I don't think it's Anon. lol
  13. @Broski
    I wonder which Anon is Ross. He's gathering rather the reputation from recasting Sailerian esoterica. Ross: Maybe soon you'll start linking Steve.

    P.S. The article was a superb expression. Possibly history changing.

  14. @Lot
    Didn't the point about the sudden change in sex ratios get made by Steve first and expanded upon in the comments?

    Maybe we need to add a flashing siren GIF and MUST CREDIT SAILER banner like Drudge Report scoops.

    I think Wilkey and perhaps other commenters were the first to make formal sex ratio analyses.

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    I never really gave much thought to sex ratios, probably because I take for granted that these migrant men will be joined in short order by their wives. Of course that still leaves them alone to upset the sex balance for months or even years. My point was more the rapid demographic transformation that will result from immigration that is "only" 1% of the German and Swedish populations.

    The Left is now going to use the attacks to argue that family reunification needs to happen post haste, or else we'll keep seeing attacks like these (nevermind the rape rate in Sweden, or that most of the Rotherham perps were probably married).
  15. @Adam
    This is from the opening of A.J.P. Taylor's "The Course of German History." For those of us who worry that recent events suggest the end of Western Civilization it is somewhat reassuring, in that that recent events conform to a familiar pattern, though it's admittedly a small comfort -- like knowing that a suicidal drunk has gone through a cycle like this before...:

    "The history of the Germans is the history of extremes. It contains everything except moderation, and in the course of a thousand years the Germans have experienced everything except normality...'German' has meant at one moment a being so sentimental, so trusting, so pious, as to be too good for this world; and at another a being so brutal, so unprincipled, so degraded, as to be not fit to live. Both descriptions are true..."

    Reads like a continuation of anti-German war propaganda. Including a justification to kill Germans en masse.

    • Replies: @Desiderius

    Reads like a continuation of anti-German war propaganda. Including a justification to kill Germans en masse.
     
    He was just barely too young to have fought in the Great War. So his formative years saw him filled with all the hatred and furor wartime whips up in the young, untempered by the humiliating futility inflicted on those at the front lines.

    His was the generation that saw to it that the Germanic peoples were well and duly castrated.

    , @Bies Podkrakowski
    Well, Germans themselves have delivered enough justifications to depopulate Germany twice or thrice over. Luckily for them Allies were merciful.

    Yes merciful. Even - and it pains me to use them and mercy in one sentence - Soviets. They let Germans live in their own country which was a lot more than Germans were planning to do to their enemies when the war was over.
  16. @Lot
    Even with all th good news for the alt right in the rest of Europe, in Germany everything looks hopeless. Merkel has a 58% approval rating.

    Even in the unlikely event a popular leader like her is deposed by her own party, that would not be enough. The winner of the last election was the center left party. They choose to keep Merkel in office rather than try to form a coalition with the far left/communist Die Linke group. But left wing parties have a majority, so Merkel is as conservative as it gets until 2017 at soonest.

    Given the German media’s response to the Cologne fiasco, do you really believe the 58% figure? I hear Pol Pot stayed at 100% for a while.

  17. @Anonymoustache
    The Germans include the highest achievers of history--but those achievers are only a micro percentage of the vast population, which is itself a giant hive mind of conformity and control freakism.

    Germans are State Worshipers like the Chinese and Japanese. Something about the math/science skew in IQ generates a bottomless love of authority.

    These peoples are trapped in the vicious cycle of following their crazy leaders off the cliff. Merkel is just the latest lunatic.

    American internet comments on Merkel don't comprehend the German psyche. They will dutifully go along with their Fuerher until the pain becomes excruciating.

    Unlike white Americans who were all up in arms when it became clear that they’d soon be a minority in their own country…

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Maybe because the definition of "white" used in this claim is absurd, plus the trend is towards miscegenation not endogamy. When most "whites" in many (if not most) areas have "nonwhite" kin it kind of makes it hard to rage about the prospect of more mixed folk. Not everyone values inbreeding so ferociously. Don't worry. We won't invade your trailer park and force your sister to mate with Tyrone.
    , @Bill
    America is a Germanic country. The two biggest ethnic groups are German and English (=German in drag).
  18. Even a link from #Instapundit would be good. Yet, here’s Sailer’s last three week’s of theory making the second of many bounces around the internet: http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/223613/#respond

  19. @Diversity Heretic
    Douthat is clearly the conservative voice of the New York Times. He must also be an iSteve reader. My only caveat is that, even with time, the unassimilable cannot be assimilated. And the cultural changes resulting from assimilation may degrade the original culture.

    I believe he’s linked to Steve a few times. It’s genuinely surprising the Times has him on their payroll. (Perhaps so they can ritually defenestrate him at some opportune point in the future).

    • Replies: @Ed
    Frum, Coulter & Douthat all read Steve. I've even seen Jamelle Bouie reference him, not positively of course, but at least he's read him.

    In a more open media Steve would be a fine replacement for Pat Buchanan.
  20. @Veracitor
    In courthouse corridors all over the world the cries of criminals' mothers and grandmothers echo: "my boy would never do that! He wouldn't hurt a flea! Those girls are liars, they must be crazy or jealous, my boy is innocent!"

    Germany's so-called "Syrian refugees" are the adopted black sheep of Angela Merkel and Henriette Reker (Cologne's Mayor) and all the other childless leftist women of Germany. Those women all repeat the eternal phrases of mothers whose sons have earned society's ire. They will cheerfully sacrifice anyone else to save their sons, even from natural justice.

    Natural selection guarantees this behavior and the fewer children a mother has, the more anxiously she will protect each one. But like any evolved behavior, this protective emotion can be activated sometimes by error. The limbic systems of Germany's barren women are desperately eager to protect offspring who are not actually there, so they motivate concern for child-substitutes, in this case the young foreign men that German women have morally adopted en-masse.

    Of course every complex phenomenon is driven by more than one factor. Other commenters and our friend Heartiste have suggested that some German women favor the "Syrian refugees" just because they are more virile than German men. There probably is some of that, but I think there is another, related factor at work as well.

    Subconsciously, I believe, Germany's younger women want to provoke fights between Germany's men and the "syrian refugees." Far too many German men are "sitzpinklers" and German women are disappointed, even if they cannot express it in their vocabulary of leftist feminist cliches. Women notoriously like to watch men fight-- so they can mate with the winners. Even when they already have mates they want to see them fight to reconfirm their merit (this may be sublimated into "winning a tennis game," "winning promotion ahead of a rival," etc.). In both the Great War and WWII the women of England joined the Order of the White Feather and amused themselves by accusing young men of cowardice if they were not in military uniform. Young women in bars encourage young men to brawl. Anthropology books are replete with examples of women egging men into combat.

    Even as many German women see "Syrian refugees" as adopted sons and wish to shield them from the opprobrium of everyone else, another cohort of German women is challenging German men: "Hey, sitzpinkler, prove you are worthy to mate with me! Throw out this challenger, whom I invited into the bar (neighborhood, city, Germany) and with whom I am flirting to make you jealous, or die trying!"

    Many German women, if you ask them, will tell you they would rather mate with a German man, "but," they say, "there aren't any good German men, they're all wimps!" Many of the women of Cologne who voted for Reker and her pro-immigration platform, then went down to the Cathedral square to get groped by MENA's, are essentially trying to summon up some non-wimpy German men to protect them and, as Heartiste might suggest, give them the tingle which they don't feel when they look at Ralf Jaeger and all the rest of the SDP eunuchs.

    In this situation the men of Germany can either pull themselves together and regain the respect and affection of their women, or disappear into the mists of history, remembered by no descendants and few foreign historians. German men must cast down Merkel, throw out the "Syrian refugees," and if they are really smart, import some young foreign women on which German men can get the children which can no longer spring from the shriveled wombs of Germany's middle-aged women. Let the motherhood-yearning of those women settle onto German nieces and nephews and grandchildren instead of immigrant louts, and put Germany's remaining young women into healthy rivalry with foreign ingenues for the attention of German men.

    In the spirit of who/whom, who is one of Germany’s natural economic rivals in high skill/high tech/high value add manufacturing.

    Certainly Japan is.

    So are the crafty Japanese behind this? I’d add that the Japanese are famously against mass migration because they feel it degrades civilization.

    Way back, 80’s I believe, MITI forecast a long term decline in American technical prowess because of the increasing population of Latinos and possibly blacks. This forecast specifically noted that Latinos have not demonstrated any ability to build a high tech economy anywhere on a par with U.S., Japan, Europe. IIRC, the report was extremely adamant on the fact that the number was zero as opposed to not many, rather less than U.S., etc. No, zero and no sign of one emerging.

    Created the predictable hue and cry in the West. This was during a period when Japan was beginning to be held to western standards, so there were a number incidents of PC-naive Japan raising a lot of feathers.

    These incidents largely stopped a long time ago quite dramatically. Is it because the Japanese, and more specifically economic planners in Japan, changed their viewpoints with corresponding speed and degree?

    Of course not. They just learned that westerners are super sensitive about talking about this stuff.

    This is a nation of long term business thinking. For instance, many high end Seiko watches include a movement that Seiko says took 28 years to develop. Can you imagine any American company spending 28 years on something, esp. something like a watch movement, before they even sell one of them?

    Think, McFly, think… What’s in it for Japan here?

    • Replies: @Jack D
    The Japanese are getting their technological lunch eaten by the Koreans. Many of the former big names in Japanese electronics are either broke or hanging on by their fingernails. They are not at the cutting edge of smartphones or anything else. Japan is a old society - like one giant nursing home, and lacks the dynamism of countries with a younger population.

    As for the 28 years to develop a watch movement, take anything you hear about watches with a giant grain of salt - watch marketing would make PT Barnum proud. If a watch movement took 28 years to develop, that means that by now its technology is 28 years out of date (actually this is not a big problem because for example the most popular Swiss mechanical movement produced today was introduced in 1961). Accurate timekeeping was the great technological problem - of the 18th century (solved by Harrison before 1760 - google "Harrison H4"). After that, it was just a question of further miniaturization and cost cutting thru automation. Today you can buy a (quartz) watch for $10 that is as accurate as you would ever need (if you need a watch at all - most kids today just look at their cell phones and regard the wristwatch as being in the same league as wall phones). Anything beyond that is just vanity (since white men can't wear big gold chains or tooth grillz, the watch is the only place for them to display their status thru jewelry).
  21. @Anon
    Problem isn't Merkel.

    Her ilk are beholden to the globo-masters who control stuff like NYT.

    The GLOB must go.

    As long as the GLOB remains, Merkel will be replaced by just another muppet.

    Problem isn’t Merkel.

    Her ilk are beholden to the globo-masters who control stuff like NYT.

    The GLOB must go.

    As long as the GLOB remains, Merkel will be replaced by just another muppet.

    The article you’re posting on directly contradicts your comment!

  22. @Broski
    I wonder which Anon is Ross. He's gathering rather the reputation from recasting Sailerian esoterica. Ross: Maybe soon you'll start linking Steve.

    I don’t think it’s Anon. lol

  23. I wouldn’t get too heartened by Douthat’s column. Even the most ardent left-lib has gotta be seeing that NYT has become a one-sided propaganda megaphone.

    Not that that is a bad thing, from NYT perspective, just allowing the appearance of such is a bad thing.

    Douthat is window dressing. But nice that he is there.

    I’ll believe it when the usual suspects there start writing similar opinions.

    One point, though. The NPR lovers love their high euro culture vacations as much as they hate white people. Having the NY riots on the steps of a cathedral that they might want to visit sometime, the prospect that downtown Cologne (and other German cities) might get hollowed out like American cities did 2 generations ago and are now just stumbling back to even shadows of their former selves, is understood viscerally by Americans, even lefty-lib ones who may be unwilling to acknowledge their feelings.

    I mean, f*ck, where are you going to go for that study abroad year? Third world is ok for short eco-tourism, but longer stuff requires a civilized country and knocking Germany out of the running reduces options for a lot of things.

    France maybe did a itself disservice by shuttling MENA folks to the ‘burbs and out of sight, gave visiting (lefty, they love Paris, of course) Americans the impression that Paris and by extension France was a heck of a lot less diverse that it actually was becoming.

    Americans know about aggrieved racial minorities in center cities like no one else….

    Germany might be a chilling peek into the abyss for some lefty people.

    • Agree: International Jew
  24. @Steve Sailer
    I think Wilkey and perhaps other commenters were the first to make formal sex ratio analyses.

    I never really gave much thought to sex ratios, probably because I take for granted that these migrant men will be joined in short order by their wives. Of course that still leaves them alone to upset the sex balance for months or even years. My point was more the rapid demographic transformation that will result from immigration that is “only” 1% of the German and Swedish populations.

    The Left is now going to use the attacks to argue that family reunification needs to happen post haste, or else we’ll keep seeing attacks like these (nevermind the rape rate in Sweden, or that most of the Rotherham perps were probably married).

  25. @Anonymous

    It means giving up the fond illusion that Germany’s past sins can be absolved with a reckless humanitarianism in the present.
     
    Is it an illusion? If letting in so many migrants in could be described as implementing a race mixing agenda then the result is real. It will mean the Final Counter-Solution to Nordicism.

    There is little “race mixing” now & that’s actually making the problem worse. Germany needs to start deportations of single men but it won’t.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    There will be little race mixing in the first generation but it will increase in the second generation and further increase in the third generation.
  26. @snorlax
    I believe he's linked to Steve a few times. It's genuinely surprising the Times has him on their payroll. (Perhaps so they can ritually defenestrate him at some opportune point in the future).

    Frum, Coulter & Douthat all read Steve. I’ve even seen Jamelle Bouie reference him, not positively of course, but at least he’s read him.

    In a more open media Steve would be a fine replacement for Pat Buchanan.

    • Replies: @GW
    Mark Steyn has mentioned him as well.
    , @Percy Gryce

    In a more open media Steve would be a fine replacement for Pat Buchanan.
     
    Steve would need to head back to church. Part of Pat's appeal is his no-nonsense Irish-American Catholicism.
  27. This is not something I expected to read in the NYT.

  28. @Veracitor
    In courthouse corridors all over the world the cries of criminals' mothers and grandmothers echo: "my boy would never do that! He wouldn't hurt a flea! Those girls are liars, they must be crazy or jealous, my boy is innocent!"

    Germany's so-called "Syrian refugees" are the adopted black sheep of Angela Merkel and Henriette Reker (Cologne's Mayor) and all the other childless leftist women of Germany. Those women all repeat the eternal phrases of mothers whose sons have earned society's ire. They will cheerfully sacrifice anyone else to save their sons, even from natural justice.

    Natural selection guarantees this behavior and the fewer children a mother has, the more anxiously she will protect each one. But like any evolved behavior, this protective emotion can be activated sometimes by error. The limbic systems of Germany's barren women are desperately eager to protect offspring who are not actually there, so they motivate concern for child-substitutes, in this case the young foreign men that German women have morally adopted en-masse.

    Of course every complex phenomenon is driven by more than one factor. Other commenters and our friend Heartiste have suggested that some German women favor the "Syrian refugees" just because they are more virile than German men. There probably is some of that, but I think there is another, related factor at work as well.

    Subconsciously, I believe, Germany's younger women want to provoke fights between Germany's men and the "syrian refugees." Far too many German men are "sitzpinklers" and German women are disappointed, even if they cannot express it in their vocabulary of leftist feminist cliches. Women notoriously like to watch men fight-- so they can mate with the winners. Even when they already have mates they want to see them fight to reconfirm their merit (this may be sublimated into "winning a tennis game," "winning promotion ahead of a rival," etc.). In both the Great War and WWII the women of England joined the Order of the White Feather and amused themselves by accusing young men of cowardice if they were not in military uniform. Young women in bars encourage young men to brawl. Anthropology books are replete with examples of women egging men into combat.

    Even as many German women see "Syrian refugees" as adopted sons and wish to shield them from the opprobrium of everyone else, another cohort of German women is challenging German men: "Hey, sitzpinkler, prove you are worthy to mate with me! Throw out this challenger, whom I invited into the bar (neighborhood, city, Germany) and with whom I am flirting to make you jealous, or die trying!"

    Many German women, if you ask them, will tell you they would rather mate with a German man, "but," they say, "there aren't any good German men, they're all wimps!" Many of the women of Cologne who voted for Reker and her pro-immigration platform, then went down to the Cathedral square to get groped by MENA's, are essentially trying to summon up some non-wimpy German men to protect them and, as Heartiste might suggest, give them the tingle which they don't feel when they look at Ralf Jaeger and all the rest of the SDP eunuchs.

    In this situation the men of Germany can either pull themselves together and regain the respect and affection of their women, or disappear into the mists of history, remembered by no descendants and few foreign historians. German men must cast down Merkel, throw out the "Syrian refugees," and if they are really smart, import some young foreign women on which German men can get the children which can no longer spring from the shriveled wombs of Germany's middle-aged women. Let the motherhood-yearning of those women settle onto German nieces and nephews and grandchildren instead of immigrant louts, and put Germany's remaining young women into healthy rivalry with foreign ingenues for the attention of German men.

    Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity, but it leaves me thinking that German men are “screwed, blued and tatooed.” Do nothing but report immigrant/invader crime to the authorities and hope that they will take the proper steps and women of your own age think you’re a wimp and refuse to have your children. Form a gang, hunt down and beat or even kill a few of the immigrants/invaders and the barren menopausal women in charge whose “sons” you’ve just attacked hurl the full force of the law at you. And if you’re a German man who has invested something in education and training to get at least an acceptable job, you have something to lose.

    Proverbial rock and a hard place. My take: the feminization of society is a rapidly unfolding disaster on a number of fronts. I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better controls.

    • Replies: @anonguy

    Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity, but it leaves me thinking that German men are “screwed, blued and tatooed.” Do nothing but report immigrant/invader crime to the authorities and hope that they will take the proper steps and women of your own age think you’re a wimp and refuse to have your children. Form a gang, hunt down and beat or even kill a few of the immigrants/invaders and the barren menopausal women in charge whose “sons” you’ve just attacked hurl the full force of the law at you. And if you’re a German man who has invested something in education and training to get at least an acceptable job, you have something to lose.
     
    By definition, "men" face up to daunting hurdles that if they don't overcome, they are screwed. This is one, and honestly, it really is only a minor first world problem compared to a lot of stuff that can and has happened in German history.

    Who would you rather be, a German dude living today in some comfortable German home or a member of the Wehrmacht 6th Army trapped in the Kessel. Really, if they can't face up to this, and I don't mean by violence, this is such a trivial problem, all they have to do is vote out the wrong people and vote in the right people.

    If German men are defeated by this, lord knows they deserve it, as sad as it is to say.
    , @Anonymous

    the feminization of society is a rapidly unfolding disaster on a number of fronts. I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better controls.
     
    Recall the demons behind the destruction, er, liberation of Libya, the Arab Spring, the instigation against Russia in its backyard, et al.

    Or, the Fall of Man in the Garden of Evil. It was another woman who reversed this with her decision ("fiat") and it was the worship of this woman which led to the rise of chivalry and of Western civilization (according to Chesterton). Then the West abandoned her and her son and coincidentally it reaps the cult which has a negative view of women and will bring on the thousand years of darkness.
    , @Desiderius

    Proverbial rock and a hard place. My take: the feminization of society is a rapidly unfolding disaster on a number of fronts. I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better controls.
     
    If Muslim society were strong, it wouldn't have been on the retreat for half a millennium from post-Renaissance Europe.

    Society has not been feminized, our men have. Our women have been masculinized.

    First rule of holes: stop the genderbending.
    , @Ed
    There are reports of attacks against migrants as a result of Cologne, which of course is throwing the elites into a fit.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12092354/Cologne-sex-attacks-New-Years-Eve-cases-rise-to-more-than-500.html
    , @Bill

    I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better control
     
    I don't hate to make that observation. It's obviously true.
    , @Veracitor

    Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity, but it leaves me thinking that German men are “screwed, blued and tatooed.” Do nothing but report immigrant/invader crime to the authorities and hope that they will take the proper steps and women of your own age think you’re a wimp and refuse to have your children. Form a gang, hunt down and beat or even kill a few of the immigrants/invaders and the barren menopausal women in charge whose “sons” you’ve just attacked hurl the full force of the law at you.
     
    Yeah. So I would suggest Germany's men try something more political, less impromptu.

    The German men's resistance movement must marshal a single-issue anti-immigration political organization and make it the decider of every election. (Of course they will give the organization some high-minded name for propaganda purposes, and to preëmptively repudiate charges of racism and hate speech). That will require determined leadership to keep the organization focused; political hacks from existing parties will try to co-opt the organization and neuter it. It may take several tries to create a suitable organization. Naturally the first few politicians to court the movement in return for crucial votes in by-elections will betray it when they take office, but as office-holders facing tough re-election campaigns (and eager-beagers contesting open or weakly-held offices) chance asking the organization for support they will move the Overton Window in the movement's favor. With a judicious mixture of interventions positive (donations, volunteer work) and negative (withdrawing support from traitors even when that means harder-leftists will win), a strong organization will eventually tame enough politicians to start changing government policy.

    The resistance movement can recruit Germany's lesbians-- they have nothing to gain from the Merkel youth and much to lose to them. The lesbians should be sicced on the local political party organizations which coordinate and promote the clammy reign of the middle-aged nulliparas like Merkel and Reker. Many of those are volunteer committees staffed by whoever shows up regularly (it may be necessary to buy some party memberships). The targets will find it hard to slap down lesbian insurgents, while the softball-whackers will enjoy intriguing for power over the Merkel brigade. As they gain it they can promote anti-immigrant candidates or at least sabotage establishment-party operations. Only a fraction of the gay men will join the resistance but they will be useful allies. To recruit as many as possible an allied organization, something like "Queers for Germany" should be set up, with a natty dress code and lots of fooling around backstage or in nearby hotels after rallies. The gays should be used to influence figures in the entertainment industry, to wheedle fruity establishment politicians in bed, and to obtain blackmail evidence, as appropriate. Influencing entertainers will be very useful since they can spread all sorts of movement propaganda easily. The resistance movement should definitely arrange for dances and concerts with music from patriotic entertainers who donate some of the ticket money to the movement organizations.

    German men need to produce and disseminate propaganda at several levels-- even in the teeth of establishment censorship. They must create a popular film which celebrates a myth of Germanic solidarity and kinship (like Braveheart did for the Scots). I don't understand German mythos very well but perhaps a new movie about the 1529 Siege of Vienna would serve. German men must formulate political euphemisms, slang, and code words to use when discussing anti-immigration efforts. The German State is far behind the Chinese in censorship technology; Germans could evade a lot of government Internet flyswatters just by referring, e.g. to Merkel youth as «Turisten» and the like. Of course much more elliptical approaches are feasible. German men should also spread anti-immigrant rumors and create black propaganda-- for example, movement hackers should forge, inject into official channels, and "leak" a scary memo from a high official in the public health service warning hospitals and clinics about antibiotic-resistant intestinal diseases spread by Merkel youth, then push rumors of women in Cologne and other cities suffering horribly after drinking coffee from cups inadequately-washed by filthy immigrants (not forgetting suitable Facebook posts). White propaganda too is required-- for example, publicizing the diversion of social-services funds from German retirees to Merkel youths.

    The German resistance movement must make a special, persistent (though discreet) effort to foster and recruit sympathizers in the police (including border guards, etc.) and fire services. It should be fairly easy to win over the lower ranks and many in the command structure. Policemen would naturally prefer to arrest and deport Merkel youth than to stand around watching them molest young German women. The police are supervised by establishment political hacks like Wolfgang Albers of the SDP in Cologne but without the cooperation of the "real" policemen the political hacks can only prevent action, not take it. The hacks have shown that they will prevent real policemen from interfering with MENA rape festivals. When confronted by a German resistance movement the hacks will order policemen to take action to identify and arrest patriots for "hate speech." Movement sympathizers in the police must frustrate those orders. Kripo and BKA officers can proceed with deliberate inefficiency, and connive at warning patriots to avoid provocations, traps, etc. Patrolmen can be clumsy and slow when it comes to arresting patriotic protestors. Both senior and junior police officials can bungle investigations of patriots and spoil evidence sought by prosecutors-- and they can leak information for patriotic politicians to publicize under parliamentary privilege.

    The movement must recruit some lawyers and bankers into a special allied organization to collect and administer legal-defense and jailed-martyr's-family-relief funds. Those succor mainly main-organization figures targeted for persecution by the establishment, but would be available to aid particularly sympathetic fringe allies.

    Every large political movement attracts a lunatic fringe (Carrie Nation, Black Panthers, etc.). Since this is unavoidable, it should at least be managed and exploited. The lunatics should be steered into a separate resistance organization so the main political organization can distinguish itself as the voice of reason and moderation. At rallies the lunatics should be relegated to attacking pro-immigration hecklers at the fringes of the crowd. The police will have to arrest some of them; so much the better-- eventually a few will make presentable martyrs. The main organization should never attempt unofficial violence-- its aim is to get the government to order the police to expel the Merkel youth. Any non-lunatic who wants to wrestle with migrants should join the police and demonstrate his prowess in the service of the law.

    The resistance movement should aim to: make the government concede first a substantial crimp then a pause in the influx of foreigners; force Merkel out of office; institute an aggressive scheme of deporting Merkel youth who commit crimes (at first) then infractions (next) and finally mere welfare-dependency; then to finish up, implement a repatriation scheme to send immigrants from MENA home. Departing migrants should be given a good-sized departure gift (e.g., $5K) if they go quietly and a dull ache in their backsides if they have to be frogmarched to the border and booted across it. It will be good for German men to have German women watch them expel the Merkel youth.

    In the early days of the movement most women will oppose it. Once it picks up some momentum, though, German women's sympathies will start to shift-- the more as the men appear to be defying the establishment and getting away with it.

  29. @Adam
    This is from the opening of A.J.P. Taylor's "The Course of German History." For those of us who worry that recent events suggest the end of Western Civilization it is somewhat reassuring, in that that recent events conform to a familiar pattern, though it's admittedly a small comfort -- like knowing that a suicidal drunk has gone through a cycle like this before...:

    "The history of the Germans is the history of extremes. It contains everything except moderation, and in the course of a thousand years the Germans have experienced everything except normality...'German' has meant at one moment a being so sentimental, so trusting, so pious, as to be too good for this world; and at another a being so brutal, so unprincipled, so degraded, as to be not fit to live. Both descriptions are true..."

    yes but it was always germans we were talking about. Now we are moving to biological level replacement. If we look at the etch-a-sketch population destruction and movement of ww2 and after, konigsberg and breslau are no longer german, lwow/lviv is no longer polish etc. Now we are doing that in mainland germany. And we are not replacing germans with nice tractable poles either.

  30. @Veracitor
    In courthouse corridors all over the world the cries of criminals' mothers and grandmothers echo: "my boy would never do that! He wouldn't hurt a flea! Those girls are liars, they must be crazy or jealous, my boy is innocent!"

    Germany's so-called "Syrian refugees" are the adopted black sheep of Angela Merkel and Henriette Reker (Cologne's Mayor) and all the other childless leftist women of Germany. Those women all repeat the eternal phrases of mothers whose sons have earned society's ire. They will cheerfully sacrifice anyone else to save their sons, even from natural justice.

    Natural selection guarantees this behavior and the fewer children a mother has, the more anxiously she will protect each one. But like any evolved behavior, this protective emotion can be activated sometimes by error. The limbic systems of Germany's barren women are desperately eager to protect offspring who are not actually there, so they motivate concern for child-substitutes, in this case the young foreign men that German women have morally adopted en-masse.

    Of course every complex phenomenon is driven by more than one factor. Other commenters and our friend Heartiste have suggested that some German women favor the "Syrian refugees" just because they are more virile than German men. There probably is some of that, but I think there is another, related factor at work as well.

    Subconsciously, I believe, Germany's younger women want to provoke fights between Germany's men and the "syrian refugees." Far too many German men are "sitzpinklers" and German women are disappointed, even if they cannot express it in their vocabulary of leftist feminist cliches. Women notoriously like to watch men fight-- so they can mate with the winners. Even when they already have mates they want to see them fight to reconfirm their merit (this may be sublimated into "winning a tennis game," "winning promotion ahead of a rival," etc.). In both the Great War and WWII the women of England joined the Order of the White Feather and amused themselves by accusing young men of cowardice if they were not in military uniform. Young women in bars encourage young men to brawl. Anthropology books are replete with examples of women egging men into combat.

    Even as many German women see "Syrian refugees" as adopted sons and wish to shield them from the opprobrium of everyone else, another cohort of German women is challenging German men: "Hey, sitzpinkler, prove you are worthy to mate with me! Throw out this challenger, whom I invited into the bar (neighborhood, city, Germany) and with whom I am flirting to make you jealous, or die trying!"

    Many German women, if you ask them, will tell you they would rather mate with a German man, "but," they say, "there aren't any good German men, they're all wimps!" Many of the women of Cologne who voted for Reker and her pro-immigration platform, then went down to the Cathedral square to get groped by MENA's, are essentially trying to summon up some non-wimpy German men to protect them and, as Heartiste might suggest, give them the tingle which they don't feel when they look at Ralf Jaeger and all the rest of the SDP eunuchs.

    In this situation the men of Germany can either pull themselves together and regain the respect and affection of their women, or disappear into the mists of history, remembered by no descendants and few foreign historians. German men must cast down Merkel, throw out the "Syrian refugees," and if they are really smart, import some young foreign women on which German men can get the children which can no longer spring from the shriveled wombs of Germany's middle-aged women. Let the motherhood-yearning of those women settle onto German nieces and nephews and grandchildren instead of immigrant louts, and put Germany's remaining young women into healthy rivalry with foreign ingenues for the attention of German men.

    > another cohort of German women is challenging German men: “Hey, sitzpinkler, prove you are worthy to mate with me! Throw out this challenger, whom I invited into the bar (neighborhood, city, Germany) and with whom I am flirting to make you jealous, or die trying!”

    Speaking of intersecting iSteve themes… you are describing catfishing on a national scale.

  31. Enoch Powell made his “rivers of blood” speeches before I was born. The British public supported him but the Establishment did not. The mass media ruled him out of bounds and that was that. He was used as an object lesson of what happens when people don’t play the game properly. Almost five decades later we’re supposed to be happy the NYT serves up this weak tea?

    We have to stop doing this, we have to stop trying to govern our countries via the mass media. This is literally killing us. We have to do politics despite them, not look for signs they’re starting to see things our way. “Bypass and haul ass”, as Gen. Patton advised. We now have the tools to do it literally at our fingertips.

    • Agree: Bill B.
    • Replies: @Kylie
    Well said. Thank you.

    I find it galling that Powell's speech is so grossly mischaracterized. Even the title given it by others, the "Rivers of Blood" speech, is a misnomer. That phrase is nowhere to be found in what Powell himself called the Birmingham speech.

    The speech itself is beautifully reasoned and written.
  32. About 25 years ago, a member of the clergy made the oddest remark to me.

    I asked him how many people lived in the small town where he reside. He said, “10,000 and we have 4000 Turks”. Funnier still, I’ve been back a few times since then, and I’ve still yet to see a Turk, or at least someone I recognize as such.

    Around that same 25 years ago, I had some German guests on their first visit to the U.S. Initially, the appeal of suburbs was utterly lost upon them, “Why would you want to live in the country?”. They also were perplexed as to why one would lock their car doors while they were actually in their cars.

    I wonder if there are many Germans who are still like this, at least up until the recent migration.

    According to HBD’ers, we should expect Germans to react much like white Americans, German being one of the major ethnicities among white Americans and closely related northern Euros even more.

    In America, they just moved away from the problem. Sure, there was lots of bluster in white flight years, disgruntlement, the occasional firebombing of the first house on the street to be inhabited by a black (incident like that happened nearby when I was a kid), all that, but they just faded like an ebb tide.

    Same thing is going to happen in Germany. In the U.S., it took a generation to figure out how to maintain some semblance of order in center cities, expect a secular upward trend in crime in Germany w/all the attendant hand wringing but not much action for a very long while. American criminal justice system was getting positively mushy-headedly scandinavian by the time the rising crime of the 60s really started hitting home.

    If they do deport, it will be well below the amount to have any meaningful difference – even if they deported 500,000, which would require a miracle to happen, that is 500,000 remaining.

    There is no way out of this one. Germany, at least the one we knew, truly is kaput.

    It breaks my heart…

    • Replies: @Bill

    In America, they just moved away from the problem.
     
    That's not true. There were riots. Blacks had their houses burned down. Blacks were beaten up. The government stopped this. You could argue that the Catholics targeted by the resettlement of blacks in their neighborhoods should have started a civil war over it, but do you really think they would have won? Catholics were a minority of whites at the time and were greatly underrepresented in positions of authority.
  33. @Diversity Heretic
    Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity, but it leaves me thinking that German men are "screwed, blued and tatooed." Do nothing but report immigrant/invader crime to the authorities and hope that they will take the proper steps and women of your own age think you're a wimp and refuse to have your children. Form a gang, hunt down and beat or even kill a few of the immigrants/invaders and the barren menopausal women in charge whose "sons" you've just attacked hurl the full force of the law at you. And if you're a German man who has invested something in education and training to get at least an acceptable job, you have something to lose.

    Proverbial rock and a hard place. My take: the feminization of society is a rapidly unfolding disaster on a number of fronts. I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better controls.

    Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity, but it leaves me thinking that German men are “screwed, blued and tatooed.” Do nothing but report immigrant/invader crime to the authorities and hope that they will take the proper steps and women of your own age think you’re a wimp and refuse to have your children. Form a gang, hunt down and beat or even kill a few of the immigrants/invaders and the barren menopausal women in charge whose “sons” you’ve just attacked hurl the full force of the law at you. And if you’re a German man who has invested something in education and training to get at least an acceptable job, you have something to lose.

    By definition, “men” face up to daunting hurdles that if they don’t overcome, they are screwed. This is one, and honestly, it really is only a minor first world problem compared to a lot of stuff that can and has happened in German history.

    Who would you rather be, a German dude living today in some comfortable German home or a member of the Wehrmacht 6th Army trapped in the Kessel. Really, if they can’t face up to this, and I don’t mean by violence, this is such a trivial problem, all they have to do is vote out the wrong people and vote in the right people.

    If German men are defeated by this, lord knows they deserve it, as sad as it is to say.

    • Replies: @JEGG
    Actually, the modern day problem of how to deal with encroaching feminization can prove more intractable than anything else, including the Nazis and WWII. This is because it's so very subtle and hits people not outside their home, but actually even in their own bedrooms.
    , @Diversity Heretic
    Valid point; no sane person would choose to be trapped at Stalingrad. But what really did the genuine heroism of the German fighting man in those battles get them? At least the Landser knew who their enemy was.

    Who is the true enemy of ther German man today: (1) the immigrant/invaders who, so "the authorities" tell him, are there legally and are subject to the police protection of the State, at least insofar as any retribution you and your colleagues might contemplate is concerned; (2) the women with whom you would like to have children but who despise you because somehow you are failing to protect them (even though individuals fighting back will face odds of five or six to one and group retribution will be prevented or punished (see (1) above); or (3) the politicians/ leaders who throw open the doors to the immigrant/invaders, and facilitate (1) and (2) above, but, you are told, have been placed in their position by a "democratic" process and can only be removed by that process.

    And, to continue the World War II metaphor, if your answer is (3), do you (German man) want to be Klaus von Stauffenbeg and the July 20 plotters--assuming that you could somehow organize such a movement in a pervasive surveillance state, and without the class and status protections of the German/Prussian officer class?

    Let me not judge a man until I have walked a mile in his moccasins! It's just not that simple!

    I do note some stories of retributive attacks in the press today. And the Corsicans have struck back; I haven't heard recently what Golden Dawn is up to. The best arrangement is that police authorities (at the beat cop level) simply arrange to look the other way.

    , @Bill
    Indeed, democracy is a machine for deflecting blame.
  34. @Veracitor
    In courthouse corridors all over the world the cries of criminals' mothers and grandmothers echo: "my boy would never do that! He wouldn't hurt a flea! Those girls are liars, they must be crazy or jealous, my boy is innocent!"

    Germany's so-called "Syrian refugees" are the adopted black sheep of Angela Merkel and Henriette Reker (Cologne's Mayor) and all the other childless leftist women of Germany. Those women all repeat the eternal phrases of mothers whose sons have earned society's ire. They will cheerfully sacrifice anyone else to save their sons, even from natural justice.

    Natural selection guarantees this behavior and the fewer children a mother has, the more anxiously she will protect each one. But like any evolved behavior, this protective emotion can be activated sometimes by error. The limbic systems of Germany's barren women are desperately eager to protect offspring who are not actually there, so they motivate concern for child-substitutes, in this case the young foreign men that German women have morally adopted en-masse.

    Of course every complex phenomenon is driven by more than one factor. Other commenters and our friend Heartiste have suggested that some German women favor the "Syrian refugees" just because they are more virile than German men. There probably is some of that, but I think there is another, related factor at work as well.

    Subconsciously, I believe, Germany's younger women want to provoke fights between Germany's men and the "syrian refugees." Far too many German men are "sitzpinklers" and German women are disappointed, even if they cannot express it in their vocabulary of leftist feminist cliches. Women notoriously like to watch men fight-- so they can mate with the winners. Even when they already have mates they want to see them fight to reconfirm their merit (this may be sublimated into "winning a tennis game," "winning promotion ahead of a rival," etc.). In both the Great War and WWII the women of England joined the Order of the White Feather and amused themselves by accusing young men of cowardice if they were not in military uniform. Young women in bars encourage young men to brawl. Anthropology books are replete with examples of women egging men into combat.

    Even as many German women see "Syrian refugees" as adopted sons and wish to shield them from the opprobrium of everyone else, another cohort of German women is challenging German men: "Hey, sitzpinkler, prove you are worthy to mate with me! Throw out this challenger, whom I invited into the bar (neighborhood, city, Germany) and with whom I am flirting to make you jealous, or die trying!"

    Many German women, if you ask them, will tell you they would rather mate with a German man, "but," they say, "there aren't any good German men, they're all wimps!" Many of the women of Cologne who voted for Reker and her pro-immigration platform, then went down to the Cathedral square to get groped by MENA's, are essentially trying to summon up some non-wimpy German men to protect them and, as Heartiste might suggest, give them the tingle which they don't feel when they look at Ralf Jaeger and all the rest of the SDP eunuchs.

    In this situation the men of Germany can either pull themselves together and regain the respect and affection of their women, or disappear into the mists of history, remembered by no descendants and few foreign historians. German men must cast down Merkel, throw out the "Syrian refugees," and if they are really smart, import some young foreign women on which German men can get the children which can no longer spring from the shriveled wombs of Germany's middle-aged women. Let the motherhood-yearning of those women settle onto German nieces and nephews and grandchildren instead of immigrant louts, and put Germany's remaining young women into healthy rivalry with foreign ingenues for the attention of German men.

    [ In … the Great War … the women of England joined the Order of the White Feather and amused themselves by accusing young men of cowardice if they were not in military uniform.]

    The women most passionately dedicated to this pastime were the suffragettes.

    • Replies: @dearieme
    "The women most passionately dedicated to this pastime were the suffragettes." It's an odd one that. After all, a rather good argument for retaining only male suffrage was that only men were required to go to war.
  35. @5371
    [ In ... the Great War ... the women of England joined the Order of the White Feather and amused themselves by accusing young men of cowardice if they were not in military uniform.]

    The women most passionately dedicated to this pastime were the suffragettes.

    “The women most passionately dedicated to this pastime were the suffragettes.” It’s an odd one that. After all, a rather good argument for retaining only male suffrage was that only men were required to go to war.

    • Replies: @dcite
    Enormous propaganda was required to get the English riled against the Germans towards whom most English had no animus. It was the usual suspects who wanted to slap down a rival mainly because it was getting too strong for its britches. Those suspects: royals, big business, the military, the bankers. The common people had nothing much to gain. The propaganda spin used women as button pushers; they'd use anything that worked: your dog, your kid, your thatched cottage, your sceptured isle, your grandmother. They set up organizations to spread the propaganda. To push buttons. There's nothing like king & country with a pretty face over the print. Some of the gettes were attention hogs, I guess.
    Most suffragettes' rhetoric went along the lines of women putting an end to war, not encouraging men into it. Yes, yes, idealisitic, and of course that's not likely considering the psychopaths of both genders who get into the highest levels. Nevertheless, that's what they thought. Or many of them. I don't know how many played into the propaganda game, but the most shattering anti-war work I ever encountered was Testament of Youth about WWI, by Vera Brittain, who lost her great love in it.
    As far as voting, enfranchisement never made much difference--men were taken on age and condition, not whether they had voted for the monster war-mongers. That's a 20th century notion. Gen. Smedly Butler admitted in the 1930s that he'd worked for big business without realizing it. Not for his "country." He died soon after that.

    The comedy of Lysistrata had the women of Greece denying sexual favors to the men until they stopped making war. Unfortunately that meant they had to deny themselves also, so it didn't get far as peace movements go.

  36. In the German case the important number here isn’t the country’s total population, currently 82 million. It’s the twentysomething population, which was less than 10 million in 2013 (and of course already included many immigrants). In that cohort and every cohort afterward, the current influx could have a transformative effect.

    Surprised he went there, in the NYT of all places.

    Elites doing damage control?

    Although he could have credited Adorján F. Kovács, who is the guy I suspect Douthat got it from originally: http://newobserveronline.com/germany-nonwhites-majority-in-one-generation/

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Although he could have credited Adorján F. Kovács, who is the guy I suspect Douthat got it from originally:

    He could more easily have gotten it from the comments section of one of Steve's posts. Like here...

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/surf-city-sweden-1-23-boys-for-every-girl/
  37. In a more open media Steve would be a fine replacement for Pat Buchanan.

    The only thing holding iSteve back from respectability should there be much further shift of the Overton window in the current direction it is currently heading is the anti-semitic and white nationalist/racist element hanging around.

    Methinks Steve is playing a good game. He has to pander subtly to these guys previously and here on unz to keep his numbers/money/rep up, but maintain as much credible deniability about himself for a future return to respectability.

    His numbers are increasing, and I think the overall increase diminishes the percentage of anti-semitic and wn types. As his numbers keep increasing in this direction, he eventually can ditch/disavow this element completely without collapsing his reader base.

    Well, it certainly would be what I would do…

    Think about the thread about Nixon being taken down. I read about the first 75 comments and there was not one single remark about “da eskimos dunnit”. About who/what took out Nixon? Nixon? Are you kidding me? I’m not sure one could get that result on Haaretz….

    Maybe it is less anti-semitic types in the readership base, maybe Komment Kontrol is coming down harder on these types, or some combination of both factors. But it was very distinctive.

    Steve’s got a shot at it and seeing all these lessers, and they are legion, getting international renown, and more importantly, the broad audience he clearly craves is a bitter pill – he’s pretty diligent about letting his readership know how his writing/ideas get transmitted to the “general public” via covert readers of his work in mainstream journalism. And he should, because he deserves a broader audience.

    So if you want to help Steve, take the anti-semitic and racist stuff to Stormfront or somewhere. Personally, I’ve heard way enough of it to last a lifetime, but if you can’t control yourself for decorum, quit ruining Steve’s shot at prime time. The PUA stuff is pretty cheesy/annoying/juvenile, but I’d have to reluctantly admit that stuff may be survivable, especially because Steve doesn’t engage at all on that.

    Think about this….

    • Replies: @Bill
    Concern troll is concerned.
    , @Mark2
    Oh look, it's this concern troll again.
    , @Hanoi Paris Hilton
    I recollect recently noting at least one especially toxic piece of Judenhass on an iSteve thread that was up for a awhile, then seemed to disappear. Maybe my imagination, but possibly Mr. Sailer thinks it's OK to let this stuff emerge into digital daylight —pre-emptive censorship being counterproductive and cowardly— and after a decent interval, to minimize the aggregate stench in his parlor. The really scary thing was how much rude Joooo-hating came up in the early days of open threads in the online NYT, WaPo, et. al. before they started taking a more hard-core approach to moderating.
    , @gbloco
    I don't think Steve ever needed the wn brigade
    , @Broski
    If the "anti-semitic" stuff includes discussions of the 2% population to 30% billionaire/40% biglaw partner/25% or whatever tenured professor discrepancies, it's hard to have an honest discussion of power and influence in the world without bringing it up.

    The dawning Overton window WILL include these facts, and the question is how Jewish elites acknowledge these facts, and certain of the excesses of influential Jewish people (like, say, Marx, Boaz, Gramsci, Gould, Lewontin, Schumer as the chief proponent of population changing immigration, Soros/Saban/Wynn/Adelson and their various machinations etc.), without white Gentiles overestimating Jewish foibles and underestimating Jewish contributions. There's a compelling case that Jewish people have caused a lot of problems, so Jewish elites better start explicitly focusing on Jewish contributions. Technology has rendered naked emperors obsolete.
    , @Mr. Anon
    Apparently, Mr. Concern Troll is also the "Komment Kontrol" nitwit, who was always complaining about his posts not getting through.

    Given that you are a guy who thinks that using a K in place of a C is witty and insightful, remind us again why we should give a single solitary damn about what you think?

  38. @anonguy

    Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity, but it leaves me thinking that German men are “screwed, blued and tatooed.” Do nothing but report immigrant/invader crime to the authorities and hope that they will take the proper steps and women of your own age think you’re a wimp and refuse to have your children. Form a gang, hunt down and beat or even kill a few of the immigrants/invaders and the barren menopausal women in charge whose “sons” you’ve just attacked hurl the full force of the law at you. And if you’re a German man who has invested something in education and training to get at least an acceptable job, you have something to lose.
     
    By definition, "men" face up to daunting hurdles that if they don't overcome, they are screwed. This is one, and honestly, it really is only a minor first world problem compared to a lot of stuff that can and has happened in German history.

    Who would you rather be, a German dude living today in some comfortable German home or a member of the Wehrmacht 6th Army trapped in the Kessel. Really, if they can't face up to this, and I don't mean by violence, this is such a trivial problem, all they have to do is vote out the wrong people and vote in the right people.

    If German men are defeated by this, lord knows they deserve it, as sad as it is to say.

    Actually, the modern day problem of how to deal with encroaching feminization can prove more intractable than anything else, including the Nazis and WWII. This is because it’s so very subtle and hits people not outside their home, but actually even in their own bedrooms.

  39. “It means giving up the fond illusion that Germany’s past sins can be absolved with a reckless humanitarianism in the present.”

    July 2019 with be the 100th anniversary of Hitler’s first job as a government informant. Which is a long time for a meme to run.

    • Replies: @5371
    AH wasn't a "government informant". He was paid by the Reichswehr as a propagandist.
  40. This rash of common sense by the NYT regarding immigration is unprecedented. I know this theory seems far-fetched, but bear with me here: What’s behind it all is the unfriendly turn that the Mexican government has taken towards Carlos Slim and his monopolistic practices. Slim is thus less inclined to help out the current regime by supporting their northern neighbor’s safety valve-like immigration policies.

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    This rash of common sense by the NYT regarding immigration is unprecedented. I know this theory seems far-fetched, but bear with me here: What’s behind it all is the unfriendly turn that the Mexican government has taken towards Carlos Slim and his monopolistic practices. Slim is thus less inclined to help out the current regime by supporting their northern neighbor’s safety valve-like immigration policies.
     
    Interesting thought -- that's a hypothesis worth considering.
  41. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Diversity Heretic
    Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity, but it leaves me thinking that German men are "screwed, blued and tatooed." Do nothing but report immigrant/invader crime to the authorities and hope that they will take the proper steps and women of your own age think you're a wimp and refuse to have your children. Form a gang, hunt down and beat or even kill a few of the immigrants/invaders and the barren menopausal women in charge whose "sons" you've just attacked hurl the full force of the law at you. And if you're a German man who has invested something in education and training to get at least an acceptable job, you have something to lose.

    Proverbial rock and a hard place. My take: the feminization of society is a rapidly unfolding disaster on a number of fronts. I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better controls.

    the feminization of society is a rapidly unfolding disaster on a number of fronts. I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better controls.

    Recall the demons behind the destruction, er, liberation of Libya, the Arab Spring, the instigation against Russia in its backyard, et al.

    Or, the Fall of Man in the Garden of Evil. It was another woman who reversed this with her decision (“fiat”) and it was the worship of this woman which led to the rise of chivalry and of Western civilization (according to Chesterton). Then the West abandoned her and her son and coincidentally it reaps the cult which has a negative view of women and will bring on the thousand years of darkness.

  42. @Ed
    There is little "race mixing" now & that's actually making the problem worse. Germany needs to start deportations of single men but it won't.

    There will be little race mixing in the first generation but it will increase in the second generation and further increase in the third generation.

  43. @anonguy

    Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity, but it leaves me thinking that German men are “screwed, blued and tatooed.” Do nothing but report immigrant/invader crime to the authorities and hope that they will take the proper steps and women of your own age think you’re a wimp and refuse to have your children. Form a gang, hunt down and beat or even kill a few of the immigrants/invaders and the barren menopausal women in charge whose “sons” you’ve just attacked hurl the full force of the law at you. And if you’re a German man who has invested something in education and training to get at least an acceptable job, you have something to lose.
     
    By definition, "men" face up to daunting hurdles that if they don't overcome, they are screwed. This is one, and honestly, it really is only a minor first world problem compared to a lot of stuff that can and has happened in German history.

    Who would you rather be, a German dude living today in some comfortable German home or a member of the Wehrmacht 6th Army trapped in the Kessel. Really, if they can't face up to this, and I don't mean by violence, this is such a trivial problem, all they have to do is vote out the wrong people and vote in the right people.

    If German men are defeated by this, lord knows they deserve it, as sad as it is to say.

    Valid point; no sane person would choose to be trapped at Stalingrad. But what really did the genuine heroism of the German fighting man in those battles get them? At least the Landser knew who their enemy was.

    Who is the true enemy of ther German man today: (1) the immigrant/invaders who, so “the authorities” tell him, are there legally and are subject to the police protection of the State, at least insofar as any retribution you and your colleagues might contemplate is concerned; (2) the women with whom you would like to have children but who despise you because somehow you are failing to protect them (even though individuals fighting back will face odds of five or six to one and group retribution will be prevented or punished (see (1) above); or (3) the politicians/ leaders who throw open the doors to the immigrant/invaders, and facilitate (1) and (2) above, but, you are told, have been placed in their position by a “democratic” process and can only be removed by that process.

    And, to continue the World War II metaphor, if your answer is (3), do you (German man) want to be Klaus von Stauffenbeg and the July 20 plotters–assuming that you could somehow organize such a movement in a pervasive surveillance state, and without the class and status protections of the German/Prussian officer class?

    Let me not judge a man until I have walked a mile in his moccasins! It’s just not that simple!

    I do note some stories of retributive attacks in the press today. And the Corsicans have struck back; I haven’t heard recently what Golden Dawn is up to. The best arrangement is that police authorities (at the beat cop level) simply arrange to look the other way.

    • Replies: @Anonym
    That is a really good comment.

    Additionally, the enemy is in part the mainstream media who serve up continuous sermonizing and indoctrination against so-called racist thought and action.

    I hope that the efficient German police look the other way on this one.
  44. Another development that’s interesting to watch
    is the recent rapprochement between Britain and
    the Visegrad group (Poland, Czech R., Slovakia, and
    Hungary). All five countries, located on the periphery
    of the EU, feel threatened by the assertiveness of Frau
    Merkel’s Germany, and not only about the redistribution
    of the migrants. Britain will never allow itself to be under
    Germany’s thumb, and the Visegrad countries feel the
    same way.

    Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the de facto leader of Poland’s
    new government, met with Orban several days ago at a castle
    in southern Poland, trying to develop a united front
    in dealing with the EU. None of the Visegrad countries
    are interested in accepting migrants. Cameron visited
    both Poland and Hungary for extensive talks. Something
    is going on.

    Another idea that’s being discussed is the revival of
    the old concept of Intermarium, an entity stretching from
    the Baltic to the Black Sea, originally proposed after
    World War I by Polish leader Josef Pilsudski – itself
    a resurrection in a sense of the Polish-Lithuanian
    Commonwealth and its enlargement into effectively
    Polish-Lthuanian-Ruthenian (and more) Commonwealth.
    The countries in Central Europe feel threatened by 100
    million German speakers on the west and 150 million
    Russian speakers on the east. The annexation of Crimea
    by Russia and Frau Merkel’s demands for Central Europe
    to accept tens of thousands of Muslim migrants re-awakened
    those old fears.

    • Replies: @Anon 2
    It's understandable for Poland and Hungary to have
    no interest in accepting Muslim migrants. Both countries
    have traumatic memories connected with Muslims,
    particularly Hungary. The latter's southern regions were
    occupied by the Ottoman Turks for almost 150 years
    (till 1699). Although Poland's traumatic memories are
    associated mainly with Germany, still on September 11,
    1683 (no doubt commemorated on 9/11 in the U.S.)
    Poland's winged hussars under King Sobieski had to
    rescue Europe at the Siege of Vienna from being
    conquered and occupied by the Ottoman Empire.
    If Vienna fell, Rome was the next target.
  45. @Veracitor
    In courthouse corridors all over the world the cries of criminals' mothers and grandmothers echo: "my boy would never do that! He wouldn't hurt a flea! Those girls are liars, they must be crazy or jealous, my boy is innocent!"

    Germany's so-called "Syrian refugees" are the adopted black sheep of Angela Merkel and Henriette Reker (Cologne's Mayor) and all the other childless leftist women of Germany. Those women all repeat the eternal phrases of mothers whose sons have earned society's ire. They will cheerfully sacrifice anyone else to save their sons, even from natural justice.

    Natural selection guarantees this behavior and the fewer children a mother has, the more anxiously she will protect each one. But like any evolved behavior, this protective emotion can be activated sometimes by error. The limbic systems of Germany's barren women are desperately eager to protect offspring who are not actually there, so they motivate concern for child-substitutes, in this case the young foreign men that German women have morally adopted en-masse.

    Of course every complex phenomenon is driven by more than one factor. Other commenters and our friend Heartiste have suggested that some German women favor the "Syrian refugees" just because they are more virile than German men. There probably is some of that, but I think there is another, related factor at work as well.

    Subconsciously, I believe, Germany's younger women want to provoke fights between Germany's men and the "syrian refugees." Far too many German men are "sitzpinklers" and German women are disappointed, even if they cannot express it in their vocabulary of leftist feminist cliches. Women notoriously like to watch men fight-- so they can mate with the winners. Even when they already have mates they want to see them fight to reconfirm their merit (this may be sublimated into "winning a tennis game," "winning promotion ahead of a rival," etc.). In both the Great War and WWII the women of England joined the Order of the White Feather and amused themselves by accusing young men of cowardice if they were not in military uniform. Young women in bars encourage young men to brawl. Anthropology books are replete with examples of women egging men into combat.

    Even as many German women see "Syrian refugees" as adopted sons and wish to shield them from the opprobrium of everyone else, another cohort of German women is challenging German men: "Hey, sitzpinkler, prove you are worthy to mate with me! Throw out this challenger, whom I invited into the bar (neighborhood, city, Germany) and with whom I am flirting to make you jealous, or die trying!"

    Many German women, if you ask them, will tell you they would rather mate with a German man, "but," they say, "there aren't any good German men, they're all wimps!" Many of the women of Cologne who voted for Reker and her pro-immigration platform, then went down to the Cathedral square to get groped by MENA's, are essentially trying to summon up some non-wimpy German men to protect them and, as Heartiste might suggest, give them the tingle which they don't feel when they look at Ralf Jaeger and all the rest of the SDP eunuchs.

    In this situation the men of Germany can either pull themselves together and regain the respect and affection of their women, or disappear into the mists of history, remembered by no descendants and few foreign historians. German men must cast down Merkel, throw out the "Syrian refugees," and if they are really smart, import some young foreign women on which German men can get the children which can no longer spring from the shriveled wombs of Germany's middle-aged women. Let the motherhood-yearning of those women settle onto German nieces and nephews and grandchildren instead of immigrant louts, and put Germany's remaining young women into healthy rivalry with foreign ingenues for the attention of German men.

    Just terrific observations. Your comment is the antidote to and should be mandatory reading for all college-aged men who were forced to undergo gender-sensitivity brainwashing. We men must figuratively and literally push back against noxious women who believe that they are entitled to contribute 50% of the input just because they comprise 50% of the population. Knowledge and competence are aristocratic, not democratic.

    Recently I helped three women push their motorboat off of a sandy beach, where they had carelessly left it to be stranded by an outgoing tide. With them in the stern for ballast, I was able to lever the bow off the beach. One of them commented “One guy is stronger than three women”–which is generally true. One man, with concentrated effort can accomplish more than the diffused strength of three normal women. After I freed their boat, one of them rewarded me with repeated views of her fine breasts as she bent over to play with her dog while we chatted and even though I’m a balding old guy whose engine is sputtering, I certainly enjoyed the view and appreciated the gesture.

    To sum up: strength and competence, gents, women find them irresistible. And if feminists don’t, then so what? What have you lost if you offend some barren witches whose favors you will never enjoy anyway?

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    What have you lost if you offend some barren witches whose favors you will never enjoy anyway?

    The barren witch may be the boss of your company, or perhaps the HR person, or the colleague who causes you trouble with HR. Their sexual favors are the least of your concerns.
  46. @Anonymous

    It means giving up the fond illusion that Germany’s past sins can be absolved with a reckless humanitarianism in the present.
     
    Is it an illusion? If letting in so many migrants in could be described as implementing a race mixing agenda then the result is real. It will mean the Final Counter-Solution to Nordicism.

    I hope youre just being too clever and not serious but it occurs you might be a jew with a grudge which being irish I can identify with except of course the irish never did any harm to the english. But back to your logic it could also be considered yet another ethnic holocaust in germany, or it could be thought as a reinvigoration of antisemitism in Germany.
    I suppose if my hunch is correct you will challenge my JQ allusion. I like jews personally but I find your politics coupled with your outsized influence pernicious to the point of existential destruction to western peoples. Almost none of you can really fully own this. If you had used your considerable talents to uphold western civilization and its peoples we would not be on the verge ww3.

  47. @Veracitor
    In courthouse corridors all over the world the cries of criminals' mothers and grandmothers echo: "my boy would never do that! He wouldn't hurt a flea! Those girls are liars, they must be crazy or jealous, my boy is innocent!"

    Germany's so-called "Syrian refugees" are the adopted black sheep of Angela Merkel and Henriette Reker (Cologne's Mayor) and all the other childless leftist women of Germany. Those women all repeat the eternal phrases of mothers whose sons have earned society's ire. They will cheerfully sacrifice anyone else to save their sons, even from natural justice.

    Natural selection guarantees this behavior and the fewer children a mother has, the more anxiously she will protect each one. But like any evolved behavior, this protective emotion can be activated sometimes by error. The limbic systems of Germany's barren women are desperately eager to protect offspring who are not actually there, so they motivate concern for child-substitutes, in this case the young foreign men that German women have morally adopted en-masse.

    Of course every complex phenomenon is driven by more than one factor. Other commenters and our friend Heartiste have suggested that some German women favor the "Syrian refugees" just because they are more virile than German men. There probably is some of that, but I think there is another, related factor at work as well.

    Subconsciously, I believe, Germany's younger women want to provoke fights between Germany's men and the "syrian refugees." Far too many German men are "sitzpinklers" and German women are disappointed, even if they cannot express it in their vocabulary of leftist feminist cliches. Women notoriously like to watch men fight-- so they can mate with the winners. Even when they already have mates they want to see them fight to reconfirm their merit (this may be sublimated into "winning a tennis game," "winning promotion ahead of a rival," etc.). In both the Great War and WWII the women of England joined the Order of the White Feather and amused themselves by accusing young men of cowardice if they were not in military uniform. Young women in bars encourage young men to brawl. Anthropology books are replete with examples of women egging men into combat.

    Even as many German women see "Syrian refugees" as adopted sons and wish to shield them from the opprobrium of everyone else, another cohort of German women is challenging German men: "Hey, sitzpinkler, prove you are worthy to mate with me! Throw out this challenger, whom I invited into the bar (neighborhood, city, Germany) and with whom I am flirting to make you jealous, or die trying!"

    Many German women, if you ask them, will tell you they would rather mate with a German man, "but," they say, "there aren't any good German men, they're all wimps!" Many of the women of Cologne who voted for Reker and her pro-immigration platform, then went down to the Cathedral square to get groped by MENA's, are essentially trying to summon up some non-wimpy German men to protect them and, as Heartiste might suggest, give them the tingle which they don't feel when they look at Ralf Jaeger and all the rest of the SDP eunuchs.

    In this situation the men of Germany can either pull themselves together and regain the respect and affection of their women, or disappear into the mists of history, remembered by no descendants and few foreign historians. German men must cast down Merkel, throw out the "Syrian refugees," and if they are really smart, import some young foreign women on which German men can get the children which can no longer spring from the shriveled wombs of Germany's middle-aged women. Let the motherhood-yearning of those women settle onto German nieces and nephews and grandchildren instead of immigrant louts, and put Germany's remaining young women into healthy rivalry with foreign ingenues for the attention of German men.

    There might be some truth to this, maybe. But lets check. How hot are the girlfriends of Pegida members? About about the “known hoologans” who allegedly counterattacked against some Pakistanis in Cologne?

  48. @Anon 2
    Another development that's interesting to watch
    is the recent rapprochement between Britain and
    the Visegrad group (Poland, Czech R., Slovakia, and
    Hungary). All five countries, located on the periphery
    of the EU, feel threatened by the assertiveness of Frau
    Merkel's Germany, and not only about the redistribution
    of the migrants. Britain will never allow itself to be under
    Germany's thumb, and the Visegrad countries feel the
    same way.

    Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the de facto leader of Poland's
    new government, met with Orban several days ago at a castle
    in southern Poland, trying to develop a united front
    in dealing with the EU. None of the Visegrad countries
    are interested in accepting migrants. Cameron visited
    both Poland and Hungary for extensive talks. Something
    is going on.

    Another idea that's being discussed is the revival of
    the old concept of Intermarium, an entity stretching from
    the Baltic to the Black Sea, originally proposed after
    World War I by Polish leader Josef Pilsudski - itself
    a resurrection in a sense of the Polish-Lithuanian
    Commonwealth and its enlargement into effectively
    Polish-Lthuanian-Ruthenian (and more) Commonwealth.
    The countries in Central Europe feel threatened by 100
    million German speakers on the west and 150 million
    Russian speakers on the east. The annexation of Crimea
    by Russia and Frau Merkel's demands for Central Europe
    to accept tens of thousands of Muslim migrants re-awakened
    those old fears.

    It’s understandable for Poland and Hungary to have
    no interest in accepting Muslim migrants. Both countries
    have traumatic memories connected with Muslims,
    particularly Hungary. The latter’s southern regions were
    occupied by the Ottoman Turks for almost 150 years
    (till 1699). Although Poland’s traumatic memories are
    associated mainly with Germany, still on September 11,
    1683 (no doubt commemorated on 9/11 in the U.S.)
    Poland’s winged hussars under King Sobieski had to
    rescue Europe at the Siege of Vienna from being
    conquered and occupied by the Ottoman Empire.
    If Vienna fell, Rome was the next target.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    [Hungary's] southern regions were occupied by the Ottoman Turks for almost 150 years
     
    Actually, almost the whole of present day Hungary was under direct Ottoman rule, including the traditional royal seat of Buda (now part of the capital city, Budapest).
  49. @Wilkey
    Douthat: "When immigration proceeds at a steady but modest clip, deep change comes slowly, and there’s time for assimilation to do its work. That’s why the Muslim population in Europe has been growing only at one percentage point a decade; it’s why many of the Turkish and North African immigrants who arrived in Germany and France decades ago are reasonably Europeanized today."

    I guess he's gotta throw a bone to the PC police, doesn't he?

    It doesn't matter whether the change comes "slowly" or rapidly. Islamization, rapidly or slowly, is bad for Europe.

    That’s why the Muslim population in Europe has been growing only at one percentage point a decade; it’s why many of the Turkish and North African immigrants who arrived in Germany and France decades ago are reasonably Europeanized today.

    If they were assimilating they would no longer be muslim. At best they’d have converted to Christianity, at worst they’d be secularist.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    It depends on what you mean by "reasonably assimilated".

    Pre-1933, German Jews were famous as being almost indistinguishable from other Germans, except for the fact that they worshiped (when they worshipped at all) on the "wrong" day - their "temples" (not synagogues) even had pipe organs and choirs like churches. Most of them had given up keeping the dietary laws, so they ate the same food. They dressed the same. They attended the same universities and formed part of the faculty. They did not form an underclass but rather were represented at all income levels including the highest. They fought in the German Army in WWI. Many were intermarried with Christians, etc. (Basically the same situation as for most American Jews today). This was in stark contrast to neighboring Poland where Jews were as distinctive from Poles as Gypsies -most Polish Jews spoke Polish as a 2nd language (after Yiddish) if they could speak it at all (but German Jews spoke only German). German Jews were so assimilated that the Nazis had to publish special books for children on how to tell who was Jewish - Aryans might have large noses but they were straight and aquiline - Jewish noses look like the number 6 in profile. German Jews had the same sense of humor as other Germans (humorless) - they were the subject of jokes by Eastern Jews because they were so stiff. But (because of the aforementioned tendency of Germans to go "all in" - a thing worth doing is worth doing well) this was not "reasonably assimilated" enough.

    So at what point will Muslims be "reasonably assimilated" enough to satisfy the German psyche?

    , @Corvinus
    Muslims, like Christians and Jews and Buddhists and Sikhs, are able to assimilate in their host country without converting to a different faith or becoming a "secularist".
  50. @Adam
    This is from the opening of A.J.P. Taylor's "The Course of German History." For those of us who worry that recent events suggest the end of Western Civilization it is somewhat reassuring, in that that recent events conform to a familiar pattern, though it's admittedly a small comfort -- like knowing that a suicidal drunk has gone through a cycle like this before...:

    "The history of the Germans is the history of extremes. It contains everything except moderation, and in the course of a thousand years the Germans have experienced everything except normality...'German' has meant at one moment a being so sentimental, so trusting, so pious, as to be too good for this world; and at another a being so brutal, so unprincipled, so degraded, as to be not fit to live. Both descriptions are true..."

    I always wonder how much of this is English prejudice, kind of like the belief Asians aren’t creative…

    I mean, Germany’s had a very turbulent history, and it wasn’t even a unified country until 150 years ago or so. You’d expect them to be prone to wars and so on.

    From the German point of view, the rest of Europe Scheissed on them for centuries, then they finally got their act together, lost a war and got stuck with the bill, lost another war and got knocked to rubble…so they decided to be good supranational types and encourage European integration, whereupon they get blamed for being the last responsible member of the union.

    I wouldn’t mind if they just slammed shut all their borders. Usually people are worried about Germany when they start sending Germans *over* their borders. 😉

  51. @Veracitor
    In courthouse corridors all over the world the cries of criminals' mothers and grandmothers echo: "my boy would never do that! He wouldn't hurt a flea! Those girls are liars, they must be crazy or jealous, my boy is innocent!"

    Germany's so-called "Syrian refugees" are the adopted black sheep of Angela Merkel and Henriette Reker (Cologne's Mayor) and all the other childless leftist women of Germany. Those women all repeat the eternal phrases of mothers whose sons have earned society's ire. They will cheerfully sacrifice anyone else to save their sons, even from natural justice.

    Natural selection guarantees this behavior and the fewer children a mother has, the more anxiously she will protect each one. But like any evolved behavior, this protective emotion can be activated sometimes by error. The limbic systems of Germany's barren women are desperately eager to protect offspring who are not actually there, so they motivate concern for child-substitutes, in this case the young foreign men that German women have morally adopted en-masse.

    Of course every complex phenomenon is driven by more than one factor. Other commenters and our friend Heartiste have suggested that some German women favor the "Syrian refugees" just because they are more virile than German men. There probably is some of that, but I think there is another, related factor at work as well.

    Subconsciously, I believe, Germany's younger women want to provoke fights between Germany's men and the "syrian refugees." Far too many German men are "sitzpinklers" and German women are disappointed, even if they cannot express it in their vocabulary of leftist feminist cliches. Women notoriously like to watch men fight-- so they can mate with the winners. Even when they already have mates they want to see them fight to reconfirm their merit (this may be sublimated into "winning a tennis game," "winning promotion ahead of a rival," etc.). In both the Great War and WWII the women of England joined the Order of the White Feather and amused themselves by accusing young men of cowardice if they were not in military uniform. Young women in bars encourage young men to brawl. Anthropology books are replete with examples of women egging men into combat.

    Even as many German women see "Syrian refugees" as adopted sons and wish to shield them from the opprobrium of everyone else, another cohort of German women is challenging German men: "Hey, sitzpinkler, prove you are worthy to mate with me! Throw out this challenger, whom I invited into the bar (neighborhood, city, Germany) and with whom I am flirting to make you jealous, or die trying!"

    Many German women, if you ask them, will tell you they would rather mate with a German man, "but," they say, "there aren't any good German men, they're all wimps!" Many of the women of Cologne who voted for Reker and her pro-immigration platform, then went down to the Cathedral square to get groped by MENA's, are essentially trying to summon up some non-wimpy German men to protect them and, as Heartiste might suggest, give them the tingle which they don't feel when they look at Ralf Jaeger and all the rest of the SDP eunuchs.

    In this situation the men of Germany can either pull themselves together and regain the respect and affection of their women, or disappear into the mists of history, remembered by no descendants and few foreign historians. German men must cast down Merkel, throw out the "Syrian refugees," and if they are really smart, import some young foreign women on which German men can get the children which can no longer spring from the shriveled wombs of Germany's middle-aged women. Let the motherhood-yearning of those women settle onto German nieces and nephews and grandchildren instead of immigrant louts, and put Germany's remaining young women into healthy rivalry with foreign ingenues for the attention of German men.

    I’m not sure how much the PUA analysis has relevance here. (Not that it’s not useful for getting laid.)

    My limited opinion (and, hey, any Germans want to comment?) is that the ladies are probably affected by compassion for refugees; we’ll see if stuff like Cologne changes their minds. The dudes, well, racism is illegal, so you have to be careful.

    If I actually spoke German I’d go over there and start a blog exposing all the stuff they’re doing; then when the SJWs come after me I could accuse them of anti-Semitism 😉

  52. @Lot
    Even with all th good news for the alt right in the rest of Europe, in Germany everything looks hopeless. Merkel has a 58% approval rating.

    Even in the unlikely event a popular leader like her is deposed by her own party, that would not be enough. The winner of the last election was the center left party. They choose to keep Merkel in office rather than try to form a coalition with the far left/communist Die Linke group. But left wing parties have a majority, so Merkel is as conservative as it gets until 2017 at soonest.

    How’s AfD doing? Seems like a nice way to go further right, and you’ve got the NPD you can point to and say, ‘See, these are the Nazis!’

  53. Here’s a street scene of a Cologne resident: http://m.liveleak.com/view?i=7f6_1452399111

    Btw, it really is Cologne, Germany and not West Baltimore or South Philly.

  54. @Adam
    This is from the opening of A.J.P. Taylor's "The Course of German History." For those of us who worry that recent events suggest the end of Western Civilization it is somewhat reassuring, in that that recent events conform to a familiar pattern, though it's admittedly a small comfort -- like knowing that a suicidal drunk has gone through a cycle like this before...:

    "The history of the Germans is the history of extremes. It contains everything except moderation, and in the course of a thousand years the Germans have experienced everything except normality...'German' has meant at one moment a being so sentimental, so trusting, so pious, as to be too good for this world; and at another a being so brutal, so unprincipled, so degraded, as to be not fit to live. Both descriptions are true..."

    Typical English propaganda (and one must admit they know which buttons to push to sway American opinion; now the yuppies are gobbling up Downton Abbey). The Germans “were being[s] so brutal, so unprincipled…as to be not fit to live” to the English, who imported foodstuffs from Ireland at the height of the Famine, who invented concentration camps during the Boer War (for the Afrikaner women and children), who forced opium addiction down the throats of the Chinese, who partitioned India?

    There is much documentation to support the contention of historians- both Indian and English- that Saint Winston of Blenheim deliberately starved between 3 and 5 million Indians in the Great Bengal Famine of 1943. Oh…you’ve never heard of it? I’m not surprised. Read more at:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_famine_of_1943

    Noam Chomsky quotes Adolf Hitler as writing in Mein Kampf that Britain won World War I because she won the “propaganda war”. Chomsky agrees with Hitler on this point.

    • Replies: @random observer
    I've heard of every one of those things. Not one of them, or all of them, equals the Holocaust in deliberation, motivation/purpose, scale, or brutality.

    Failure to properly discern a natural-origin crisis, lack of tools to act quickly [this is hyper-minimal government early Victorian Britain we are talking about wrt to Ireland] and to regulate commerce accordingly, and indeed even callous unwillingness to take the crisis seriously or attempt these things, is not the equal of setting out to exterminate millions for its own sake.

    Rounding up enemy civilians in wartime is an ancient practice, to be sure, and once ended up at the auction block. Rounding them up temporarily to deny support to the enemy is less cruel, and common in modern times. As it happens, the modern incarnation was not invented by the British and is attested earlier in such places as Poland and Cuba, the former as far back as the 18th century. Doing this, as the British did in South Africa, even if they do it sloppily and don't care much about health and welfare, is not the equal of setting up camps for one's own citizens in peacetime, then setting up more in surrendered territories for the purpose of mass murder. That's all on Germany. [Or Russia, but then the Germans were the first to practice it on millions of citizens of other countries. THe Russians prior to 1941 were content with their own targets.]

    The British certainly did use military force to compel the Chinese empire to accept opium imports to defray the tea trade deficit. But you can't actually force opium addiction on anyone. [Same goes for the US drug war today, of course. Every coke and heroin addict a volunteer.] It certainly does not equate to the Holocaust. The victims of the latter didn't sign up to take drugs the GErmans just happened to have forced onto the market. They were unwillingly signed up to get killed.

    Who partitioned India...? Exactly what was Britain supposed to do in 1947? The options were:

    1. Stay, at great cost and probably at the cost of war with both sides. Not to mention the US coming down on Britain like a ton of bricks.

    2. Try to force a unified India on both sides before leaving. Which would probably mean never leaving and revert to option 1.

    3. Partition, but stay longer to get the borders right or run the population movements with British personnel. Pretty much all the negatives of 1 and 2.

    4. Leave and hope the locals would not massacre one another. Oops.

    Still, It wasn't British soldiers who massacred all those millions of people. Or were they children who needed Mother England to take care of them after all?

    Aware of the Bengal famine, one of many Bengal had suffered. Plenty of political and economic structural reasons about late British India that contributed to it. SOme others about wartime exigencies do not exactly adorn Britain's record. But note even that wiki article fairly presents just how many of the problems were war related, or products of the amount of autonomy the British had already granted to Indians. Indian-controlled other provinces seemed more than willing to let Bengalis die rather than open up grain shipments, as Britain could no longer compel them to do.

    Apart from a racist comment by Churchill comparing Bengalis to Greeks, nothing in that article supports your contention.

    And none of it involves Britain setting up camps to kill millions of Bengalis or lining them up and machine gunning them into graves they had to dig themselves.
  55. WGG [AKA "World\'s Greatest Grandson"] says:

    The New York Times is signaling to Hillary (and Bernie for that matter) to walk it back some. Hillary was quoted a few days ago as saying that Angela Merkel is her hero and would like to govern in a similar manner. How tone-deaf to the public can a person be? She has no clue that most people despise Merkel and her 21st century pogroms.

    “Psssssst…. Hillary…Hey, Hillary, come ‘ere. Don’t freak out, but people don’t like you very much and they really don’t like what Frau Merkel is doing. Walk it back some. You’re blowing this thing!”

    -The New York Times

  56. I’m reading news reports of bodybuilders and bouncers are forming vigilante groups in Cologne and across Germany to protect women.

    Hope after all.

  57. Eustace Tilley (not) [AKA "Schiller/Nietzsche"] says:
    @Adam
    This is from the opening of A.J.P. Taylor's "The Course of German History." For those of us who worry that recent events suggest the end of Western Civilization it is somewhat reassuring, in that that recent events conform to a familiar pattern, though it's admittedly a small comfort -- like knowing that a suicidal drunk has gone through a cycle like this before...:

    "The history of the Germans is the history of extremes. It contains everything except moderation, and in the course of a thousand years the Germans have experienced everything except normality...'German' has meant at one moment a being so sentimental, so trusting, so pious, as to be too good for this world; and at another a being so brutal, so unprincipled, so degraded, as to be not fit to live. Both descriptions are true..."

    Where is the flag of England?
    Go sail where the rich galleons come
    With their shoddy and wasted cotton,
    And beer and Bibles and rum.
    Seek the land where brute force hath triumphed
    And hypocrisy hath its lair.
    And your question will thus be answered
    For the flag of England is there!

    The Butcher’s Apron by the Wolfe Tones

  58. @Adam
    This is from the opening of A.J.P. Taylor's "The Course of German History." For those of us who worry that recent events suggest the end of Western Civilization it is somewhat reassuring, in that that recent events conform to a familiar pattern, though it's admittedly a small comfort -- like knowing that a suicidal drunk has gone through a cycle like this before...:

    "The history of the Germans is the history of extremes. It contains everything except moderation, and in the course of a thousand years the Germans have experienced everything except normality...'German' has meant at one moment a being so sentimental, so trusting, so pious, as to be too good for this world; and at another a being so brutal, so unprincipled, so degraded, as to be not fit to live. Both descriptions are true..."

    And that opening page continues

    “One looks in vain in their history for juste milieu (“middle way” or “happy medium”), for common sense – the two qualities that have distinguished France and England. Nothing is normal in German history except violent oscillations.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    “One looks in vain in their history for juste milieu (“middle way” or “happy medium”), for common sense – the two qualities that have distinguished France and England. "

    Because nothing says "happy medium" like the French Revolution or the Wars of the Roses.
  59. @Anonymous
    Reads like a continuation of anti-German war propaganda. Including a justification to kill Germans en masse.

    Reads like a continuation of anti-German war propaganda. Including a justification to kill Germans en masse.

    He was just barely too young to have fought in the Great War. So his formative years saw him filled with all the hatred and furor wartime whips up in the young, untempered by the humiliating futility inflicted on those at the front lines.

    His was the generation that saw to it that the Germanic peoples were well and duly castrated.

    • Replies: @5371
    Harsh on Taylor, who wrote a brilliant and groundbreaking study questioning Hitler's exclusive guilt for WW2.
  60. Merkel has vandalized Germany.

    I guess karma is a mofo, even if it is 1560 later.

  61. @Diversity Heretic
    Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity, but it leaves me thinking that German men are "screwed, blued and tatooed." Do nothing but report immigrant/invader crime to the authorities and hope that they will take the proper steps and women of your own age think you're a wimp and refuse to have your children. Form a gang, hunt down and beat or even kill a few of the immigrants/invaders and the barren menopausal women in charge whose "sons" you've just attacked hurl the full force of the law at you. And if you're a German man who has invested something in education and training to get at least an acceptable job, you have something to lose.

    Proverbial rock and a hard place. My take: the feminization of society is a rapidly unfolding disaster on a number of fronts. I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better controls.

    Proverbial rock and a hard place. My take: the feminization of society is a rapidly unfolding disaster on a number of fronts. I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better controls.

    If Muslim society were strong, it wouldn’t have been on the retreat for half a millennium from post-Renaissance Europe.

    Society has not been feminized, our men have. Our women have been masculinized.

    First rule of holes: stop the genderbending.

  62. @Anonymous
    Reads like a continuation of anti-German war propaganda. Including a justification to kill Germans en masse.

    Well, Germans themselves have delivered enough justifications to depopulate Germany twice or thrice over. Luckily for them Allies were merciful.

    Yes merciful. Even – and it pains me to use them and mercy in one sentence – Soviets. They let Germans live in their own country which was a lot more than Germans were planning to do to their enemies when the war was over.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Yes, I have seen that movie too. I hope you managed to wipe away the foam from your mouth before writing that comment.
  63. It means giving up the fond illusion that Germany’s past sins can be absolved with a reckless humanitarianism in the present.

    Those sins don’ t just belong to Germany.

    There’s only One with a sufficient line of credit to pay that debt, and He’s already scratched that check with His blood on the Cross, but only for those who confess Him as Lord and repent.

    It will take an Awakening.

  64. Taylor sounds like he’s writing about the Jews, who are always either being expelled from somewhere, or working on it, riding high or riding low, dramatically overbreeding resulting in mass poverty, or dramatically assimilating in a silent holocaust, being overthrown in Germany, or taking over in Russia, being oppressed by Nazis, or oppressing the Palestinians like Nazis, etc. So crazy as to be not fit to live…

  65. I’m not sure how much the PUA analysis has relevance here.

    Me neither, but it seems like many PUA adherents feel its principles are the General Theory Of Everything. Whatever the merits of the belief system in success with women, an unfortunate side effect is the constant explaining of all events through PUA belief prism.

    It is another secular religion like SJW left/liberalism, has all the characteristics. The de-Christianizing of the west has all sorts of pseudo-religions popping to fill the vacuum across the political spectrum, not just on the left.

    One distinct characteristic is creating extraodinary detailed explanations/rationales presented as revelation that always boil down to some obvious truism.

    Here is my distillation of this one:

    1) Woman have had an an enormous influence on current events in Germany.

    Well, of course they have. In normal populations, they usually comprise ~50% of the population so they of course have enormous effect on any event, just like men do, who comprise the other ~50%. So in Germany, with a presumably normal sex ration, it would be only significant were women not a major, major, like roughly 50% interestingly, part of the influence on what is happening there.

    Dog bites man…

    2) Women have different motivators and theirs are very distinct from men because of their role in reproduction.

    Well, duhh, what largely differentiates men/woman is due to their different roles in reproduction.

    Dog bites man…

    3) Women through innocent intentions, misplaced trust, and excessive independence, are marching themselves and their men down a path of folly that will result in catastrophe for all.

    According to at least one huge religious tradition, this is what kicked off human existence, the founding event.

    Dog bites man…

    I don’t understand why we can’t all just take these things as givens. My guess is the PUA guys were so propagandized by egalitarian propaganda growing up – it is significant the timeline/age groups where PUA began – that commonplaces about men/women really are revelations to them and they have to keep reiterating them to full supplant the egalitarian brainwashing.

    So, maybe is just deprogramming and potentially deserves a little more sympathy. I’d say 2), that men and women are really different is the truly novel proposition to these guys. And the way that PUA treats this former common sense item as the most profound of insights is a testament to how effective the egalitarian brainwashing system has been in recent decades.

    • Replies: @random observer
    Your offer wisdom, but we need to be realistic. Your number 2 seems to come as a revelation to many more people than PUAs, and most of public culture is based on the premise that it is not true. Your number 3 is institutionally rejected by our entire civilization, true though it be.
    , @SoItGoes
    Hah, these are good observations. I wonder how much of it is due to indoctrination and how much due to smaller families meaning that most young men nowadays didn't grow up sharing a home with a sneaky/manipulative sister.
  66. @anonguy
    In the spirit of who/whom, who is one of Germany's natural economic rivals in high skill/high tech/high value add manufacturing.

    Certainly Japan is.

    So are the crafty Japanese behind this? I'd add that the Japanese are famously against mass migration because they feel it degrades civilization.

    Way back, 80's I believe, MITI forecast a long term decline in American technical prowess because of the increasing population of Latinos and possibly blacks. This forecast specifically noted that Latinos have not demonstrated any ability to build a high tech economy anywhere on a par with U.S., Japan, Europe. IIRC, the report was extremely adamant on the fact that the number was zero as opposed to not many, rather less than U.S., etc. No, zero and no sign of one emerging.

    Created the predictable hue and cry in the West. This was during a period when Japan was beginning to be held to western standards, so there were a number incidents of PC-naive Japan raising a lot of feathers.

    These incidents largely stopped a long time ago quite dramatically. Is it because the Japanese, and more specifically economic planners in Japan, changed their viewpoints with corresponding speed and degree?

    Of course not. They just learned that westerners are super sensitive about talking about this stuff.

    This is a nation of long term business thinking. For instance, many high end Seiko watches include a movement that Seiko says took 28 years to develop. Can you imagine any American company spending 28 years on something, esp. something like a watch movement, before they even sell one of them?

    Think, McFly, think... What's in it for Japan here?

    The Japanese are getting their technological lunch eaten by the Koreans. Many of the former big names in Japanese electronics are either broke or hanging on by their fingernails. They are not at the cutting edge of smartphones or anything else. Japan is a old society – like one giant nursing home, and lacks the dynamism of countries with a younger population.

    As for the 28 years to develop a watch movement, take anything you hear about watches with a giant grain of salt – watch marketing would make PT Barnum proud. If a watch movement took 28 years to develop, that means that by now its technology is 28 years out of date (actually this is not a big problem because for example the most popular Swiss mechanical movement produced today was introduced in 1961). Accurate timekeeping was the great technological problem – of the 18th century (solved by Harrison before 1760 – google “Harrison H4”). After that, it was just a question of further miniaturization and cost cutting thru automation. Today you can buy a (quartz) watch for $10 that is as accurate as you would ever need (if you need a watch at all – most kids today just look at their cell phones and regard the wristwatch as being in the same league as wall phones). Anything beyond that is just vanity (since white men can’t wear big gold chains or tooth grillz, the watch is the only place for them to display their status thru jewelry).

    • Replies: @anonguy

    The Japanese are getting their technological lunch eaten by the Koreans. Many of the former big names in Japanese electronics are either broke or hanging on by their fingernails. They are not at the cutting edge of smartphones or anything else. Japan is a old society – like one giant nursing home, and lacks the dynamism of countries with a younger population.
     
    Ditto of the the standard Washington Consensus/Chicago School spiel from Economist, WSJ, etc. I spend lots of time in Japan, the propaganda is, well, overstated would be a diplomatic term. A lot of these sources are not neutral broker, have their fundamental ideologies as dogs in the fight against Japan, which is a clear and very large refutation of much of the core of these ideologies.

    And an interesting thesis I give a lot of credit to is that there is not much pushback from Japan on these notions of a poor, failing, aging Japan because pervasive beliefs like that among foreigners because it lets Japan fly under the radar, less pressure for contributions to international this/that, allows them to credibly plead lack of resources, etc.

    You might try adding measures of outcomes for Japan's residents to the abstract economic metrics these medicine doctors push as evidence. Consider things like dependency ratios, etc. Things are going quite well here for the Japanese by plenty more metrics - health, longevity, literacy, availability of basic services, etc. That doesn't mean everything is perfect, but there are few nations in the world who deliver the goods for the common man in the street like Japan currently does and there is little indication that this is going to end any time soon.

    But nobody cares about that, only about how much arbitrage that can be extracted from the replaceable, commoditized peasantry inhabiting economic zones that are still often mistaken for the nation states they formerly were.


    As for the 28 years to develop a watch movement, take anything you hear about watches with a giant grain of salt ....
     
    I didn't post the rest of your comment for brevity, but I'll add first, it was just a simple example that immediately came to mind, hardly the only one I could have come up with. And the reason it came to mind is that I have pretty extensive knowledge/involvement with Japanese watches. And while it is a meaningless appeal to authority, I'll just state that, based upon your comment, I know orders of magnitudes more about the Japanese watch industry, facts, not opinions, than you evidently do. Take that as you will.

    I also know a lot about japanese power industry, but that seemed esoteric...

  67. @iSteveFan

    That’s why the Muslim population in Europe has been growing only at one percentage point a decade; it’s why many of the Turkish and North African immigrants who arrived in Germany and France decades ago are reasonably Europeanized today.
     
    If they were assimilating they would no longer be muslim. At best they'd have converted to Christianity, at worst they'd be secularist.

    It depends on what you mean by “reasonably assimilated”.

    Pre-1933, German Jews were famous as being almost indistinguishable from other Germans, except for the fact that they worshiped (when they worshipped at all) on the “wrong” day – their “temples” (not synagogues) even had pipe organs and choirs like churches. Most of them had given up keeping the dietary laws, so they ate the same food. They dressed the same. They attended the same universities and formed part of the faculty. They did not form an underclass but rather were represented at all income levels including the highest. They fought in the German Army in WWI. Many were intermarried with Christians, etc. (Basically the same situation as for most American Jews today). This was in stark contrast to neighboring Poland where Jews were as distinctive from Poles as Gypsies -most Polish Jews spoke Polish as a 2nd language (after Yiddish) if they could speak it at all (but German Jews spoke only German). German Jews were so assimilated that the Nazis had to publish special books for children on how to tell who was Jewish – Aryans might have large noses but they were straight and aquiline – Jewish noses look like the number 6 in profile. German Jews had the same sense of humor as other Germans (humorless) – they were the subject of jokes by Eastern Jews because they were so stiff. But (because of the aforementioned tendency of Germans to go “all in” – a thing worth doing is worth doing well) this was not “reasonably assimilated” enough.

    So at what point will Muslims be “reasonably assimilated” enough to satisfy the German psyche?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Why does Isreal sterilize Ethopian jews? Aren't they assimiliated enough?
    , @Anon 2
    The Germans, like other Western Europeans, have expelled
    their Jewish populations several times in history, and so in
    Weimar Germany ended up with a tiny Jewish population,
    only 500,000 out of the total German population of 60 million,
    i.e., 0.8%. More migrants entered Germany in just one year,
    as we all know.

    In early 1930s Poland, by contrast, the Jewish population was
    huge - about 3.2 million out of the total Polish population of 33
    million, i.e., roughly 10%. One reason the Jewish population
    was huge was because for many centuries Poland offered refuge
    to the Jews that were being expelled by England, France, Italy,
    and Germany.

    The Jews in Poland to a large extent formed a parallel society
    that was Orthodox and Yiddish speaking in contrast to the
    Reformed Jews of Germany. Isaac Bashevis Singer wrote
    many stories about the Jewish life in Warsaw (in Yiddish,
    not Polish, of course)
  68. @Anonymous
    Unlike white Americans who were all up in arms when it became clear that they'd soon be a minority in their own country...

    Maybe because the definition of “white” used in this claim is absurd, plus the trend is towards miscegenation not endogamy. When most “whites” in many (if not most) areas have “nonwhite” kin it kind of makes it hard to rage about the prospect of more mixed folk. Not everyone values inbreeding so ferociously. Don’t worry. We won’t invade your trailer park and force your sister to mate with Tyrone.

  69. @Diversity Heretic
    Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity, but it leaves me thinking that German men are "screwed, blued and tatooed." Do nothing but report immigrant/invader crime to the authorities and hope that they will take the proper steps and women of your own age think you're a wimp and refuse to have your children. Form a gang, hunt down and beat or even kill a few of the immigrants/invaders and the barren menopausal women in charge whose "sons" you've just attacked hurl the full force of the law at you. And if you're a German man who has invested something in education and training to get at least an acceptable job, you have something to lose.

    Proverbial rock and a hard place. My take: the feminization of society is a rapidly unfolding disaster on a number of fronts. I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better controls.

    There are reports of attacks against migrants as a result of Cologne, which of course is throwing the elites into a fit.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12092354/Cologne-sex-attacks-New-Years-Eve-cases-rise-to-more-than-500.html

  70. @iSteveFan

    That’s why the Muslim population in Europe has been growing only at one percentage point a decade; it’s why many of the Turkish and North African immigrants who arrived in Germany and France decades ago are reasonably Europeanized today.
     
    If they were assimilating they would no longer be muslim. At best they'd have converted to Christianity, at worst they'd be secularist.

    Muslims, like Christians and Jews and Buddhists and Sikhs, are able to assimilate in their host country without converting to a different faith or becoming a “secularist”.

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    "Muslims, like Christians and Jews and Buddhists and Sikhs, are able to assimilate in their host country without converting to a different faith or becoming a “secularist”."

    It all depends on the degree to which your religion requires you to reject your adopted country's culture. Some religions put up walls than others. But feel free to ignore the experience of Muslim immigration to pretty much every non-Muslim country on the planet.
  71. @Veracitor
    In courthouse corridors all over the world the cries of criminals' mothers and grandmothers echo: "my boy would never do that! He wouldn't hurt a flea! Those girls are liars, they must be crazy or jealous, my boy is innocent!"

    Germany's so-called "Syrian refugees" are the adopted black sheep of Angela Merkel and Henriette Reker (Cologne's Mayor) and all the other childless leftist women of Germany. Those women all repeat the eternal phrases of mothers whose sons have earned society's ire. They will cheerfully sacrifice anyone else to save their sons, even from natural justice.

    Natural selection guarantees this behavior and the fewer children a mother has, the more anxiously she will protect each one. But like any evolved behavior, this protective emotion can be activated sometimes by error. The limbic systems of Germany's barren women are desperately eager to protect offspring who are not actually there, so they motivate concern for child-substitutes, in this case the young foreign men that German women have morally adopted en-masse.

    Of course every complex phenomenon is driven by more than one factor. Other commenters and our friend Heartiste have suggested that some German women favor the "Syrian refugees" just because they are more virile than German men. There probably is some of that, but I think there is another, related factor at work as well.

    Subconsciously, I believe, Germany's younger women want to provoke fights between Germany's men and the "syrian refugees." Far too many German men are "sitzpinklers" and German women are disappointed, even if they cannot express it in their vocabulary of leftist feminist cliches. Women notoriously like to watch men fight-- so they can mate with the winners. Even when they already have mates they want to see them fight to reconfirm their merit (this may be sublimated into "winning a tennis game," "winning promotion ahead of a rival," etc.). In both the Great War and WWII the women of England joined the Order of the White Feather and amused themselves by accusing young men of cowardice if they were not in military uniform. Young women in bars encourage young men to brawl. Anthropology books are replete with examples of women egging men into combat.

    Even as many German women see "Syrian refugees" as adopted sons and wish to shield them from the opprobrium of everyone else, another cohort of German women is challenging German men: "Hey, sitzpinkler, prove you are worthy to mate with me! Throw out this challenger, whom I invited into the bar (neighborhood, city, Germany) and with whom I am flirting to make you jealous, or die trying!"

    Many German women, if you ask them, will tell you they would rather mate with a German man, "but," they say, "there aren't any good German men, they're all wimps!" Many of the women of Cologne who voted for Reker and her pro-immigration platform, then went down to the Cathedral square to get groped by MENA's, are essentially trying to summon up some non-wimpy German men to protect them and, as Heartiste might suggest, give them the tingle which they don't feel when they look at Ralf Jaeger and all the rest of the SDP eunuchs.

    In this situation the men of Germany can either pull themselves together and regain the respect and affection of their women, or disappear into the mists of history, remembered by no descendants and few foreign historians. German men must cast down Merkel, throw out the "Syrian refugees," and if they are really smart, import some young foreign women on which German men can get the children which can no longer spring from the shriveled wombs of Germany's middle-aged women. Let the motherhood-yearning of those women settle onto German nieces and nephews and grandchildren instead of immigrant louts, and put Germany's remaining young women into healthy rivalry with foreign ingenues for the attention of German men.

    “The limbic systems of Germany’s barren women are desperately eager to protect offspring who are not actually there, so they motivate concern for child-substitutes, in this case the young foreign men that German women have morally adopted en-masse.”

    Please do us all a favor and stop with the pop psychology analysis. If you are going to make these statements, you’re going to have to offer specific evidence rather than CH standard rhetoric.

    “Subconsciously, I believe, Germany’s younger women want to provoke fights between Germany’s men and the “syrian refugees.” 


    Ok, so you are wildly speculating here. Any sociological data to support your hypothesis, or you intellectually flailing?

    
“Far too many German men are “sitzpinklers” and German women are disappointed, even if they cannot express it in their vocabulary of leftist feminist cliches. Women notoriously like to watch men fight– so they can mate with the winners”.

    So, are you married? Have children? If not, it would appear that you haven’t fought enough.

    “Young women in bars encourage young men to brawl. Anthropology books are replete with examples of women egging men into combat.”

    Oh, those books. Praytell, what examples? Please list authors and the results of these studies.

    “Many German women, if you ask them, will tell you they would rather mate with a German man, “but,” they say, “there aren’t any good German men, they’re all wimps!””

    How many German women?

    See, all you have is mere speculation. That’s it. There’s little of substance to hold on to. You make these statements as if they were accurate without any proof.

    Diversity Heretic—“Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity.”

    Observations, yes. The real test is whether or not they have a factual basis.

    “I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better controls.”

    Assuming that keeping women under control is a strength of ANY society.

    • Replies: @anonguy

    Observations, yes. The real test is whether or not they have a factual basis.
     
    No doubt this is a necessary condition for consideration of, as you rightly call it , "pop culture", but is still insufficient. I'd go on to add that a few more necessary conditions is whether the regurgitated pop culture hairball is anything other than a unremarkable but pervasive non-issue to anyone not detoxing from egalitarian propaganda force feeding and whether it is possible that that the phenomenon comes down on one side or the other or is in any way especially relevant in this situation compared to others.

    For instance, the observation that the refugees in Germany like to drink stuff when they are thirsty. This is indisputably true, and maybe if this were all happening in a desert or drought there might be an angle to it, but need I go on?......

    Hey, what is slightly relevant is that Ossies were often considered "ruined" by their brainwashing under socialism and only a new generation supplanting them would completely eradicate the residual learned dependency, socialist reflexes, and so forth thought to be holding Ossies back. I don't know if this thought is still much in currency leastwise because a whole generation has now indeed passed.

    I hope I don't come to the conclusion that we may have a bit of a lost generation that has come of age in the U.S. the past 10 years or so as well (and more are in the pipeline), but things aren't looking too positive in that regard... As irritating as the constant incantations of the PUA may be, I have to remind myself that their hearts are ok usually, has them questioning what is The Man for their age group.
    , @Veracitor
  72. @Adam
    This is from the opening of A.J.P. Taylor's "The Course of German History." For those of us who worry that recent events suggest the end of Western Civilization it is somewhat reassuring, in that that recent events conform to a familiar pattern, though it's admittedly a small comfort -- like knowing that a suicidal drunk has gone through a cycle like this before...:

    "The history of the Germans is the history of extremes. It contains everything except moderation, and in the course of a thousand years the Germans have experienced everything except normality...'German' has meant at one moment a being so sentimental, so trusting, so pious, as to be too good for this world; and at another a being so brutal, so unprincipled, so degraded, as to be not fit to live. Both descriptions are true..."

    Re the continuation of Taylor’s words by Anonymous Nephew:

    The oscillation back to the Right is now certain, and I for one can’t wait.

  73. All of this talk about German men presumes that they are actually “German” ethnically. I recall during my time in Berlin (U.S. Army, 1987-90) that the young male population looked distinctly unGerman–that certain Germanic virility was lacking. Of course, that was years before I learned about the mass rape of German women by the Red Army at the end of WWII:

    https://www.google.com/search?q=soviet+mass+rape+in+world+war+ii

    • Replies: @Jack D
    That's right - the rapists of the Red Army were a bunch of sissies and they passed their sissy genes on to the youth of Germany - not only those born in 1946 (a small cohort) but all of them, somehow.
    , @anonguy

    I recall during my time in Berlin (U.S. Army, 1987-90) that the young male population looked distinctly unGerman–that certain Germanic virility was lacking.
     
    I participated in several NATO exercises a bit before your time in Berlin. The pervasive impression all of us Marines had of the Bundeswehr was that they were "chicks with d*cks". Of course, being Marines, we were heavily biased towards drawing that conclusion about everyone that wasn't us, but I do remember how shocked all of us were on first encounter with these guys, in our naivete most of us had expected something a bit more rough and ready than these guys.

    This was particularly so because one vaguely sensed that it wasn't a remediable training issue, but rather something more intrinsic, a lack of a certain moral fiber. And while we were biased, we did make differentiated judgments in these situations. For instance, ROK forces and Royal Marines were highly respected and generally thought to be better, much better, on a man to man basis than the average Marine - a lot of Marines thought, or even wished, that the Corps would adopt some of their practices. The UK ground forces seemed at least a little better than the average NATO force - generally all of them seemed a bit more of a civil service populated by civil servants than a military one. But the Bundeswehr was the real head-scratcher.

    The impression received of Scandinavian force members was similarly low even for a NATO force, but that was aligned with expectations that Americans tended to have about Scandinavia even back then. The Bundeswehr was the force whose members seemed most contrary to expectations - as Americans understanding that our forebears had within living memory (then) fought two wars against Germany where it had been a legendarily formidable opposition in most every regard, I guess we had expected a lot more from these guys considered individually as opposed to their organizational skills, etc, which were of course superlative.

    I know what I'm going to write now can, likely will, be taken as supporting evidence by annoying PUA, but I'm an honest broker.

    In 1978, I participated in a humongous NATO exercise that at least partially was an early and major sabre-rattling by the west against the Soviets in the twilight of detente. It also was the first time Marines had been present in any massed formations in Europe since WWI - in WWII, USMC was dedicated to the Pacific Theatre. Just given the reputation of the Corps, the locals everywhere were pretty curious about us even though our contingent of a regimental landing team of ~3k was at best 5% of the total forces involved in this exercise which had portions all over Europe.

    However, our ops were one centerpiece of the exercise, demonstrating U.S. ability post-Vietnam to conduct major, RLT level, amphibious landings under highly adverse conditions on the Soviets doorstep. So we also got media attention for that as it was a then-novel aspect of a big NATO exercise which tended to get a lot of media coverage in Europe then.

    The Soviet propaganda mill had been putting out informative briefs describing the U.S. Marines as "troops willing to loot, murder, and rape, and lacking the basic differences that separates man from the animals" and such which I guess aligned with whatever vague expectations the Europeans had of the Corps from what they had heard of Pacific Island fighting, Vietnam, etc.

    A very common question from a random European would be if it was really true that all Marines were convicted murderers or just assumed that was true and asked how many people did you kill? Really, and often was the reason that the European had struck up a conversation, although it usually took a bit of chit-chat for them to get up the nerve to ask.

    So we were on the ground foreigners generally considered as quite violent/aggressive loutish individuals.

    The local women f*cking adored us Marines, period, although I'm certain continued exposure would have eventually changed their minds. And this was in very stark contrast to their reactions, at least as I observed, to members of other forces American or otherwise. The sailors, on whose ships we sailed and who were on liberty concurrent with us, were green with envy because they were completely invisible, if not reviled, by the same local women.

    As for local male response, there was a pattern of local guys picking a fight with a Marine specifically because he was a Marine. I'm certain there is a PUA interpretation, and I'll throw gas on that fire by noting that the pervasive self-confessed cause by the local guy was that he wanted to be able to say he had been in a fight with a U.S. Marine whether or not he won or lost. Conversations with other non-adversarial local guys indicated that this was a common aspiration among the young local guys, kind of a "no ballz, dude" thing with them.

    PUA: Eureka! I knew it, PUA wins again - men showboating for the ladies, nyah nyah, I'm so insightful....

    Me/comrades: Huh, what? But of course, that is what guys do and women like to observe/vet and the victor gets the spoils. You didn't know *that*?

    Anyhow, this was a pretty cool thing for the ego, albeit something of a annoyance, but ultimately just part and parcel of heightened local women interest, which of course is always the prize for young men.

  74. My quick read of the NYT comments shows a large number saying “Mr. Douthat, you are half right.”

    Wow, maybe people are waking up.

  75. @Ed
    Frum, Coulter & Douthat all read Steve. I've even seen Jamelle Bouie reference him, not positively of course, but at least he's read him.

    In a more open media Steve would be a fine replacement for Pat Buchanan.

    Mark Steyn has mentioned him as well.

  76. @Corvinus
    Muslims, like Christians and Jews and Buddhists and Sikhs, are able to assimilate in their host country without converting to a different faith or becoming a "secularist".

    “Muslims, like Christians and Jews and Buddhists and Sikhs, are able to assimilate in their host country without converting to a different faith or becoming a “secularist”.”

    It all depends on the degree to which your religion requires you to reject your adopted country’s culture. Some religions put up walls than others. But feel free to ignore the experience of Muslim immigration to pretty much every non-Muslim country on the planet.

  77. @Bies Podkrakowski
    Well, Germans themselves have delivered enough justifications to depopulate Germany twice or thrice over. Luckily for them Allies were merciful.

    Yes merciful. Even - and it pains me to use them and mercy in one sentence - Soviets. They let Germans live in their own country which was a lot more than Germans were planning to do to their enemies when the war was over.

    Yes, I have seen that movie too. I hope you managed to wipe away the foam from your mouth before writing that comment.

    • Replies: @Bies Podkrakowski
    No foaming on my part. Memory and passing each day places and buildings where commemorative plaques hang is enough.

    On those plaques you can read: here is a wall where Germans shot a few tens of civilians. And here was a local Gestapo HQ. Interesting things happened in its cellars. And over there is a cemetery full of fallen and murdered. Several graves are empty, bodies burned in concentration camps.

    Poor Germans.
  78. @Jack D
    It depends on what you mean by "reasonably assimilated".

    Pre-1933, German Jews were famous as being almost indistinguishable from other Germans, except for the fact that they worshiped (when they worshipped at all) on the "wrong" day - their "temples" (not synagogues) even had pipe organs and choirs like churches. Most of them had given up keeping the dietary laws, so they ate the same food. They dressed the same. They attended the same universities and formed part of the faculty. They did not form an underclass but rather were represented at all income levels including the highest. They fought in the German Army in WWI. Many were intermarried with Christians, etc. (Basically the same situation as for most American Jews today). This was in stark contrast to neighboring Poland where Jews were as distinctive from Poles as Gypsies -most Polish Jews spoke Polish as a 2nd language (after Yiddish) if they could speak it at all (but German Jews spoke only German). German Jews were so assimilated that the Nazis had to publish special books for children on how to tell who was Jewish - Aryans might have large noses but they were straight and aquiline - Jewish noses look like the number 6 in profile. German Jews had the same sense of humor as other Germans (humorless) - they were the subject of jokes by Eastern Jews because they were so stiff. But (because of the aforementioned tendency of Germans to go "all in" - a thing worth doing is worth doing well) this was not "reasonably assimilated" enough.

    So at what point will Muslims be "reasonably assimilated" enough to satisfy the German psyche?

    Why does Isreal sterilize Ethopian jews? Aren’t they assimiliated enough?

    • Replies: @Jack D
    Uh I think you are confusing contraception with sterilization. Also you can't spell Israel.
  79. @Anonymous
    Unlike white Americans who were all up in arms when it became clear that they'd soon be a minority in their own country...

    America is a Germanic country. The two biggest ethnic groups are German and English (=German in drag).

  80. The big never to be asked question is:

    “Where are the German men?

    Why aren’t they protecting their women.?

    European men created the freest, safest society that women have ever known and they are standing by while it is destroyed.

  81. @Anon
    Problem isn't Merkel.

    Her ilk are beholden to the globo-masters who control stuff like NYT.

    The GLOB must go.

    As long as the GLOB remains, Merkel will be replaced by just another muppet.

    Problem isn’t Merkel.

    Her ilk are beholden to the globo-masters who control stuff like NYT.

    The linked NYT article is calling for a removal of Merkel, closing of borders, and deportation of existing migrants. Are those the globo-masters? OK, Ross Douthat is the one exception NYT writer to break the mold and criticize mass immigration.

    Merkel is not a lone voice supporting using the European governments to eliminate biological European ethnic groups. But she is one of them. And she needs to be removed from office. Surprisingly, she formerly sharply criticized multi-culturalism.

    I also find her insistence on incoming foreigners learning German puzzling. After you eliminate the majority German ethnic group in Germany who will support keeping the language as a keepsake artifact of an eliminated ethnic people?

  82. @Eustace Tilley (not)
    Typical English propaganda (and one must admit they know which buttons to push to sway American opinion; now the yuppies are gobbling up Downton Abbey). The Germans "were being[s] so brutal, so unprincipled...as to be not fit to live" to the English, who imported foodstuffs from Ireland at the height of the Famine, who invented concentration camps during the Boer War (for the Afrikaner women and children), who forced opium addiction down the throats of the Chinese, who partitioned India?

    There is much documentation to support the contention of historians- both Indian and English- that Saint Winston of Blenheim deliberately starved between 3 and 5 million Indians in the Great Bengal Famine of 1943. Oh...you've never heard of it? I'm not surprised. Read more at:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_famine_of_1943

    Noam Chomsky quotes Adolf Hitler as writing in Mein Kampf that Britain won World War I because she won the "propaganda war". Chomsky agrees with Hitler on this point.

    I’ve heard of every one of those things. Not one of them, or all of them, equals the Holocaust in deliberation, motivation/purpose, scale, or brutality.

    Failure to properly discern a natural-origin crisis, lack of tools to act quickly [this is hyper-minimal government early Victorian Britain we are talking about wrt to Ireland] and to regulate commerce accordingly, and indeed even callous unwillingness to take the crisis seriously or attempt these things, is not the equal of setting out to exterminate millions for its own sake.

    Rounding up enemy civilians in wartime is an ancient practice, to be sure, and once ended up at the auction block. Rounding them up temporarily to deny support to the enemy is less cruel, and common in modern times. As it happens, the modern incarnation was not invented by the British and is attested earlier in such places as Poland and Cuba, the former as far back as the 18th century. Doing this, as the British did in South Africa, even if they do it sloppily and don’t care much about health and welfare, is not the equal of setting up camps for one’s own citizens in peacetime, then setting up more in surrendered territories for the purpose of mass murder. That’s all on Germany. [Or Russia, but then the Germans were the first to practice it on millions of citizens of other countries. THe Russians prior to 1941 were content with their own targets.]

    The British certainly did use military force to compel the Chinese empire to accept opium imports to defray the tea trade deficit. But you can’t actually force opium addiction on anyone. [Same goes for the US drug war today, of course. Every coke and heroin addict a volunteer.] It certainly does not equate to the Holocaust. The victims of the latter didn’t sign up to take drugs the GErmans just happened to have forced onto the market. They were unwillingly signed up to get killed.

    Who partitioned India…? Exactly what was Britain supposed to do in 1947? The options were:

    1. Stay, at great cost and probably at the cost of war with both sides. Not to mention the US coming down on Britain like a ton of bricks.

    2. Try to force a unified India on both sides before leaving. Which would probably mean never leaving and revert to option 1.

    3. Partition, but stay longer to get the borders right or run the population movements with British personnel. Pretty much all the negatives of 1 and 2.

    4. Leave and hope the locals would not massacre one another. Oops.

    Still, It wasn’t British soldiers who massacred all those millions of people. Or were they children who needed Mother England to take care of them after all?

    Aware of the Bengal famine, one of many Bengal had suffered. Plenty of political and economic structural reasons about late British India that contributed to it. SOme others about wartime exigencies do not exactly adorn Britain’s record. But note even that wiki article fairly presents just how many of the problems were war related, or products of the amount of autonomy the British had already granted to Indians. Indian-controlled other provinces seemed more than willing to let Bengalis die rather than open up grain shipments, as Britain could no longer compel them to do.

    Apart from a racist comment by Churchill comparing Bengalis to Greeks, nothing in that article supports your contention.

    And none of it involves Britain setting up camps to kill millions of Bengalis or lining them up and machine gunning them into graves they had to dig themselves.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    I agree that nothing the British ever did compares even remotely to the Holocaust. I would say though that Stalin (and Mao) came close (or maybe even came out ahead in body count). What makes the Holocaust unique is that they combined the barbarism of savages with the strong organizational, logistical and industrial skills we normally associate with advanced civilizations - no one on earth ever built a death factory like Auschwitz where raw materials (human beings) were shipped in by rail from all over Europe and efficiently converted to ashes in a matter of hours.
    , @5371
    [lack of tools to act quickly [this is hyper-minimal government early Victorian Britain]

    In reality, as distinct from later self-image, Britain's government was not then (or later) unusually minimal, nor did it lack tools to do what it wanted to do.
    , @anonguy
    One theme that used to be more prominent in Holocaust literature was that another particular horror was that it occurred in Germany, the land of Kultur, Schilling, Lessing, Goethe, Kant.

    Up until WWI, many (non-Germans) considered Germany the pinnacle of western civilization because of its achievements on so many intellectual fronts for starters. That a place so eminently civilized could turn its gifts, in the blink of an eye essentially, to such barbaric savagery was considered particularly grotesque. It also served as a cautionary tale in that if it could happen in Germany - Germany! - of all places, it could happen anywhere.

    Frankly, what happened in Rwanda wasn't entirely against expectations for a poor 3rd world country. And if a lot of people dig deep enough, the expectations are because of at least unconscious racism - bigotry of low expectations, all that.

    I think the angle that it was particularly shocking because it was in Germany has diminished because those whose expectations were set about Germany prior to WWII, and even moreso prior to WWI have nearly all dead - p.s. for pedants, I know everyone alive early enough to have formed adult opinions about Germany prior to WWI are all dead....
  83. @Percy Gryce
    All of this talk about German men presumes that they are actually "German" ethnically. I recall during my time in Berlin (U.S. Army, 1987-90) that the young male population looked distinctly unGerman--that certain Germanic virility was lacking. Of course, that was years before I learned about the mass rape of German women by the Red Army at the end of WWII:

    https://www.google.com/search?q=soviet+mass+rape+in+world+war+ii

    That’s right – the rapists of the Red Army were a bunch of sissies and they passed their sissy genes on to the youth of Germany – not only those born in 1946 (a small cohort) but all of them, somehow.

    • Replies: @Percy Gryce
    I'm a bit incredulous that an iSteve regular would think there are no genetic differences between Germans (echt deutsch) and the Slavic and Caucasian peasants who made up the WWII-era Red Army.

    Of course, West Berlin at the time I was there was also a haven from conscription into the West German army, so there were also a lot of draft dodgers and other "sissies" about town.

    In any case, I'm just telling you what I saw during my military service. If you have any relevant firsthand information on post-War eastern Germany to share, I'd be glad to read it.
  84. @Diversity Heretic
    Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity, but it leaves me thinking that German men are "screwed, blued and tatooed." Do nothing but report immigrant/invader crime to the authorities and hope that they will take the proper steps and women of your own age think you're a wimp and refuse to have your children. Form a gang, hunt down and beat or even kill a few of the immigrants/invaders and the barren menopausal women in charge whose "sons" you've just attacked hurl the full force of the law at you. And if you're a German man who has invested something in education and training to get at least an acceptable job, you have something to lose.

    Proverbial rock and a hard place. My take: the feminization of society is a rapidly unfolding disaster on a number of fronts. I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better controls.

    I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better control

    I don’t hate to make that observation. It’s obviously true.

  85. @Desiderius

    Reads like a continuation of anti-German war propaganda. Including a justification to kill Germans en masse.
     
    He was just barely too young to have fought in the Great War. So his formative years saw him filled with all the hatred and furor wartime whips up in the young, untempered by the humiliating futility inflicted on those at the front lines.

    His was the generation that saw to it that the Germanic peoples were well and duly castrated.

    Harsh on Taylor, who wrote a brilliant and groundbreaking study questioning Hitler’s exclusive guilt for WW2.

  86. @random observer
    I've heard of every one of those things. Not one of them, or all of them, equals the Holocaust in deliberation, motivation/purpose, scale, or brutality.

    Failure to properly discern a natural-origin crisis, lack of tools to act quickly [this is hyper-minimal government early Victorian Britain we are talking about wrt to Ireland] and to regulate commerce accordingly, and indeed even callous unwillingness to take the crisis seriously or attempt these things, is not the equal of setting out to exterminate millions for its own sake.

    Rounding up enemy civilians in wartime is an ancient practice, to be sure, and once ended up at the auction block. Rounding them up temporarily to deny support to the enemy is less cruel, and common in modern times. As it happens, the modern incarnation was not invented by the British and is attested earlier in such places as Poland and Cuba, the former as far back as the 18th century. Doing this, as the British did in South Africa, even if they do it sloppily and don't care much about health and welfare, is not the equal of setting up camps for one's own citizens in peacetime, then setting up more in surrendered territories for the purpose of mass murder. That's all on Germany. [Or Russia, but then the Germans were the first to practice it on millions of citizens of other countries. THe Russians prior to 1941 were content with their own targets.]

    The British certainly did use military force to compel the Chinese empire to accept opium imports to defray the tea trade deficit. But you can't actually force opium addiction on anyone. [Same goes for the US drug war today, of course. Every coke and heroin addict a volunteer.] It certainly does not equate to the Holocaust. The victims of the latter didn't sign up to take drugs the GErmans just happened to have forced onto the market. They were unwillingly signed up to get killed.

    Who partitioned India...? Exactly what was Britain supposed to do in 1947? The options were:

    1. Stay, at great cost and probably at the cost of war with both sides. Not to mention the US coming down on Britain like a ton of bricks.

    2. Try to force a unified India on both sides before leaving. Which would probably mean never leaving and revert to option 1.

    3. Partition, but stay longer to get the borders right or run the population movements with British personnel. Pretty much all the negatives of 1 and 2.

    4. Leave and hope the locals would not massacre one another. Oops.

    Still, It wasn't British soldiers who massacred all those millions of people. Or were they children who needed Mother England to take care of them after all?

    Aware of the Bengal famine, one of many Bengal had suffered. Plenty of political and economic structural reasons about late British India that contributed to it. SOme others about wartime exigencies do not exactly adorn Britain's record. But note even that wiki article fairly presents just how many of the problems were war related, or products of the amount of autonomy the British had already granted to Indians. Indian-controlled other provinces seemed more than willing to let Bengalis die rather than open up grain shipments, as Britain could no longer compel them to do.

    Apart from a racist comment by Churchill comparing Bengalis to Greeks, nothing in that article supports your contention.

    And none of it involves Britain setting up camps to kill millions of Bengalis or lining them up and machine gunning them into graves they had to dig themselves.

    I agree that nothing the British ever did compares even remotely to the Holocaust. I would say though that Stalin (and Mao) came close (or maybe even came out ahead in body count). What makes the Holocaust unique is that they combined the barbarism of savages with the strong organizational, logistical and industrial skills we normally associate with advanced civilizations – no one on earth ever built a death factory like Auschwitz where raw materials (human beings) were shipped in by rail from all over Europe and efficiently converted to ashes in a matter of hours.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "What makes the Holocaust unique is that they combined the barbarism of savages with the strong organizational, logistical and industrial skills we normally associate with advanced civilizations........."

    Exactly the combination in evidence in the bombing raids on Hamburg, Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, etc.
  87. @George
    "It means giving up the fond illusion that Germany’s past sins can be absolved with a reckless humanitarianism in the present."

    July 2019 with be the 100th anniversary of Hitler's first job as a government informant. Which is a long time for a meme to run.

    AH wasn’t a “government informant”. He was paid by the Reichswehr as a propagandist.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "AH wasn’t a “government informant”. He was paid by the Reichswehr as a propagandist."

    The Reichswehr was part of the government, was it not? And I would suppose that his army paymasters expected him to inform them what he heard, would they not?
  88. @random observer
    I've heard of every one of those things. Not one of them, or all of them, equals the Holocaust in deliberation, motivation/purpose, scale, or brutality.

    Failure to properly discern a natural-origin crisis, lack of tools to act quickly [this is hyper-minimal government early Victorian Britain we are talking about wrt to Ireland] and to regulate commerce accordingly, and indeed even callous unwillingness to take the crisis seriously or attempt these things, is not the equal of setting out to exterminate millions for its own sake.

    Rounding up enemy civilians in wartime is an ancient practice, to be sure, and once ended up at the auction block. Rounding them up temporarily to deny support to the enemy is less cruel, and common in modern times. As it happens, the modern incarnation was not invented by the British and is attested earlier in such places as Poland and Cuba, the former as far back as the 18th century. Doing this, as the British did in South Africa, even if they do it sloppily and don't care much about health and welfare, is not the equal of setting up camps for one's own citizens in peacetime, then setting up more in surrendered territories for the purpose of mass murder. That's all on Germany. [Or Russia, but then the Germans were the first to practice it on millions of citizens of other countries. THe Russians prior to 1941 were content with their own targets.]

    The British certainly did use military force to compel the Chinese empire to accept opium imports to defray the tea trade deficit. But you can't actually force opium addiction on anyone. [Same goes for the US drug war today, of course. Every coke and heroin addict a volunteer.] It certainly does not equate to the Holocaust. The victims of the latter didn't sign up to take drugs the GErmans just happened to have forced onto the market. They were unwillingly signed up to get killed.

    Who partitioned India...? Exactly what was Britain supposed to do in 1947? The options were:

    1. Stay, at great cost and probably at the cost of war with both sides. Not to mention the US coming down on Britain like a ton of bricks.

    2. Try to force a unified India on both sides before leaving. Which would probably mean never leaving and revert to option 1.

    3. Partition, but stay longer to get the borders right or run the population movements with British personnel. Pretty much all the negatives of 1 and 2.

    4. Leave and hope the locals would not massacre one another. Oops.

    Still, It wasn't British soldiers who massacred all those millions of people. Or were they children who needed Mother England to take care of them after all?

    Aware of the Bengal famine, one of many Bengal had suffered. Plenty of political and economic structural reasons about late British India that contributed to it. SOme others about wartime exigencies do not exactly adorn Britain's record. But note even that wiki article fairly presents just how many of the problems were war related, or products of the amount of autonomy the British had already granted to Indians. Indian-controlled other provinces seemed more than willing to let Bengalis die rather than open up grain shipments, as Britain could no longer compel them to do.

    Apart from a racist comment by Churchill comparing Bengalis to Greeks, nothing in that article supports your contention.

    And none of it involves Britain setting up camps to kill millions of Bengalis or lining them up and machine gunning them into graves they had to dig themselves.

    [lack of tools to act quickly [this is hyper-minimal government early Victorian Britain]

    In reality, as distinct from later self-image, Britain’s government was not then (or later) unusually minimal, nor did it lack tools to do what it wanted to do.

  89. @anonguy
    About 25 years ago, a member of the clergy made the oddest remark to me.

    I asked him how many people lived in the small town where he reside. He said, "10,000 and we have 4000 Turks". Funnier still, I've been back a few times since then, and I've still yet to see a Turk, or at least someone I recognize as such.

    Around that same 25 years ago, I had some German guests on their first visit to the U.S. Initially, the appeal of suburbs was utterly lost upon them, "Why would you want to live in the country?". They also were perplexed as to why one would lock their car doors while they were actually in their cars.

    I wonder if there are many Germans who are still like this, at least up until the recent migration.

    According to HBD'ers, we should expect Germans to react much like white Americans, German being one of the major ethnicities among white Americans and closely related northern Euros even more.

    In America, they just moved away from the problem. Sure, there was lots of bluster in white flight years, disgruntlement, the occasional firebombing of the first house on the street to be inhabited by a black (incident like that happened nearby when I was a kid), all that, but they just faded like an ebb tide.

    Same thing is going to happen in Germany. In the U.S., it took a generation to figure out how to maintain some semblance of order in center cities, expect a secular upward trend in crime in Germany w/all the attendant hand wringing but not much action for a very long while. American criminal justice system was getting positively mushy-headedly scandinavian by the time the rising crime of the 60s really started hitting home.

    If they do deport, it will be well below the amount to have any meaningful difference - even if they deported 500,000, which would require a miracle to happen, that is 500,000 remaining.

    There is no way out of this one. Germany, at least the one we knew, truly is kaput.

    It breaks my heart...

    https://youtu.be/GQpt4X0t72w

    In America, they just moved away from the problem.

    That’s not true. There were riots. Blacks had their houses burned down. Blacks were beaten up. The government stopped this. You could argue that the Catholics targeted by the resettlement of blacks in their neighborhoods should have started a civil war over it, but do you really think they would have won? Catholics were a minority of whites at the time and were greatly underrepresented in positions of authority.

  90. @anonguy

    I’m not sure how much the PUA analysis has relevance here.
     
    Me neither, but it seems like many PUA adherents feel its principles are the General Theory Of Everything. Whatever the merits of the belief system in success with women, an unfortunate side effect is the constant explaining of all events through PUA belief prism.

    It is another secular religion like SJW left/liberalism, has all the characteristics. The de-Christianizing of the west has all sorts of pseudo-religions popping to fill the vacuum across the political spectrum, not just on the left.

    One distinct characteristic is creating extraodinary detailed explanations/rationales presented as revelation that always boil down to some obvious truism.

    Here is my distillation of this one:

    1) Woman have had an an enormous influence on current events in Germany.

    Well, of course they have. In normal populations, they usually comprise ~50% of the population so they of course have enormous effect on any event, just like men do, who comprise the other ~50%. So in Germany, with a presumably normal sex ration, it would be only significant were women not a major, major, like roughly 50% interestingly, part of the influence on what is happening there.

    Dog bites man...

    2) Women have different motivators and theirs are very distinct from men because of their role in reproduction.

    Well, duhh, what largely differentiates men/woman is due to their different roles in reproduction.

    Dog bites man...

    3) Women through innocent intentions, misplaced trust, and excessive independence, are marching themselves and their men down a path of folly that will result in catastrophe for all.

    According to at least one huge religious tradition, this is what kicked off human existence, the founding event.

    Dog bites man...

    I don't understand why we can't all just take these things as givens. My guess is the PUA guys were so propagandized by egalitarian propaganda growing up - it is significant the timeline/age groups where PUA began - that commonplaces about men/women really are revelations to them and they have to keep reiterating them to full supplant the egalitarian brainwashing.

    So, maybe is just deprogramming and potentially deserves a little more sympathy. I'd say 2), that men and women are really different is the truly novel proposition to these guys. And the way that PUA treats this former common sense item as the most profound of insights is a testament to how effective the egalitarian brainwashing system has been in recent decades.

    Your offer wisdom, but we need to be realistic. Your number 2 seems to come as a revelation to many more people than PUAs, and most of public culture is based on the premise that it is not true. Your number 3 is institutionally rejected by our entire civilization, true though it be.

    • Replies: @anonguy

    Your number 3 is institutionally rejected by our entire civilization, true though it be.
     
    Yeah, I know. And it is deplorable, but when you have unrestricted levers of power, they get pulled.

    Your number 2 seems to come as a revelation to many more people than PUAs, and most of public culture is based on the premise that it is not true.
     
    This is the horrifying part and honestly, it is still sinking in to me that so many people actually believe such things. I can understand get along/go along, not everyone is some fighter for truth/justice. But no, many people apparently truly believe things that are both contra-factual to every bit of evidence, whether it is anecdotal, formally scientific/statistical, or anything in between.

    That is the part that gets me - anosognosia rather than denial. And how swiftly and pervasively the beliefs have become entrenched and passionately held by what seems to be majorities across national boundaries and so forth.

    You know, sincere belief all the way down...

    Those guys who wrote "Generations", airport book a while back that predicted a religious revival or something similar IIRC among millenials. Maybe those guys (2 authors to the book) were right and this is it. And maybe it is like another utterly contrafactual/counterproductive belief system - Ghost Dance - that spread like wildfire among a defeated/declining people and was seemingly a last ditch effort at salvation by a people whose previous cultural tools had failed them.

    The analogy is imperfect, but something to think about. At my age, I know plenty of people from back in the day when current beliefs would be perverse in anyone, who harbored none of this then, but now by any investigation seem to be completely sincere believers in this orthodoxy.

    It may be a little more striking to me personally because I spend lots of time in east asia where these notions don't have nearly so much traction. I have to consciously activate a mental filter when I return to the U.S. so I don't inadvertently utter a the slightest naughty thought.

  91. @anonguy

    Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity, but it leaves me thinking that German men are “screwed, blued and tatooed.” Do nothing but report immigrant/invader crime to the authorities and hope that they will take the proper steps and women of your own age think you’re a wimp and refuse to have your children. Form a gang, hunt down and beat or even kill a few of the immigrants/invaders and the barren menopausal women in charge whose “sons” you’ve just attacked hurl the full force of the law at you. And if you’re a German man who has invested something in education and training to get at least an acceptable job, you have something to lose.
     
    By definition, "men" face up to daunting hurdles that if they don't overcome, they are screwed. This is one, and honestly, it really is only a minor first world problem compared to a lot of stuff that can and has happened in German history.

    Who would you rather be, a German dude living today in some comfortable German home or a member of the Wehrmacht 6th Army trapped in the Kessel. Really, if they can't face up to this, and I don't mean by violence, this is such a trivial problem, all they have to do is vote out the wrong people and vote in the right people.

    If German men are defeated by this, lord knows they deserve it, as sad as it is to say.

    Indeed, democracy is a machine for deflecting blame.

  92. @anonguy

    In a more open media Steve would be a fine replacement for Pat Buchanan.
     
    The only thing holding iSteve back from respectability should there be much further shift of the Overton window in the current direction it is currently heading is the anti-semitic and white nationalist/racist element hanging around.

    Methinks Steve is playing a good game. He has to pander subtly to these guys previously and here on unz to keep his numbers/money/rep up, but maintain as much credible deniability about himself for a future return to respectability.

    His numbers are increasing, and I think the overall increase diminishes the percentage of anti-semitic and wn types. As his numbers keep increasing in this direction, he eventually can ditch/disavow this element completely without collapsing his reader base.

    Well, it certainly would be what I would do...

    Think about the thread about Nixon being taken down. I read about the first 75 comments and there was not one single remark about "da eskimos dunnit". About who/what took out Nixon? Nixon? Are you kidding me? I'm not sure one could get that result on Haaretz....

    Maybe it is less anti-semitic types in the readership base, maybe Komment Kontrol is coming down harder on these types, or some combination of both factors. But it was very distinctive.

    Steve's got a shot at it and seeing all these lessers, and they are legion, getting international renown, and more importantly, the broad audience he clearly craves is a bitter pill - he's pretty diligent about letting his readership know how his writing/ideas get transmitted to the "general public" via covert readers of his work in mainstream journalism. And he should, because he deserves a broader audience.

    So if you want to help Steve, take the anti-semitic and racist stuff to Stormfront or somewhere. Personally, I've heard way enough of it to last a lifetime, but if you can't control yourself for decorum, quit ruining Steve's shot at prime time. The PUA stuff is pretty cheesy/annoying/juvenile, but I'd have to reluctantly admit that stuff may be survivable, especially because Steve doesn't engage at all on that.

    Think about this....

    Concern troll is concerned.

    • Replies: @anonguy

    Concern troll is concerned.
     
    A response like that indicates one of several things:

    1) You mistake Mr. Sailer's tolerance for a wide range of opinions as sympathy/support for your racist/anti-semitic views and are attempting to white knight for him.

    I'm not privy to Steve's inner thoughts, but he expresses quite a few of them and by examination of that, I'd conclude you are dead wrong on this one.

    2) You are actually an opponent of Steve's writing/philosophies but sock puppeting in an attempt to use Steve's tolerance against him so that he is future-slimable as an anti-semite/racist.

    3) You are so in the grip of anti-semitic/racist fantasies you don't care what collateral damage you do in pursuit of these delusions.

    4) You have a reading comprehension level beneath the level at which I wrote, which any high-school graduate should easily understand. Note I said should, and unfortunately, I meant it in its very hypothetical/subjunctive, contrary to current fact, usage as I am aware of the appallingly low levels of literacy and critical thinking skills among many these days.

    No other possibilities, really. You'd do much better to run off to Stormfront or wherever if you can't contribute productively. One of the notable attractions of iSteve is the lively intellect displayed by many of the commenters - it has been said, much more than once incidentally, that he has the best commenters anywhere on the Web (anywhere, not just HBD, alt-right, etc).

    However, that doesn't apply to 100% of them, some of the chaff is people exploiting this popularity, riding its coattails, to push your notions.

    Whatever is the case with you, there is an saying that a bore is someone who deprives you of solitude without providing you company.

    I could think of a number of cute paraphrases of this thought to apply to your case, a commenter like Bill is one who deprives a thread of X without providing Y.

    Here is my challenge - demonstrate you are capable of an original thought by coming up with some clever X and Ys. Make them insulting to me if that is the motivation you need, I don't mind, I'd like to see you up your game. Plus, iSteve commenters have a reputation to uphold and you are just dragging things down with nyah, nyah, you are a poopy face stuff.

  93. What makes the Holocaust unique is that they combined the barbarism of savages with the strong organizational, logistical and industrial skills we normally associate with advanced civilizations – no one on earth ever built a death factory like Auschwitz where raw materials (human beings) were shipped in by rail from all over Europe and efficiently converted to ashes in a matter of hours.

    Silliness. The Rwandan genocide exceeded the death rate of the Holocaust, and all the implement of choice for the Hutus was the machete.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    So why didn't the Germans just use machetes? The Germans were not silly people and even using slave labor and confiscated wealth, building a death factory and executing on all the logistics of shipping people all over Europe in the middle of a war were not cheap or easy, so why did they do it?
  94. who forced opium addiction down the throats of the Chinese, who partitioned India?

    At least the British Jews did their part though.

  95. More and more people are starting to observe that Muslim Extremism is in large part about young Muslim men’s access to sex.

    If Europe were only letting in women, children, and much older families (i.e. telling military age men to stay in their home countries and sort things out with ISIS while the supply of marriageable women is drained off by Europe), this whole situation would have a completely different dynamic to it.

  96. And none of it involves Britain setting up camps to kill millions of Bengalis or lining them up and machine gunning them into graves they had to dig themselves.

    It might’ve, if Britain had subsequently lost a war and been occupied.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    We can never be sure about such hypotheticals but there is zero evidence from English history that they would have behaved that way. The Germans were already well known for committing atrocities during WWI, especially in Belgium. Some of them were exaggerated as part of British propaganda but some were quite real and well documented such as the intentional burning of the library of Leuven with its 300,000 priceless medieval manuscripts (not to mention thousands of civilian deaths).

    I would say that the burden is on you to prove that the British would have acted this way and you just make a naked assertion without any evidence.

    , @Bill
    You're getting drawn into an argument the agenda of which has been set by your opponent. You don't have to accept these absurd claims that killing civilians en masse and "on accident, dude, I promise" over and over again is morally distinct from setting up camps specifically for the purpose. Not all distinctions are morally relevant distinctions. The English are bloodthirsty psychos who have the PR sense to deny, in a formulaic way, that they are trying to kill civilians.

    Yeah man, we systematically bombed cities and constantly bitched that the Americans showed insufficient ardor for killing civilians, but we didn't set up death camps! Oh, you know we did set up death camps. Well, we didn't call them death camps, and we had the good taste to let the hunger and disease inevitably resulting from the conditions we created in the death camps do the work. No bullets involved!

    Americans are their true sons, too. Knocking down the Twin Towers was the evilest evil that ever evilled. However, blowing up weddings and hospitals and creating conditions inevitably leading to megadeaths by disease, riot, forced expulsion, etc are perfectly moral. 'Cause, hey, we weren't trying to kill civilians. It was an accident that weddings and hospitals have civilians. Who could have known? Civilians don't really need food, medicine, and sanitation. That's just enemy propaganda. Attacking a the military base at Pearl Harbor: evil. Nuking two cities full of civilians: good. And these aren't even fringe beliefs.
  97. I must be halucinating, because I am reading that the NY times strongly criticizing Merkel for her pro immigrant stance.

  98. @Cagey Beast
    Enoch Powell made his "rivers of blood" speeches before I was born. The British public supported him but the Establishment did not. The mass media ruled him out of bounds and that was that. He was used as an object lesson of what happens when people don't play the game properly. Almost five decades later we're supposed to be happy the NYT serves up this weak tea?

    We have to stop doing this, we have to stop trying to govern our countries via the mass media. This is literally killing us. We have to do politics despite them, not look for signs they're starting to see things our way. "Bypass and haul ass", as Gen. Patton advised. We now have the tools to do it literally at our fingertips.

    Well said. Thank you.

    I find it galling that Powell’s speech is so grossly mischaracterized. Even the title given it by others, the “Rivers of Blood” speech, is a misnomer. That phrase is nowhere to be found in what Powell himself called the Birmingham speech.

    The speech itself is beautifully reasoned and written.

  99. @anonguy

    In a more open media Steve would be a fine replacement for Pat Buchanan.
     
    The only thing holding iSteve back from respectability should there be much further shift of the Overton window in the current direction it is currently heading is the anti-semitic and white nationalist/racist element hanging around.

    Methinks Steve is playing a good game. He has to pander subtly to these guys previously and here on unz to keep his numbers/money/rep up, but maintain as much credible deniability about himself for a future return to respectability.

    His numbers are increasing, and I think the overall increase diminishes the percentage of anti-semitic and wn types. As his numbers keep increasing in this direction, he eventually can ditch/disavow this element completely without collapsing his reader base.

    Well, it certainly would be what I would do...

    Think about the thread about Nixon being taken down. I read about the first 75 comments and there was not one single remark about "da eskimos dunnit". About who/what took out Nixon? Nixon? Are you kidding me? I'm not sure one could get that result on Haaretz....

    Maybe it is less anti-semitic types in the readership base, maybe Komment Kontrol is coming down harder on these types, or some combination of both factors. But it was very distinctive.

    Steve's got a shot at it and seeing all these lessers, and they are legion, getting international renown, and more importantly, the broad audience he clearly craves is a bitter pill - he's pretty diligent about letting his readership know how his writing/ideas get transmitted to the "general public" via covert readers of his work in mainstream journalism. And he should, because he deserves a broader audience.

    So if you want to help Steve, take the anti-semitic and racist stuff to Stormfront or somewhere. Personally, I've heard way enough of it to last a lifetime, but if you can't control yourself for decorum, quit ruining Steve's shot at prime time. The PUA stuff is pretty cheesy/annoying/juvenile, but I'd have to reluctantly admit that stuff may be survivable, especially because Steve doesn't engage at all on that.

    Think about this....

    Oh look, it’s this concern troll again.

  100. The comments at the NYT suggest there has been a major change in opinioin

    As usual, the Reader’s Picks are overwhelmingly anti-immigration, but, the NYT Picks are also predominantly anti-immigration … that’s unusual.

    Most intriguing are the comments criticizing Douthat. None say “No problem, immigration is GREAT!” Most agree that “Yes, this is terrible”, but wander off from there, saying “It’s Bush’s fault”, or “Just fix the Middle East” or “Germany can assimilate them with enough government programs”.

    There doesn’t seem to be any real disagreement about the central issue anymore.

  101. @Jack D
    That's right - the rapists of the Red Army were a bunch of sissies and they passed their sissy genes on to the youth of Germany - not only those born in 1946 (a small cohort) but all of them, somehow.

    I’m a bit incredulous that an iSteve regular would think there are no genetic differences between Germans (echt deutsch) and the Slavic and Caucasian peasants who made up the WWII-era Red Army.

    Of course, West Berlin at the time I was there was also a haven from conscription into the West German army, so there were also a lot of draft dodgers and other “sissies” about town.

    In any case, I’m just telling you what I saw during my military service. If you have any relevant firsthand information on post-War eastern Germany to share, I’d be glad to read it.

  102. ‘Taharrush gamea’ comes to Germany? Police fear Cologne sex abuse may be imported practice

    https://www.rt.com/news/328561-taharrush-germany-assault-collective/

  103. Merkel is not a stupid person. Why did she do this?? Is there something forcing her hand??

    • Replies: @anon
    Yes but her attempted solution has made it worse.
  104. @Adam
    This is from the opening of A.J.P. Taylor's "The Course of German History." For those of us who worry that recent events suggest the end of Western Civilization it is somewhat reassuring, in that that recent events conform to a familiar pattern, though it's admittedly a small comfort -- like knowing that a suicidal drunk has gone through a cycle like this before...:

    "The history of the Germans is the history of extremes. It contains everything except moderation, and in the course of a thousand years the Germans have experienced everything except normality...'German' has meant at one moment a being so sentimental, so trusting, so pious, as to be too good for this world; and at another a being so brutal, so unprincipled, so degraded, as to be not fit to live. Both descriptions are true..."

    “The Hun is either at your boot or your throat” — Winston Churchill

  105. anon • Disclaimer says:

    The bad guys tipped their hand and are trying to row back.

    Expect an extreme ramping up in posts aimed at divide and rule between
    – white men and white women
    – different white nations

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._J._P._Taylor#Germanophobia

    Taylor held fierce Germanophobic views. In 1944, he was temporarily banned from the BBC following complaints about a series of lectures he gave on air in which he gave full vent to his anti-German feelings.

  106. It means giving up the fond illusion that Germany’s past sins can be absolved with a reckless humanitarianism in the present.

    When are the sins of the Bolshevik concentration camps of the 1920s going to be absolved?

    • Replies: @Percy Gryce

    When are the sins of the Bolshevik concentration camps of the 1920s going to be absolved?
     
    First they would have to be repented of. There never was a de-Bolshevikization like German de-Nazification.
  107. @Diversity Heretic
    Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity, but it leaves me thinking that German men are "screwed, blued and tatooed." Do nothing but report immigrant/invader crime to the authorities and hope that they will take the proper steps and women of your own age think you're a wimp and refuse to have your children. Form a gang, hunt down and beat or even kill a few of the immigrants/invaders and the barren menopausal women in charge whose "sons" you've just attacked hurl the full force of the law at you. And if you're a German man who has invested something in education and training to get at least an acceptable job, you have something to lose.

    Proverbial rock and a hard place. My take: the feminization of society is a rapidly unfolding disaster on a number of fronts. I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better controls.

    Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity, but it leaves me thinking that German men are “screwed, blued and tatooed.” Do nothing but report immigrant/invader crime to the authorities and hope that they will take the proper steps and women of your own age think you’re a wimp and refuse to have your children. Form a gang, hunt down and beat or even kill a few of the immigrants/invaders and the barren menopausal women in charge whose “sons” you’ve just attacked hurl the full force of the law at you.

    Yeah. So I would suggest Germany’s men try something more political, less impromptu.

    The German men’s resistance movement must marshal a single-issue anti-immigration political organization and make it the decider of every election. (Of course they will give the organization some high-minded name for propaganda purposes, and to preëmptively repudiate charges of racism and hate speech). That will require determined leadership to keep the organization focused; political hacks from existing parties will try to co-opt the organization and neuter it. It may take several tries to create a suitable organization. Naturally the first few politicians to court the movement in return for crucial votes in by-elections will betray it when they take office, but as office-holders facing tough re-election campaigns (and eager-beagers contesting open or weakly-held offices) chance asking the organization for support they will move the Overton Window in the movement’s favor. With a judicious mixture of interventions positive (donations, volunteer work) and negative (withdrawing support from traitors even when that means harder-leftists will win), a strong organization will eventually tame enough politicians to start changing government policy.

    The resistance movement can recruit Germany’s lesbians– they have nothing to gain from the Merkel youth and much to lose to them. The lesbians should be sicced on the local political party organizations which coordinate and promote the clammy reign of the middle-aged nulliparas like Merkel and Reker. Many of those are volunteer committees staffed by whoever shows up regularly (it may be necessary to buy some party memberships). The targets will find it hard to slap down lesbian insurgents, while the softball-whackers will enjoy intriguing for power over the Merkel brigade. As they gain it they can promote anti-immigrant candidates or at least sabotage establishment-party operations. Only a fraction of the gay men will join the resistance but they will be useful allies. To recruit as many as possible an allied organization, something like “Queers for Germany” should be set up, with a natty dress code and lots of fooling around backstage or in nearby hotels after rallies. The gays should be used to influence figures in the entertainment industry, to wheedle fruity establishment politicians in bed, and to obtain blackmail evidence, as appropriate. Influencing entertainers will be very useful since they can spread all sorts of movement propaganda easily. The resistance movement should definitely arrange for dances and concerts with music from patriotic entertainers who donate some of the ticket money to the movement organizations.

    German men need to produce and disseminate propaganda at several levels– even in the teeth of establishment censorship. They must create a popular film which celebrates a myth of Germanic solidarity and kinship (like Braveheart did for the Scots). I don’t understand German mythos very well but perhaps a new movie about the 1529 Siege of Vienna would serve. German men must formulate political euphemisms, slang, and code words to use when discussing anti-immigration efforts. The German State is far behind the Chinese in censorship technology; Germans could evade a lot of government Internet flyswatters just by referring, e.g. to Merkel youth as «Turisten» and the like. Of course much more elliptical approaches are feasible. German men should also spread anti-immigrant rumors and create black propaganda– for example, movement hackers should forge, inject into official channels, and “leak” a scary memo from a high official in the public health service warning hospitals and clinics about antibiotic-resistant intestinal diseases spread by Merkel youth, then push rumors of women in Cologne and other cities suffering horribly after drinking coffee from cups inadequately-washed by filthy immigrants (not forgetting suitable Facebook posts). White propaganda too is required– for example, publicizing the diversion of social-services funds from German retirees to Merkel youths.

    The German resistance movement must make a special, persistent (though discreet) effort to foster and recruit sympathizers in the police (including border guards, etc.) and fire services. It should be fairly easy to win over the lower ranks and many in the command structure. Policemen would naturally prefer to arrest and deport Merkel youth than to stand around watching them molest young German women. The police are supervised by establishment political hacks like Wolfgang Albers of the SDP in Cologne but without the cooperation of the “real” policemen the political hacks can only prevent action, not take it. The hacks have shown that they will prevent real policemen from interfering with MENA rape festivals. When confronted by a German resistance movement the hacks will order policemen to take action to identify and arrest patriots for “hate speech.” Movement sympathizers in the police must frustrate those orders. Kripo and BKA officers can proceed with deliberate inefficiency, and connive at warning patriots to avoid provocations, traps, etc. Patrolmen can be clumsy and slow when it comes to arresting patriotic protestors. Both senior and junior police officials can bungle investigations of patriots and spoil evidence sought by prosecutors– and they can leak information for patriotic politicians to publicize under parliamentary privilege.

    The movement must recruit some lawyers and bankers into a special allied organization to collect and administer legal-defense and jailed-martyr’s-family-relief funds. Those succor mainly main-organization figures targeted for persecution by the establishment, but would be available to aid particularly sympathetic fringe allies.

    Every large political movement attracts a lunatic fringe (Carrie Nation, Black Panthers, etc.). Since this is unavoidable, it should at least be managed and exploited. The lunatics should be steered into a separate resistance organization so the main political organization can distinguish itself as the voice of reason and moderation. At rallies the lunatics should be relegated to attacking pro-immigration hecklers at the fringes of the crowd. The police will have to arrest some of them; so much the better– eventually a few will make presentable martyrs. The main organization should never attempt unofficial violence– its aim is to get the government to order the police to expel the Merkel youth. Any non-lunatic who wants to wrestle with migrants should join the police and demonstrate his prowess in the service of the law.

    The resistance movement should aim to: make the government concede first a substantial crimp then a pause in the influx of foreigners; force Merkel out of office; institute an aggressive scheme of deporting Merkel youth who commit crimes (at first) then infractions (next) and finally mere welfare-dependency; then to finish up, implement a repatriation scheme to send immigrants from MENA home. Departing migrants should be given a good-sized departure gift (e.g., $5K) if they go quietly and a dull ache in their backsides if they have to be frogmarched to the border and booted across it. It will be good for German men to have German women watch them expel the Merkel youth.

    In the early days of the movement most women will oppose it. Once it picks up some momentum, though, German women’s sympathies will start to shift– the more as the men appear to be defying the establishment and getting away with it.

    • Replies: @anonguy

    I don’t understand German mythos very well but...
     
    The Battle of Stalingrad has much symbolic signficance for a lot of Germans and rightly so IMO. It is kind of downplayed here in the U.S. because of the common belief that the Normandy invasion & followon is what singlehandedly fixed the Germans' trolley.

    The right to drive without speed limits is roughly the analog to the 2d Amendment in the U.S., viewed as a fundamental right of a free people - frei fahrt für freie bürger. Naturally, the wets are on the wrong side of this one.

    I can't think of any Stalingrad angle off-hand, but the surest way to get German men to "drop their cocks and grab their socks" is to get them thinking that "frei fahrt" is under attack, which does happen from time to time.

  108. @Veracitor

    Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity, but it leaves me thinking that German men are “screwed, blued and tatooed.” Do nothing but report immigrant/invader crime to the authorities and hope that they will take the proper steps and women of your own age think you’re a wimp and refuse to have your children. Form a gang, hunt down and beat or even kill a few of the immigrants/invaders and the barren menopausal women in charge whose “sons” you’ve just attacked hurl the full force of the law at you.
     
    Yeah. So I would suggest Germany's men try something more political, less impromptu.

    The German men's resistance movement must marshal a single-issue anti-immigration political organization and make it the decider of every election. (Of course they will give the organization some high-minded name for propaganda purposes, and to preëmptively repudiate charges of racism and hate speech). That will require determined leadership to keep the organization focused; political hacks from existing parties will try to co-opt the organization and neuter it. It may take several tries to create a suitable organization. Naturally the first few politicians to court the movement in return for crucial votes in by-elections will betray it when they take office, but as office-holders facing tough re-election campaigns (and eager-beagers contesting open or weakly-held offices) chance asking the organization for support they will move the Overton Window in the movement's favor. With a judicious mixture of interventions positive (donations, volunteer work) and negative (withdrawing support from traitors even when that means harder-leftists will win), a strong organization will eventually tame enough politicians to start changing government policy.

    The resistance movement can recruit Germany's lesbians-- they have nothing to gain from the Merkel youth and much to lose to them. The lesbians should be sicced on the local political party organizations which coordinate and promote the clammy reign of the middle-aged nulliparas like Merkel and Reker. Many of those are volunteer committees staffed by whoever shows up regularly (it may be necessary to buy some party memberships). The targets will find it hard to slap down lesbian insurgents, while the softball-whackers will enjoy intriguing for power over the Merkel brigade. As they gain it they can promote anti-immigrant candidates or at least sabotage establishment-party operations. Only a fraction of the gay men will join the resistance but they will be useful allies. To recruit as many as possible an allied organization, something like "Queers for Germany" should be set up, with a natty dress code and lots of fooling around backstage or in nearby hotels after rallies. The gays should be used to influence figures in the entertainment industry, to wheedle fruity establishment politicians in bed, and to obtain blackmail evidence, as appropriate. Influencing entertainers will be very useful since they can spread all sorts of movement propaganda easily. The resistance movement should definitely arrange for dances and concerts with music from patriotic entertainers who donate some of the ticket money to the movement organizations.

    German men need to produce and disseminate propaganda at several levels-- even in the teeth of establishment censorship. They must create a popular film which celebrates a myth of Germanic solidarity and kinship (like Braveheart did for the Scots). I don't understand German mythos very well but perhaps a new movie about the 1529 Siege of Vienna would serve. German men must formulate political euphemisms, slang, and code words to use when discussing anti-immigration efforts. The German State is far behind the Chinese in censorship technology; Germans could evade a lot of government Internet flyswatters just by referring, e.g. to Merkel youth as «Turisten» and the like. Of course much more elliptical approaches are feasible. German men should also spread anti-immigrant rumors and create black propaganda-- for example, movement hackers should forge, inject into official channels, and "leak" a scary memo from a high official in the public health service warning hospitals and clinics about antibiotic-resistant intestinal diseases spread by Merkel youth, then push rumors of women in Cologne and other cities suffering horribly after drinking coffee from cups inadequately-washed by filthy immigrants (not forgetting suitable Facebook posts). White propaganda too is required-- for example, publicizing the diversion of social-services funds from German retirees to Merkel youths.

    The German resistance movement must make a special, persistent (though discreet) effort to foster and recruit sympathizers in the police (including border guards, etc.) and fire services. It should be fairly easy to win over the lower ranks and many in the command structure. Policemen would naturally prefer to arrest and deport Merkel youth than to stand around watching them molest young German women. The police are supervised by establishment political hacks like Wolfgang Albers of the SDP in Cologne but without the cooperation of the "real" policemen the political hacks can only prevent action, not take it. The hacks have shown that they will prevent real policemen from interfering with MENA rape festivals. When confronted by a German resistance movement the hacks will order policemen to take action to identify and arrest patriots for "hate speech." Movement sympathizers in the police must frustrate those orders. Kripo and BKA officers can proceed with deliberate inefficiency, and connive at warning patriots to avoid provocations, traps, etc. Patrolmen can be clumsy and slow when it comes to arresting patriotic protestors. Both senior and junior police officials can bungle investigations of patriots and spoil evidence sought by prosecutors-- and they can leak information for patriotic politicians to publicize under parliamentary privilege.

    The movement must recruit some lawyers and bankers into a special allied organization to collect and administer legal-defense and jailed-martyr's-family-relief funds. Those succor mainly main-organization figures targeted for persecution by the establishment, but would be available to aid particularly sympathetic fringe allies.

    Every large political movement attracts a lunatic fringe (Carrie Nation, Black Panthers, etc.). Since this is unavoidable, it should at least be managed and exploited. The lunatics should be steered into a separate resistance organization so the main political organization can distinguish itself as the voice of reason and moderation. At rallies the lunatics should be relegated to attacking pro-immigration hecklers at the fringes of the crowd. The police will have to arrest some of them; so much the better-- eventually a few will make presentable martyrs. The main organization should never attempt unofficial violence-- its aim is to get the government to order the police to expel the Merkel youth. Any non-lunatic who wants to wrestle with migrants should join the police and demonstrate his prowess in the service of the law.

    The resistance movement should aim to: make the government concede first a substantial crimp then a pause in the influx of foreigners; force Merkel out of office; institute an aggressive scheme of deporting Merkel youth who commit crimes (at first) then infractions (next) and finally mere welfare-dependency; then to finish up, implement a repatriation scheme to send immigrants from MENA home. Departing migrants should be given a good-sized departure gift (e.g., $5K) if they go quietly and a dull ache in their backsides if they have to be frogmarched to the border and booted across it. It will be good for German men to have German women watch them expel the Merkel youth.

    In the early days of the movement most women will oppose it. Once it picks up some momentum, though, German women's sympathies will start to shift-- the more as the men appear to be defying the establishment and getting away with it.

    I don’t understand German mythos very well but…

    The Battle of Stalingrad has much symbolic signficance for a lot of Germans and rightly so IMO. It is kind of downplayed here in the U.S. because of the common belief that the Normandy invasion & followon is what singlehandedly fixed the Germans’ trolley.

    The right to drive without speed limits is roughly the analog to the 2d Amendment in the U.S., viewed as a fundamental right of a free people – frei fahrt für freie bürger. Naturally, the wets are on the wrong side of this one.

    I can’t think of any Stalingrad angle off-hand, but the surest way to get German men to “drop their cocks and grab their socks” is to get them thinking that “frei fahrt” is under attack, which does happen from time to time.

  109. They must create a popular film which celebrates a myth of Germanic solidarity and kinship

    The closest historical analogue to today’s situation would be German resistance to Roman domination and decadence, with the post-American Empire as Rome.

  110. @Anonymous
    Merkel is not a stupid person. Why did she do this?? Is there something forcing her hand??

    Yes but her attempted solution has made it worse.

  111. @Corvinus
    “The limbic systems of Germany’s barren women are desperately eager to protect offspring who are not actually there, so they motivate concern for child-substitutes, in this case the young foreign men that German women have morally adopted en-masse.”

    Please do us all a favor and stop with the pop psychology analysis. If you are going to make these statements, you’re going to have to offer specific evidence rather than CH standard rhetoric.

    “Subconsciously, I believe, Germany’s younger women want to provoke fights between Germany’s men and the “syrian refugees.” 


    Ok, so you are wildly speculating here. Any sociological data to support your hypothesis, or you intellectually flailing?

    
“Far too many German men are “sitzpinklers” and German women are disappointed, even if they cannot express it in their vocabulary of leftist feminist cliches. Women notoriously like to watch men fight– so they can mate with the winners”.

    So, are you married? Have children? If not, it would appear that you haven’t fought enough.

    “Young women in bars encourage young men to brawl. Anthropology books are replete with examples of women egging men into combat.”

    Oh, those books. Praytell, what examples? Please list authors and the results of these studies.

    “Many German women, if you ask them, will tell you they would rather mate with a German man, “but,” they say, “there aren’t any good German men, they’re all wimps!””

    How many German women?

    See, all you have is mere speculation. That's it. There's little of substance to hold on to. You make these statements as if they were accurate without any proof.


    Diversity Heretic—“Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity.”

    Observations, yes. The real test is whether or not they have a factual basis.

    “I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better controls.”

    Assuming that keeping women under control is a strength of ANY society.

    Observations, yes. The real test is whether or not they have a factual basis.

    No doubt this is a necessary condition for consideration of, as you rightly call it , “pop culture”, but is still insufficient. I’d go on to add that a few more necessary conditions is whether the regurgitated pop culture hairball is anything other than a unremarkable but pervasive non-issue to anyone not detoxing from egalitarian propaganda force feeding and whether it is possible that that the phenomenon comes down on one side or the other or is in any way especially relevant in this situation compared to others.

    For instance, the observation that the refugees in Germany like to drink stuff when they are thirsty. This is indisputably true, and maybe if this were all happening in a desert or drought there might be an angle to it, but need I go on?……

    Hey, what is slightly relevant is that Ossies were often considered “ruined” by their brainwashing under socialism and only a new generation supplanting them would completely eradicate the residual learned dependency, socialist reflexes, and so forth thought to be holding Ossies back. I don’t know if this thought is still much in currency leastwise because a whole generation has now indeed passed.

    I hope I don’t come to the conclusion that we may have a bit of a lost generation that has come of age in the U.S. the past 10 years or so as well (and more are in the pipeline), but things aren’t looking too positive in that regard… As irritating as the constant incantations of the PUA may be, I have to remind myself that their hearts are ok usually, has them questioning what is The Man for their age group.

  112. @Corvinus
    “The limbic systems of Germany’s barren women are desperately eager to protect offspring who are not actually there, so they motivate concern for child-substitutes, in this case the young foreign men that German women have morally adopted en-masse.”

    Please do us all a favor and stop with the pop psychology analysis. If you are going to make these statements, you’re going to have to offer specific evidence rather than CH standard rhetoric.

    “Subconsciously, I believe, Germany’s younger women want to provoke fights between Germany’s men and the “syrian refugees.” 


    Ok, so you are wildly speculating here. Any sociological data to support your hypothesis, or you intellectually flailing?

    
“Far too many German men are “sitzpinklers” and German women are disappointed, even if they cannot express it in their vocabulary of leftist feminist cliches. Women notoriously like to watch men fight– so they can mate with the winners”.

    So, are you married? Have children? If not, it would appear that you haven’t fought enough.

    “Young women in bars encourage young men to brawl. Anthropology books are replete with examples of women egging men into combat.”

    Oh, those books. Praytell, what examples? Please list authors and the results of these studies.

    “Many German women, if you ask them, will tell you they would rather mate with a German man, “but,” they say, “there aren’t any good German men, they’re all wimps!””

    How many German women?

    See, all you have is mere speculation. That's it. There's little of substance to hold on to. You make these statements as if they were accurate without any proof.


    Diversity Heretic—“Both of these observations appear to me to have some validity.”

    Observations, yes. The real test is whether or not they have a factual basis.

    “I hate to make this observation, but one of the strengths of Muslim society is that it keeps its women under better controls.”

    Assuming that keeping women under control is a strength of ANY society.
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    “Young women in bars encourage young men to brawl. Anthropology books are replete with examples of women egging men into combat.”

    You actually offered a source. Was that so hard? Now, the source offered historical examples by which men from various tribal groups captured women as a status symbol or partook in wife-capture in the context of war. The next step is specifically link these instances to actual events today by which young German women have openly encouraged brawling to secure a Muslim mate.
  113. @anon

    It means giving up the fond illusion that Germany’s past sins can be absolved with a reckless humanitarianism in the present.
     
    When are the sins of the Bolshevik concentration camps of the 1920s going to be absolved?

    When are the sins of the Bolshevik concentration camps of the 1920s going to be absolved?

    First they would have to be repented of. There never was a de-Bolshevikization like German de-Nazification.

    • Replies: @Bill
    1992-1918=74
    1945-1932=13

    Who would you de-Bolshevize? Certainly not Russia. The Bolsheviks, at the leadership level especially, were not Russian. The evolution, over time, of the leadership of the USSR to become more Russian went right along with it becoming, first, less murderous and then less Communist. You want to go sift through the population of old men in Israel to find people guilty of crimes against humanity?
  114. @anonguy

    In a more open media Steve would be a fine replacement for Pat Buchanan.
     
    The only thing holding iSteve back from respectability should there be much further shift of the Overton window in the current direction it is currently heading is the anti-semitic and white nationalist/racist element hanging around.

    Methinks Steve is playing a good game. He has to pander subtly to these guys previously and here on unz to keep his numbers/money/rep up, but maintain as much credible deniability about himself for a future return to respectability.

    His numbers are increasing, and I think the overall increase diminishes the percentage of anti-semitic and wn types. As his numbers keep increasing in this direction, he eventually can ditch/disavow this element completely without collapsing his reader base.

    Well, it certainly would be what I would do...

    Think about the thread about Nixon being taken down. I read about the first 75 comments and there was not one single remark about "da eskimos dunnit". About who/what took out Nixon? Nixon? Are you kidding me? I'm not sure one could get that result on Haaretz....

    Maybe it is less anti-semitic types in the readership base, maybe Komment Kontrol is coming down harder on these types, or some combination of both factors. But it was very distinctive.

    Steve's got a shot at it and seeing all these lessers, and they are legion, getting international renown, and more importantly, the broad audience he clearly craves is a bitter pill - he's pretty diligent about letting his readership know how his writing/ideas get transmitted to the "general public" via covert readers of his work in mainstream journalism. And he should, because he deserves a broader audience.

    So if you want to help Steve, take the anti-semitic and racist stuff to Stormfront or somewhere. Personally, I've heard way enough of it to last a lifetime, but if you can't control yourself for decorum, quit ruining Steve's shot at prime time. The PUA stuff is pretty cheesy/annoying/juvenile, but I'd have to reluctantly admit that stuff may be survivable, especially because Steve doesn't engage at all on that.

    Think about this....

    I recollect recently noting at least one especially toxic piece of Judenhass on an iSteve thread that was up for a awhile, then seemed to disappear. Maybe my imagination, but possibly Mr. Sailer thinks it’s OK to let this stuff emerge into digital daylight —pre-emptive censorship being counterproductive and cowardly— and after a decent interval, to minimize the aggregate stench in his parlor. The really scary thing was how much rude Joooo-hating came up in the early days of open threads in the online NYT, WaPo, et. al. before they started taking a more hard-core approach to moderating.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "I recollect recently noting at least one especially toxic piece of Judenhass....."

    Considering that some people - you, perhaps - deem it to be "Judenhass" anytime a gentile notices something about Jews, or talks about Jews as if they are a distinct, and often self-interested group (which I might add, many Jews do with respect to gentiles all the time) - your noticing of said incident is not really very interesting or meaningful.

  115. @Anonymoustache
    The Germans include the highest achievers of history--but those achievers are only a micro percentage of the vast population, which is itself a giant hive mind of conformity and control freakism.

    Germans are State Worshipers like the Chinese and Japanese. Something about the math/science skew in IQ generates a bottomless love of authority.

    These peoples are trapped in the vicious cycle of following their crazy leaders off the cliff. Merkel is just the latest lunatic.

    American internet comments on Merkel don't comprehend the German psyche. They will dutifully go along with their Fuerher until the pain becomes excruciating.

    so true! my grandfather told me years ago us germans were smart as hell! but they will follow any nut into the fires of hell! that’s why my great grandfather left that sewer in the late 1800s!

    • Replies: @scoops
    im American of german decendants! didn't mean us germans! lol
  116. @scoops
    so true! my grandfather told me years ago us germans were smart as hell! but they will follow any nut into the fires of hell! that's why my great grandfather left that sewer in the late 1800s!

    im American of german decendants! didn’t mean us germans! lol

  117. @Anonymous
    Why does Isreal sterilize Ethopian jews? Aren't they assimiliated enough?

    Uh I think you are confusing contraception with sterilization. Also you can’t spell Israel.

  118. @dearieme
    "The women most passionately dedicated to this pastime were the suffragettes." It's an odd one that. After all, a rather good argument for retaining only male suffrage was that only men were required to go to war.

    Enormous propaganda was required to get the English riled against the Germans towards whom most English had no animus. It was the usual suspects who wanted to slap down a rival mainly because it was getting too strong for its britches. Those suspects: royals, big business, the military, the bankers. The common people had nothing much to gain. The propaganda spin used women as button pushers; they’d use anything that worked: your dog, your kid, your thatched cottage, your sceptured isle, your grandmother. They set up organizations to spread the propaganda. To push buttons. There’s nothing like king & country with a pretty face over the print. Some of the gettes were attention hogs, I guess.
    Most suffragettes’ rhetoric went along the lines of women putting an end to war, not encouraging men into it. Yes, yes, idealisitic, and of course that’s not likely considering the psychopaths of both genders who get into the highest levels. Nevertheless, that’s what they thought. Or many of them. I don’t know how many played into the propaganda game, but the most shattering anti-war work I ever encountered was Testament of Youth about WWI, by Vera Brittain, who lost her great love in it.
    As far as voting, enfranchisement never made much difference–men were taken on age and condition, not whether they had voted for the monster war-mongers. That’s a 20th century notion. Gen. Smedly Butler admitted in the 1930s that he’d worked for big business without realizing it. Not for his “country.” He died soon after that.

    The comedy of Lysistrata had the women of Greece denying sexual favors to the men until they stopped making war. Unfortunately that meant they had to deny themselves also, so it didn’t get far as peace movements go.

  119. @Svigor

    What makes the Holocaust unique is that they combined the barbarism of savages with the strong organizational, logistical and industrial skills we normally associate with advanced civilizations – no one on earth ever built a death factory like Auschwitz where raw materials (human beings) were shipped in by rail from all over Europe and efficiently converted to ashes in a matter of hours.
     
    Silliness. The Rwandan genocide exceeded the death rate of the Holocaust, and all the implement of choice for the Hutus was the machete.

    So why didn’t the Germans just use machetes? The Germans were not silly people and even using slave labor and confiscated wealth, building a death factory and executing on all the logistics of shipping people all over Europe in the middle of a war were not cheap or easy, so why did they do it?

    • Replies: @snorlax
    Well, at first the Germans just used machine guns and pistols, but nobody wanted to volunteer for the SS-Sonderkommando units which carried out the executions, and so it became a punishment for unruly soldiers.

    The Sonderkommando units had extremely high rates of suicides and desertions. Himmler himself visited one while they carried out a mass execution and reportedly started vomiting and crying.

    So instead the Nazis created their death factories so they could carry out the mass murdering in a more clinical and detached way. Out of sight, out of mind.

    , @reiner Tor
    They didn't have the stomachs to murder so many people. They had too few General Blokhin types, and even Himmler himself fainted when he saw the execution of a mere hundred people. Hitler famously tried to distance himself from the whole process as much as possible, which meant that we only have circumstancial evidence (albeit, very szrong circumstancial evidence) regarding his personal involvement.

    And so they tried to find a less personal way of mass murder. Actually even very few of the death camp staff had to watch mass death day by day. Sure, they watched some death on a daily basis (and an untold amount of suffering and misery), but not too many corpses at a time. (I think that out of curiosity or because of peer pressure all male and probably at least some female staff members, even cooks and typists watched a gas chamber operation once, but that's not the same as constant, unlimited exposure to mass death. And to be sure, not all of them had the stomachs for even the limited exposure, which is the reason why some of them requested to be transferred to the front.

    Building death camps was not worse than massacring the same number of people with machetes or through mass hunger. It's less psychopathic than the machete murders, and it's less suffering for the victims than being starved to death slowly over the course of a month.
  120. @Anatoly Karlin

    In the German case the important number here isn’t the country’s total population, currently 82 million. It’s the twentysomething population, which was less than 10 million in 2013 (and of course already included many immigrants). In that cohort and every cohort afterward, the current influx could have a transformative effect.
     
    Surprised he went there, in the NYT of all places.

    Elites doing damage control?

    Although he could have credited Adorján F. Kovács, who is the guy I suspect Douthat got it from originally: http://newobserveronline.com/germany-nonwhites-majority-in-one-generation/

    Although he could have credited Adorján F. Kovács, who is the guy I suspect Douthat got it from originally:

    He could more easily have gotten it from the comments section of one of Steve’s posts. Like here…

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/surf-city-sweden-1-23-boys-for-every-girl/

  121. @Percy Gryce
    All of this talk about German men presumes that they are actually "German" ethnically. I recall during my time in Berlin (U.S. Army, 1987-90) that the young male population looked distinctly unGerman--that certain Germanic virility was lacking. Of course, that was years before I learned about the mass rape of German women by the Red Army at the end of WWII:

    https://www.google.com/search?q=soviet+mass+rape+in+world+war+ii

    I recall during my time in Berlin (U.S. Army, 1987-90) that the young male population looked distinctly unGerman–that certain Germanic virility was lacking.

    I participated in several NATO exercises a bit before your time in Berlin. The pervasive impression all of us Marines had of the Bundeswehr was that they were “chicks with d*cks”. Of course, being Marines, we were heavily biased towards drawing that conclusion about everyone that wasn’t us, but I do remember how shocked all of us were on first encounter with these guys, in our naivete most of us had expected something a bit more rough and ready than these guys.

    This was particularly so because one vaguely sensed that it wasn’t a remediable training issue, but rather something more intrinsic, a lack of a certain moral fiber. And while we were biased, we did make differentiated judgments in these situations. For instance, ROK forces and Royal Marines were highly respected and generally thought to be better, much better, on a man to man basis than the average Marine – a lot of Marines thought, or even wished, that the Corps would adopt some of their practices. The UK ground forces seemed at least a little better than the average NATO force – generally all of them seemed a bit more of a civil service populated by civil servants than a military one. But the Bundeswehr was the real head-scratcher.

    The impression received of Scandinavian force members was similarly low even for a NATO force, but that was aligned with expectations that Americans tended to have about Scandinavia even back then. The Bundeswehr was the force whose members seemed most contrary to expectations – as Americans understanding that our forebears had within living memory (then) fought two wars against Germany where it had been a legendarily formidable opposition in most every regard, I guess we had expected a lot more from these guys considered individually as opposed to their organizational skills, etc, which were of course superlative.

    I know what I’m going to write now can, likely will, be taken as supporting evidence by annoying PUA, but I’m an honest broker.

    In 1978, I participated in a humongous NATO exercise that at least partially was an early and major sabre-rattling by the west against the Soviets in the twilight of detente. It also was the first time Marines had been present in any massed formations in Europe since WWI – in WWII, USMC was dedicated to the Pacific Theatre. Just given the reputation of the Corps, the locals everywhere were pretty curious about us even though our contingent of a regimental landing team of ~3k was at best 5% of the total forces involved in this exercise which had portions all over Europe.

    However, our ops were one centerpiece of the exercise, demonstrating U.S. ability post-Vietnam to conduct major, RLT level, amphibious landings under highly adverse conditions on the Soviets doorstep. So we also got media attention for that as it was a then-novel aspect of a big NATO exercise which tended to get a lot of media coverage in Europe then.

    The Soviet propaganda mill had been putting out informative briefs describing the U.S. Marines as “troops willing to loot, murder, and rape, and lacking the basic differences that separates man from the animals” and such which I guess aligned with whatever vague expectations the Europeans had of the Corps from what they had heard of Pacific Island fighting, Vietnam, etc.

    A very common question from a random European would be if it was really true that all Marines were convicted murderers or just assumed that was true and asked how many people did you kill? Really, and often was the reason that the European had struck up a conversation, although it usually took a bit of chit-chat for them to get up the nerve to ask.

    So we were on the ground foreigners generally considered as quite violent/aggressive loutish individuals.

    The local women f*cking adored us Marines, period, although I’m certain continued exposure would have eventually changed their minds. And this was in very stark contrast to their reactions, at least as I observed, to members of other forces American or otherwise. The sailors, on whose ships we sailed and who were on liberty concurrent with us, were green with envy because they were completely invisible, if not reviled, by the same local women.

    As for local male response, there was a pattern of local guys picking a fight with a Marine specifically because he was a Marine. I’m certain there is a PUA interpretation, and I’ll throw gas on that fire by noting that the pervasive self-confessed cause by the local guy was that he wanted to be able to say he had been in a fight with a U.S. Marine whether or not he won or lost. Conversations with other non-adversarial local guys indicated that this was a common aspiration among the young local guys, kind of a “no ballz, dude” thing with them.

    PUA: Eureka! I knew it, PUA wins again – men showboating for the ladies, nyah nyah, I’m so insightful….

    Me/comrades: Huh, what? But of course, that is what guys do and women like to observe/vet and the victor gets the spoils. You didn’t know *that*?

    Anyhow, this was a pretty cool thing for the ego, albeit something of a annoyance, but ultimately just part and parcel of heightened local women interest, which of course is always the prize for young men.

    • Agree: Percy Gryce
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    Me/comrades: Huh, what? But of course, that is what guys do and women like to observe/vet and the victor gets the spoils. You didn’t know *that*?
     
    How could they? The vast majority grew up with much different experiences than your own. You were living in an environment that was a holdover from WWII male glory, while back home things were going more the way of Stripes.

    There have been two generations of reaction to that, and reaction to the reaction since. If anything, things are finally starting to turn back around to where you've evidently always been. You don't get a cookie for saying, "duh, they've always been that way."
    , @Reg Cæsar
    The Germans and Scandinavians of whom you write were conscripts, weren't they?
  122. @Svigor

    And none of it involves Britain setting up camps to kill millions of Bengalis or lining them up and machine gunning them into graves they had to dig themselves.
     
    It might've, if Britain had subsequently lost a war and been occupied.

    We can never be sure about such hypotheticals but there is zero evidence from English history that they would have behaved that way. The Germans were already well known for committing atrocities during WWI, especially in Belgium. Some of them were exaggerated as part of British propaganda but some were quite real and well documented such as the intentional burning of the library of Leuven with its 300,000 priceless medieval manuscripts (not to mention thousands of civilian deaths).

    I would say that the burden is on you to prove that the British would have acted this way and you just make a naked assertion without any evidence.

    • Replies: @fnn

    We can never be sure about such hypotheticals but there is zero evidence from English history that they would have behaved that way.
     
    Cromwell was said to have been responsible for a lot of atrocities in Ireland. Also, you can do a search for British atrocities against the Kikuyu during the Mau Mau uprising in Kenya. The latter has a lot of grisly details Sailer wouldn't allow to be posted here.
    , @German_reader
    "The Germans were already well known for committing atrocities during WWI, especially in Belgium. "

    So what, the Belgians had committed horrible crimes in the Congo, so they sort of deserved it as a nation. Those atrocity stories about Germans hacking the hands off Belgian children were simply projection of crimes the Belgians themselves had committed (their forced labourers in the Congo had their limbs cut off if they didn't make the required rubber quota).
  123. @anonguy

    In a more open media Steve would be a fine replacement for Pat Buchanan.
     
    The only thing holding iSteve back from respectability should there be much further shift of the Overton window in the current direction it is currently heading is the anti-semitic and white nationalist/racist element hanging around.

    Methinks Steve is playing a good game. He has to pander subtly to these guys previously and here on unz to keep his numbers/money/rep up, but maintain as much credible deniability about himself for a future return to respectability.

    His numbers are increasing, and I think the overall increase diminishes the percentage of anti-semitic and wn types. As his numbers keep increasing in this direction, he eventually can ditch/disavow this element completely without collapsing his reader base.

    Well, it certainly would be what I would do...

    Think about the thread about Nixon being taken down. I read about the first 75 comments and there was not one single remark about "da eskimos dunnit". About who/what took out Nixon? Nixon? Are you kidding me? I'm not sure one could get that result on Haaretz....

    Maybe it is less anti-semitic types in the readership base, maybe Komment Kontrol is coming down harder on these types, or some combination of both factors. But it was very distinctive.

    Steve's got a shot at it and seeing all these lessers, and they are legion, getting international renown, and more importantly, the broad audience he clearly craves is a bitter pill - he's pretty diligent about letting his readership know how his writing/ideas get transmitted to the "general public" via covert readers of his work in mainstream journalism. And he should, because he deserves a broader audience.

    So if you want to help Steve, take the anti-semitic and racist stuff to Stormfront or somewhere. Personally, I've heard way enough of it to last a lifetime, but if you can't control yourself for decorum, quit ruining Steve's shot at prime time. The PUA stuff is pretty cheesy/annoying/juvenile, but I'd have to reluctantly admit that stuff may be survivable, especially because Steve doesn't engage at all on that.

    Think about this....

    I don’t think Steve ever needed the wn brigade

    • Replies: @rvg
    Because liberals will not have a field day with Derbyshire claiming claiming to speak for white rights while having a Thai wife right? Because if I am a liberal I will attack him on this point all day until he is destroyed. What next a Muslim claiming to be the next Byzantine emperor?
    , @anonguy

    I don’t think Steve ever needed the wn brigade
     
    I don't think so either, but they've glommed onto him and having a lot of unorthodox views himself, a prominent one being how PC stifles dissent, he doesn't seem big on censorship. Trying to set good example.

    I actually applaud him for allowing some pretty way out views (both ends of the spectrum, incidentally), takes a lot of courage this day and age. And given the prominence of the notion in HBD circles that WASPs, etc, were undermined by their commitment to fairness and other virtues, he undoubtedly, by that light, can see the danger of that happening to him on his own blog. Whether he cares or not is unknown and is his own business, its his blog. Seems like he knows what he is doing, certainly is doing what he wants.

    , @Desiderius

    I don’t think Steve ever needed the wn brigade
     
    Steve's not the needy type.

    On the broader question of some level of nationalism being (perhaps counterintutively to those greatly affected by the 20th Century) relatively healthy over against GloboMonoCultCorpProgBorg transnationalism, Steve's insights tend to suggest the former. It's no surprise that they would appeal to white nationalists as much as to chartreuse with pink polka-dotted nationalists.

    This place is indeed a hotbed of anti-anti-racism. At this point in time, that's for the good.
  124. @gbloco
    I don't think Steve ever needed the wn brigade

    Because liberals will not have a field day with Derbyshire claiming claiming to speak for white rights while having a Thai wife right? Because if I am a liberal I will attack him on this point all day until he is destroyed. What next a Muslim claiming to be the next Byzantine emperor?

  125. @Bill
    Concern troll is concerned.

    Concern troll is concerned.

    A response like that indicates one of several things:

    1) You mistake Mr. Sailer’s tolerance for a wide range of opinions as sympathy/support for your racist/anti-semitic views and are attempting to white knight for him.

    I’m not privy to Steve’s inner thoughts, but he expresses quite a few of them and by examination of that, I’d conclude you are dead wrong on this one.

    2) You are actually an opponent of Steve’s writing/philosophies but sock puppeting in an attempt to use Steve’s tolerance against him so that he is future-slimable as an anti-semite/racist.

    3) You are so in the grip of anti-semitic/racist fantasies you don’t care what collateral damage you do in pursuit of these delusions.

    4) You have a reading comprehension level beneath the level at which I wrote, which any high-school graduate should easily understand. Note I said should, and unfortunately, I meant it in its very hypothetical/subjunctive, contrary to current fact, usage as I am aware of the appallingly low levels of literacy and critical thinking skills among many these days.

    No other possibilities, really. You’d do much better to run off to Stormfront or wherever if you can’t contribute productively. One of the notable attractions of iSteve is the lively intellect displayed by many of the commenters – it has been said, much more than once incidentally, that he has the best commenters anywhere on the Web (anywhere, not just HBD, alt-right, etc).

    However, that doesn’t apply to 100% of them, some of the chaff is people exploiting this popularity, riding its coattails, to push your notions.

    Whatever is the case with you, there is an saying that a bore is someone who deprives you of solitude without providing you company.

    I could think of a number of cute paraphrases of this thought to apply to your case, a commenter like Bill is one who deprives a thread of X without providing Y.

    Here is my challenge – demonstrate you are capable of an original thought by coming up with some clever X and Ys. Make them insulting to me if that is the motivation you need, I don’t mind, I’d like to see you up your game. Plus, iSteve commenters have a reputation to uphold and you are just dragging things down with nyah, nyah, you are a poopy face stuff.

  126. @anonguy

    In a more open media Steve would be a fine replacement for Pat Buchanan.
     
    The only thing holding iSteve back from respectability should there be much further shift of the Overton window in the current direction it is currently heading is the anti-semitic and white nationalist/racist element hanging around.

    Methinks Steve is playing a good game. He has to pander subtly to these guys previously and here on unz to keep his numbers/money/rep up, but maintain as much credible deniability about himself for a future return to respectability.

    His numbers are increasing, and I think the overall increase diminishes the percentage of anti-semitic and wn types. As his numbers keep increasing in this direction, he eventually can ditch/disavow this element completely without collapsing his reader base.

    Well, it certainly would be what I would do...

    Think about the thread about Nixon being taken down. I read about the first 75 comments and there was not one single remark about "da eskimos dunnit". About who/what took out Nixon? Nixon? Are you kidding me? I'm not sure one could get that result on Haaretz....

    Maybe it is less anti-semitic types in the readership base, maybe Komment Kontrol is coming down harder on these types, or some combination of both factors. But it was very distinctive.

    Steve's got a shot at it and seeing all these lessers, and they are legion, getting international renown, and more importantly, the broad audience he clearly craves is a bitter pill - he's pretty diligent about letting his readership know how his writing/ideas get transmitted to the "general public" via covert readers of his work in mainstream journalism. And he should, because he deserves a broader audience.

    So if you want to help Steve, take the anti-semitic and racist stuff to Stormfront or somewhere. Personally, I've heard way enough of it to last a lifetime, but if you can't control yourself for decorum, quit ruining Steve's shot at prime time. The PUA stuff is pretty cheesy/annoying/juvenile, but I'd have to reluctantly admit that stuff may be survivable, especially because Steve doesn't engage at all on that.

    Think about this....

    If the “anti-semitic” stuff includes discussions of the 2% population to 30% billionaire/40% biglaw partner/25% or whatever tenured professor discrepancies, it’s hard to have an honest discussion of power and influence in the world without bringing it up.

    The dawning Overton window WILL include these facts, and the question is how Jewish elites acknowledge these facts, and certain of the excesses of influential Jewish people (like, say, Marx, Boaz, Gramsci, Gould, Lewontin, Schumer as the chief proponent of population changing immigration, Soros/Saban/Wynn/Adelson and their various machinations etc.), without white Gentiles overestimating Jewish foibles and underestimating Jewish contributions. There’s a compelling case that Jewish people have caused a lot of problems, so Jewish elites better start explicitly focusing on Jewish contributions. Technology has rendered naked emperors obsolete.

  127. @Jack D
    We can never be sure about such hypotheticals but there is zero evidence from English history that they would have behaved that way. The Germans were already well known for committing atrocities during WWI, especially in Belgium. Some of them were exaggerated as part of British propaganda but some were quite real and well documented such as the intentional burning of the library of Leuven with its 300,000 priceless medieval manuscripts (not to mention thousands of civilian deaths).

    I would say that the burden is on you to prove that the British would have acted this way and you just make a naked assertion without any evidence.

    We can never be sure about such hypotheticals but there is zero evidence from English history that they would have behaved that way.

    Cromwell was said to have been responsible for a lot of atrocities in Ireland. Also, you can do a search for British atrocities against the Kikuyu during the Mau Mau uprising in Kenya. The latter has a lot of grisly details Sailer wouldn’t allow to be posted here.

  128. @Jack D
    We can never be sure about such hypotheticals but there is zero evidence from English history that they would have behaved that way. The Germans were already well known for committing atrocities during WWI, especially in Belgium. Some of them were exaggerated as part of British propaganda but some were quite real and well documented such as the intentional burning of the library of Leuven with its 300,000 priceless medieval manuscripts (not to mention thousands of civilian deaths).

    I would say that the burden is on you to prove that the British would have acted this way and you just make a naked assertion without any evidence.

    “The Germans were already well known for committing atrocities during WWI, especially in Belgium. ”

    So what, the Belgians had committed horrible crimes in the Congo, so they sort of deserved it as a nation. Those atrocity stories about Germans hacking the hands off Belgian children were simply projection of crimes the Belgians themselves had committed (their forced labourers in the Congo had their limbs cut off if they didn’t make the required rubber quota).

  129. @anonguy

    I recall during my time in Berlin (U.S. Army, 1987-90) that the young male population looked distinctly unGerman–that certain Germanic virility was lacking.
     
    I participated in several NATO exercises a bit before your time in Berlin. The pervasive impression all of us Marines had of the Bundeswehr was that they were "chicks with d*cks". Of course, being Marines, we were heavily biased towards drawing that conclusion about everyone that wasn't us, but I do remember how shocked all of us were on first encounter with these guys, in our naivete most of us had expected something a bit more rough and ready than these guys.

    This was particularly so because one vaguely sensed that it wasn't a remediable training issue, but rather something more intrinsic, a lack of a certain moral fiber. And while we were biased, we did make differentiated judgments in these situations. For instance, ROK forces and Royal Marines were highly respected and generally thought to be better, much better, on a man to man basis than the average Marine - a lot of Marines thought, or even wished, that the Corps would adopt some of their practices. The UK ground forces seemed at least a little better than the average NATO force - generally all of them seemed a bit more of a civil service populated by civil servants than a military one. But the Bundeswehr was the real head-scratcher.

    The impression received of Scandinavian force members was similarly low even for a NATO force, but that was aligned with expectations that Americans tended to have about Scandinavia even back then. The Bundeswehr was the force whose members seemed most contrary to expectations - as Americans understanding that our forebears had within living memory (then) fought two wars against Germany where it had been a legendarily formidable opposition in most every regard, I guess we had expected a lot more from these guys considered individually as opposed to their organizational skills, etc, which were of course superlative.

    I know what I'm going to write now can, likely will, be taken as supporting evidence by annoying PUA, but I'm an honest broker.

    In 1978, I participated in a humongous NATO exercise that at least partially was an early and major sabre-rattling by the west against the Soviets in the twilight of detente. It also was the first time Marines had been present in any massed formations in Europe since WWI - in WWII, USMC was dedicated to the Pacific Theatre. Just given the reputation of the Corps, the locals everywhere were pretty curious about us even though our contingent of a regimental landing team of ~3k was at best 5% of the total forces involved in this exercise which had portions all over Europe.

    However, our ops were one centerpiece of the exercise, demonstrating U.S. ability post-Vietnam to conduct major, RLT level, amphibious landings under highly adverse conditions on the Soviets doorstep. So we also got media attention for that as it was a then-novel aspect of a big NATO exercise which tended to get a lot of media coverage in Europe then.

    The Soviet propaganda mill had been putting out informative briefs describing the U.S. Marines as "troops willing to loot, murder, and rape, and lacking the basic differences that separates man from the animals" and such which I guess aligned with whatever vague expectations the Europeans had of the Corps from what they had heard of Pacific Island fighting, Vietnam, etc.

    A very common question from a random European would be if it was really true that all Marines were convicted murderers or just assumed that was true and asked how many people did you kill? Really, and often was the reason that the European had struck up a conversation, although it usually took a bit of chit-chat for them to get up the nerve to ask.

    So we were on the ground foreigners generally considered as quite violent/aggressive loutish individuals.

    The local women f*cking adored us Marines, period, although I'm certain continued exposure would have eventually changed their minds. And this was in very stark contrast to their reactions, at least as I observed, to members of other forces American or otherwise. The sailors, on whose ships we sailed and who were on liberty concurrent with us, were green with envy because they were completely invisible, if not reviled, by the same local women.

    As for local male response, there was a pattern of local guys picking a fight with a Marine specifically because he was a Marine. I'm certain there is a PUA interpretation, and I'll throw gas on that fire by noting that the pervasive self-confessed cause by the local guy was that he wanted to be able to say he had been in a fight with a U.S. Marine whether or not he won or lost. Conversations with other non-adversarial local guys indicated that this was a common aspiration among the young local guys, kind of a "no ballz, dude" thing with them.

    PUA: Eureka! I knew it, PUA wins again - men showboating for the ladies, nyah nyah, I'm so insightful....

    Me/comrades: Huh, what? But of course, that is what guys do and women like to observe/vet and the victor gets the spoils. You didn't know *that*?

    Anyhow, this was a pretty cool thing for the ego, albeit something of a annoyance, but ultimately just part and parcel of heightened local women interest, which of course is always the prize for young men.

    Me/comrades: Huh, what? But of course, that is what guys do and women like to observe/vet and the victor gets the spoils. You didn’t know *that*?

    How could they? The vast majority grew up with much different experiences than your own. You were living in an environment that was a holdover from WWII male glory, while back home things were going more the way of Stripes.

    There have been two generations of reaction to that, and reaction to the reaction since. If anything, things are finally starting to turn back around to where you’ve evidently always been. You don’t get a cookie for saying, “duh, they’ve always been that way.”

  130. @gbloco
    I don't think Steve ever needed the wn brigade

    I don’t think Steve ever needed the wn brigade

    I don’t think so either, but they’ve glommed onto him and having a lot of unorthodox views himself, a prominent one being how PC stifles dissent, he doesn’t seem big on censorship. Trying to set good example.

    I actually applaud him for allowing some pretty way out views (both ends of the spectrum, incidentally), takes a lot of courage this day and age. And given the prominence of the notion in HBD circles that WASPs, etc, were undermined by their commitment to fairness and other virtues, he undoubtedly, by that light, can see the danger of that happening to him on his own blog. Whether he cares or not is unknown and is his own business, its his blog. Seems like he knows what he is doing, certainly is doing what he wants.

  131. @gbloco
    I don't think Steve ever needed the wn brigade

    I don’t think Steve ever needed the wn brigade

    Steve’s not the needy type.

    On the broader question of some level of nationalism being (perhaps counterintutively to those greatly affected by the 20th Century) relatively healthy over against GloboMonoCultCorpProgBorg transnationalism, Steve’s insights tend to suggest the former. It’s no surprise that they would appeal to white nationalists as much as to chartreuse with pink polka-dotted nationalists.

    This place is indeed a hotbed of anti-anti-racism. At this point in time, that’s for the good.

  132. @random observer
    I've heard of every one of those things. Not one of them, or all of them, equals the Holocaust in deliberation, motivation/purpose, scale, or brutality.

    Failure to properly discern a natural-origin crisis, lack of tools to act quickly [this is hyper-minimal government early Victorian Britain we are talking about wrt to Ireland] and to regulate commerce accordingly, and indeed even callous unwillingness to take the crisis seriously or attempt these things, is not the equal of setting out to exterminate millions for its own sake.

    Rounding up enemy civilians in wartime is an ancient practice, to be sure, and once ended up at the auction block. Rounding them up temporarily to deny support to the enemy is less cruel, and common in modern times. As it happens, the modern incarnation was not invented by the British and is attested earlier in such places as Poland and Cuba, the former as far back as the 18th century. Doing this, as the British did in South Africa, even if they do it sloppily and don't care much about health and welfare, is not the equal of setting up camps for one's own citizens in peacetime, then setting up more in surrendered territories for the purpose of mass murder. That's all on Germany. [Or Russia, but then the Germans were the first to practice it on millions of citizens of other countries. THe Russians prior to 1941 were content with their own targets.]

    The British certainly did use military force to compel the Chinese empire to accept opium imports to defray the tea trade deficit. But you can't actually force opium addiction on anyone. [Same goes for the US drug war today, of course. Every coke and heroin addict a volunteer.] It certainly does not equate to the Holocaust. The victims of the latter didn't sign up to take drugs the GErmans just happened to have forced onto the market. They were unwillingly signed up to get killed.

    Who partitioned India...? Exactly what was Britain supposed to do in 1947? The options were:

    1. Stay, at great cost and probably at the cost of war with both sides. Not to mention the US coming down on Britain like a ton of bricks.

    2. Try to force a unified India on both sides before leaving. Which would probably mean never leaving and revert to option 1.

    3. Partition, but stay longer to get the borders right or run the population movements with British personnel. Pretty much all the negatives of 1 and 2.

    4. Leave and hope the locals would not massacre one another. Oops.

    Still, It wasn't British soldiers who massacred all those millions of people. Or were they children who needed Mother England to take care of them after all?

    Aware of the Bengal famine, one of many Bengal had suffered. Plenty of political and economic structural reasons about late British India that contributed to it. SOme others about wartime exigencies do not exactly adorn Britain's record. But note even that wiki article fairly presents just how many of the problems were war related, or products of the amount of autonomy the British had already granted to Indians. Indian-controlled other provinces seemed more than willing to let Bengalis die rather than open up grain shipments, as Britain could no longer compel them to do.

    Apart from a racist comment by Churchill comparing Bengalis to Greeks, nothing in that article supports your contention.

    And none of it involves Britain setting up camps to kill millions of Bengalis or lining them up and machine gunning them into graves they had to dig themselves.

    One theme that used to be more prominent in Holocaust literature was that another particular horror was that it occurred in Germany, the land of Kultur, Schilling, Lessing, Goethe, Kant.

    Up until WWI, many (non-Germans) considered Germany the pinnacle of western civilization because of its achievements on so many intellectual fronts for starters. That a place so eminently civilized could turn its gifts, in the blink of an eye essentially, to such barbaric savagery was considered particularly grotesque. It also served as a cautionary tale in that if it could happen in Germany – Germany! – of all places, it could happen anywhere.

    Frankly, what happened in Rwanda wasn’t entirely against expectations for a poor 3rd world country. And if a lot of people dig deep enough, the expectations are because of at least unconscious racism – bigotry of low expectations, all that.

    I think the angle that it was particularly shocking because it was in Germany has diminished because those whose expectations were set about Germany prior to WWII, and even moreso prior to WWI have nearly all dead – p.s. for pedants, I know everyone alive early enough to have formed adult opinions about Germany prior to WWI are all dead….

    • Replies: @rvg
    I though it was actually the mufti of Jerusalem that came up with the idea of the Shoah, and then convinced Hitler to implement it? Or maybe the whole event was a gross exagerration altogeher? I mean if 1 million died instead of 6 million, it could point to neglect and starvation, or perhaps even Japanese POW camp like conditions, and not a deliberate genocide, btw only mass expulsion of Jews was talked based on the minutes of Wansee, but of course the Germans may have burned away all the evidence.
  133. @Veracitor

    “Young women in bars encourage young men to brawl. Anthropology books are replete with examples of women egging men into combat.”

    You actually offered a source. Was that so hard? Now, the source offered historical examples by which men from various tribal groups captured women as a status symbol or partook in wife-capture in the context of war. The next step is specifically link these instances to actual events today by which young German women have openly encouraged brawling to secure a Muslim mate.

    • Replies: @Veracitor
    I begin to think your reading comprehension isn't any better than your manners.
  134. I think that people know that the Norwegians are tasked with holding the entire Northern flank of NATO during the Cold war right? And aside from a US MEU and some minor reinforcements from the Canadians the Norweigians are supposed to hold the entire Northen flank of NATO on their own, in the 80s the Norweigians had barely 100 modern fighters. As for the Bundeswehr there is no way a Soviet offensive can be held back without the Bundeswehr doing a decent job of holding back the German tank formations, the Dutch and the Belgians are stationed in CENTAG, which includes the Fulda Gap, and NORTAG, which included the North German Plain, the Dutch had around 1000 main battle tanks, while the Belgians had 300, the French were also stationed in German soil, in SOUTHAG, around the area of Munich, overall in 1982 the Warsaw Pact outnumbered NATO 2.5:1 in tanks, in 1989 the Bundeswehr had around 5,500 main battle tanks, and hundreds of M109 SPH and 90mm assault guns. About the Bundeswehr being very bad compared to the Americans. NATO’s defence plan actually assumed that they would be able to do a good job, otherwise there just simply were not enough American tanks to go around.

  135. @Diversity Heretic
    Valid point; no sane person would choose to be trapped at Stalingrad. But what really did the genuine heroism of the German fighting man in those battles get them? At least the Landser knew who their enemy was.

    Who is the true enemy of ther German man today: (1) the immigrant/invaders who, so "the authorities" tell him, are there legally and are subject to the police protection of the State, at least insofar as any retribution you and your colleagues might contemplate is concerned; (2) the women with whom you would like to have children but who despise you because somehow you are failing to protect them (even though individuals fighting back will face odds of five or six to one and group retribution will be prevented or punished (see (1) above); or (3) the politicians/ leaders who throw open the doors to the immigrant/invaders, and facilitate (1) and (2) above, but, you are told, have been placed in their position by a "democratic" process and can only be removed by that process.

    And, to continue the World War II metaphor, if your answer is (3), do you (German man) want to be Klaus von Stauffenbeg and the July 20 plotters--assuming that you could somehow organize such a movement in a pervasive surveillance state, and without the class and status protections of the German/Prussian officer class?

    Let me not judge a man until I have walked a mile in his moccasins! It's just not that simple!

    I do note some stories of retributive attacks in the press today. And the Corsicans have struck back; I haven't heard recently what Golden Dawn is up to. The best arrangement is that police authorities (at the beat cop level) simply arrange to look the other way.

    That is a really good comment.

    Additionally, the enemy is in part the mainstream media who serve up continuous sermonizing and indoctrination against so-called racist thought and action.

    I hope that the efficient German police look the other way on this one.

  136. @anonguy
    One theme that used to be more prominent in Holocaust literature was that another particular horror was that it occurred in Germany, the land of Kultur, Schilling, Lessing, Goethe, Kant.

    Up until WWI, many (non-Germans) considered Germany the pinnacle of western civilization because of its achievements on so many intellectual fronts for starters. That a place so eminently civilized could turn its gifts, in the blink of an eye essentially, to such barbaric savagery was considered particularly grotesque. It also served as a cautionary tale in that if it could happen in Germany - Germany! - of all places, it could happen anywhere.

    Frankly, what happened in Rwanda wasn't entirely against expectations for a poor 3rd world country. And if a lot of people dig deep enough, the expectations are because of at least unconscious racism - bigotry of low expectations, all that.

    I think the angle that it was particularly shocking because it was in Germany has diminished because those whose expectations were set about Germany prior to WWII, and even moreso prior to WWI have nearly all dead - p.s. for pedants, I know everyone alive early enough to have formed adult opinions about Germany prior to WWI are all dead....

    I though it was actually the mufti of Jerusalem that came up with the idea of the Shoah, and then convinced Hitler to implement it? Or maybe the whole event was a gross exagerration altogeher? I mean if 1 million died instead of 6 million, it could point to neglect and starvation, or perhaps even Japanese POW camp like conditions, and not a deliberate genocide, btw only mass expulsion of Jews was talked based on the minutes of Wansee, but of course the Germans may have burned away all the evidence.

  137. @random observer
    Your offer wisdom, but we need to be realistic. Your number 2 seems to come as a revelation to many more people than PUAs, and most of public culture is based on the premise that it is not true. Your number 3 is institutionally rejected by our entire civilization, true though it be.

    Your number 3 is institutionally rejected by our entire civilization, true though it be.

    Yeah, I know. And it is deplorable, but when you have unrestricted levers of power, they get pulled.

    Your number 2 seems to come as a revelation to many more people than PUAs, and most of public culture is based on the premise that it is not true.

    This is the horrifying part and honestly, it is still sinking in to me that so many people actually believe such things. I can understand get along/go along, not everyone is some fighter for truth/justice. But no, many people apparently truly believe things that are both contra-factual to every bit of evidence, whether it is anecdotal, formally scientific/statistical, or anything in between.

    That is the part that gets me – anosognosia rather than denial. And how swiftly and pervasively the beliefs have become entrenched and passionately held by what seems to be majorities across national boundaries and so forth.

    You know, sincere belief all the way down…

    Those guys who wrote “Generations”, airport book a while back that predicted a religious revival or something similar IIRC among millenials. Maybe those guys (2 authors to the book) were right and this is it. And maybe it is like another utterly contrafactual/counterproductive belief system – Ghost Dance – that spread like wildfire among a defeated/declining people and was seemingly a last ditch effort at salvation by a people whose previous cultural tools had failed them.

    The analogy is imperfect, but something to think about. At my age, I know plenty of people from back in the day when current beliefs would be perverse in anyone, who harbored none of this then, but now by any investigation seem to be completely sincere believers in this orthodoxy.

    It may be a little more striking to me personally because I spend lots of time in east asia where these notions don’t have nearly so much traction. I have to consciously activate a mental filter when I return to the U.S. so I don’t inadvertently utter a the slightest naughty thought.

  138. @Jack D
    The Japanese are getting their technological lunch eaten by the Koreans. Many of the former big names in Japanese electronics are either broke or hanging on by their fingernails. They are not at the cutting edge of smartphones or anything else. Japan is a old society - like one giant nursing home, and lacks the dynamism of countries with a younger population.

    As for the 28 years to develop a watch movement, take anything you hear about watches with a giant grain of salt - watch marketing would make PT Barnum proud. If a watch movement took 28 years to develop, that means that by now its technology is 28 years out of date (actually this is not a big problem because for example the most popular Swiss mechanical movement produced today was introduced in 1961). Accurate timekeeping was the great technological problem - of the 18th century (solved by Harrison before 1760 - google "Harrison H4"). After that, it was just a question of further miniaturization and cost cutting thru automation. Today you can buy a (quartz) watch for $10 that is as accurate as you would ever need (if you need a watch at all - most kids today just look at their cell phones and regard the wristwatch as being in the same league as wall phones). Anything beyond that is just vanity (since white men can't wear big gold chains or tooth grillz, the watch is the only place for them to display their status thru jewelry).

    The Japanese are getting their technological lunch eaten by the Koreans. Many of the former big names in Japanese electronics are either broke or hanging on by their fingernails. They are not at the cutting edge of smartphones or anything else. Japan is a old society – like one giant nursing home, and lacks the dynamism of countries with a younger population.

    Ditto of the the standard Washington Consensus/Chicago School spiel from Economist, WSJ, etc. I spend lots of time in Japan, the propaganda is, well, overstated would be a diplomatic term. A lot of these sources are not neutral broker, have their fundamental ideologies as dogs in the fight against Japan, which is a clear and very large refutation of much of the core of these ideologies.

    And an interesting thesis I give a lot of credit to is that there is not much pushback from Japan on these notions of a poor, failing, aging Japan because pervasive beliefs like that among foreigners because it lets Japan fly under the radar, less pressure for contributions to international this/that, allows them to credibly plead lack of resources, etc.

    You might try adding measures of outcomes for Japan’s residents to the abstract economic metrics these medicine doctors push as evidence. Consider things like dependency ratios, etc. Things are going quite well here for the Japanese by plenty more metrics – health, longevity, literacy, availability of basic services, etc. That doesn’t mean everything is perfect, but there are few nations in the world who deliver the goods for the common man in the street like Japan currently does and there is little indication that this is going to end any time soon.

    But nobody cares about that, only about how much arbitrage that can be extracted from the replaceable, commoditized peasantry inhabiting economic zones that are still often mistaken for the nation states they formerly were.

    As for the 28 years to develop a watch movement, take anything you hear about watches with a giant grain of salt ….

    I didn’t post the rest of your comment for brevity, but I’ll add first, it was just a simple example that immediately came to mind, hardly the only one I could have come up with. And the reason it came to mind is that I have pretty extensive knowledge/involvement with Japanese watches. And while it is a meaningless appeal to authority, I’ll just state that, based upon your comment, I know orders of magnitudes more about the Japanese watch industry, facts, not opinions, than you evidently do. Take that as you will.

    I also know a lot about japanese power industry, but that seemed esoteric…

    • Replies: @Bill

    And an interesting thesis I give a lot of credit to is that there is not much pushback from Japan on these notions of a poor, failing, aging Japan because pervasive beliefs like that among foreigners because it lets Japan fly under the radar, less pressure for contributions to international this/that, allows them to credibly plead lack of resources, etc.
     
    This. The Japanese strategy for resisting the empire has worked out pretty well. Showing no sign of overt resistance combined with "It is difficult" has done the trick. When the empire topples, they'll either seek realignment or rebuild their military, whichever seems more prudent. And they'll still be Japanese.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Ditto of the the standard Washington Consensus/Chicago School spiel from Economist, WSJ, etc. I spend lots of time in Japan, the propaganda is, well, overstated would be a diplomatic term."

    That's probably where Jack D gets his information. He is some kind of Wall Street hustler. To his kind, there is nothing to a nation but money. It is - materialist isn't the right word - a highly financialist world view.
  139. @Corvinus
    “Young women in bars encourage young men to brawl. Anthropology books are replete with examples of women egging men into combat.”

    You actually offered a source. Was that so hard? Now, the source offered historical examples by which men from various tribal groups captured women as a status symbol or partook in wife-capture in the context of war. The next step is specifically link these instances to actual events today by which young German women have openly encouraged brawling to secure a Muslim mate.

    I begin to think your reading comprehension isn’t any better than your manners.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "I begin to think your reading comprehension isn’t any better than your manners."

    What a sweet thing to say, Baboo.

    Now, just to make sure you know your assignment--The next step is specifically link these instances to actual events today by which young German women have openly encouraged brawling to secure a Muslim mate.
  140. @Ed
    Frum, Coulter & Douthat all read Steve. I've even seen Jamelle Bouie reference him, not positively of course, but at least he's read him.

    In a more open media Steve would be a fine replacement for Pat Buchanan.

    In a more open media Steve would be a fine replacement for Pat Buchanan.

    Steve would need to head back to church. Part of Pat’s appeal is his no-nonsense Irish-American Catholicism.

  141. @Jack D
    So why didn't the Germans just use machetes? The Germans were not silly people and even using slave labor and confiscated wealth, building a death factory and executing on all the logistics of shipping people all over Europe in the middle of a war were not cheap or easy, so why did they do it?

    Well, at first the Germans just used machine guns and pistols, but nobody wanted to volunteer for the SS-Sonderkommando units which carried out the executions, and so it became a punishment for unruly soldiers.

    The Sonderkommando units had extremely high rates of suicides and desertions. Himmler himself visited one while they carried out a mass execution and reportedly started vomiting and crying.

    So instead the Nazis created their death factories so they could carry out the mass murdering in a more clinical and detached way. Out of sight, out of mind.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    I didn't read your comment before writing mine, but that's what I wrote in a less concise manner. The Germans weren't psychopathic enough for traditional mass murder, so eventually they created the death factories to make it easier for their minds. Logistically it was actually a nightmare, would have been easier and cheaper to kill the Jewish population in their hometowns.
  142. @Anon 2
    It's understandable for Poland and Hungary to have
    no interest in accepting Muslim migrants. Both countries
    have traumatic memories connected with Muslims,
    particularly Hungary. The latter's southern regions were
    occupied by the Ottoman Turks for almost 150 years
    (till 1699). Although Poland's traumatic memories are
    associated mainly with Germany, still on September 11,
    1683 (no doubt commemorated on 9/11 in the U.S.)
    Poland's winged hussars under King Sobieski had to
    rescue Europe at the Siege of Vienna from being
    conquered and occupied by the Ottoman Empire.
    If Vienna fell, Rome was the next target.

    [Hungary’s] southern regions were occupied by the Ottoman Turks for almost 150 years

    Actually, almost the whole of present day Hungary was under direct Ottoman rule, including the traditional royal seat of Buda (now part of the capital city, Budapest).

    • Replies: @Anon 2
    Thank you for the correction. What I meant was the southern
    regions of the Hungarian territory in the 16th century
  143. @Jack D
    So why didn't the Germans just use machetes? The Germans were not silly people and even using slave labor and confiscated wealth, building a death factory and executing on all the logistics of shipping people all over Europe in the middle of a war were not cheap or easy, so why did they do it?

    They didn’t have the stomachs to murder so many people. They had too few General Blokhin types, and even Himmler himself fainted when he saw the execution of a mere hundred people. Hitler famously tried to distance himself from the whole process as much as possible, which meant that we only have circumstancial evidence (albeit, very szrong circumstancial evidence) regarding his personal involvement.

    And so they tried to find a less personal way of mass murder. Actually even very few of the death camp staff had to watch mass death day by day. Sure, they watched some death on a daily basis (and an untold amount of suffering and misery), but not too many corpses at a time. (I think that out of curiosity or because of peer pressure all male and probably at least some female staff members, even cooks and typists watched a gas chamber operation once, but that’s not the same as constant, unlimited exposure to mass death. And to be sure, not all of them had the stomachs for even the limited exposure, which is the reason why some of them requested to be transferred to the front.

    Building death camps was not worse than massacring the same number of people with machetes or through mass hunger. It’s less psychopathic than the machete murders, and it’s less suffering for the victims than being starved to death slowly over the course of a month.

  144. @snorlax
    Well, at first the Germans just used machine guns and pistols, but nobody wanted to volunteer for the SS-Sonderkommando units which carried out the executions, and so it became a punishment for unruly soldiers.

    The Sonderkommando units had extremely high rates of suicides and desertions. Himmler himself visited one while they carried out a mass execution and reportedly started vomiting and crying.

    So instead the Nazis created their death factories so they could carry out the mass murdering in a more clinical and detached way. Out of sight, out of mind.

    I didn’t read your comment before writing mine, but that’s what I wrote in a less concise manner. The Germans weren’t psychopathic enough for traditional mass murder, so eventually they created the death factories to make it easier for their minds. Logistically it was actually a nightmare, would have been easier and cheaper to kill the Jewish population in their hometowns.

    • Agree: snorlax
    • Replies: @Jack D
    That's what they did when they invaded Russia - as soon as they had taken a town they would immediately shoot the Jewish population on the spot. The idea (I guess) was that lots of civilians get killed in the heat of battle/fog of war.

    I don't think they built the camps to ease the conscience of the murderers. Rather, they understood even then that history would not look kindly on mass murder and it had to be done under conditions of secrecy or deniability.
  145. @reiner Tor

    [Hungary's] southern regions were occupied by the Ottoman Turks for almost 150 years
     
    Actually, almost the whole of present day Hungary was under direct Ottoman rule, including the traditional royal seat of Buda (now part of the capital city, Budapest).

    Thank you for the correction. What I meant was the southern
    regions of the Hungarian territory in the 16th century

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    More like southern and central regions of 16th century Hungary. The eastern part was an Ottoman vassal state (the Principality of Transylvania, governed mostly by local Hungarian aristocrats and nobles, though its population was more multi-ethnic, especially with a huge Romanian minority), while the northernmost and westernmost parts were the rump Kingdom of Hungary under the rule of the Habsburg kings (who also held the titles of King of Germany and Holy Roman Emperor).
  146. @Veracitor
    I begin to think your reading comprehension isn't any better than your manners.

    “I begin to think your reading comprehension isn’t any better than your manners.”

    What a sweet thing to say, Baboo.

    Now, just to make sure you know your assignment–The next step is specifically link these instances to actual events today by which young German women have openly encouraged brawling to secure a Muslim mate.

  147. @Anonymous
    Yes, I have seen that movie too. I hope you managed to wipe away the foam from your mouth before writing that comment.

    No foaming on my part. Memory and passing each day places and buildings where commemorative plaques hang is enough.

    On those plaques you can read: here is a wall where Germans shot a few tens of civilians. And here was a local Gestapo HQ. Interesting things happened in its cellars. And over there is a cemetery full of fallen and murdered. Several graves are empty, bodies burned in concentration camps.

    Poor Germans.

  148. @Anon 2
    Thank you for the correction. What I meant was the southern
    regions of the Hungarian territory in the 16th century

    More like southern and central regions of 16th century Hungary. The eastern part was an Ottoman vassal state (the Principality of Transylvania, governed mostly by local Hungarian aristocrats and nobles, though its population was more multi-ethnic, especially with a huge Romanian minority), while the northernmost and westernmost parts were the rump Kingdom of Hungary under the rule of the Habsburg kings (who also held the titles of King of Germany and Holy Roman Emperor).

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    In other words, a third of the country (including the central region with the capital) were under direct Ottoman rule, while another third was an Ottoman vassal governed by Hungarian aristocrats, with the rest (including Croatia) under Habsburg rule, but mostly also governed by Hungarian (and Croatian) aristocrats. Of course, Ottoman (and Crimean Tatar - they were Ottoman vassals) armies kept destroying both the Habsburg-ruled parts (both in wartime and during times of nominal "peace") and Transylvania (when the local prince ran afoul of the orders of the Ottoman emperor).
  149. @reiner Tor
    More like southern and central regions of 16th century Hungary. The eastern part was an Ottoman vassal state (the Principality of Transylvania, governed mostly by local Hungarian aristocrats and nobles, though its population was more multi-ethnic, especially with a huge Romanian minority), while the northernmost and westernmost parts were the rump Kingdom of Hungary under the rule of the Habsburg kings (who also held the titles of King of Germany and Holy Roman Emperor).

    In other words, a third of the country (including the central region with the capital) were under direct Ottoman rule, while another third was an Ottoman vassal governed by Hungarian aristocrats, with the rest (including Croatia) under Habsburg rule, but mostly also governed by Hungarian (and Croatian) aristocrats. Of course, Ottoman (and Crimean Tatar – they were Ottoman vassals) armies kept destroying both the Habsburg-ruled parts (both in wartime and during times of nominal “peace”) and Transylvania (when the local prince ran afoul of the orders of the Ottoman emperor).

  150. @Svigor

    And none of it involves Britain setting up camps to kill millions of Bengalis or lining them up and machine gunning them into graves they had to dig themselves.
     
    It might've, if Britain had subsequently lost a war and been occupied.

    You’re getting drawn into an argument the agenda of which has been set by your opponent. You don’t have to accept these absurd claims that killing civilians en masse and “on accident, dude, I promise” over and over again is morally distinct from setting up camps specifically for the purpose. Not all distinctions are morally relevant distinctions. The English are bloodthirsty psychos who have the PR sense to deny, in a formulaic way, that they are trying to kill civilians.

    Yeah man, we systematically bombed cities and constantly bitched that the Americans showed insufficient ardor for killing civilians, but we didn’t set up death camps! Oh, you know we did set up death camps. Well, we didn’t call them death camps, and we had the good taste to let the hunger and disease inevitably resulting from the conditions we created in the death camps do the work. No bullets involved!

    Americans are their true sons, too. Knocking down the Twin Towers was the evilest evil that ever evilled. However, blowing up weddings and hospitals and creating conditions inevitably leading to megadeaths by disease, riot, forced expulsion, etc are perfectly moral. ‘Cause, hey, we weren’t trying to kill civilians. It was an accident that weddings and hospitals have civilians. Who could have known? Civilians don’t really need food, medicine, and sanitation. That’s just enemy propaganda. Attacking a the military base at Pearl Harbor: evil. Nuking two cities full of civilians: good. And these aren’t even fringe beliefs.

  151. @Percy Gryce

    When are the sins of the Bolshevik concentration camps of the 1920s going to be absolved?
     
    First they would have to be repented of. There never was a de-Bolshevikization like German de-Nazification.

    1992-1918=74
    1945-1932=13

    Who would you de-Bolshevize? Certainly not Russia. The Bolsheviks, at the leadership level especially, were not Russian. The evolution, over time, of the leadership of the USSR to become more Russian went right along with it becoming, first, less murderous and then less Communist. You want to go sift through the population of old men in Israel to find people guilty of crimes against humanity?

    • Replies: @Jack D
    The Joos done it! Lenin, Stalin, Beria, Molotov, Mikoyan - all Jooos!
  152. @anonguy

    The Japanese are getting their technological lunch eaten by the Koreans. Many of the former big names in Japanese electronics are either broke or hanging on by their fingernails. They are not at the cutting edge of smartphones or anything else. Japan is a old society – like one giant nursing home, and lacks the dynamism of countries with a younger population.
     
    Ditto of the the standard Washington Consensus/Chicago School spiel from Economist, WSJ, etc. I spend lots of time in Japan, the propaganda is, well, overstated would be a diplomatic term. A lot of these sources are not neutral broker, have their fundamental ideologies as dogs in the fight against Japan, which is a clear and very large refutation of much of the core of these ideologies.

    And an interesting thesis I give a lot of credit to is that there is not much pushback from Japan on these notions of a poor, failing, aging Japan because pervasive beliefs like that among foreigners because it lets Japan fly under the radar, less pressure for contributions to international this/that, allows them to credibly plead lack of resources, etc.

    You might try adding measures of outcomes for Japan's residents to the abstract economic metrics these medicine doctors push as evidence. Consider things like dependency ratios, etc. Things are going quite well here for the Japanese by plenty more metrics - health, longevity, literacy, availability of basic services, etc. That doesn't mean everything is perfect, but there are few nations in the world who deliver the goods for the common man in the street like Japan currently does and there is little indication that this is going to end any time soon.

    But nobody cares about that, only about how much arbitrage that can be extracted from the replaceable, commoditized peasantry inhabiting economic zones that are still often mistaken for the nation states they formerly were.


    As for the 28 years to develop a watch movement, take anything you hear about watches with a giant grain of salt ....
     
    I didn't post the rest of your comment for brevity, but I'll add first, it was just a simple example that immediately came to mind, hardly the only one I could have come up with. And the reason it came to mind is that I have pretty extensive knowledge/involvement with Japanese watches. And while it is a meaningless appeal to authority, I'll just state that, based upon your comment, I know orders of magnitudes more about the Japanese watch industry, facts, not opinions, than you evidently do. Take that as you will.

    I also know a lot about japanese power industry, but that seemed esoteric...

    And an interesting thesis I give a lot of credit to is that there is not much pushback from Japan on these notions of a poor, failing, aging Japan because pervasive beliefs like that among foreigners because it lets Japan fly under the radar, less pressure for contributions to international this/that, allows them to credibly plead lack of resources, etc.

    This. The Japanese strategy for resisting the empire has worked out pretty well. Showing no sign of overt resistance combined with “It is difficult” has done the trick. When the empire topples, they’ll either seek realignment or rebuild their military, whichever seems more prudent. And they’ll still be Japanese.

    • Replies: @anonguy
    A parley with a Japanese person often will have all the stereotypical politeness, pleasantries, etiquette, focused listening, and so forth, just a wonderful experience that generates all those, "What a beautiful people" remarks from tourists and such.

    Then the Japanese person will go off and it is like they had f*cking earplugs on the whole time, you didn't have the slightest influence on their plans and intentions.

    The westerner will be thinking he had been negotiating whereas the Japanese person was thinking he was mollifying. This is a very common misunderstanding between the two because each thought the other person understood the nature of the parley the same way he did himself.

    Japanese are the most stubborn people I've ever encountered. All the polite indirection, fawning manners, and so forth, allows them to have a functioning society without everything breaking down into head to head confrontations all the time.

    Took me an awfully long time to fully embrace this and westerners saturated with "everyone is the same under the skin" are almost constitutionally incapable of accepting this for obvious reasons. Lefty expats and random Japanophiles tend to develop an informal mental model that everyone is the same except Japanese. This is similar to the way Economist, WSJ, et al gloss over the glaring Japanese counterexample to their notions with a little happy talk about sui generis Japan that makes their readers feel clever and superior for knowing a latin phrase.

    I'd doubt that there is a conscious, directed strategy to be sandbagging for the international community even if it is the net effect. They are just doing their characteristic listen politely to stuff they don't agree with and go off and do whatever.

    Anyone interested can read up on honne - tatamae, central element of Japanese culture. Covers a lot of other stuff as well.
  153. @Anonymous Nephew
    And that opening page continues

    "One looks in vain in their history for juste milieu (“middle way” or “happy medium”), for common sense - the two qualities that have distinguished France and England. Nothing is normal in German history except violent oscillations.
     

    “One looks in vain in their history for juste milieu (“middle way” or “happy medium”), for common sense – the two qualities that have distinguished France and England. ”

    Because nothing says “happy medium” like the French Revolution or the Wars of the Roses.

  154. @Adam
    This is from the opening of A.J.P. Taylor's "The Course of German History." For those of us who worry that recent events suggest the end of Western Civilization it is somewhat reassuring, in that that recent events conform to a familiar pattern, though it's admittedly a small comfort -- like knowing that a suicidal drunk has gone through a cycle like this before...:

    "The history of the Germans is the history of extremes. It contains everything except moderation, and in the course of a thousand years the Germans have experienced everything except normality...'German' has meant at one moment a being so sentimental, so trusting, so pious, as to be too good for this world; and at another a being so brutal, so unprincipled, so degraded, as to be not fit to live. Both descriptions are true..."

    Taylor was a doctrinaire leftist – a longtime communist and then laborite. His opinions aren’t really that interesting, nor indeed should they be considered authoritative in any way.

  155. “The British certainly did use military force to compel the Chinese empire to accept opium imports to defray the tea trade deficit. But you can’t actually force opium addiction on anyone. [Same goes for the US drug war today, of course. Every coke and heroin addict a volunteer.] It certainly does not equate to the Holocaust. ”

    You are right. The english imperial officials and english soldiers and english merchants (and american merchants, like FDRs’ grandfather) who forced the opium trade on China can not be compared to the nazis. They can only be compared to Pablo Escobar and Joaquín Guzmán. That still doesn’t give the English much grounds for moral posturing.

  156. @5371
    AH wasn't a "government informant". He was paid by the Reichswehr as a propagandist.

    “AH wasn’t a “government informant”. He was paid by the Reichswehr as a propagandist.”

    The Reichswehr was part of the government, was it not? And I would suppose that his army paymasters expected him to inform them what he heard, would they not?

    • Replies: @5371
    The activities require a completely different skill set from employer and employed. He was not spying among the hostile but inspiring the sympathetic.
  157. @Hanoi Paris Hilton
    I recollect recently noting at least one especially toxic piece of Judenhass on an iSteve thread that was up for a awhile, then seemed to disappear. Maybe my imagination, but possibly Mr. Sailer thinks it's OK to let this stuff emerge into digital daylight —pre-emptive censorship being counterproductive and cowardly— and after a decent interval, to minimize the aggregate stench in his parlor. The really scary thing was how much rude Joooo-hating came up in the early days of open threads in the online NYT, WaPo, et. al. before they started taking a more hard-core approach to moderating.

    “I recollect recently noting at least one especially toxic piece of Judenhass…..”

    Considering that some people – you, perhaps – deem it to be “Judenhass” anytime a gentile notices something about Jews, or talks about Jews as if they are a distinct, and often self-interested group (which I might add, many Jews do with respect to gentiles all the time) – your noticing of said incident is not really very interesting or meaningful.

    • Replies: @Hanoi Paris Hilton
    Look, I can get where balls-out Nazis are coming from, and to a point see the legitimacy of the critique of characteristic Jewish arrogance and obliviousness. But when our host —who has his Judaeophilic tendencies, to be sure— sticks it to those particular qualities manifesting in a situation of some interest to him, it doesn't smack of Judenhass in the least; and more often than not I agree...especially since criticism leads to consciousness. But in the case of no small number of other regulars around here, it's sewer acid pur et dur. You perhaps?

    Here's the body of an email that I CC:d to several of my insufferably progressive fellow congregants here in the goyische heartland...

    "This is deeply unhinged.

    Every progressive bien pensant, high-minded, liberal, humane, morally uplifted Jew in America needs to be strapped into a chair with their eyes propped open, a la Clockwork Orange, and forced to watch these few seconds about a thousand times. This is also the first bit of de facto malevolent Jew baiting that I’ve ever encountered on Vanderleun’s blog, which I’ve followed closely for a decade...

    Go to...

    http://www.americandigest.org

    ...then open to the clip labeled “tsunami”, and then go all the way to end (c. 18’54”). Most of the preceding video --in the making of which, presumably, no Jews were harmed-- is distasteful and xenophobic, but certainly to be expected in light of recent events in Europe

    I’m quite certain this utterly clueless woman is totally for real, not a patsy for a false flag operation."
    , @Jack D
    Would you consider it to be Judenhass to blame everything (bad) that happened in the Soviet Union on the Joos? To blame everything bad that happens in America and in the modern world on Jewish influence? Or is that just the simple truth as far as you are concerned?

    His friend John Hay claimed that when Henry Adams saw Vesuvius reddening the midnight air he searched the horizon to find a Jew stoking the fire. Some of the people here remind me of him.
  158. @anonguy

    In a more open media Steve would be a fine replacement for Pat Buchanan.
     
    The only thing holding iSteve back from respectability should there be much further shift of the Overton window in the current direction it is currently heading is the anti-semitic and white nationalist/racist element hanging around.

    Methinks Steve is playing a good game. He has to pander subtly to these guys previously and here on unz to keep his numbers/money/rep up, but maintain as much credible deniability about himself for a future return to respectability.

    His numbers are increasing, and I think the overall increase diminishes the percentage of anti-semitic and wn types. As his numbers keep increasing in this direction, he eventually can ditch/disavow this element completely without collapsing his reader base.

    Well, it certainly would be what I would do...

    Think about the thread about Nixon being taken down. I read about the first 75 comments and there was not one single remark about "da eskimos dunnit". About who/what took out Nixon? Nixon? Are you kidding me? I'm not sure one could get that result on Haaretz....

    Maybe it is less anti-semitic types in the readership base, maybe Komment Kontrol is coming down harder on these types, or some combination of both factors. But it was very distinctive.

    Steve's got a shot at it and seeing all these lessers, and they are legion, getting international renown, and more importantly, the broad audience he clearly craves is a bitter pill - he's pretty diligent about letting his readership know how his writing/ideas get transmitted to the "general public" via covert readers of his work in mainstream journalism. And he should, because he deserves a broader audience.

    So if you want to help Steve, take the anti-semitic and racist stuff to Stormfront or somewhere. Personally, I've heard way enough of it to last a lifetime, but if you can't control yourself for decorum, quit ruining Steve's shot at prime time. The PUA stuff is pretty cheesy/annoying/juvenile, but I'd have to reluctantly admit that stuff may be survivable, especially because Steve doesn't engage at all on that.

    Think about this....

    Apparently, Mr. Concern Troll is also the “Komment Kontrol” nitwit, who was always complaining about his posts not getting through.

    Given that you are a guy who thinks that using a K in place of a C is witty and insightful, remind us again why we should give a single solitary damn about what you think?

  159. @anonguy

    The Japanese are getting their technological lunch eaten by the Koreans. Many of the former big names in Japanese electronics are either broke or hanging on by their fingernails. They are not at the cutting edge of smartphones or anything else. Japan is a old society – like one giant nursing home, and lacks the dynamism of countries with a younger population.
     
    Ditto of the the standard Washington Consensus/Chicago School spiel from Economist, WSJ, etc. I spend lots of time in Japan, the propaganda is, well, overstated would be a diplomatic term. A lot of these sources are not neutral broker, have their fundamental ideologies as dogs in the fight against Japan, which is a clear and very large refutation of much of the core of these ideologies.

    And an interesting thesis I give a lot of credit to is that there is not much pushback from Japan on these notions of a poor, failing, aging Japan because pervasive beliefs like that among foreigners because it lets Japan fly under the radar, less pressure for contributions to international this/that, allows them to credibly plead lack of resources, etc.

    You might try adding measures of outcomes for Japan's residents to the abstract economic metrics these medicine doctors push as evidence. Consider things like dependency ratios, etc. Things are going quite well here for the Japanese by plenty more metrics - health, longevity, literacy, availability of basic services, etc. That doesn't mean everything is perfect, but there are few nations in the world who deliver the goods for the common man in the street like Japan currently does and there is little indication that this is going to end any time soon.

    But nobody cares about that, only about how much arbitrage that can be extracted from the replaceable, commoditized peasantry inhabiting economic zones that are still often mistaken for the nation states they formerly were.


    As for the 28 years to develop a watch movement, take anything you hear about watches with a giant grain of salt ....
     
    I didn't post the rest of your comment for brevity, but I'll add first, it was just a simple example that immediately came to mind, hardly the only one I could have come up with. And the reason it came to mind is that I have pretty extensive knowledge/involvement with Japanese watches. And while it is a meaningless appeal to authority, I'll just state that, based upon your comment, I know orders of magnitudes more about the Japanese watch industry, facts, not opinions, than you evidently do. Take that as you will.

    I also know a lot about japanese power industry, but that seemed esoteric...

    “Ditto of the the standard Washington Consensus/Chicago School spiel from Economist, WSJ, etc. I spend lots of time in Japan, the propaganda is, well, overstated would be a diplomatic term.”

    That’s probably where Jack D gets his information. He is some kind of Wall Street hustler. To his kind, there is nothing to a nation but money. It is – materialist isn’t the right word – a highly financialist world view.

  160. @Jack D
    I agree that nothing the British ever did compares even remotely to the Holocaust. I would say though that Stalin (and Mao) came close (or maybe even came out ahead in body count). What makes the Holocaust unique is that they combined the barbarism of savages with the strong organizational, logistical and industrial skills we normally associate with advanced civilizations - no one on earth ever built a death factory like Auschwitz where raw materials (human beings) were shipped in by rail from all over Europe and efficiently converted to ashes in a matter of hours.

    “What makes the Holocaust unique is that they combined the barbarism of savages with the strong organizational, logistical and industrial skills we normally associate with advanced civilizations………”

    Exactly the combination in evidence in the bombing raids on Hamburg, Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, etc.

  161. @anonguy

    I’m not sure how much the PUA analysis has relevance here.
     
    Me neither, but it seems like many PUA adherents feel its principles are the General Theory Of Everything. Whatever the merits of the belief system in success with women, an unfortunate side effect is the constant explaining of all events through PUA belief prism.

    It is another secular religion like SJW left/liberalism, has all the characteristics. The de-Christianizing of the west has all sorts of pseudo-religions popping to fill the vacuum across the political spectrum, not just on the left.

    One distinct characteristic is creating extraodinary detailed explanations/rationales presented as revelation that always boil down to some obvious truism.

    Here is my distillation of this one:

    1) Woman have had an an enormous influence on current events in Germany.

    Well, of course they have. In normal populations, they usually comprise ~50% of the population so they of course have enormous effect on any event, just like men do, who comprise the other ~50%. So in Germany, with a presumably normal sex ration, it would be only significant were women not a major, major, like roughly 50% interestingly, part of the influence on what is happening there.

    Dog bites man...

    2) Women have different motivators and theirs are very distinct from men because of their role in reproduction.

    Well, duhh, what largely differentiates men/woman is due to their different roles in reproduction.

    Dog bites man...

    3) Women through innocent intentions, misplaced trust, and excessive independence, are marching themselves and their men down a path of folly that will result in catastrophe for all.

    According to at least one huge religious tradition, this is what kicked off human existence, the founding event.

    Dog bites man...

    I don't understand why we can't all just take these things as givens. My guess is the PUA guys were so propagandized by egalitarian propaganda growing up - it is significant the timeline/age groups where PUA began - that commonplaces about men/women really are revelations to them and they have to keep reiterating them to full supplant the egalitarian brainwashing.

    So, maybe is just deprogramming and potentially deserves a little more sympathy. I'd say 2), that men and women are really different is the truly novel proposition to these guys. And the way that PUA treats this former common sense item as the most profound of insights is a testament to how effective the egalitarian brainwashing system has been in recent decades.

    Hah, these are good observations. I wonder how much of it is due to indoctrination and how much due to smaller families meaning that most young men nowadays didn’t grow up sharing a home with a sneaky/manipulative sister.

  162. @reiner Tor
    I didn't read your comment before writing mine, but that's what I wrote in a less concise manner. The Germans weren't psychopathic enough for traditional mass murder, so eventually they created the death factories to make it easier for their minds. Logistically it was actually a nightmare, would have been easier and cheaper to kill the Jewish population in their hometowns.

    That’s what they did when they invaded Russia – as soon as they had taken a town they would immediately shoot the Jewish population on the spot. The idea (I guess) was that lots of civilians get killed in the heat of battle/fog of war.

    I don’t think they built the camps to ease the conscience of the murderers. Rather, they understood even then that history would not look kindly on mass murder and it had to be done under conditions of secrecy or deniability.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Regardless of what you think, constructing death camps actually reduced the German leaders' plausible deniability. I mean, mass shootings could be chalked up to excesses by local commanders, but building a frigging death camp?

    And it's well documented that Himmler personally had no stomach to watch even a hundred people being shot, and that he was concerned about the very high suicide rate in the 'special' units.
  163. @Mr. Anon
    "AH wasn’t a “government informant”. He was paid by the Reichswehr as a propagandist."

    The Reichswehr was part of the government, was it not? And I would suppose that his army paymasters expected him to inform them what he heard, would they not?

    The activities require a completely different skill set from employer and employed. He was not spying among the hostile but inspiring the sympathetic.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "The activities require a completely different skill set from employer and employed. He was not spying among the hostile but inspiring the sympathetic."

    I think that the Junkers who commanded the German Army would deem an organization named "National Socialist German Workers Party" to be hostile, rather than sympathetic.
  164. @Mr. Anon
    "I recollect recently noting at least one especially toxic piece of Judenhass....."

    Considering that some people - you, perhaps - deem it to be "Judenhass" anytime a gentile notices something about Jews, or talks about Jews as if they are a distinct, and often self-interested group (which I might add, many Jews do with respect to gentiles all the time) - your noticing of said incident is not really very interesting or meaningful.

    Look, I can get where balls-out Nazis are coming from, and to a point see the legitimacy of the critique of characteristic Jewish arrogance and obliviousness. But when our host —who has his Judaeophilic tendencies, to be sure— sticks it to those particular qualities manifesting in a situation of some interest to him, it doesn’t smack of Judenhass in the least; and more often than not I agree…especially since criticism leads to consciousness. But in the case of no small number of other regulars around here, it’s sewer acid pur et dur. You perhaps?

    Here’s the body of an email that I CC:d to several of my insufferably progressive fellow congregants here in the goyische heartland…

    “This is deeply unhinged.

    Every progressive bien pensant, high-minded, liberal, humane, morally uplifted Jew in America needs to be strapped into a chair with their eyes propped open, a la Clockwork Orange, and forced to watch these few seconds about a thousand times. This is also the first bit of de facto malevolent Jew baiting that I’ve ever encountered on Vanderleun’s blog, which I’ve followed closely for a decade…

    Go to…

    http://www.americandigest.org

    …then open to the clip labeled “tsunami”, and then go all the way to end (c. 18’54”). Most of the preceding video –in the making of which, presumably, no Jews were harmed– is distasteful and xenophobic, but certainly to be expected in light of recent events in Europe

    I’m quite certain this utterly clueless woman is totally for real, not a patsy for a false flag operation.”

  165. I don’t think they built the camps to ease the conscience of the murderers. Rather, they understood even then that history would not look kindly on mass murder and it had to be done under conditions of secrecy or deniability.

    That’s right. Look up the history of Charlemagne and the Saxons. That massacre permanently stained the reputation of the founder of the 1st German Reich. The founder of the 3rd Reich didn’t want a similar stain on his own posthumous reputation.

  166. @Jack D
    It depends on what you mean by "reasonably assimilated".

    Pre-1933, German Jews were famous as being almost indistinguishable from other Germans, except for the fact that they worshiped (when they worshipped at all) on the "wrong" day - their "temples" (not synagogues) even had pipe organs and choirs like churches. Most of them had given up keeping the dietary laws, so they ate the same food. They dressed the same. They attended the same universities and formed part of the faculty. They did not form an underclass but rather were represented at all income levels including the highest. They fought in the German Army in WWI. Many were intermarried with Christians, etc. (Basically the same situation as for most American Jews today). This was in stark contrast to neighboring Poland where Jews were as distinctive from Poles as Gypsies -most Polish Jews spoke Polish as a 2nd language (after Yiddish) if they could speak it at all (but German Jews spoke only German). German Jews were so assimilated that the Nazis had to publish special books for children on how to tell who was Jewish - Aryans might have large noses but they were straight and aquiline - Jewish noses look like the number 6 in profile. German Jews had the same sense of humor as other Germans (humorless) - they were the subject of jokes by Eastern Jews because they were so stiff. But (because of the aforementioned tendency of Germans to go "all in" - a thing worth doing is worth doing well) this was not "reasonably assimilated" enough.

    So at what point will Muslims be "reasonably assimilated" enough to satisfy the German psyche?

    The Germans, like other Western Europeans, have expelled
    their Jewish populations several times in history, and so in
    Weimar Germany ended up with a tiny Jewish population,
    only 500,000 out of the total German population of 60 million,
    i.e., 0.8%. More migrants entered Germany in just one year,
    as we all know.

    In early 1930s Poland, by contrast, the Jewish population was
    huge – about 3.2 million out of the total Polish population of 33
    million, i.e., roughly 10%. One reason the Jewish population
    was huge was because for many centuries Poland offered refuge
    to the Jews that were being expelled by England, France, Italy,
    and Germany.

    The Jews in Poland to a large extent formed a parallel society
    that was Orthodox and Yiddish speaking in contrast to the
    Reformed Jews of Germany. Isaac Bashevis Singer wrote
    many stories about the Jewish life in Warsaw (in Yiddish,
    not Polish, of course)

  167. They equated Jewish with Bolshevik.

  168. @Jack D
    That's what they did when they invaded Russia - as soon as they had taken a town they would immediately shoot the Jewish population on the spot. The idea (I guess) was that lots of civilians get killed in the heat of battle/fog of war.

    I don't think they built the camps to ease the conscience of the murderers. Rather, they understood even then that history would not look kindly on mass murder and it had to be done under conditions of secrecy or deniability.

    Regardless of what you think, constructing death camps actually reduced the German leaders’ plausible deniability. I mean, mass shootings could be chalked up to excesses by local commanders, but building a frigging death camp?

    And it’s well documented that Himmler personally had no stomach to watch even a hundred people being shot, and that he was concerned about the very high suicide rate in the ‘special’ units.

  169. @Bill
    1992-1918=74
    1945-1932=13

    Who would you de-Bolshevize? Certainly not Russia. The Bolsheviks, at the leadership level especially, were not Russian. The evolution, over time, of the leadership of the USSR to become more Russian went right along with it becoming, first, less murderous and then less Communist. You want to go sift through the population of old men in Israel to find people guilty of crimes against humanity?

    The Joos done it! Lenin, Stalin, Beria, Molotov, Mikoyan – all Jooos!

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "The Joos done it! Lenin, Stalin, Beria, Molotov, Mikoyan – all Jooos!"

    Trotsky, Yagoda, Zinoviev, Kamenev, Sverdlov. Nothing to see here. Move along.
  170. @Mr. Anon
    "I recollect recently noting at least one especially toxic piece of Judenhass....."

    Considering that some people - you, perhaps - deem it to be "Judenhass" anytime a gentile notices something about Jews, or talks about Jews as if they are a distinct, and often self-interested group (which I might add, many Jews do with respect to gentiles all the time) - your noticing of said incident is not really very interesting or meaningful.

    Would you consider it to be Judenhass to blame everything (bad) that happened in the Soviet Union on the Joos? To blame everything bad that happens in America and in the modern world on Jewish influence? Or is that just the simple truth as far as you are concerned?

    His friend John Hay claimed that when Henry Adams saw Vesuvius reddening the midnight air he searched the horizon to find a Jew stoking the fire. Some of the people here remind me of him.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "Would you consider it to be Judenhass to blame everything (bad) that happened in the Soviet Union on the Joos? To blame everything bad that happens in America and in the modern world on Jewish influence?"

    You mean Jews? "Joos" is a common trope among those who would paint anybody who notices that Jews often act as a self-interested group as "anti-semites". It is a pretty trite and ridiculous term by now.

    Do I blame everything bad in the U.S. and The Soviet Union on Jews? No. However, many Jews acting according to their percieved group interest have acted in ways that harmed both of those nations.

    Is it illegitimate to notice that? If so, why? And let me tell you - plenty of people have noticed group traits about MY tribe, so I damn well think that other tribes can f**king put up with it as well.
    , @anon

    Would you consider it to be Judenhass to blame everything (bad) that happened in the Soviet Union on the Joos?
     
    Given their collective blame of the Germans would you consider it hypocrisy or insanity that Jews take none of the blame for the Bolshevik concentration camps?
  171. Ah, well. I’ll just put my comments to this thread here.

  172. @Hapalong Cassidy
    This rash of common sense by the NYT regarding immigration is unprecedented. I know this theory seems far-fetched, but bear with me here: What's behind it all is the unfriendly turn that the Mexican government has taken towards Carlos Slim and his monopolistic practices. Slim is thus less inclined to help out the current regime by supporting their northern neighbor's safety valve-like immigration policies.

    This rash of common sense by the NYT regarding immigration is unprecedented. I know this theory seems far-fetched, but bear with me here: What’s behind it all is the unfriendly turn that the Mexican government has taken towards Carlos Slim and his monopolistic practices. Slim is thus less inclined to help out the current regime by supporting their northern neighbor’s safety valve-like immigration policies.

    Interesting thought — that’s a hypothesis worth considering.

  173. @Threecranes
    Just terrific observations. Your comment is the antidote to and should be mandatory reading for all college-aged men who were forced to undergo gender-sensitivity brainwashing. We men must figuratively and literally push back against noxious women who believe that they are entitled to contribute 50% of the input just because they comprise 50% of the population. Knowledge and competence are aristocratic, not democratic.

    Recently I helped three women push their motorboat off of a sandy beach, where they had carelessly left it to be stranded by an outgoing tide. With them in the stern for ballast, I was able to lever the bow off the beach. One of them commented "One guy is stronger than three women"--which is generally true. One man, with concentrated effort can accomplish more than the diffused strength of three normal women. After I freed their boat, one of them rewarded me with repeated views of her fine breasts as she bent over to play with her dog while we chatted and even though I'm a balding old guy whose engine is sputtering, I certainly enjoyed the view and appreciated the gesture.

    To sum up: strength and competence, gents, women find them irresistible. And if feminists don't, then so what? What have you lost if you offend some barren witches whose favors you will never enjoy anyway?

    What have you lost if you offend some barren witches whose favors you will never enjoy anyway?

    The barren witch may be the boss of your company, or perhaps the HR person, or the colleague who causes you trouble with HR. Their sexual favors are the least of your concerns.

  174. @Jack D
    Would you consider it to be Judenhass to blame everything (bad) that happened in the Soviet Union on the Joos? To blame everything bad that happens in America and in the modern world on Jewish influence? Or is that just the simple truth as far as you are concerned?

    His friend John Hay claimed that when Henry Adams saw Vesuvius reddening the midnight air he searched the horizon to find a Jew stoking the fire. Some of the people here remind me of him.

    “Would you consider it to be Judenhass to blame everything (bad) that happened in the Soviet Union on the Joos? To blame everything bad that happens in America and in the modern world on Jewish influence?”

    You mean Jews? “Joos” is a common trope among those who would paint anybody who notices that Jews often act as a self-interested group as “anti-semites”. It is a pretty trite and ridiculous term by now.

    Do I blame everything bad in the U.S. and The Soviet Union on Jews? No. However, many Jews acting according to their percieved group interest have acted in ways that harmed both of those nations.

    Is it illegitimate to notice that? If so, why? And let me tell you – plenty of people have noticed group traits about MY tribe, so I damn well think that other tribes can f**king put up with it as well.

  175. @5371
    The activities require a completely different skill set from employer and employed. He was not spying among the hostile but inspiring the sympathetic.

    “The activities require a completely different skill set from employer and employed. He was not spying among the hostile but inspiring the sympathetic.”

    I think that the Junkers who commanded the German Army would deem an organization named “National Socialist German Workers Party” to be hostile, rather than sympathetic.

  176. @Bill

    And an interesting thesis I give a lot of credit to is that there is not much pushback from Japan on these notions of a poor, failing, aging Japan because pervasive beliefs like that among foreigners because it lets Japan fly under the radar, less pressure for contributions to international this/that, allows them to credibly plead lack of resources, etc.
     
    This. The Japanese strategy for resisting the empire has worked out pretty well. Showing no sign of overt resistance combined with "It is difficult" has done the trick. When the empire topples, they'll either seek realignment or rebuild their military, whichever seems more prudent. And they'll still be Japanese.

    A parley with a Japanese person often will have all the stereotypical politeness, pleasantries, etiquette, focused listening, and so forth, just a wonderful experience that generates all those, “What a beautiful people” remarks from tourists and such.

    Then the Japanese person will go off and it is like they had f*cking earplugs on the whole time, you didn’t have the slightest influence on their plans and intentions.

    The westerner will be thinking he had been negotiating whereas the Japanese person was thinking he was mollifying. This is a very common misunderstanding between the two because each thought the other person understood the nature of the parley the same way he did himself.

    Japanese are the most stubborn people I’ve ever encountered. All the polite indirection, fawning manners, and so forth, allows them to have a functioning society without everything breaking down into head to head confrontations all the time.

    Took me an awfully long time to fully embrace this and westerners saturated with “everyone is the same under the skin” are almost constitutionally incapable of accepting this for obvious reasons. Lefty expats and random Japanophiles tend to develop an informal mental model that everyone is the same except Japanese. This is similar to the way Economist, WSJ, et al gloss over the glaring Japanese counterexample to their notions with a little happy talk about sui generis Japan that makes their readers feel clever and superior for knowing a latin phrase.

    I’d doubt that there is a conscious, directed strategy to be sandbagging for the international community even if it is the net effect. They are just doing their characteristic listen politely to stuff they don’t agree with and go off and do whatever.

    Anyone interested can read up on honne – tatamae, central element of Japanese culture. Covers a lot of other stuff as well.

  177. @Jack D
    The Joos done it! Lenin, Stalin, Beria, Molotov, Mikoyan - all Jooos!

    “The Joos done it! Lenin, Stalin, Beria, Molotov, Mikoyan – all Jooos!”

    Trotsky, Yagoda, Zinoviev, Kamenev, Sverdlov. Nothing to see here. Move along.

  178. @anonguy

    I recall during my time in Berlin (U.S. Army, 1987-90) that the young male population looked distinctly unGerman–that certain Germanic virility was lacking.
     
    I participated in several NATO exercises a bit before your time in Berlin. The pervasive impression all of us Marines had of the Bundeswehr was that they were "chicks with d*cks". Of course, being Marines, we were heavily biased towards drawing that conclusion about everyone that wasn't us, but I do remember how shocked all of us were on first encounter with these guys, in our naivete most of us had expected something a bit more rough and ready than these guys.

    This was particularly so because one vaguely sensed that it wasn't a remediable training issue, but rather something more intrinsic, a lack of a certain moral fiber. And while we were biased, we did make differentiated judgments in these situations. For instance, ROK forces and Royal Marines were highly respected and generally thought to be better, much better, on a man to man basis than the average Marine - a lot of Marines thought, or even wished, that the Corps would adopt some of their practices. The UK ground forces seemed at least a little better than the average NATO force - generally all of them seemed a bit more of a civil service populated by civil servants than a military one. But the Bundeswehr was the real head-scratcher.

    The impression received of Scandinavian force members was similarly low even for a NATO force, but that was aligned with expectations that Americans tended to have about Scandinavia even back then. The Bundeswehr was the force whose members seemed most contrary to expectations - as Americans understanding that our forebears had within living memory (then) fought two wars against Germany where it had been a legendarily formidable opposition in most every regard, I guess we had expected a lot more from these guys considered individually as opposed to their organizational skills, etc, which were of course superlative.

    I know what I'm going to write now can, likely will, be taken as supporting evidence by annoying PUA, but I'm an honest broker.

    In 1978, I participated in a humongous NATO exercise that at least partially was an early and major sabre-rattling by the west against the Soviets in the twilight of detente. It also was the first time Marines had been present in any massed formations in Europe since WWI - in WWII, USMC was dedicated to the Pacific Theatre. Just given the reputation of the Corps, the locals everywhere were pretty curious about us even though our contingent of a regimental landing team of ~3k was at best 5% of the total forces involved in this exercise which had portions all over Europe.

    However, our ops were one centerpiece of the exercise, demonstrating U.S. ability post-Vietnam to conduct major, RLT level, amphibious landings under highly adverse conditions on the Soviets doorstep. So we also got media attention for that as it was a then-novel aspect of a big NATO exercise which tended to get a lot of media coverage in Europe then.

    The Soviet propaganda mill had been putting out informative briefs describing the U.S. Marines as "troops willing to loot, murder, and rape, and lacking the basic differences that separates man from the animals" and such which I guess aligned with whatever vague expectations the Europeans had of the Corps from what they had heard of Pacific Island fighting, Vietnam, etc.

    A very common question from a random European would be if it was really true that all Marines were convicted murderers or just assumed that was true and asked how many people did you kill? Really, and often was the reason that the European had struck up a conversation, although it usually took a bit of chit-chat for them to get up the nerve to ask.

    So we were on the ground foreigners generally considered as quite violent/aggressive loutish individuals.

    The local women f*cking adored us Marines, period, although I'm certain continued exposure would have eventually changed their minds. And this was in very stark contrast to their reactions, at least as I observed, to members of other forces American or otherwise. The sailors, on whose ships we sailed and who were on liberty concurrent with us, were green with envy because they were completely invisible, if not reviled, by the same local women.

    As for local male response, there was a pattern of local guys picking a fight with a Marine specifically because he was a Marine. I'm certain there is a PUA interpretation, and I'll throw gas on that fire by noting that the pervasive self-confessed cause by the local guy was that he wanted to be able to say he had been in a fight with a U.S. Marine whether or not he won or lost. Conversations with other non-adversarial local guys indicated that this was a common aspiration among the young local guys, kind of a "no ballz, dude" thing with them.

    PUA: Eureka! I knew it, PUA wins again - men showboating for the ladies, nyah nyah, I'm so insightful....

    Me/comrades: Huh, what? But of course, that is what guys do and women like to observe/vet and the victor gets the spoils. You didn't know *that*?

    Anyhow, this was a pretty cool thing for the ego, albeit something of a annoyance, but ultimately just part and parcel of heightened local women interest, which of course is always the prize for young men.

    The Germans and Scandinavians of whom you write were conscripts, weren’t they?

    • Replies: @anonguy

    The Germans and Scandinavians of whom you write were conscripts, weren’t they?
     
    Yes. I assume you are making some cute statement to try to make me look stupid because I didn't realize that German/Scandinavian forces are conscriptees.

    But you are the one that should do your homework before trying something like this because ROK forces are also conscriptees and, as I noted, Marines considered them more or less legendary badasses, at least back then.

    I could come up with more examples, but I already falsified your implied contention that it is unfair for Marine volunteers to be casting aspersions on the level of toughness of German/Scandinavian forces since they were conscriptees because conscriptees can't be expected to be attain a level of toughness that a Marine volunteer would respect.

    Need I go on?

    Aren't you the one I advised to tighten your game if you want to play with me? Even if I try to help, like a grownup helping a child with his checkers moves to try to let him win....

    Really, take my advice. It will likely help in other areas.

  179. @Reg Cæsar
    The Germans and Scandinavians of whom you write were conscripts, weren't they?

    The Germans and Scandinavians of whom you write were conscripts, weren’t they?

    Yes. I assume you are making some cute statement to try to make me look stupid because I didn’t realize that German/Scandinavian forces are conscriptees.

    But you are the one that should do your homework before trying something like this because ROK forces are also conscriptees and, as I noted, Marines considered them more or less legendary badasses, at least back then.

    I could come up with more examples, but I already falsified your implied contention that it is unfair for Marine volunteers to be casting aspersions on the level of toughness of German/Scandinavian forces since they were conscriptees because conscriptees can’t be expected to be attain a level of toughness that a Marine volunteer would respect.

    Need I go on?

    Aren’t you the one I advised to tighten your game if you want to play with me? Even if I try to help, like a grownup helping a child with his checkers moves to try to let him win….

    Really, take my advice. It will likely help in other areas.

    • Replies: @iffen
    I am embarrassed for you when you repeatedly tell us how much smarter you are than some particular commenter here. If it is true then some of us will be able to see that for ourselves. It really makes you look needy. Just show us what you have and let us decide. If you do, in fact, have the biggest pecker you don't need to brag about it all the time you will get your deserved accolades.
  180. @anonguy

    The Germans and Scandinavians of whom you write were conscripts, weren’t they?
     
    Yes. I assume you are making some cute statement to try to make me look stupid because I didn't realize that German/Scandinavian forces are conscriptees.

    But you are the one that should do your homework before trying something like this because ROK forces are also conscriptees and, as I noted, Marines considered them more or less legendary badasses, at least back then.

    I could come up with more examples, but I already falsified your implied contention that it is unfair for Marine volunteers to be casting aspersions on the level of toughness of German/Scandinavian forces since they were conscriptees because conscriptees can't be expected to be attain a level of toughness that a Marine volunteer would respect.

    Need I go on?

    Aren't you the one I advised to tighten your game if you want to play with me? Even if I try to help, like a grownup helping a child with his checkers moves to try to let him win....

    Really, take my advice. It will likely help in other areas.

    I am embarrassed for you when you repeatedly tell us how much smarter you are than some particular commenter here. If it is true then some of us will be able to see that for ourselves. It really makes you look needy. Just show us what you have and let us decide. If you do, in fact, have the biggest pecker you don’t need to brag about it all the time you will get your deserved accolades.

    • Replies: @anonguy

    I am embarrassed for you when you repeatedly tell us how much smarter you are than some particular commenter here. If it is true then some of us will be able to see that for ourselves. It really makes you look needy. Just show us what you have and let us decide. If you do, in fact, have the biggest pecker you don’t need to brag about it all the time you will get your deserved accolades.
     
    Ad hominems are typically a last resort and demonstrate one has nothing left other than spewing futile anger - it is the equivalent of monkeys flinging feces.

    I know I'm "smarter" than nearly all of the commenters here as measured by various metrics unless the commenters here represent an almost impossibly skewed sample set. But I've at least several times expressed my very sincere belief, which is confirmed by, well, life to begin with, that outcomes/performance are far from perfectly correlated with these abstractions.

    That is why I encourage you guys to up your game, I know there is tons of potential for easily realizable improvement. And if you can't effectively debate, say me (and honestly, I'm barely trying) in your own hothouse, how do expect to ever win over others to points of view that many of them consider not just wrong, but evil? Do you *really* expect to convince SJWs, for instance, by going on about their insecurities about their peckers?

    Anyhow, a fact is a fact and whether something is indeed a fact is completely independent of the intelligence, or pecker insecurities and so forth, of who presents it.

    , @anonguy
    Here is an example:

    If it is true then some of us will be able to see that for ourselves.
     
    Why don't you think about what is the logic error with that statement as an exercise. Actually, there are several.

    BTW, I just grabbed this as an example, there are others in the same paragraph.
  181. @Jack D
    Would you consider it to be Judenhass to blame everything (bad) that happened in the Soviet Union on the Joos? To blame everything bad that happens in America and in the modern world on Jewish influence? Or is that just the simple truth as far as you are concerned?

    His friend John Hay claimed that when Henry Adams saw Vesuvius reddening the midnight air he searched the horizon to find a Jew stoking the fire. Some of the people here remind me of him.

    Would you consider it to be Judenhass to blame everything (bad) that happened in the Soviet Union on the Joos?

    Given their collective blame of the Germans would you consider it hypocrisy or insanity that Jews take none of the blame for the Bolshevik concentration camps?

  182. Is Ron fiddling with the site code again?

    A very common question from a random European would be if it was really true that all Marines were convicted murderers or just assumed that was true and asked how many people did you kill? Really, and often was the reason that the European had struck up a conversation, although it usually took a bit of chit-chat for them to get up the nerve to ask.

    You might be the only Marine who doesn’t know that service in the Corps was an alternative to jail time at some points. That ended after Vietnam, in ’73, but I’m sure many of your fellow Marines were still around from those days in ’78.

    Come to think of it, I bet many of your fellow Marines in ’78 entered the service as conscripts before ’73, too.

  183. anonguy says:
    January 11, 2016 at 1:05 pm GMT • 300 Words

    Nah. Steve should go full libtard, or at worst, full neocon or cuckservative. That’s the path to success. And he’d be so distinct from all the other libtards, neokahns, and cuckservatives because…well he wouldn’t, but them’s the breaks.

  184. A parley with a Japanese person often will have all the stereotypical politeness, pleasantries, etiquette, focused listening, and so forth, just a wonderful experience that generates all those, “What a beautiful people” remarks from tourists and such.

    See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ichi-go_ichi-e

    Then the Japanese person will go off and it is like they had f*cking earplugs on the whole time, you didn’t have the slightest influence on their plans and intentions.

    Perhaps first person would be more accurate here than second, given the glowing personality you’ve exhibited in your comments. There is something sui generis here, and it ain’t the Japanese.

  185. @iffen
    I am embarrassed for you when you repeatedly tell us how much smarter you are than some particular commenter here. If it is true then some of us will be able to see that for ourselves. It really makes you look needy. Just show us what you have and let us decide. If you do, in fact, have the biggest pecker you don't need to brag about it all the time you will get your deserved accolades.

    I am embarrassed for you when you repeatedly tell us how much smarter you are than some particular commenter here. If it is true then some of us will be able to see that for ourselves. It really makes you look needy. Just show us what you have and let us decide. If you do, in fact, have the biggest pecker you don’t need to brag about it all the time you will get your deserved accolades.

    Ad hominems are typically a last resort and demonstrate one has nothing left other than spewing futile anger – it is the equivalent of monkeys flinging feces.

    I know I’m “smarter” than nearly all of the commenters here as measured by various metrics unless the commenters here represent an almost impossibly skewed sample set. But I’ve at least several times expressed my very sincere belief, which is confirmed by, well, life to begin with, that outcomes/performance are far from perfectly correlated with these abstractions.

    That is why I encourage you guys to up your game, I know there is tons of potential for easily realizable improvement. And if you can’t effectively debate, say me (and honestly, I’m barely trying) in your own hothouse, how do expect to ever win over others to points of view that many of them consider not just wrong, but evil? Do you *really* expect to convince SJWs, for instance, by going on about their insecurities about their peckers?

    Anyhow, a fact is a fact and whether something is indeed a fact is completely independent of the intelligence, or pecker insecurities and so forth, of who presents it.

    • Replies: @iffen
    typically a last resort

    I think of it more along the lines of a first resort. I thought some of your comments were insightful and perhaps you had potential.

    This is what a last resort looks like: never mind.
  186. @iffen
    I am embarrassed for you when you repeatedly tell us how much smarter you are than some particular commenter here. If it is true then some of us will be able to see that for ourselves. It really makes you look needy. Just show us what you have and let us decide. If you do, in fact, have the biggest pecker you don't need to brag about it all the time you will get your deserved accolades.

    Here is an example:

    If it is true then some of us will be able to see that for ourselves.

    Why don’t you think about what is the logic error with that statement as an exercise. Actually, there are several.

    BTW, I just grabbed this as an example, there are others in the same paragraph.

  187. @anonguy

    I am embarrassed for you when you repeatedly tell us how much smarter you are than some particular commenter here. If it is true then some of us will be able to see that for ourselves. It really makes you look needy. Just show us what you have and let us decide. If you do, in fact, have the biggest pecker you don’t need to brag about it all the time you will get your deserved accolades.
     
    Ad hominems are typically a last resort and demonstrate one has nothing left other than spewing futile anger - it is the equivalent of monkeys flinging feces.

    I know I'm "smarter" than nearly all of the commenters here as measured by various metrics unless the commenters here represent an almost impossibly skewed sample set. But I've at least several times expressed my very sincere belief, which is confirmed by, well, life to begin with, that outcomes/performance are far from perfectly correlated with these abstractions.

    That is why I encourage you guys to up your game, I know there is tons of potential for easily realizable improvement. And if you can't effectively debate, say me (and honestly, I'm barely trying) in your own hothouse, how do expect to ever win over others to points of view that many of them consider not just wrong, but evil? Do you *really* expect to convince SJWs, for instance, by going on about their insecurities about their peckers?

    Anyhow, a fact is a fact and whether something is indeed a fact is completely independent of the intelligence, or pecker insecurities and so forth, of who presents it.

    typically a last resort

    I think of it more along the lines of a first resort. I thought some of your comments were insightful and perhaps you had potential.

    This is what a last resort looks like: never mind.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
Our Reigning Political Puppets, Dancing to Invisible Strings