The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Somali Culture
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

In 2008, from the War Nerd:

Naturally Somalis go for that Islamic noise, because compared to the basic Somali ideology, which is “Every man for himself and eat the losers” Islamic law is bleeding-heart liberalism. It’s kind of funny, imagining Somalis begging the mullahs, “Please institute Sharia law! We’re ready for that soft, easygoing hippie ‘tude! This Somali macho stuff, it’s too harsh!” See, when Islam spread from Morocco to Jakarta it washed over all kinds of tribes. For some of them, soft city types, Sharia law was scary, hardcore stuff. But to the Somali, who were used to fighting over a few starved goats all day, and then getting up tomorrow to fight over the same lousy goats all over again, Sharia law was the Rapture. “Wait, you are telling me that Sharia forbids stealing? No stealing? So I can sleep, maybe, with both eyes closed, for the first time in my life? Bring it on, baby!”

By all accounts, Mogadishu was almost peaceful when the Islamists were in charge. It was a little like the early days of the Taleban in Kabul: nobody gave a shit whether the Taleban was “democratic” as long as they kept the random gunfire down to a steady patter. Democracy is for rich people. I guarantee if you had to live like they do in Kabul or Mog, you wouldn’t care about it either. Not after ducking warlord-vs.-warlord streetfights every time you want to get water from the neighborhood pump. It wears you out fast, that kind of living—having to check for snipers every time you cross a street. A few years of that and you kind of look forward to a little Islamic fanaticism, where nobody’s allowed to do nuthin’, make any noise or hum a tune or fly a kite or whatever. It’s “Shuttup and siddown!” to the whole neighborhood, including the warlords and their khat-chewing skinnies who’ve been zooming up and down the alleys in their technicals blowing up kids because they can’t handle their high.

… That’s because what we see as a bloody mess that needs charity is natural to most Somalis. Not all—the Somalis actually used to have a rep as the best office workers in the Horn, believe it or not, under the colonial regimes. They’re not stupid people. But they are nomads at heart, and nomads don’t really have the idea of a central government protecting everybody. They want to protect themselves. Somalis actually live the way these survivalist wackos up in the Idaho panhandle think they live: all on their own, protecting their families. The way the Idaho nuts do it is all wrong, which any Somali or Bedu could tell them: you don’t hole up in a log cabin with a bunch of motion sensors and polish your gun collection all day like a sitting duck. You move, you and your goats. You keep moving, keep watch, and don’t trust anybody outside the clan. If you’re really going to do it you can’t do that single-family stuff. Too easy to besiege and wipe out. You need a clan. So the Somalis are organized in clans for mutual defense, hitting each other and running. Used to do it on livestock, then they met their dream car, the Toyota pickup, and never looked back. Mount a Soviet heavy machine gun or AA cannon on that thing and you were living the dream.

Meanwhile there were a few Somalis in suits and ties, trying to live the Western life in Mog. But the desert won, the old ways won. Somalia voted for the epic life, blasting away on your technical, not shuffling papers. Not good news if you were, say, a woman with three kids, but GREAT news if you were a khat-blasted eighth grader ready to pull that trigger.

 
Hide 119 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Sadly, many here are degenerating into mere SJWs.

  2. Compared to what Africans manage to do on their own, sharia law will be an absolute godsend.

    South Africa’s ANC needs just 5 years ‘to destroy the economy & the country,’ economist warns

    https://www.rt.com/business/452656-south-africa-anc-crisis/

  3. Great text. Insightful indeed.

    “Somalis actually live the way these survivalist wackos up in the Idaho panhandle think they live: all on their own, protecting their families.”

    This line has a Michel-Houellbecqian drive in it. Love it.

    One more interesting remark from this text: “They’re not stupid people. But they are nomads at heart, and nomads don’t really have the idea of a central government protecting everybody.”

    • Replies: @Counterinsurgency
    @Dieter Kief


    “They’re not stupid people. But they are nomads at heart, and nomads don’t really have the idea of a central government protecting everybody.”
     
    Very early forms of central government in Mesopotamia had nothing to do with protecting people. There was, supposedly, an early central government that was essentially an army that made its living by conquering a city, sucking it dry over several years, and "after taking from you everything he can steal", went on to conquer the next city (using the impoverished natives of its current city as crunches to take the next city) . As I recall, it worked until the general who organized the whole thing died.

    It wasn't until the invention of (gasp) Civil Service with pay and pensions and a structured career and regular rotation between jobs that a central government could rule more than one city. Prior to that, the henchman in City B would always eventually revolt against the central government in City A [1].

    It took several hundred years to figure that out, during which time Mesopotamian governments were all one city governments, run by either a priesthood, a conqueror, or maybe both.

    Supposedly the European attitude towards traders was a local invention, traceable back to the Viking settlements c.a. AD 900. Vikings were trader/raiders/settlers, and after a generation or so were willing to pay a percentage to local nobles, who in turn could use that money to pay for troops and thus to overcome their neighboring nobles. This led to the idea that traders were _not_ foreign parasites, but essential parts of the State. In other parts of the world, they were regarded as parasites, and this belief was actually a part of Marxism (still is, really).

    So: the basic form of central government protects nobody, takes everything, preserves nothing. Sort of like Postmodernism. Many places have a basic form of government, even today. In fact, such areas are expanding and the central government protects over a smaller area yearly [2], and this has been going on since WW II.

    So, no, the Somalis aren't dumb, they're just evolved to live in an evolutionary stable strategy [3] that assumes a primitive central government. One could think of similar groups.

    The real question is just how much of this sort of thing can an industrial society survive? There is an overhead to industrial society.
    Industrial society requires significant capital investment. I'm using "capital" in the sense of an asset that takes time to produce and may be useless (obsolete technically, economically, politically, etc.) by the time it is produced. A diversion of capital investment to non-productive uses can end an industrial society.
    For example, consider the USSR after Stalin's death, when changes in Soviet policy made preparations for general industrialized war pointless. The USSR continued to invest almost all available capital in preparedness for WW II (except what it spent for WW III) and industrial projects were grossly undercaptialized. Among other things, environmental damage such as chemical poisoning, and the possibility of catastrophic failure, was not considered in project design. Russian ended up with a poisoned or ruined landscape [4], and, had Westerners not been available to provide industrial goods and food, it is difficult to say that industrial society would have continued.
    Right now the West is doing something very similar, in that its diverting capital investment to paying for political stability (funding welfare, activists, various "pride" monuments, importing voters to cities, etc.) As a consequence "infrastructure" is decaying, and the return on investment of capital goods is not being received [5]. The US has made up the difference through what amounts to tribute (cheap goods from East Asia, seigniorage [6] from inflation, etc.) but that era is visibly ending.

    Counterinsurgency

    1] https://janieblairireg.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/a-world-history-by-william-h-mcneill.pdf

    2] Martin van Creveld, "The Fate of the State," Parameters, 26 (Spring 1996), 4-18. 30.
    http://www.dnipogo.org/creveld/the_fate_of_the_state.htm

    3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene

    4] Poisoned: https://socialist-alliance.org/alliance-voices/ecological-disaster-was-ussr-0
    Ruined: https://thediplomat.com/2014/10/how-the-soviet-union-created-central-asias-worst-environmental-disaster/

    5] The US essentially shut down innovation outside of electronics and to an extent software back in the late AD 1960s, and the reason given was to promote social stability. The funds went directly to "community organizers" of various sorts, and social stability visibly eroded. I've seen it printed that the US spent 22 trillion dollars to buy a nation full of Detroits. I don't know about the 22 trillion, but we do have a nation full of Detroits, and we don't have much else. Like it or not, Detroit doesn't produce much return on investment.

    6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seigniorage
    , @Abe
    @Dieter Kief


    This line has a Michel-Houellbecqian drive in it. Love it.
     
    I was embarrassed to learn way after the fact that WAR NERD was a parody literary persona. That there really wasn’t this Dwight Schrute-like incel weirdo character churning out globe-spanning geostrategic copy from the comfort of his Central Valley basement. I mean, who the heck wants to pretend to be the Gen-X, more Aspergey/failure-to-launch version of Edward Luttwack?

    Yet I think I’m not merely salving my own ego when I say it was not really a hoax or a goof; that I was not wrong (or alone) in reading the column seriously. And those columns were usually works of quit subtle genius because they were the complete opposites of your typical David Brooks or Ross Douhat screed. Basically Step 2 of the writing of every single damn WAR NERD column seemed to be laying on the absolute maximum of buffonish, Call of Duty/Rainbow Cell 6 online muchkin gamer blather as sufficient to reach, but never ever cross, the line of suffocating the deeply trenchant, deeply important point about conflict and human nature that was discovered during Step 1 of the writing of a WAR NERD column.

    Be careful of staring into a WAR NERD column, because it might stare into you!
    , @Merde
    @Dieter Kief

    “Somalis actually live the way these survivalist wackos up in the Idaho panhandle think they live: all on their own, protecting their families.”

    This is a funny line, but Idaho survivalist are not nomads. They are following their own traditions which have carried them from Western Asia across two continents. Build a homestead, protect the homestead, kill or chase away any strange or unfriendly neighbors, then move west and repeat the process.

    Replies: @Dieter Kief

  4. It is very simple. The highly educated people leave and gang drug traffickers and Mullahs take over, which makes even moderately educated people want to leave, and so the country spirals down into a hell on Earth. Immigration has a natural tendency to accelerate because diasporas in the counties where people are going progressively reduce their costs.

    The fate of black districts in America was a very similar process. Once educated middle class blacks moved out those previously stable areas became taken over by gangs and drug traffickers. There was also the Black Muslims.

    • Replies: @James N. Kennett
    @Sean

    The best thing that Somalis can do for their children is to sustain a low-level civil war. This guarantees that anyone who manages to reach a soft-hearted Western country will not be sent back.

  5. Reminds me of the description of the Somalis at the beginning of Isak Dinesen/Karen Blixen’s 1937 Out of Africa, probably describing people and events she knew in the 20s; the more things change….

    The Somali town was farther away from Nairobi, on account, I think, of the Somali’s system of seclusion of their women. There were in my day a few beautiful young Somali women, of whom all the town knew the names, who went and lived in the Bazaar and led the Nairobi Police a great dance; they were intelligent, and bewitching people. But the honest Somali women were not seen in the town. The Somali town lay exposed to all winds and was shadeless and dusty, it must have recalled to the Somali their native deserts. Europeans, who live for a long time, even for several generations, in the same place, cannot reconcile themselves to the complete indifference to the surroundings of their homes, of the nomadic races. The Somali’s houses were irregularly strewn on the bare ground, and looked as if they had been nailed together with a bushel of four-inch nails, to last for a week. It was a surprising thing, when you entered one of them, to find it inside so neat and fresh, scented with Arab incenses, with fine carpets and hangings, vessels of brass and silver, and swords with ivory hilts and noble blades. The Somali women themselves had dignified, gentle ways, and were hospitable and gay, with a laughter like silver bells. I was much at home in the Somali village through my Somali servant Farah Aden, who was with me all the time that I was in Africa, and I went to many of their feasts. A big Somali wedding is a magnificent, traditional festivity. As a guest of honour I was taken into the bridal chamber, where the walls and the bridal bed were hung with old gently glowing weavings and embroideries, and the dark-eyed young bride herself was stiff, like a marshal’s baton with heavy silks, gold and amber.
    The Somali were cattle-dealers and traders all over the country. For the transport of their goods they kept a number of little grey donkeys in the village, and I have seen camels there as well: haughty, hardened products of the desert, beyond all earthly sufferings, like Cactus, and like the Somali.
    The Somali bring much trouble upon themselves terrible tribal quarrels. In this matter they feel and reason differently from other people. Farah belonged to the tribe of Habr Yunis, so that personally in a quarrel I sided with them. At one time there was a great real fight in the Somali town, between the two tribes of Dulba Hantis and Habr Chaolo, with rifle-shooting and fires, and ten or twelve people killed, until the Government interfered. Farah then had a young friend of his own tribe, by name of Sayid, who used to come out to see him at the farm, and who was a graceful boy, so that I was sorry when I was told by my houseboys that Sayid had gone round to visit a Habr Chaolo family in their house, when an angry member of the Dulba Hantis tribe had passed and fired two shots at haphazard through the wall of the house and broken Sayid’s leg. I condoled with Farah on his friend’s misfortune.—“What? Sayid?” Farah cried out with vehemence. “That was good enough for Sayid. Why must he go and drink tea in the house of a Habr Chaolo?”

    • Replies: @Anon1
    @Spotted Toad

    Thanks for posting that. Very insightful.

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Spotted Toad


    Reminds me of the description of the Somalis at the beginning of Isak Dinesen/Karen Blixen’s 1937 Out of Africa, probably describing people and events she knew in the 20s; the more things change…
     
    The Canadian poet Margaret Laurence lived in British Somaliland for a time, where her British husband worked as an engineer. Probably bored out of her mind, she took up making English translations of the locals' poetry. (She never learned the language, but worked from the rough draft translations of others.) Poetry slams are to Somalis what hoops is to black Americans.

    The Prophet’s Camel Bell
    A MEMOIR OF SOMALILAND


    The Somali women themselves had dignified, gentle ways, and were hospitable and gay, with a laughter like silver bells.
     
    Mrs Laurence noted the same thing, about the younger women. They're like French and Italian girls used to be. Once they've aged, though, with all those kids, they're not so happy-go-lucky. (Aren't the kids helping out? Mothers of large American families seem as content as anyone here.) Reading this, I just had to nod in agreement. That's exactly what I've observed in 21st-century Somali-Minnesotans.

    This change from young, lithe, and gay to old, stocky, and crabby is known all over the world, but it seems particularly extreme among the Somalis.

    https://prodimage.images-bn.com/pimages/9781550221770_p0_v3_s550x406.jpg

    https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51bpksXw3aL._SX337_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

    , @EdwardM
    @Spotted Toad


    I have seen camels there as well: haughty, hardened products of the desert, beyond all earthly sufferings, like Cactus, and like the Somali.
     
    Fantastic sentence.
  6. It’s telling that this is what you serve up in response to the young Somali-American woman courageously speaking truth to power.

    • Replies: @DH
    @John Achterhof

    Agreed. Sailer dropped the ball.
    Still after readinf this I somehow respect a bit more the Somalis.

    , @Abe
    @John Achterhof


    It’s telling that this is what you serve up in response to the young Somali-American woman courageously speaking truth to power.

     

    She in a way IS admirable for her bravery and truth-telling, yes. Indeed it is amazing how loyal to culture, religion, race/tribe, and above all menfolk these Muslimas are, even when vaulted to sudden prominence and power by the kaffir’s silly kakocracy.

    Yet it’s simply a matter of a stopped clock being for the moment right, of bravery being girded by spite and truthfulness being emboldened by malice. Still does not change the fact that Somalis are bad news for America, even if it may be fun to watch members of the coalition of the fringes start hacking att each other. Welcome to Thunderdome America! Art of the deal, break on the wheel!
    , @Trevor H.
    @John Achterhof

    Who said that this is in response to that?

    Replies: @anonymous

    , @forgottenpseudonym
    @John Achterhof

    Courageous? Anti-white prejudice and religious fanaticism don't require courage. She's just being fashionable to the point of banality.

    , @Anon
    @John Achterhof

    If she was courageous and wanted to speak truth to power , she would highlight the 14 apartheid states (Somalia included) where converting from islam to Christianity is illegal and punishable by the death penalty.

    If she was honest she would not lie about being an advocate for Lbgtq rights , while remaining silent about the 14 apartheid countries ( Somalia included) .where being lgbtq is illegal and punishable by the death penalty.

    If she was really interested in human rights she would not merely create a straw man to pummel . she will talk about slavery that was abolished 150 years ago but remains silent about chattel slavery in Islamic republics of Mauritania,Sudan.Somalia,Libya,Nigeria in 2019 !!!!

  7. So the point of this piece is of course, we need to bring more of them into the US so they can represent us in Congress.

    BTW, I’ll take a thousand wackos in Idaho over one half Japanese FBI agent everyday of the week.

    • Agree: Federalist
    • Replies: @JMcG
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    Damn right, ol’ Lonnie boy is one guy I wouldn’t p**s on were I to notice him burning to death. Hell isn’t hot enough for that creep.

  8. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:

    Is this a retort to those who criticized Mr. Sailer’s post about Congresswoman Omar the other day?

    Maybe someone needs to do a nature/nurture thingy on those Great White Defenders in Congress racing around to disavow what she had to say.

  9. War Nerd is always a great read.

    http://exiledonline.com/big-brothers-george-orwell-and-christopher-hitchens-exposed/

    Americans have been falling in unrequited love with these glib visiting Brits since frontier days. Every time a 19th-c. British author overspent on child prostitutes or laudanum, he or she embarked on an American lecture tour to repair the family finances, following Dickens’ path from one muddy American boomtown to the next. At every stop the author would let the yokels adore him for a few minutes, then retire to make careful notes on the locals’ ignorance, foul table manners and general stupidity for the scathing book to be published once safe in London.

    And the Yanks fell for it every time. After wining and dining their distinguished visitor, the social elite of Podunk would order copies of the noble visitor’s account, hoping to see their names in print-only to be stunned at the lecturer’s sketch of Podunk as a stinking backwater, and brief description of its leading lights as an “execrable mob of beasts.”

    I’ll bet an appendage Hitchens hates his groveling audience of American suckers just as much as his Victorian predecessors did. His earlier books are remarkable for their strident anti-American tone-and I mean compared to other books by British Trotskyites. In other words, he’s rabid, folks. He’d hit that nuclear trigger and vaporize your sweet hometown in a second, ya suckers. Hitchens’ orc-like understudy, Mark Steyn, who now poses as a champion of the U.S., was less discreet than Hitchens, describing our country (in an article gloating over the Atlanta bombing) as “the United States of losers and bozos.” You know we’re low on spokespersons when these are our star players.

    On a related note: RIP Lyndon LaRouche (who brought us real historians)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoLDwKd6NW8&feature=youtu.be

    and condolence to Vox Day for the loss of Keith Flint who killed himself when his waifu left him (Vox loves the gook)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONsaSQOUCyM&feature=youtu.be

    (You know, at a good old fashioned Irish Wake they’d stand the cadaver up and dance with the deceased)

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @Pat Hannagan

    The War Nerd was a hoot. What happened to it?

    Replies: @simple_pseudonymic_handle

  10. This is something I’ve tried explaining to moderns: in its original spreading, Islam was usually the more civilized alternative. As the WN says, making robbery punishable by amputation, limiting war booty to four brides*, treating all Muslims—not just clan members—as brothers, etc., these were mercies compared to what went before.

    Coincidentally, Islam spread rapidly from its cradle in the nomad-heavy Arabian Peninsula until it ran up against other civilizations that already had functioning laws/customs for the above things. And even then, if those other civilizations had become decadent/dysfunctional, Islam quickly scarfed up the place: e.g., Egypt, North Africa, fratricidal Visigothic Iberia. A society need not have been advanced to resist the Islamic Borg assimilation, just modestly functional. Even the primitive Merovingians were able to break the Islamic wave at Tours. Strangely, the Merovingians’ descendants, the modern European Union seems not able to duplicate this elementary feat…

    *I note that in anthropological studies of all-out warfare, e.g., rainforest cannibals or the Eastern Front in WWII, they typically find that 30%-40% or so of the men are killed and a like portion permanently maimed/incapacitated, so the four-women-per-(surviving)-man rule is not arbitrary. It reduces concubinage in violent societies through partial enfranchisement. Also in US ghettos. There are reasons that Louis Farrakhan and Nation of Islam have done well here.

    • Replies: @m___
    @Almost Missouri

    Best explanation, to the point. These elements must play for and against Islam. The context playing an important role.

    What about the Balkan, part of it, why is Turkish Islam pushed aside by generational Muslims, the younger generations, for a cruder, better sponsored Saudi Arabia one. How come they do not adapt the more then one woman part. Is fashion at play, the consumer environment, and it the more important part of today's religious attractions mostly identity politics. Belonging.

    , @Jimi
    @Almost Missouri

    In the American underclass many men have multiple sex partners and children with different women.

    Restricting them to a maximum of 4 (all of whom they would be legally required to support) would be an improvement.

    Of course the ideal situation would be children within a monogamous marriages. But that's totally lame!

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

    , @Colin Wright
    @Almost Missouri

    'I note that in anthropological studies of all-out warfare, e.g., rainforest cannibals or the Eastern Front in WWII, they typically find that 30%-40% or so of the men are killed and a like portion permanently maimed/incapacitated, so the four-women-per-(surviving)-man rule is not arbitrary. It reduces concubinage in violent societies through partial enfranchisement. Also in US ghettos. There are reasons that Louis Farrakhan and Nation of Islam have done well here.'

    There's a Christian fascination with Muslim polygamy.

    A couple of things need to be noted. First, a form of polygamy is an institution in many Christian societies -- the mistress. In Latin American and Mediterranean countries in particular, it's long been usual for any wealthy and successful man to essentially have a second family, and this 'wife's' status has long been recognized in custom, if not in law.

    Second, and on the other hand, in Islamic societies, polygamy is often a more theoretical right than one actually practiced. For example, actual, polygamous marriages are very rare in Morocco; there are something like four thousand, which would work out to considerably less than one tenth of one percent of all unions. Yet a clear majority of Moroccans think they should have the legal right to engage in a polygamous marriage. It's just that there tend to be innumerable practical obstacles -- like the hostility of the current wife to the idea, for starters. Then too, it's apparently just not the usual practice.

    It's kind of like 'right to carry' here in the US. Many of us -- myself included -- think we have the right to wear our .44 Magnum when we go do the grocery shopping or have dinner out. Not very many of us exercise that right, though. We'd feel like damned fools, and that frigging cannon might go off or something. So it stays home, or we don't even own a gun.

    So polygamy in Islam isn't as significant an issue as many seem to think -- not in practice.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    , @Counterinsurgency
    @Almost Missouri

    Agree

    More on that era:
    Tom Holland.
    _In the Shadow of the Sword_.
    2012.
    Great depiction of Late Antiquity, and Holland discovers that there are _no_ primary documents surviving from the first _two Centuries_ after the Prophet was born. Like, none. The earliest documents surviving state that an effort was made to destroy all earlier documents that might cast discredit on Islam or on politically powerful persons then living. The result was something like fallout -- because it covered everything.

    Robert R. Reilly.
    _The Closing of the Muslim Mind: How Intellectual Suicide Created the Modern Islamist Crisis _
    2011.
    Shows how Islam resolved the problem of reason vs. faith. Starting in c.a. AD 450, the resolution consisted the assertion that reason is an uncertain guide, suitable only to show that it is unsuitable. The arguments are much like those used by Hume, except that Hume's arguments against religion were not used. Given an omnipotent deity that (by definition) is not limited even by itself or by reason, one ends up with a particularistic, here meaning a religion in which every event is a separate miracle, and logic doesn't apply. Once logic doesn't apply, understanding the world becomes a contradiction in terms. People do not understand, they reacts. This is amazingly similar to Postmodernism (see Hicks, _Understanding Postmodernism_, and Youtube "Hicks postmodernism 2018"), which might explain the alliance (however one sided) between postmodernists and Islam.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    , @Spangel
    @Almost Missouri

    Claiming Islam was usually the more civilized alternative doesn’t make much sense given that it quickly spread through what was the christianized east Roman Empire, a land rules by law and a complex civilization.

    Islam was realistically barely different than existing mores in the Arabian peninsula- really an amalgamation of norms that allowed a unified empire, but it was a step backward in North Africa and the near east when it spread. It wasn’t initially a step backward in Europe but it was fast becoming a shackle to backwardness and was fortunately overthrown at that time.

    Replies: @Louis Renault, @Almost Missouri

    , @Alden
    @Almost Missouri

    One thing Christianity and Islam have in common; both outlawed infantacide which was common practice in ancient pagan times.

    Before Christianity was legalized it was wide spread. One reason Christianity grew so much before legalization was that Christians went to the village garbage dumps and picked up and raised the abandoned babies thus increasing the number of Christians.

  11. This is something I’ve tried explaining to moderns: in its original spreading, Islam was usually the more civilized alternative. As the WN says, making robbery punishable by amputation, limiting war booty to four brides*, treating all Muslims—not just clan members—as brothers, etc., these were mercies compared to what went before.

    But this is ahistorical rubbish. Rome and later Christianity had already pacified much of what your Islam “civilized”.

    Sailer was just quoting a great Irishman in advance of his own next Taki Mag essay. Don’t get carried away into the lands of absurdity.

  12. “Somalia voted for the epic life, blasting away on your technical, not shuffling papers.”

    Back in the day I knew a Somali who had been born a nomad but was sheltered during a drought in an Italian(?) mission where they taught him to read and write. He migrated to the big city, learned English, and became a bank clerk, then a manager. I sometimes wonder what became of him since. Still shuffling papers, I hope.

  13. OT:

    From an article with usual moralistic talking points and status-quo humming and hewing about ‘education’ with no attempts to delve too deep, comes the cherry-on-top of a Fareed Zakaria quote.

    While Asian education systems may be surpassing Finland’s, their uncompromising schedules and test-driven milieu may be shortchanging their futures for short-term gains. That’s the argument made by journalist and political scientist Fareed Zakaria.

    “[We] should be careful before they try to mimic Asian educational systems, which are still oriented around memorization and test taking,” writes Zakaria. “I went through that kind of system and it’s not conductive to thinking, problem solving, or creativity.”

    Is he self-aware or does he think the West has changed him? I mean you could just make a machine-learning algorithm to parse neo-con and neo-liberal talking points du jure and it’d probably be as good as him.

  14. I believe much the same is true in the wilder parts of Pakistan: Islam is a civilising, pro-feminist force, because the tribal laws that would otherwise apply are much harsher.

    So in fact the country runs three parallel systems: the original one, the Arabic one left behind by the islamic empires, and the English one left behind by the Raj. When there is some protest in favor of Sharia, it can be a little hard to figure out which they are against.

    The book by Anatol Lieven was pretty good on such things:
    https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/books/review/book-review-pakistan-by-anatol-lieven.html

  15. Worth more than a hundred New York Times articles.

  16. As usual, Steve is on point.

    https://pjmedia.com/michaelwalsh/somali-gangs-battle-in-minneapolis-somalis-demand-that-cops-do-something/

    From Mog to Minn, most of them are violent animals that need to be put down.

    • Replies: @Fredrik
    @Brutusale

    Similar in Sweden. Unrest in certain neighbourhoods that has been broadcast internationally is in fact a territorial dispute between Somali gangs.

  17. ” the basic Somali ideology, which is “Every man for himself and eat the losers” As opposed to who, and which country?

    “By all accounts, Mogadishu was almost peaceful when the Islamists were in charge.” Then what happened, did someone invade?

    “It was a little like the early days of the Taleban in Kabul:” Then what happened, did someone invade?

    To be honest that whole war nerd piece seems based on the world of 2000 not 2001. Minnesota was wise to elect Somalians.

  18. Mount a Soviet heavy machine gun or AA cannon on that thing and you were living the dream.

    Oh, Hell, yeah!

    A bit rough on having a family, sort of like introducing grenades to a boxing match (or nitrogen chemistry explosives to WW I), but as attractive to young men as makeup is to young women.

    Counterinsurgency

  19. @Almost Missouri
    This is something I've tried explaining to moderns: in its original spreading, Islam was usually the more civilized alternative. As the WN says, making robbery punishable by amputation, limiting war booty to four brides*, treating all Muslims—not just clan members—as brothers, etc., these were mercies compared to what went before.

    Coincidentally, Islam spread rapidly from its cradle in the nomad-heavy Arabian Peninsula until it ran up against other civilizations that already had functioning laws/customs for the above things. And even then, if those other civilizations had become decadent/dysfunctional, Islam quickly scarfed up the place: e.g., Egypt, North Africa, fratricidal Visigothic Iberia. A society need not have been advanced to resist the Islamic Borg assimilation, just modestly functional. Even the primitive Merovingians were able to break the Islamic wave at Tours. Strangely, the Merovingians' descendants, the modern European Union seems not able to duplicate this elementary feat...

    *I note that in anthropological studies of all-out warfare, e.g., rainforest cannibals or the Eastern Front in WWII, they typically find that 30%-40% or so of the men are killed and a like portion permanently maimed/incapacitated, so the four-women-per-(surviving)-man rule is not arbitrary. It reduces concubinage in violent societies through partial enfranchisement. Also in US ghettos. There are reasons that Louis Farrakhan and Nation of Islam have done well here.

    Replies: @m___, @Jimi, @Colin Wright, @Counterinsurgency, @Spangel, @Alden

    Best explanation, to the point. These elements must play for and against Islam. The context playing an important role.

    What about the Balkan, part of it, why is Turkish Islam pushed aside by generational Muslims, the younger generations, for a cruder, better sponsored Saudi Arabia one. How come they do not adapt the more then one woman part. Is fashion at play, the consumer environment, and it the more important part of today’s religious attractions mostly identity politics. Belonging.

  20. The guy is a good writer, but his crack on survivalists in Idaho is just asinine. Idaho is not Somalia – people don’t f__k goats or herd them around as a job, eat wacky weed all day, and hate everyone outside their families and “Klan” (haha). Survivalists always talk community, community, community, and they live it, as most are not the Ted Kazinsky type.

    They’re not stupid people. But they are nomads at heart, and nomads don’t really have the idea of a central government protecting everybody.

    Yes, actually, in terms of how Americans think, they are indeed stupid. No, they aren’t stupid for Somalia, but they are stupid for America. Interestingly, the preppers, survivalists, and Constitutionalists also don’t like the idea of a central governnment “protecting” the hell out of everybody. It’s just that they have 1,000 years of British/American culture to back them up, and are much better regulated (in the 2nd- Amendment sense). Somalians are retards in comparison to Idaho preppers.

    “War Nerd” should have spent some time in northern Idaho, so he could understand the mindset as well as he seems to understand that of the Somalians.

    • Replies: @william munny
    @Achmed E. Newman

    “War Nerd” should have spent some time in northern Idaho, so he could understand the mindset as well as he seems to understand that of the Somalians.

    I seem to recall listening to an episode of the podcast where he discussed looking for a home in Idaho, or something like that. He was terrified of locals so decided against it. He is afraid of rural American whites.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

  21. Anonymous[154] • Disclaimer says:

    Great read! Asserting their unalienable rights and pursuing happiness in a Toyota pickup! Admittedly, Somalian way sounds much more exciting than penciling in bubbles on a ballot paper.

  22. Buses in London have a door at the front, where you pay your fare, and an exit at the rear. If I see a Somali family at the bus stop I know they will try to get on at the rear door and avoid paying the fare.

  23. I got a lot of interesting reading material out of the War Nerd’s works.

    • Replies: @Cortes
    @Hunsdon

    Agreed.

    His Orwell essay should be required reading in High Schools.

  24. Somali culture is being imported into European Christian nations by the various ruling classes of these nations to create multicultural mayhem and to destroy cultural cohesion.

    The treasonous and evil ruling classes of European Christian nations have found the Somalis to be the most effective culturally corrosive demographic weapon to create maximum multicultural mayhem.

    Nation-wrecking elements within the ruling classes of European Christian nations are particularly fond of the way Somalis are so dissimilar to the European Christian ancestral core of their nations.

    Omar from Minnesota is having fun going after the JEW/WASP ruling class on the ISRAEL QUESTION. I am adamantly opposed to the importation of Somalis or Somalians, but I must give Omar credit for poking the 800 pound Israel Lobby gorilla in the belly with a stick.

    Omar is using the “Trope” — A — Dope Strategy to wear out the Israel Lobby. Omar ain’t done yet.

    Many of the Jew nutcakes in Minnesota push mass legal immigration and illegal immigration and REFUGEE OVERLOAD. Al Franken is a Jew from Minnesota who pushes mass immigration and multicultural mayhem.

    I came up with this one about Franken and Somalis, or I grabbed it off the internet, I honestly don’t remember:

    Al Franken’s Somali Jihadis Go On Head-Chopping Holiday

    Tweets from 2014:

  25. @Almost Missouri
    This is something I've tried explaining to moderns: in its original spreading, Islam was usually the more civilized alternative. As the WN says, making robbery punishable by amputation, limiting war booty to four brides*, treating all Muslims—not just clan members—as brothers, etc., these were mercies compared to what went before.

    Coincidentally, Islam spread rapidly from its cradle in the nomad-heavy Arabian Peninsula until it ran up against other civilizations that already had functioning laws/customs for the above things. And even then, if those other civilizations had become decadent/dysfunctional, Islam quickly scarfed up the place: e.g., Egypt, North Africa, fratricidal Visigothic Iberia. A society need not have been advanced to resist the Islamic Borg assimilation, just modestly functional. Even the primitive Merovingians were able to break the Islamic wave at Tours. Strangely, the Merovingians' descendants, the modern European Union seems not able to duplicate this elementary feat...

    *I note that in anthropological studies of all-out warfare, e.g., rainforest cannibals or the Eastern Front in WWII, they typically find that 30%-40% or so of the men are killed and a like portion permanently maimed/incapacitated, so the four-women-per-(surviving)-man rule is not arbitrary. It reduces concubinage in violent societies through partial enfranchisement. Also in US ghettos. There are reasons that Louis Farrakhan and Nation of Islam have done well here.

    Replies: @m___, @Jimi, @Colin Wright, @Counterinsurgency, @Spangel, @Alden

    In the American underclass many men have multiple sex partners and children with different women.

    Restricting them to a maximum of 4 (all of whom they would be legally required to support) would be an improvement.

    Of course the ideal situation would be children within a monogamous marriages. But that’s totally lame!

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    @Jimi

    Jimi, You too funny... "all of whom they would be legally required to support." You know that's our job, don't be subbing it out!

  26. @Almost Missouri
    This is something I've tried explaining to moderns: in its original spreading, Islam was usually the more civilized alternative. As the WN says, making robbery punishable by amputation, limiting war booty to four brides*, treating all Muslims—not just clan members—as brothers, etc., these were mercies compared to what went before.

    Coincidentally, Islam spread rapidly from its cradle in the nomad-heavy Arabian Peninsula until it ran up against other civilizations that already had functioning laws/customs for the above things. And even then, if those other civilizations had become decadent/dysfunctional, Islam quickly scarfed up the place: e.g., Egypt, North Africa, fratricidal Visigothic Iberia. A society need not have been advanced to resist the Islamic Borg assimilation, just modestly functional. Even the primitive Merovingians were able to break the Islamic wave at Tours. Strangely, the Merovingians' descendants, the modern European Union seems not able to duplicate this elementary feat...

    *I note that in anthropological studies of all-out warfare, e.g., rainforest cannibals or the Eastern Front in WWII, they typically find that 30%-40% or so of the men are killed and a like portion permanently maimed/incapacitated, so the four-women-per-(surviving)-man rule is not arbitrary. It reduces concubinage in violent societies through partial enfranchisement. Also in US ghettos. There are reasons that Louis Farrakhan and Nation of Islam have done well here.

    Replies: @m___, @Jimi, @Colin Wright, @Counterinsurgency, @Spangel, @Alden

    ‘I note that in anthropological studies of all-out warfare, e.g., rainforest cannibals or the Eastern Front in WWII, they typically find that 30%-40% or so of the men are killed and a like portion permanently maimed/incapacitated, so the four-women-per-(surviving)-man rule is not arbitrary. It reduces concubinage in violent societies through partial enfranchisement. Also in US ghettos. There are reasons that Louis Farrakhan and Nation of Islam have done well here.’

    There’s a Christian fascination with Muslim polygamy.

    A couple of things need to be noted. First, a form of polygamy is an institution in many Christian societies — the mistress. In Latin American and Mediterranean countries in particular, it’s long been usual for any wealthy and successful man to essentially have a second family, and this ‘wife’s’ status has long been recognized in custom, if not in law.

    Second, and on the other hand, in Islamic societies, polygamy is often a more theoretical right than one actually practiced. For example, actual, polygamous marriages are very rare in Morocco; there are something like four thousand, which would work out to considerably less than one tenth of one percent of all unions. Yet a clear majority of Moroccans think they should have the legal right to engage in a polygamous marriage. It’s just that there tend to be innumerable practical obstacles — like the hostility of the current wife to the idea, for starters. Then too, it’s apparently just not the usual practice.

    It’s kind of like ‘right to carry’ here in the US. Many of us — myself included — think we have the right to wear our .44 Magnum when we go do the grocery shopping or have dinner out. Not very many of us exercise that right, though. We’d feel like damned fools, and that frigging cannon might go off or something. So it stays home, or we don’t even own a gun.

    So polygamy in Islam isn’t as significant an issue as many seem to think — not in practice.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Colin Wright

    While I agree factually that monogamous cultures are less so in practice than in theory, and same for polygamous cultures' polygamy, it is also true that everything's theory exceeds practice, so I'm not sure what the point is supposed to be.

    I think the right to carry is an apt analogy. Not everyone has to carry for it to have a deterrent effect.

  27. @Dieter Kief
    Great text. Insightful indeed.

    "Somalis actually live the way these survivalist wackos up in the Idaho panhandle think they live: all on their own, protecting their families."

    This line has a Michel-Houellbecqian drive in it. Love it.

    One more interesting remark from this text: "They’re not stupid people. But they are nomads at heart, and nomads don’t really have the idea of a central government protecting everybody."

    Replies: @Counterinsurgency, @Abe, @Merde

    “They’re not stupid people. But they are nomads at heart, and nomads don’t really have the idea of a central government protecting everybody.”

    Very early forms of central government in Mesopotamia had nothing to do with protecting people. There was, supposedly, an early central government that was essentially an army that made its living by conquering a city, sucking it dry over several years, and “after taking from you everything he can steal”, went on to conquer the next city (using the impoverished natives of its current city as crunches to take the next city) . As I recall, it worked until the general who organized the whole thing died.

    It wasn’t until the invention of (gasp) Civil Service with pay and pensions and a structured career and regular rotation between jobs that a central government could rule more than one city. Prior to that, the henchman in City B would always eventually revolt against the central government in City A [1].

    It took several hundred years to figure that out, during which time Mesopotamian governments were all one city governments, run by either a priesthood, a conqueror, or maybe both.

    Supposedly the European attitude towards traders was a local invention, traceable back to the Viking settlements c.a. AD 900. Vikings were trader/raiders/settlers, and after a generation or so were willing to pay a percentage to local nobles, who in turn could use that money to pay for troops and thus to overcome their neighboring nobles. This led to the idea that traders were _not_ foreign parasites, but essential parts of the State. In other parts of the world, they were regarded as parasites, and this belief was actually a part of Marxism (still is, really).

    So: the basic form of central government protects nobody, takes everything, preserves nothing. Sort of like Postmodernism. Many places have a basic form of government, even today. In fact, such areas are expanding and the central government protects over a smaller area yearly [2], and this has been going on since WW II.

    So, no, the Somalis aren’t dumb, they’re just evolved to live in an evolutionary stable strategy [3] that assumes a primitive central government. One could think of similar groups.

    The real question is just how much of this sort of thing can an industrial society survive? There is an overhead to industrial society.
    Industrial society requires significant capital investment. I’m using “capital” in the sense of an asset that takes time to produce and may be useless (obsolete technically, economically, politically, etc.) by the time it is produced. A diversion of capital investment to non-productive uses can end an industrial society.
    For example, consider the USSR after Stalin’s death, when changes in Soviet policy made preparations for general industrialized war pointless. The USSR continued to invest almost all available capital in preparedness for WW II (except what it spent for WW III) and industrial projects were grossly undercaptialized. Among other things, environmental damage such as chemical poisoning, and the possibility of catastrophic failure, was not considered in project design. Russian ended up with a poisoned or ruined landscape [4], and, had Westerners not been available to provide industrial goods and food, it is difficult to say that industrial society would have continued.
    Right now the West is doing something very similar, in that its diverting capital investment to paying for political stability (funding welfare, activists, various “pride” monuments, importing voters to cities, etc.) As a consequence “infrastructure” is decaying, and the return on investment of capital goods is not being received [5]. The US has made up the difference through what amounts to tribute (cheap goods from East Asia, seigniorage [6] from inflation, etc.) but that era is visibly ending.

    Counterinsurgency

    1] https://janieblairireg.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/a-world-history-by-william-h-mcneill.pdf

    2] Martin van Creveld, “The Fate of the State,” Parameters, 26 (Spring 1996), 4-18. 30.
    http://www.dnipogo.org/creveld/the_fate_of_the_state.htm

    3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene

    4] Poisoned: https://socialist-alliance.org/alliance-voices/ecological-disaster-was-ussr-0
    Ruined: https://thediplomat.com/2014/10/how-the-soviet-union-created-central-asias-worst-environmental-disaster/

    5] The US essentially shut down innovation outside of electronics and to an extent software back in the late AD 1960s, and the reason given was to promote social stability. The funds went directly to “community organizers” of various sorts, and social stability visibly eroded. I’ve seen it printed that the US spent 22 trillion dollars to buy a nation full of Detroits. I don’t know about the 22 trillion, but we do have a nation full of Detroits, and we don’t have much else. Like it or not, Detroit doesn’t produce much return on investment.

    6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seigniorage

  28. Most of the Somalis are genial dorks just like the German and Norwegian genial dorks that live here in central Minnesota. For the first decade here, the Somalis were polite and unobtrusive. Lately, many of the males have become brazen shoplifters of liquor and other goods knowing that they have “racism” as a defense.

    Ilhan Omar is the face of the obnoxious, demanding Somali that knows they can claim racism and bigotry and thanks to CAIR, will extort special privileges. Politicians around here are so arthritic with political correctness that when a Somali went on a stabbing spree at the local mall and ten non-Muslims were victims, the knee-jerk reaction was to presume retailation by the locals. No attempt to assure the public that they were safe. They had to comfort the Somali community first and foremost.

    The Somali people seem a little out of place. There are plenty of stories of Somali apartment dwellers bringing a load of dirt on to their carpeting to grow things. The Somali kids have turned the fenced-in basketball courts into small soccer fields. It is heartening to see throngs of Somali kids coming home from the playing fields just at dusk just as we did from baseball fields fifty years ago.

    So as someone who sees Somalis everyday, I want to say that they are pleasant if not out-going people. But when you add the CAIR-style radicals like Ilhan Omar to the mix, it is full-throated extortion in the offing.

  29. @Almost Missouri
    This is something I've tried explaining to moderns: in its original spreading, Islam was usually the more civilized alternative. As the WN says, making robbery punishable by amputation, limiting war booty to four brides*, treating all Muslims—not just clan members—as brothers, etc., these were mercies compared to what went before.

    Coincidentally, Islam spread rapidly from its cradle in the nomad-heavy Arabian Peninsula until it ran up against other civilizations that already had functioning laws/customs for the above things. And even then, if those other civilizations had become decadent/dysfunctional, Islam quickly scarfed up the place: e.g., Egypt, North Africa, fratricidal Visigothic Iberia. A society need not have been advanced to resist the Islamic Borg assimilation, just modestly functional. Even the primitive Merovingians were able to break the Islamic wave at Tours. Strangely, the Merovingians' descendants, the modern European Union seems not able to duplicate this elementary feat...

    *I note that in anthropological studies of all-out warfare, e.g., rainforest cannibals or the Eastern Front in WWII, they typically find that 30%-40% or so of the men are killed and a like portion permanently maimed/incapacitated, so the four-women-per-(surviving)-man rule is not arbitrary. It reduces concubinage in violent societies through partial enfranchisement. Also in US ghettos. There are reasons that Louis Farrakhan and Nation of Islam have done well here.

    Replies: @m___, @Jimi, @Colin Wright, @Counterinsurgency, @Spangel, @Alden

    Agree

    More on that era:
    Tom Holland.
    _In the Shadow of the Sword_.
    2012.
    Great depiction of Late Antiquity, and Holland discovers that there are _no_ primary documents surviving from the first _two Centuries_ after the Prophet was born. Like, none. The earliest documents surviving state that an effort was made to destroy all earlier documents that might cast discredit on Islam or on politically powerful persons then living. The result was something like fallout — because it covered everything.

    Robert R. Reilly.
    _The Closing of the Muslim Mind: How Intellectual Suicide Created the Modern Islamist Crisis _
    2011.
    Shows how Islam resolved the problem of reason vs. faith. Starting in c.a. AD 450, the resolution consisted the assertion that reason is an uncertain guide, suitable only to show that it is unsuitable. The arguments are much like those used by Hume, except that Hume’s arguments against religion were not used. Given an omnipotent deity that (by definition) is not limited even by itself or by reason, one ends up with a particularistic, here meaning a religion in which every event is a separate miracle, and logic doesn’t apply. Once logic doesn’t apply, understanding the world becomes a contradiction in terms. People do not understand, they reacts. This is amazingly similar to Postmodernism (see Hicks, _Understanding Postmodernism_, and Youtube “Hicks postmodernism 2018”), which might explain the alliance (however one sided) between postmodernists and Islam.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Counterinsurgency

    Yes, postmodernism has no principles, while Islam has the principle of taking whatever it wants to reach its goals, so it is a natural match.

    As the modren West reprimitivizes, White Sharia will become a more and more attractive alternative to the ever increasing anarcho-tyranny.

  30. War Nerd- what are his politics?

    I remember being disappointed by them.

    Pleasant Hell was s very enjoyable read FYI.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Danindc

    My overarching recollection is that he was essentially an Irish nationalist posing as an American nationalist. He had the Irishman's verbal facility which he used to attack anything that smacked of Englishness, WASPs, the British Empire or any other traditional Irish hobgoblin. When his real name turned out to be Dolan rather than Brecher, the surprise level was zero. Still, I liked reading him in the old days.

    Replies: @Danindc

    , @BB753
    @Danindc

    A liberal, basically.

    , @Brutusale
    @Danindc

    He's an Irish-American poet who taught at UC Berkeley, so what do you think his politics are?

    Replies: @Danindc

  31. @Hunsdon
    I got a lot of interesting reading material out of the War Nerd's works.

    Replies: @Cortes

    Agreed.

    His Orwell essay should be required reading in High Schools.

  32. Abe says:
    @Dieter Kief
    Great text. Insightful indeed.

    "Somalis actually live the way these survivalist wackos up in the Idaho panhandle think they live: all on their own, protecting their families."

    This line has a Michel-Houellbecqian drive in it. Love it.

    One more interesting remark from this text: "They’re not stupid people. But they are nomads at heart, and nomads don’t really have the idea of a central government protecting everybody."

    Replies: @Counterinsurgency, @Abe, @Merde

    This line has a Michel-Houellbecqian drive in it. Love it.

    I was embarrassed to learn way after the fact that WAR NERD was a parody literary persona. That there really wasn’t this Dwight Schrute-like incel weirdo character churning out globe-spanning geostrategic copy from the comfort of his Central Valley basement. I mean, who the heck wants to pretend to be the Gen-X, more Aspergey/failure-to-launch version of Edward Luttwack?

    Yet I think I’m not merely salving my own ego when I say it was not really a hoax or a goof; that I was not wrong (or alone) in reading the column seriously. And those columns were usually works of quit subtle genius because they were the complete opposites of your typical David Brooks or Ross Douhat screed. Basically Step 2 of the writing of every single damn WAR NERD column seemed to be laying on the absolute maximum of buffonish, Call of Duty/Rainbow Cell 6 online muchkin gamer blather as sufficient to reach, but never ever cross, the line of suffocating the deeply trenchant, deeply important point about conflict and human nature that was discovered during Step 1 of the writing of a WAR NERD column.

    Be careful of staring into a WAR NERD column, because it might stare into you!

  33. anonymous[405] • Disclaimer says:

    War Nerd makes a valid point in how hardline Islam actually brought law and order to some places. In the wake of the warlord victory in Afghanistan against the Russian supported government they began fighting each other and the country was consumed with chaos and banditry. The Taliban actually brought safety and stability to the areas under their control. Somalia has additional problems with outsiders, US included, mucking about within, supporting one faction or another and keeping the pot boiling.

  34. War Nerd’s writing style is a little too Gonzo! for me but he is basically right. There are a lot of groups like that – either someone is kicking ass and taking names or else all hell breaks loose. There’s no in between. This is why Russians are most happy when they are governed by a strong Czar – no matter how corrupt he is, it’s better than being ruled by the mob.

    The New England or Japanese village model where the hand of the law is light and yet people behave themselves anyway is the exception, not the rule and it doesn’t take too much “diversity” to spoil that paradise. In the old days it was “colorful” to read about tribal ways in travelogues (I enjoyed “Out of Africa” as a kid) but you didn’t expect the tribe to be living alongside you in St. Paul.

    • LOL: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Jack D


    The New England or Japanese village model where the hand of the law is light and yet people behave themselves anyway is the exception, not the rule
     
    On the contrary, agriculturalists living in a small village everywhere tend to have good social cohesion and are generally peaceful. When the bulk of one's property is immovable, it's difficult to engage in destructive behavior without ruining it for everyone.

    The major communal behavioral difference is not that between New Englanders/Japanese and everyone else - it is between high-density agriculturalists who tend to be more cooperative and docile and pastoralists/semi-nomadic people who are warlike, independent, and querulous. It's for the same reason why Mongolians are far more violent and unruly compared to, say, South Koreans.
  35. There is a larger point in this piece about the failure of white conservative individualist culture. The future belongs to tribes, not rugged individualists.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @ATBOTL


    There is a larger point in this piece about the failure of white conservative individualist culture. The future belongs to tribes, not rugged individualists.
     
    You don't necessarily need a tribe, but you do need a community.

    "War Nerd" speaks to truth, when he says the following:

    If you’re really going to do it you can’t do that single-family stuff. Too easy to besiege and wipe out. You need a clan.
     
    I know lots of people who are survivalists and think that they are going to make it in a major infrastructure-disruption/disorder scenario, because they are armed and have some spare food and fuel.

    I always tell them they are simply being good (free) supply storage for organized people (e.g. gangs). It's EASY to isolate and overrun single individuals and families tucked in somewhere, no matter how well-armed.

    If it were just me or perhaps just my wife and me, I might be able to disappear into the woods and make it a go and survive, even for the long-term (I happen to live where there is plenty of fresh water). When you have young children, that is absolutely impossible and you need a community, a defensible community, to stand a chance. Furthermore, that community has to be populated by people with good cohesion built on mutual trust (and that's why gangs start with an advantage in such crises).

    And for goodness sakes, learn some basic medical care, including how to use an Israeli bandage:
    https://youtu.be/wNR8rRFgwNk

    People without combat experience talk about guns and ammo (and maybe generator), but few if any of them seem to understand having a ready source of fresh water and access to trauma care.
  36. Taco Bell management should consider bringing in Sharia consultants. Here a pack of Taco Bell Workers Of Color hold a white customer down on the curb and beat the shit out of him. I’m shocked this story of hate isn’t dominating world headlines.

  37. It takes a somali muslim immigrant woman in Congress to defend our Founder’s warning against being “tools and dupes” to foreign nations, avoiding foreign entanglements, and not surrendering our nation’s interests to that of a foreign nation – she is the bravest person by far in congress, let alone the country – and all you can do is mock elements of her native country’s culture? Do you not see the bigger story here (the forest for the trees) or does the idea of a black, head-scarfed muslim woman single-handedly defending our country’s founding principles – where angels fear to tread – make you feel small, insecure, and jealous?

  38. Anonymous[416] • Disclaimer says:

    OT: Any posts about Canadian Culture?

    Progressive darling Trudeau is facing a growing scandal after his first Indigenous woman justice minister went nuclear and aired his dirty laundry in retaliation for her demotion.

    Justin Trudeau came to office in 2015 by the high road, exuding charm, confidence, integrity and an openness to change. He filled his cabinet with women and minorities, opened Canada’s doors to immigrants and posed for endless selfies with adoring crowds. But in politics the fresher the face, the more obvious the blemishes.

    The crisis unfolded after The Globe and Mail newspaper reported on Feb. 7 that Jody Wilson-Raybould, Mr. Trudeau’s former justice minister and attorney general, had come under improper pressure from the prime minister’s office to reach a negotiated settlement with a multinational engineering firm, SNC-Lavalin, instead of prosecuting it on criminal charges it faces over its business dealings in Libya. Conviction would bar it from government contracts for a decade.

    The case centers on accusations that SNC-Lavalin paid 47.7 million Canadian dollars in bribes to officials in Libya to win contracts there, and defrauded the Libyan government and its agencies of 129.8 million Canadian dollars. Libya at the time was led by the dictator Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi.

    Now his top political adviser has resigned along with two prominent woman cabinet members.

    More background information:

    A criminal conviction would leave the company, which is one of Quebec’s most prominent corporations with 52,000 employees worldwide, unable to do business with the government of Canada for a decade.

    All along, Mr. Trudeau has denied doing anything wrong. He acknowledges that he spoke to Ms. Wilson-Raybould about the SNC-Lavalin case but argues that the discussions were well within the bounds of the rules. His defenders note that charges were not dropped against the company and that a prime minister should show concern about the potential loss of 9,000 jobs. The issue, moreover, was never about dropping charges, but about allowing the firm to pay a fine instead of facing a criminal prosecution.

    Looked at from south of the Canadian border, the entire matter may seem trivial alongside any of the many accusations levied at President Trump, or of the pressures routinely applied by politicians on behalf of powerful companies.

    But in Canada, the tangled SNC-Lavalin affair is unavoidably measured against the expectations Mr. Trudeau raised and the standards he set. For him to be accused by two prominent women from his team of violating the high ethical bar he himself set is a major blow, at the least to his brand.

    I’m no insider to Canadian politics but as far as I can tell, this is a case of politics as usual… gone sideways. A company doing business in Libya – shockingly! – paid bribes. A woke justice minister decides the hammer MUST be brought down. Trudeau’s Liberal Party, based in Quebec, works the political levers to ensure this doesn’t happen. Justice minister plays hardball. Trudeau realizes that appointing people to powerful positions based on woke politics may be a bad idea and demotes her. “Anonymous” leaks go to newspapers, scandal erupts!

    As they say: “Get woke, go broke”

    ————–
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/04/world/canada/trudeau-scandal-SNC-Lavalin.html
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/05/opinion/justin-trudeau-scandal.html
    https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/read-jody-wilson-rayboulds-full-remarks-to-the-house-of-commons-justice-committee

  39. Very interesting related article. Al Shabab’s bloody attacks in Kenya as a sort of reply of the slave trade.

    https://quillette.com/2019/02/06/understanding-modern-african-horrors-by-way-of-the-indian-ocean-slave-trade/

    From the late 19th century onwards, the British bypassed the Swahili, sending in missionaries from the coast to convert the Bantu and Nilotic speaking tribes of the Kenyan interior, these being former victims of the coastal slave trade. The modernizing elites of these groups then fought with the British durinhttps://quillette.com/2019/02/06/understanding-modern-african-horrors-by-way-of-the-indian-ocean-slave-trade/g WWI and WWII, and demanded independence after the war, which they got. From an ethnographic point of view, what this means is that the descendants of the non-Muslim tribes that formerly provided the coastal Muslims with slaves were now in charge of the government and economy of Kenya, making Muslims to the northeast and on the coast a political minority within the region.

    After 9/11, the southwest expansion of the Somali Darod into Kenyan territory took on a new religious dimension. The young men who man Al Shabab and the youngish “imams” who write their fatwas, the religious rulings that encourage them to bomb “infidel hotels” in Nairobi and other places, have broken away from their elders. Their violent nihilism isn’t much different in character from that of rampaging Congolese militias, except they perform their violence under cover of Jihad. But whatever the pretext, the campaign can be classified, as former Governor of Tanganyika and Zanzibar, Sir Richard Turnbull, called it, the “Darod Invasion” of northeastern Kenya.

  40. Actually, I am enjoying the whole Ilhan Omar – Rashida Tlaib $h!t show. Yes, it is two votes out of 435 and a harbinger of what is demographically to come but to watch the disruption it is causing to the Democratic party not to mention a (((group of special people))) that are not used to open opposition it is a hoot. Same for the Jack Ass, AOC. Replacing a garden variety Democratic pol with her was a gift from heaven.

    • Agree: Abe
  41. And yet Mussolini’s Italy, the joke army of WWII, was able to keep the peace.

  42. OT:

    • LOL: fish
    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt
    @snorlax

    Cat Scratch Fever in the Coalition of the Fringes in the Democrat Party will lead to the Coalition of the Fringes clawing each other's eyes out.

    , @Jimi
    @snorlax

    I have a hard time telling if this is a parody account.

    , @J.Ross
    @snorlax

    While it looks like a stray transmission from Venus, this tweet is representative of a big mess happening now in DC, with rallies and speeches for and against the Minnesotan Mahdi. At the same time there is more news about the AOC-Chakrabarti scandal. Now is the time for Trump to see how weak his enemies are and actually -- aaaaaaaand he's tweeting and golfing.

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @snorlax

    Welcome to the party, pal! (or pallette, I can't tell with that name).

    Anyone who hates Nancy Pelosi more than me is welcome anytime to our fraternity lacrosse league. First keg's on me!

    Replies: @BIll Jones

    , @Buffalo Joe
    @snorlax

    A little help please. Is Saira Rao some one I should know or care about?

    Replies: @Anon1

    , @Clyde
    @snorlax

    The tweet author is Indian but born here and ran for Congress in Colorado. Has a law degree so watch out! https://sairaforcongress.com/about/

  43. Perfectly sums up the Film Culture Zeitgeist.

    https://twitter.com/TitaniaMcGrath/status/1103304190829445122

  44. @Spotted Toad
    Reminds me of the description of the Somalis at the beginning of Isak Dinesen/Karen Blixen’s 1937 Out of Africa, probably describing people and events she knew in the 20s; the more things change....

    The Somali town was farther away from Nairobi, on account, I think, of the Somali’s system of seclusion of their women. There were in my day a few beautiful young Somali women, of whom all the town knew the names, who went and lived in the Bazaar and led the Nairobi Police a great dance; they were intelligent, and bewitching people. But the honest Somali women were not seen in the town. The Somali town lay exposed to all winds and was shadeless and dusty, it must have recalled to the Somali their native deserts. Europeans, who live for a long time, even for several generations, in the same place, cannot reconcile themselves to the complete indifference to the surroundings of their homes, of the nomadic races. The Somali’s houses were irregularly strewn on the bare ground, and looked as if they had been nailed together with a bushel of four-inch nails, to last for a week. It was a surprising thing, when you entered one of them, to find it inside so neat and fresh, scented with Arab incenses, with fine carpets and hangings, vessels of brass and silver, and swords with ivory hilts and noble blades. The Somali women themselves had dignified, gentle ways, and were hospitable and gay, with a laughter like silver bells. I was much at home in the Somali village through my Somali servant Farah Aden, who was with me all the time that I was in Africa, and I went to many of their feasts. A big Somali wedding is a magnificent, traditional festivity. As a guest of honour I was taken into the bridal chamber, where the walls and the bridal bed were hung with old gently glowing weavings and embroideries, and the dark-eyed young bride herself was stiff, like a marshal’s baton with heavy silks, gold and amber.
    The Somali were cattle-dealers and traders all over the country. For the transport of their goods they kept a number of little grey donkeys in the village, and I have seen camels there as well: haughty, hardened products of the desert, beyond all earthly sufferings, like Cactus, and like the Somali.
    The Somali bring much trouble upon themselves terrible tribal quarrels. In this matter they feel and reason differently from other people. Farah belonged to the tribe of Habr Yunis, so that personally in a quarrel I sided with them. At one time there was a great real fight in the Somali town, between the two tribes of Dulba Hantis and Habr Chaolo, with rifle-shooting and fires, and ten or twelve people killed, until the Government interfered. Farah then had a young friend of his own tribe, by name of Sayid, who used to come out to see him at the farm, and who was a graceful boy, so that I was sorry when I was told by my houseboys that Sayid had gone round to visit a Habr Chaolo family in their house, when an angry member of the Dulba Hantis tribe had passed and fired two shots at haphazard through the wall of the house and broken Sayid’s leg. I condoled with Farah on his friend’s misfortune.—“What? Sayid?” Farah cried out with vehemence. “That was good enough for Sayid. Why must he go and drink tea in the house of a Habr Chaolo?”

    Replies: @Anon1, @Reg Cæsar, @EdwardM

    Thanks for posting that. Very insightful.

  45. Islam is democratic. Much more so than Christianity, which is aristocratic. Mohamed is not the “king,” he is the prophet, and – above all – the lawgiver. Christ is the King, above reproach, God incarnate. Philosophically there’s an enormous difference between the two faiths.

    Consider that Christ takes an executive approach, while Mohamed is more parliamentarian. In the Koran, Mohamed often speaks (for Allah) in the first person plural, while Jesus speaks strictly in the first person singular. This may seem like a subtle difference, but it’s important.

    My theory is that people with a democratic faith need a secular strongman to keep them in line, whereas those with a hierarchical, aristocratic religion can handle a more democratic secular rule better. With the loss of a regimented, Christian basis for our society, I doubt we can sustain our polity much longer. If people are not ruled by God, they must be ruled by man.

    • Disagree: James Speaks, Stick, Anon1
    • Replies: @James Speaks
    @Bill P

    The lessons of Jesus were much more, "Figure this out and keep in mind these ethical principles." than the New Testament lets on, but that document was created by authoritarian committee centuries after Jesus died.

    Christianity (TM) may be authoritarian as you say, but only in the same sense that Whahabbism is authoritarian.

    Jesus taught by means of ethical dilemnas. Mohamed by means of many, many examples. Same goals.

    The central strongman figure of many Arab societies is due to the centralized source of income, i.e. oil. During the Middle Ages, Europe was ruled by strongmen called nobles.


    My theory is that people with a democratic faith need a secular strongman to keep them in line,
     
    Who is the strongman for Reform Jews?

    Replies: @Bill P

    , @Spangel
    @Bill P

    Islam doesn’t work better than alternative religions anywhere. This has been repeatedly demonstrated with real data.

    In Europe, the poorest and most backward whites are the Muslims of Albania and Chechnya.

    In the Middle East, the Muslims are poorer and less educated than Coptic Christians, despite the state sanctioned oppression the copts face.

    In South Asia, Pakistan and bangladesh are far less stable and somewhat poorer and more backward than Hindu India and bhuddist Sri Lanka.

    In Nigeria, the Christian southern half is infinitely better than the Muslim northern half.

    Really anywhere and everywhere you look, if you look at the population within an ethnicity between Christians vs Muslims, the Christians always demonstrate a more advanced and stable society.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Anon1

    , @Buzz Mohawk
    @Bill P

    It is the people, not the religion.

    The Christians in America who created our constitutional republic with democratically-elected leaders were Northwestern Europeans, specifically Englishmen.

    They were intelligent enough to hold two ideas at once: Christ the King for those who believe, and a government of The People without establishment of religion.

    Christians in some other lands still have not caught up, and Muslims, well... LOL.

    Replies: @BB753

    , @Charles_Martel
    @Bill P

    You are correct about one thing: Philisophically, Islam is miles apart from Christianity or any other religion. Exhibit A: Mohammed married a 6-year old, setting the standard for all pedophiles and goat-fuckers out there on the burning sands.

    'Nuff said.

    Replies: @Cortes

    , @Almost Missouri
    @Bill P

    I like interesting ideas like this, and I think there is something to it as well. It's akin to the British model of government where the chief executive is a monarch who reigns but does not rule. This neutralized the threat of the overmighty executive. Of course Britain has found ways to create equivalent problems through other paths, but still, one has to admire the counter intuitive wisdom that serve Britain for so long.

    Another analogy is freedom and equality, two concepts most moderns think are important but that are potentially mutually contradictory. It was once widely understood that equality was before the law, not an engineered equality of outcome, while freedom lay elsewhere: in speech, thought, religion, education, etc. Now the poles are almost reversed. We have extra degrees of freedom (or unfreedom, aka, slavery) granted to favored or unfavored groups by law, while all academia, employment, entertainment etc. all has to conform to absurd equality dictates.

    I remember a bumper sticker during the Obama campaign when he was being apotheosized as a new messiah by the media: "No thanks, I already have a Messiah."

  46. @Almost Missouri
    This is something I've tried explaining to moderns: in its original spreading, Islam was usually the more civilized alternative. As the WN says, making robbery punishable by amputation, limiting war booty to four brides*, treating all Muslims—not just clan members—as brothers, etc., these were mercies compared to what went before.

    Coincidentally, Islam spread rapidly from its cradle in the nomad-heavy Arabian Peninsula until it ran up against other civilizations that already had functioning laws/customs for the above things. And even then, if those other civilizations had become decadent/dysfunctional, Islam quickly scarfed up the place: e.g., Egypt, North Africa, fratricidal Visigothic Iberia. A society need not have been advanced to resist the Islamic Borg assimilation, just modestly functional. Even the primitive Merovingians were able to break the Islamic wave at Tours. Strangely, the Merovingians' descendants, the modern European Union seems not able to duplicate this elementary feat...

    *I note that in anthropological studies of all-out warfare, e.g., rainforest cannibals or the Eastern Front in WWII, they typically find that 30%-40% or so of the men are killed and a like portion permanently maimed/incapacitated, so the four-women-per-(surviving)-man rule is not arbitrary. It reduces concubinage in violent societies through partial enfranchisement. Also in US ghettos. There are reasons that Louis Farrakhan and Nation of Islam have done well here.

    Replies: @m___, @Jimi, @Colin Wright, @Counterinsurgency, @Spangel, @Alden

    Claiming Islam was usually the more civilized alternative doesn’t make much sense given that it quickly spread through what was the christianized east Roman Empire, a land rules by law and a complex civilization.

    Islam was realistically barely different than existing mores in the Arabian peninsula- really an amalgamation of norms that allowed a unified empire, but it was a step backward in North Africa and the near east when it spread. It wasn’t initially a step backward in Europe but it was fast becoming a shackle to backwardness and was fortunately overthrown at that time.

    • Replies: @Louis Renault
    @Spangel


    it quickly spread
     
    how did that happen, elections?
    , @Almost Missouri
    @Spangel


    "it quickly spread through what was the christianized east Roman Empire, a land rules by law and a complex civilization."
     
    It quickly spread thorough what was formerly the christianized east (and western) Roman Empire.

    The Roman Empire peaked in the second century AD. Five hundred years later, when Islam came through these lands, they were at most RINO (Roman in name only) and more often not even that. North Africa, Iberia, Egypt, the Levant and the Red Sea littoral were all under varying degrees barbarian rule or anarchy when the Muslims showed up.

    "It wasn’t initially a step backward in Europe but it was fast becoming a shackle to backwardness and was fortunately overthrown at that time."
     
    As I keep saying, given current trends in western Europe, Islam may well appear as the civilized alternative in the near future.

    Replies: @Spangel

  47. @Bill P
    Islam is democratic. Much more so than Christianity, which is aristocratic. Mohamed is not the "king," he is the prophet, and - above all - the lawgiver. Christ is the King, above reproach, God incarnate. Philosophically there's an enormous difference between the two faiths.

    Consider that Christ takes an executive approach, while Mohamed is more parliamentarian. In the Koran, Mohamed often speaks (for Allah) in the first person plural, while Jesus speaks strictly in the first person singular. This may seem like a subtle difference, but it's important.

    My theory is that people with a democratic faith need a secular strongman to keep them in line, whereas those with a hierarchical, aristocratic religion can handle a more democratic secular rule better. With the loss of a regimented, Christian basis for our society, I doubt we can sustain our polity much longer. If people are not ruled by God, they must be ruled by man.

    Replies: @James Speaks, @Spangel, @Buzz Mohawk, @Charles_Martel, @Almost Missouri

    The lessons of Jesus were much more, “Figure this out and keep in mind these ethical principles.” than the New Testament lets on, but that document was created by authoritarian committee centuries after Jesus died.

    Christianity (TM) may be authoritarian as you say, but only in the same sense that Whahabbism is authoritarian.

    Jesus taught by means of ethical dilemnas. Mohamed by means of many, many examples. Same goals.

    The central strongman figure of many Arab societies is due to the centralized source of income, i.e. oil. During the Middle Ages, Europe was ruled by strongmen called nobles.

    My theory is that people with a democratic faith need a secular strongman to keep them in line,

    Who is the strongman for Reform Jews?

    • Replies: @Bill P
    @James Speaks

    Liberal/secular Jews definitely trend authoritarian. Take the Jews at the SPLC for example. Liberal Jews support restrictions on speech, gun control, government interference in religion (prosecuting Christians who refuse to support gay marriage) etc.

    Orthodox Jews, on the other hand, don't seem to be so interested in this stuff, perhaps because managing their own communities according to their standards requires a great deal of effort, and there's little time left over for managing others.

    Judaism, however, is not aristocratic like Christianity. Jewish priests are not as important as rabbis, for example. Interpreting the law is the big thing in Judaism, so it's more of a "judicial" religion.

    Jewish courts known as beth din, which are a sort of rabbinic troika, have real secular power in Israel. The police will enforce their verdicts. Even here in the US a beth din's verdicts can be enforced by civil authorities so long as Jews entered into a contract together (e.g. a ketubah).

    I think it's interesting how the three major Abrahamic religions roughly approximate our three branches of government in their leanings.

    Replies: @James Speaks

  48. @Bill P
    Islam is democratic. Much more so than Christianity, which is aristocratic. Mohamed is not the "king," he is the prophet, and - above all - the lawgiver. Christ is the King, above reproach, God incarnate. Philosophically there's an enormous difference between the two faiths.

    Consider that Christ takes an executive approach, while Mohamed is more parliamentarian. In the Koran, Mohamed often speaks (for Allah) in the first person plural, while Jesus speaks strictly in the first person singular. This may seem like a subtle difference, but it's important.

    My theory is that people with a democratic faith need a secular strongman to keep them in line, whereas those with a hierarchical, aristocratic religion can handle a more democratic secular rule better. With the loss of a regimented, Christian basis for our society, I doubt we can sustain our polity much longer. If people are not ruled by God, they must be ruled by man.

    Replies: @James Speaks, @Spangel, @Buzz Mohawk, @Charles_Martel, @Almost Missouri

    Islam doesn’t work better than alternative religions anywhere. This has been repeatedly demonstrated with real data.

    In Europe, the poorest and most backward whites are the Muslims of Albania and Chechnya.

    In the Middle East, the Muslims are poorer and less educated than Coptic Christians, despite the state sanctioned oppression the copts face.

    In South Asia, Pakistan and bangladesh are far less stable and somewhat poorer and more backward than Hindu India and bhuddist Sri Lanka.

    In Nigeria, the Christian southern half is infinitely better than the Muslim northern half.

    Really anywhere and everywhere you look, if you look at the population within an ethnicity between Christians vs Muslims, the Christians always demonstrate a more advanced and stable society.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @Spangel

    "How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apa­thy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property—either as a child, a wife, or a concubine—must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men."

    Winston Churchill

    , @Anon1
    @Spangel

    Muslims tend to be fatalistic. There's this view that man cannot control his fate, so why even try?

  49. @Bill P
    Islam is democratic. Much more so than Christianity, which is aristocratic. Mohamed is not the "king," he is the prophet, and - above all - the lawgiver. Christ is the King, above reproach, God incarnate. Philosophically there's an enormous difference between the two faiths.

    Consider that Christ takes an executive approach, while Mohamed is more parliamentarian. In the Koran, Mohamed often speaks (for Allah) in the first person plural, while Jesus speaks strictly in the first person singular. This may seem like a subtle difference, but it's important.

    My theory is that people with a democratic faith need a secular strongman to keep them in line, whereas those with a hierarchical, aristocratic religion can handle a more democratic secular rule better. With the loss of a regimented, Christian basis for our society, I doubt we can sustain our polity much longer. If people are not ruled by God, they must be ruled by man.

    Replies: @James Speaks, @Spangel, @Buzz Mohawk, @Charles_Martel, @Almost Missouri

    It is the people, not the religion.

    The Christians in America who created our constitutional republic with democratically-elected leaders were Northwestern Europeans, specifically Englishmen.

    They were intelligent enough to hold two ideas at once: Christ the King for those who believe, and a government of The People without establishment of religion.

    Christians in some other lands still have not caught up, and Muslims, well… LOL.

    • Replies: @BB753
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Many of the founding fathers, about half, were only Christian in name. Freemasons are either agnostic, theistic or luciferian.

  50. @snorlax
    OT:

    https://twitter.com/sairasameerarao/status/1103073229168496640

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Jimi, @J.Ross, @Achmed E. Newman, @Buffalo Joe, @Clyde

    Cat Scratch Fever in the Coalition of the Fringes in the Democrat Party will lead to the Coalition of the Fringes clawing each other’s eyes out.

  51. At some point the War Nerd became much more PC than this. Couldn’t tell you when.

  52. @Buzz

    That’s my point — the democratic nature of Islam does not povide the spiritual and communal order that you get from an aristocratic faith like Christianity. Without that order, democratic government doesn’t work so well.

    Note that our increasingly post-Christian society is increasingly authoritarian, with the least religious (e.g. college educated millennials) calling most forcefully for authoritarian rule.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Bill P

    Yes, but note what a hard time people in some mostly Christian countries like Russia, Romania, etc. had building and maintaining democracies without electing strongmen or establishing systems like communism.

    Remember too that Christians lived under Earthly kings for most of their history. Republics with leaders elected democratically from among The People are a recent exception, almost an anomaly.

    My point is that I think there is a genetic component, and that it is not distributed evenly, not even among Europeans.

    There was a powerful, genetic change in Northwestern European people in recent centuries that yielded more-civilized, less-violent men. We find it easy to behave ourselves because we are hard-wired to do so. The most violent and unruly among us were culled via execution over a period of centuries.

    Our post-Christian society is more authoritarian and corrupt, in part at least, because our population is less Northwestern European and less White overall -- but I will grant that your point about this last aspect is valid. Drifting away from Christianity has contributed to the problem, but it is a chicken-and-egg thing: Which came first, influence from non-Christians, or the drift?

  53. @Dieter Kief
    Great text. Insightful indeed.

    "Somalis actually live the way these survivalist wackos up in the Idaho panhandle think they live: all on their own, protecting their families."

    This line has a Michel-Houellbecqian drive in it. Love it.

    One more interesting remark from this text: "They’re not stupid people. But they are nomads at heart, and nomads don’t really have the idea of a central government protecting everybody."

    Replies: @Counterinsurgency, @Abe, @Merde

    “Somalis actually live the way these survivalist wackos up in the Idaho panhandle think they live: all on their own, protecting their families.”

    This is a funny line, but Idaho survivalist are not nomads. They are following their own traditions which have carried them from Western Asia across two continents. Build a homestead, protect the homestead, kill or chase away any strange or unfriendly neighbors, then move west and repeat the process.

    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    @Merde

    War Nerd digs your point and knows what the "survivalist wackos" have to do:


    " (...) you don’t hole up in a log cabin with a bunch of motion sensors and polish your gun collection all day like a sitting duck. You move, you and your goats. You keep moving, keep watch, and don’t trust anybody outside the clan. If you’re really going to do it you can’t do that single-family stuff. Too easy to besiege and wipe out. You need a clan. "

  54. anon[370] • Disclaimer says:

    PJ O’Rourke visits Somalia in “All the Trouble in the World” (1995). PJ visited s-holes across the globe in his career- Soviet Russia, Central America, civil-war torn Lebanon, rebel-held parts of the Philippines – but was usually able to come up with a few positives about the country and its native population.

    Except Somalia. He found nothing redeeming about Somalia. In so many words: “worst people on the planet”.

  55. @snorlax
    OT:

    https://twitter.com/sairasameerarao/status/1103073229168496640

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Jimi, @J.Ross, @Achmed E. Newman, @Buffalo Joe, @Clyde

    I have a hard time telling if this is a parody account.

    • Agree: RationalExpressions
  56. The schism in America and England was Puritans and Quakers. These two define the poles of religious crazy. Most of England and early America was Anglican – which is a very light religion – Catholicism without a Pope. The Ps and Qs took religion to either repressive, inbred lows or ecstatic highs of What Would Jesus Do. Neither had the glue to build a nation and neither did.

  57. O/t

    In breaking high altitude news,

    ‘The 45lb stray is thought to be a cross between a Tibetan mastiff and a Himalayan sheepdog.’

    Dog climbs 23,000 ft peak unaided.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/03/06/stray-dog-tags-along-climbing-expedition-top-23000ft-himalayan/

  58. @snorlax
    OT:

    https://twitter.com/sairasameerarao/status/1103073229168496640

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Jimi, @J.Ross, @Achmed E. Newman, @Buffalo Joe, @Clyde

    While it looks like a stray transmission from Venus, this tweet is representative of a big mess happening now in DC, with rallies and speeches for and against the Minnesotan Mahdi. At the same time there is more news about the AOC-Chakrabarti scandal. Now is the time for Trump to see how weak his enemies are and actually — aaaaaaaand he’s tweeting and golfing.

  59. @Spotted Toad
    Reminds me of the description of the Somalis at the beginning of Isak Dinesen/Karen Blixen’s 1937 Out of Africa, probably describing people and events she knew in the 20s; the more things change....

    The Somali town was farther away from Nairobi, on account, I think, of the Somali’s system of seclusion of their women. There were in my day a few beautiful young Somali women, of whom all the town knew the names, who went and lived in the Bazaar and led the Nairobi Police a great dance; they were intelligent, and bewitching people. But the honest Somali women were not seen in the town. The Somali town lay exposed to all winds and was shadeless and dusty, it must have recalled to the Somali their native deserts. Europeans, who live for a long time, even for several generations, in the same place, cannot reconcile themselves to the complete indifference to the surroundings of their homes, of the nomadic races. The Somali’s houses were irregularly strewn on the bare ground, and looked as if they had been nailed together with a bushel of four-inch nails, to last for a week. It was a surprising thing, when you entered one of them, to find it inside so neat and fresh, scented with Arab incenses, with fine carpets and hangings, vessels of brass and silver, and swords with ivory hilts and noble blades. The Somali women themselves had dignified, gentle ways, and were hospitable and gay, with a laughter like silver bells. I was much at home in the Somali village through my Somali servant Farah Aden, who was with me all the time that I was in Africa, and I went to many of their feasts. A big Somali wedding is a magnificent, traditional festivity. As a guest of honour I was taken into the bridal chamber, where the walls and the bridal bed were hung with old gently glowing weavings and embroideries, and the dark-eyed young bride herself was stiff, like a marshal’s baton with heavy silks, gold and amber.
    The Somali were cattle-dealers and traders all over the country. For the transport of their goods they kept a number of little grey donkeys in the village, and I have seen camels there as well: haughty, hardened products of the desert, beyond all earthly sufferings, like Cactus, and like the Somali.
    The Somali bring much trouble upon themselves terrible tribal quarrels. In this matter they feel and reason differently from other people. Farah belonged to the tribe of Habr Yunis, so that personally in a quarrel I sided with them. At one time there was a great real fight in the Somali town, between the two tribes of Dulba Hantis and Habr Chaolo, with rifle-shooting and fires, and ten or twelve people killed, until the Government interfered. Farah then had a young friend of his own tribe, by name of Sayid, who used to come out to see him at the farm, and who was a graceful boy, so that I was sorry when I was told by my houseboys that Sayid had gone round to visit a Habr Chaolo family in their house, when an angry member of the Dulba Hantis tribe had passed and fired two shots at haphazard through the wall of the house and broken Sayid’s leg. I condoled with Farah on his friend’s misfortune.—“What? Sayid?” Farah cried out with vehemence. “That was good enough for Sayid. Why must he go and drink tea in the house of a Habr Chaolo?”

    Replies: @Anon1, @Reg Cæsar, @EdwardM

    Reminds me of the description of the Somalis at the beginning of Isak Dinesen/Karen Blixen’s 1937 Out of Africa, probably describing people and events she knew in the 20s; the more things change…

    The Canadian poet Margaret Laurence lived in British Somaliland for a time, where her British husband worked as an engineer. Probably bored out of her mind, she took up making English translations of the locals’ poetry. (She never learned the language, but worked from the rough draft translations of others.) Poetry slams are to Somalis what hoops is to black Americans.

    The Prophet’s Camel Bell
    A MEMOIR OF SOMALILAND

    The Somali women themselves had dignified, gentle ways, and were hospitable and gay, with a laughter like silver bells.

    Mrs Laurence noted the same thing, about the younger women. They’re like French and Italian girls used to be. Once they’ve aged, though, with all those kids, they’re not so happy-go-lucky. (Aren’t the kids helping out? Mothers of large American families seem as content as anyone here.) Reading this, I just had to nod in agreement. That’s exactly what I’ve observed in 21st-century Somali-Minnesotans.

    This change from young, lithe, and gay to old, stocky, and crabby is known all over the world, but it seems particularly extreme among the Somalis.

  60. @snorlax
    OT:

    https://twitter.com/sairasameerarao/status/1103073229168496640

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Jimi, @J.Ross, @Achmed E. Newman, @Buffalo Joe, @Clyde

    Welcome to the party, pal! (or pallette, I can’t tell with that name).

    Anyone who hates Nancy Pelosi more than me is welcome anytime to our fraternity lacrosse league. First keg’s on me!

    • Replies: @BIll Jones
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I don't know anything about you, so a good working hypothesis would be that I hate Pelosi more than I hate you.
    I am prepared to amend this at the drop of a hat, or course. Do I need to learn lacrosse?

  61. This puts into words what I have always intuited about the difference between Islam and Christianity. Sharia was designed to impose social control on savages. Christianity was designed to impose a universal moral order on people already tamed by civilization for thousands of years.

  62. @Buzz Mohawk
    @Bill P

    It is the people, not the religion.

    The Christians in America who created our constitutional republic with democratically-elected leaders were Northwestern Europeans, specifically Englishmen.

    They were intelligent enough to hold two ideas at once: Christ the King for those who believe, and a government of The People without establishment of religion.

    Christians in some other lands still have not caught up, and Muslims, well... LOL.

    Replies: @BB753

    Many of the founding fathers, about half, were only Christian in name. Freemasons are either agnostic, theistic or luciferian.

  63. @Bill P
    @Buzz

    That's my point -- the democratic nature of Islam does not povide the spiritual and communal order that you get from an aristocratic faith like Christianity. Without that order, democratic government doesn't work so well.

    Note that our increasingly post-Christian society is increasingly authoritarian, with the least religious (e.g. college educated millennials) calling most forcefully for authoritarian rule.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    Yes, but note what a hard time people in some mostly Christian countries like Russia, Romania, etc. had building and maintaining democracies without electing strongmen or establishing systems like communism.

    Remember too that Christians lived under Earthly kings for most of their history. Republics with leaders elected democratically from among The People are a recent exception, almost an anomaly.

    My point is that I think there is a genetic component, and that it is not distributed evenly, not even among Europeans.

    There was a powerful, genetic change in Northwestern European people in recent centuries that yielded more-civilized, less-violent men. We find it easy to behave ourselves because we are hard-wired to do so. The most violent and unruly among us were culled via execution over a period of centuries.

    Our post-Christian society is more authoritarian and corrupt, in part at least, because our population is less Northwestern European and less White overall — but I will grant that your point about this last aspect is valid. Drifting away from Christianity has contributed to the problem, but it is a chicken-and-egg thing: Which came first, influence from non-Christians, or the drift?

  64. @Bill P
    Islam is democratic. Much more so than Christianity, which is aristocratic. Mohamed is not the "king," he is the prophet, and - above all - the lawgiver. Christ is the King, above reproach, God incarnate. Philosophically there's an enormous difference between the two faiths.

    Consider that Christ takes an executive approach, while Mohamed is more parliamentarian. In the Koran, Mohamed often speaks (for Allah) in the first person plural, while Jesus speaks strictly in the first person singular. This may seem like a subtle difference, but it's important.

    My theory is that people with a democratic faith need a secular strongman to keep them in line, whereas those with a hierarchical, aristocratic religion can handle a more democratic secular rule better. With the loss of a regimented, Christian basis for our society, I doubt we can sustain our polity much longer. If people are not ruled by God, they must be ruled by man.

    Replies: @James Speaks, @Spangel, @Buzz Mohawk, @Charles_Martel, @Almost Missouri

    You are correct about one thing: Philisophically, Islam is miles apart from Christianity or any other religion. Exhibit A: Mohammed married a 6-year old, setting the standard for all pedophiles and goat-fuckers out there on the burning sands.

    ‘Nuff said.

    • Replies: @Cortes
    @Charles_Martel

    Political marriages were quite common in Christian Europe during the Middle Ages. A fair idea can be obtained from the reply by Elspeth Cowie:

    https://www.quora.com/Were-child-marriages-common-among-nobility-in-European-Medieval-times

  65. Fun additional tidbits about Somalia: they have Jorge Ramos’d Kenya, to the extent that they are a huge proportion of the population and will never be fully extricated, and they cure demonic possession (which they diagnose frequently) by leaving the possessed party alone in a room with a hyena (“LET ME OUT YOU GUYS I WAS KIDDING!”).

  66. Remember too that Christians lived under Earthly kings for most of their history. Republics with leaders elected democratically from among The People are a recent exception, almost an anomaly, not the rule at all.

    Not every people can handle a republic. And some that can don’t bother– the rest of the Anglosphere, Scandinavia, the Low Countries.

    But almost all peoples should be able to hack monarchism, as it’s ultimately based on family structure. Robert Filmer can explain it all for you, once you put away your Locke.

    Come to think of it, America’s “civic religion” is pretty much under Locke and Key:

  67. “At some point the War Nerd became much more PC than this. Couldn’t tell you when.”

    after obama was elected. which is when i think other people started writing the war nerd columns, since it was anonymous, after all, and anybody could write one and post it on the site. war nerd was not the administrator of the site where his columns were published.

    almost immediately after obama was elected, the war nerd columns changed. i doubt the same guy writes them anymore, or if he does, some are definitely not written by him.

  68. @Bill P
    Islam is democratic. Much more so than Christianity, which is aristocratic. Mohamed is not the "king," he is the prophet, and - above all - the lawgiver. Christ is the King, above reproach, God incarnate. Philosophically there's an enormous difference between the two faiths.

    Consider that Christ takes an executive approach, while Mohamed is more parliamentarian. In the Koran, Mohamed often speaks (for Allah) in the first person plural, while Jesus speaks strictly in the first person singular. This may seem like a subtle difference, but it's important.

    My theory is that people with a democratic faith need a secular strongman to keep them in line, whereas those with a hierarchical, aristocratic religion can handle a more democratic secular rule better. With the loss of a regimented, Christian basis for our society, I doubt we can sustain our polity much longer. If people are not ruled by God, they must be ruled by man.

    Replies: @James Speaks, @Spangel, @Buzz Mohawk, @Charles_Martel, @Almost Missouri

    I like interesting ideas like this, and I think there is something to it as well. It’s akin to the British model of government where the chief executive is a monarch who reigns but does not rule. This neutralized the threat of the overmighty executive. Of course Britain has found ways to create equivalent problems through other paths, but still, one has to admire the counter intuitive wisdom that serve Britain for so long.

    Another analogy is freedom and equality, two concepts most moderns think are important but that are potentially mutually contradictory. It was once widely understood that equality was before the law, not an engineered equality of outcome, while freedom lay elsewhere: in speech, thought, religion, education, etc. Now the poles are almost reversed. We have extra degrees of freedom (or unfreedom, aka, slavery) granted to favored or unfavored groups by law, while all academia, employment, entertainment etc. all has to conform to absurd equality dictates.

    I remember a bumper sticker during the Obama campaign when he was being apotheosized as a new messiah by the media: “No thanks, I already have a Messiah.”

  69. @Brutusale
    As usual, Steve is on point.

    https://pjmedia.com/michaelwalsh/somali-gangs-battle-in-minneapolis-somalis-demand-that-cops-do-something/

    From Mog to Minn, most of them are violent animals that need to be put down.

    Replies: @Fredrik

    Similar in Sweden. Unrest in certain neighbourhoods that has been broadcast internationally is in fact a territorial dispute between Somali gangs.

  70. @Danindc
    War Nerd- what are his politics?

    I remember being disappointed by them.

    Pleasant Hell was s very enjoyable read FYI.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @BB753, @Brutusale

    My overarching recollection is that he was essentially an Irish nationalist posing as an American nationalist. He had the Irishman’s verbal facility which he used to attack anything that smacked of Englishness, WASPs, the British Empire or any other traditional Irish hobgoblin. When his real name turned out to be Dolan rather than Brecher, the surprise level was zero. Still, I liked reading him in the old days.

    • Replies: @Danindc
    @Almost Missouri

    That sounds right and I do see that a lot from my ppl...and try to discourage it

  71. @Charles_Martel
    @Bill P

    You are correct about one thing: Philisophically, Islam is miles apart from Christianity or any other religion. Exhibit A: Mohammed married a 6-year old, setting the standard for all pedophiles and goat-fuckers out there on the burning sands.

    'Nuff said.

    Replies: @Cortes

    Political marriages were quite common in Christian Europe during the Middle Ages. A fair idea can be obtained from the reply by Elspeth Cowie:

    https://www.quora.com/Were-child-marriages-common-among-nobility-in-European-Medieval-times

  72. OT:
    I found this recent interview with Martin Gurri, a retired CIA analyst to be very interesting. I suspect a lot of readers here will as well. His hat tip to José Ortega y Gasset reflects well on him:

    Trump and Brexit Proved This Book Prophetic — What Calamity Will Befall Us Next?
    https://theintercept.com/2019/03/03/revolt-of-the-public-martin-gurri/

  73. @John Achterhof
    It's telling that this is what you serve up in response to the young Somali-American woman courageously speaking truth to power.

    Replies: @DH, @Abe, @Trevor H., @forgottenpseudonym, @Anon

    Agreed. Sailer dropped the ball.
    Still after readinf this I somehow respect a bit more the Somalis.

  74. “Culture” goes with “Somali” in the same way it does with “staphylococci.”

  75. @Danindc
    War Nerd- what are his politics?

    I remember being disappointed by them.

    Pleasant Hell was s very enjoyable read FYI.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @BB753, @Brutusale

    A liberal, basically.

  76. @Colin Wright
    @Almost Missouri

    'I note that in anthropological studies of all-out warfare, e.g., rainforest cannibals or the Eastern Front in WWII, they typically find that 30%-40% or so of the men are killed and a like portion permanently maimed/incapacitated, so the four-women-per-(surviving)-man rule is not arbitrary. It reduces concubinage in violent societies through partial enfranchisement. Also in US ghettos. There are reasons that Louis Farrakhan and Nation of Islam have done well here.'

    There's a Christian fascination with Muslim polygamy.

    A couple of things need to be noted. First, a form of polygamy is an institution in many Christian societies -- the mistress. In Latin American and Mediterranean countries in particular, it's long been usual for any wealthy and successful man to essentially have a second family, and this 'wife's' status has long been recognized in custom, if not in law.

    Second, and on the other hand, in Islamic societies, polygamy is often a more theoretical right than one actually practiced. For example, actual, polygamous marriages are very rare in Morocco; there are something like four thousand, which would work out to considerably less than one tenth of one percent of all unions. Yet a clear majority of Moroccans think they should have the legal right to engage in a polygamous marriage. It's just that there tend to be innumerable practical obstacles -- like the hostility of the current wife to the idea, for starters. Then too, it's apparently just not the usual practice.

    It's kind of like 'right to carry' here in the US. Many of us -- myself included -- think we have the right to wear our .44 Magnum when we go do the grocery shopping or have dinner out. Not very many of us exercise that right, though. We'd feel like damned fools, and that frigging cannon might go off or something. So it stays home, or we don't even own a gun.

    So polygamy in Islam isn't as significant an issue as many seem to think -- not in practice.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    While I agree factually that monogamous cultures are less so in practice than in theory, and same for polygamous cultures’ polygamy, it is also true that everything’s theory exceeds practice, so I’m not sure what the point is supposed to be.

    I think the right to carry is an apt analogy. Not everyone has to carry for it to have a deterrent effect.

  77. @Jimi
    @Almost Missouri

    In the American underclass many men have multiple sex partners and children with different women.

    Restricting them to a maximum of 4 (all of whom they would be legally required to support) would be an improvement.

    Of course the ideal situation would be children within a monogamous marriages. But that's totally lame!

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

    Jimi, You too funny… “all of whom they would be legally required to support.” You know that’s our job, don’t be subbing it out!

  78. @snorlax
    OT:

    https://twitter.com/sairasameerarao/status/1103073229168496640

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Jimi, @J.Ross, @Achmed E. Newman, @Buffalo Joe, @Clyde

    A little help please. Is Saira Rao some one I should know or care about?

    • Replies: @Anon1
    @Buffalo Joe

    In an ideal world, no.

  79. @Counterinsurgency
    @Almost Missouri

    Agree

    More on that era:
    Tom Holland.
    _In the Shadow of the Sword_.
    2012.
    Great depiction of Late Antiquity, and Holland discovers that there are _no_ primary documents surviving from the first _two Centuries_ after the Prophet was born. Like, none. The earliest documents surviving state that an effort was made to destroy all earlier documents that might cast discredit on Islam or on politically powerful persons then living. The result was something like fallout -- because it covered everything.

    Robert R. Reilly.
    _The Closing of the Muslim Mind: How Intellectual Suicide Created the Modern Islamist Crisis _
    2011.
    Shows how Islam resolved the problem of reason vs. faith. Starting in c.a. AD 450, the resolution consisted the assertion that reason is an uncertain guide, suitable only to show that it is unsuitable. The arguments are much like those used by Hume, except that Hume's arguments against religion were not used. Given an omnipotent deity that (by definition) is not limited even by itself or by reason, one ends up with a particularistic, here meaning a religion in which every event is a separate miracle, and logic doesn't apply. Once logic doesn't apply, understanding the world becomes a contradiction in terms. People do not understand, they reacts. This is amazingly similar to Postmodernism (see Hicks, _Understanding Postmodernism_, and Youtube "Hicks postmodernism 2018"), which might explain the alliance (however one sided) between postmodernists and Islam.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    Yes, postmodernism has no principles, while Islam has the principle of taking whatever it wants to reach its goals, so it is a natural match.

    As the modren West reprimitivizes, White Sharia will become a more and more attractive alternative to the ever increasing anarcho-tyranny.

  80. New franchise film series for Johnny Depp, “Somalian Pirates of the Caribbean”, what ever happened to those happy go lucky buccaneers ?

  81. @Spangel
    @Almost Missouri

    Claiming Islam was usually the more civilized alternative doesn’t make much sense given that it quickly spread through what was the christianized east Roman Empire, a land rules by law and a complex civilization.

    Islam was realistically barely different than existing mores in the Arabian peninsula- really an amalgamation of norms that allowed a unified empire, but it was a step backward in North Africa and the near east when it spread. It wasn’t initially a step backward in Europe but it was fast becoming a shackle to backwardness and was fortunately overthrown at that time.

    Replies: @Louis Renault, @Almost Missouri

    it quickly spread

    how did that happen, elections?

  82. @John Achterhof
    It's telling that this is what you serve up in response to the young Somali-American woman courageously speaking truth to power.

    Replies: @DH, @Abe, @Trevor H., @forgottenpseudonym, @Anon

    It’s telling that this is what you serve up in response to the young Somali-American woman courageously speaking truth to power.

    She in a way IS admirable for her bravery and truth-telling, yes. Indeed it is amazing how loyal to culture, religion, race/tribe, and above all menfolk these Muslimas are, even when vaulted to sudden prominence and power by the kaffir’s silly kakocracy.

    Yet it’s simply a matter of a stopped clock being for the moment right, of bravery being girded by spite and truthfulness being emboldened by malice. Still does not change the fact that Somalis are bad news for America, even if it may be fun to watch members of the coalition of the fringes start hacking att each other. Welcome to Thunderdome America! Art of the deal, break on the wheel!

  83. @John Achterhof
    It's telling that this is what you serve up in response to the young Somali-American woman courageously speaking truth to power.

    Replies: @DH, @Abe, @Trevor H., @forgottenpseudonym, @Anon

    Who said that this is in response to that?

    • Replies: @anonymous
    @Trevor H.

    Yup, Mr. Sailer may have been looking for some 2008 bank statements, and stumbled onto the article he had clipped but forgotten. Or something like that.

    Right?

  84. @Spangel
    @Almost Missouri

    Claiming Islam was usually the more civilized alternative doesn’t make much sense given that it quickly spread through what was the christianized east Roman Empire, a land rules by law and a complex civilization.

    Islam was realistically barely different than existing mores in the Arabian peninsula- really an amalgamation of norms that allowed a unified empire, but it was a step backward in North Africa and the near east when it spread. It wasn’t initially a step backward in Europe but it was fast becoming a shackle to backwardness and was fortunately overthrown at that time.

    Replies: @Louis Renault, @Almost Missouri

    “it quickly spread through what was the christianized east Roman Empire, a land rules by law and a complex civilization.”

    It quickly spread thorough what was formerly the christianized east (and western) Roman Empire.

    The Roman Empire peaked in the second century AD. Five hundred years later, when Islam came through these lands, they were at most RINO (Roman in name only) and more often not even that. North Africa, Iberia, Egypt, the Levant and the Red Sea littoral were all under varying degrees barbarian rule or anarchy when the Muslims showed up.

    “It wasn’t initially a step backward in Europe but it was fast becoming a shackle to backwardness and was fortunately overthrown at that time.”

    As I keep saying, given current trends in western Europe, Islam may well appear as the civilized alternative in the near future.

    • Replies: @Spangel
    @Almost Missouri

    Given current trends in Europe? This makes no sense. The worst current trend in Europe is that they let hordes of useless Muslim men in their nations to be perpetual welfare leaches. Islam could not concievably be a solution to this. Islam would only create a reason for a unified global government with Europe and backward Arab states under the banner of a new caliphate.

  85. This is OT I know and somebody gave me some shit about posting a link to this site before . But I thought this guy’s story was pretty good . Steve doesn’t have to pass it and you don’t have to watch it . It’s three parts and altogether > 3 hrs.

    Parts 2&3 are on the side if you’re interested .

  86. @MikeatMikedotMike
    So the point of this piece is of course, we need to bring more of them into the US so they can represent us in Congress.

    BTW, I'll take a thousand wackos in Idaho over one half Japanese FBI agent everyday of the week.

    Replies: @JMcG

    Damn right, ol’ Lonnie boy is one guy I wouldn’t p**s on were I to notice him burning to death. Hell isn’t hot enough for that creep.

  87. @snorlax
    OT:

    https://twitter.com/sairasameerarao/status/1103073229168496640

    Replies: @Charles Pewitt, @Jimi, @J.Ross, @Achmed E. Newman, @Buffalo Joe, @Clyde

    The tweet author is Indian but born here and ran for Congress in Colorado. Has a law degree so watch out! https://sairaforcongress.com/about/

  88. @John Achterhof
    It's telling that this is what you serve up in response to the young Somali-American woman courageously speaking truth to power.

    Replies: @DH, @Abe, @Trevor H., @forgottenpseudonym, @Anon

    Courageous? Anti-white prejudice and religious fanaticism don’t require courage. She’s just being fashionable to the point of banality.

  89. @Pat Hannagan
    War Nerd is always a great read.

    http://exiledonline.com/big-brothers-george-orwell-and-christopher-hitchens-exposed/

    Americans have been falling in unrequited love with these glib visiting Brits since frontier days. Every time a 19th-c. British author overspent on child prostitutes or laudanum, he or she embarked on an American lecture tour to repair the family finances, following Dickens’ path from one muddy American boomtown to the next. At every stop the author would let the yokels adore him for a few minutes, then retire to make careful notes on the locals’ ignorance, foul table manners and general stupidity for the scathing book to be published once safe in London.

    And the Yanks fell for it every time. After wining and dining their distinguished visitor, the social elite of Podunk would order copies of the noble visitor’s account, hoping to see their names in print-only to be stunned at the lecturer’s sketch of Podunk as a stinking backwater, and brief description of its leading lights as an “execrable mob of beasts.”

    I’ll bet an appendage Hitchens hates his groveling audience of American suckers just as much as his Victorian predecessors did. His earlier books are remarkable for their strident anti-American tone-and I mean compared to other books by British Trotskyites. In other words, he’s rabid, folks. He’d hit that nuclear trigger and vaporize your sweet hometown in a second, ya suckers. Hitchens’ orc-like understudy, Mark Steyn, who now poses as a champion of the U.S., was less discreet than Hitchens, describing our country (in an article gloating over the Atlanta bombing) as “the United States of losers and bozos.” You know we’re low on spokespersons when these are our star players.

    On a related note: RIP Lyndon LaRouche (who brought us real historians)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoLDwKd6NW8&feature=youtu.be

    and condolence to Vox Day for the loss of Keith Flint who killed himself when his waifu left him (Vox loves the gook)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONsaSQOUCyM&feature=youtu.be

    (You know, at a good old fashioned Irish Wake they'd stand the cadaver up and dance with the deceased)

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob

    The War Nerd was a hoot. What happened to it?

    • Replies: @simple_pseudonymic_handle
    @Jim Don Bob

    > The War Nerd was a hoot. What happened to it?

    War Nerd (Gary Brecher) is an episodic nom de plume of John Dolan who has bounced around a lot of places. The John Dolan wikipedia page does not have a really linear continuous CV.

    My friends who are more paranoid would say this strongly resembles a spook-sponsored media project. A lot of his writings are complaints about the miserable compensation for a professional writer. If there is not a market for War Nerd columns as a full-time job that is truly disappointing. That thing somebody posted in the India-Pakistan thread about War Nerd's Pakistani taxi driving neighbors in Los Angeles is hilarious.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dolan_(writer)

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Anonymous

  90. @Spangel
    @Bill P

    Islam doesn’t work better than alternative religions anywhere. This has been repeatedly demonstrated with real data.

    In Europe, the poorest and most backward whites are the Muslims of Albania and Chechnya.

    In the Middle East, the Muslims are poorer and less educated than Coptic Christians, despite the state sanctioned oppression the copts face.

    In South Asia, Pakistan and bangladesh are far less stable and somewhat poorer and more backward than Hindu India and bhuddist Sri Lanka.

    In Nigeria, the Christian southern half is infinitely better than the Muslim northern half.

    Really anywhere and everywhere you look, if you look at the population within an ethnicity between Christians vs Muslims, the Christians always demonstrate a more advanced and stable society.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Anon1

    “How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apa­thy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property—either as a child, a wife, or a concubine—must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.”

    Winston Churchill

  91. @Jim Don Bob
    @Pat Hannagan

    The War Nerd was a hoot. What happened to it?

    Replies: @simple_pseudonymic_handle

    > The War Nerd was a hoot. What happened to it?

    War Nerd (Gary Brecher) is an episodic nom de plume of John Dolan who has bounced around a lot of places. The John Dolan wikipedia page does not have a really linear continuous CV.

    My friends who are more paranoid would say this strongly resembles a spook-sponsored media project. A lot of his writings are complaints about the miserable compensation for a professional writer. If there is not a market for War Nerd columns as a full-time job that is truly disappointing. That thing somebody posted in the India-Pakistan thread about War Nerd’s Pakistani taxi driving neighbors in Los Angeles is hilarious.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dolan_(writer)

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @simple_pseudonymic_handle

    I would like to think our spooks are that smart.

    I liked his rants about how useless many of our modern weapons would be in a real war.

    , @Anonymous
    @simple_pseudonymic_handle

    Was it Dolan or "Brecher" who wrote a piece comparing murderous Norwegian Death Metal-heads to American Neo-Conservatives? I wish I'd saved a link to it. It was one of the funniest things I'd read at the time.

  92. @James Speaks
    @Bill P

    The lessons of Jesus were much more, "Figure this out and keep in mind these ethical principles." than the New Testament lets on, but that document was created by authoritarian committee centuries after Jesus died.

    Christianity (TM) may be authoritarian as you say, but only in the same sense that Whahabbism is authoritarian.

    Jesus taught by means of ethical dilemnas. Mohamed by means of many, many examples. Same goals.

    The central strongman figure of many Arab societies is due to the centralized source of income, i.e. oil. During the Middle Ages, Europe was ruled by strongmen called nobles.


    My theory is that people with a democratic faith need a secular strongman to keep them in line,
     
    Who is the strongman for Reform Jews?

    Replies: @Bill P

    Liberal/secular Jews definitely trend authoritarian. Take the Jews at the SPLC for example. Liberal Jews support restrictions on speech, gun control, government interference in religion (prosecuting Christians who refuse to support gay marriage) etc.

    Orthodox Jews, on the other hand, don’t seem to be so interested in this stuff, perhaps because managing their own communities according to their standards requires a great deal of effort, and there’s little time left over for managing others.

    Judaism, however, is not aristocratic like Christianity. Jewish priests are not as important as rabbis, for example. Interpreting the law is the big thing in Judaism, so it’s more of a “judicial” religion.

    Jewish courts known as beth din, which are a sort of rabbinic troika, have real secular power in Israel. The police will enforce their verdicts. Even here in the US a beth din’s verdicts can be enforced by civil authorities so long as Jews entered into a contract together (e.g. a ketubah).

    I think it’s interesting how the three major Abrahamic religions roughly approximate our three branches of government in their leanings.

    • Replies: @James Speaks
    @Bill P

    So, we need more Muslims in Congress???

    Replies: @Anon1, @Bill P

  93. Anon[163] • Disclaimer says:
    @John Achterhof
    It's telling that this is what you serve up in response to the young Somali-American woman courageously speaking truth to power.

    Replies: @DH, @Abe, @Trevor H., @forgottenpseudonym, @Anon

    If she was courageous and wanted to speak truth to power , she would highlight the 14 apartheid states (Somalia included) where converting from islam to Christianity is illegal and punishable by the death penalty.

    If she was honest she would not lie about being an advocate for Lbgtq rights , while remaining silent about the 14 apartheid countries ( Somalia included) .where being lgbtq is illegal and punishable by the death penalty.

    If she was really interested in human rights she would not merely create a straw man to pummel . she will talk about slavery that was abolished 150 years ago but remains silent about chattel slavery in Islamic republics of Mauritania,Sudan.Somalia,Libya,Nigeria in 2019 !!!!

  94. @Bill P
    @James Speaks

    Liberal/secular Jews definitely trend authoritarian. Take the Jews at the SPLC for example. Liberal Jews support restrictions on speech, gun control, government interference in religion (prosecuting Christians who refuse to support gay marriage) etc.

    Orthodox Jews, on the other hand, don't seem to be so interested in this stuff, perhaps because managing their own communities according to their standards requires a great deal of effort, and there's little time left over for managing others.

    Judaism, however, is not aristocratic like Christianity. Jewish priests are not as important as rabbis, for example. Interpreting the law is the big thing in Judaism, so it's more of a "judicial" religion.

    Jewish courts known as beth din, which are a sort of rabbinic troika, have real secular power in Israel. The police will enforce their verdicts. Even here in the US a beth din's verdicts can be enforced by civil authorities so long as Jews entered into a contract together (e.g. a ketubah).

    I think it's interesting how the three major Abrahamic religions roughly approximate our three branches of government in their leanings.

    Replies: @James Speaks

    So, we need more Muslims in Congress???

    • Replies: @Anon1
    @James Speaks

    No, but we need more in the Knesset.

    , @Bill P
    @James Speaks

    hmm? I think you're getting the wrong impression from me calling Islam "democratic." It isn't a value judgment.

    But it is true. The concept of shura doesn't exist in Christianity -- or Judaism for that matter.

  95. @Sean
    It is very simple. The highly educated people leave and gang drug traffickers and Mullahs take over, which makes even moderately educated people want to leave, and so the country spirals down into a hell on Earth. Immigration has a natural tendency to accelerate because diasporas in the counties where people are going progressively reduce their costs.

    The fate of black districts in America was a very similar process. Once educated middle class blacks moved out those previously stable areas became taken over by gangs and drug traffickers. There was also the Black Muslims.

    Replies: @James N. Kennett

    The best thing that Somalis can do for their children is to sustain a low-level civil war. This guarantees that anyone who manages to reach a soft-hearted Western country will not be sent back.

  96. @Spangel
    @Bill P

    Islam doesn’t work better than alternative religions anywhere. This has been repeatedly demonstrated with real data.

    In Europe, the poorest and most backward whites are the Muslims of Albania and Chechnya.

    In the Middle East, the Muslims are poorer and less educated than Coptic Christians, despite the state sanctioned oppression the copts face.

    In South Asia, Pakistan and bangladesh are far less stable and somewhat poorer and more backward than Hindu India and bhuddist Sri Lanka.

    In Nigeria, the Christian southern half is infinitely better than the Muslim northern half.

    Really anywhere and everywhere you look, if you look at the population within an ethnicity between Christians vs Muslims, the Christians always demonstrate a more advanced and stable society.

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Anon1

    Muslims tend to be fatalistic. There’s this view that man cannot control his fate, so why even try?

  97. @James Speaks
    @Bill P

    So, we need more Muslims in Congress???

    Replies: @Anon1, @Bill P

    No, but we need more in the Knesset.

  98. @Buffalo Joe
    @snorlax

    A little help please. Is Saira Rao some one I should know or care about?

    Replies: @Anon1

    In an ideal world, no.

  99. @Almost Missouri
    @Spangel


    "it quickly spread through what was the christianized east Roman Empire, a land rules by law and a complex civilization."
     
    It quickly spread thorough what was formerly the christianized east (and western) Roman Empire.

    The Roman Empire peaked in the second century AD. Five hundred years later, when Islam came through these lands, they were at most RINO (Roman in name only) and more often not even that. North Africa, Iberia, Egypt, the Levant and the Red Sea littoral were all under varying degrees barbarian rule or anarchy when the Muslims showed up.

    "It wasn’t initially a step backward in Europe but it was fast becoming a shackle to backwardness and was fortunately overthrown at that time."
     
    As I keep saying, given current trends in western Europe, Islam may well appear as the civilized alternative in the near future.

    Replies: @Spangel

    Given current trends in Europe? This makes no sense. The worst current trend in Europe is that they let hordes of useless Muslim men in their nations to be perpetual welfare leaches. Islam could not concievably be a solution to this. Islam would only create a reason for a unified global government with Europe and backward Arab states under the banner of a new caliphate.

  100. @simple_pseudonymic_handle
    @Jim Don Bob

    > The War Nerd was a hoot. What happened to it?

    War Nerd (Gary Brecher) is an episodic nom de plume of John Dolan who has bounced around a lot of places. The John Dolan wikipedia page does not have a really linear continuous CV.

    My friends who are more paranoid would say this strongly resembles a spook-sponsored media project. A lot of his writings are complaints about the miserable compensation for a professional writer. If there is not a market for War Nerd columns as a full-time job that is truly disappointing. That thing somebody posted in the India-Pakistan thread about War Nerd's Pakistani taxi driving neighbors in Los Angeles is hilarious.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dolan_(writer)

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Anonymous

    I would like to think our spooks are that smart.

    I liked his rants about how useless many of our modern weapons would be in a real war.

  101. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Trevor H.
    @John Achterhof

    Who said that this is in response to that?

    Replies: @anonymous

    Yup, Mr. Sailer may have been looking for some 2008 bank statements, and stumbled onto the article he had clipped but forgotten. Or something like that.

    Right?

  102. @James Speaks
    @Bill P

    So, we need more Muslims in Congress???

    Replies: @Anon1, @Bill P

    hmm? I think you’re getting the wrong impression from me calling Islam “democratic.” It isn’t a value judgment.

    But it is true. The concept of shura doesn’t exist in Christianity — or Judaism for that matter.

  103. @Jack D
    War Nerd's writing style is a little too Gonzo! for me but he is basically right. There are a lot of groups like that - either someone is kicking ass and taking names or else all hell breaks loose. There's no in between. This is why Russians are most happy when they are governed by a strong Czar - no matter how corrupt he is, it's better than being ruled by the mob.

    The New England or Japanese village model where the hand of the law is light and yet people behave themselves anyway is the exception, not the rule and it doesn't take too much "diversity" to spoil that paradise. In the old days it was "colorful" to read about tribal ways in travelogues (I enjoyed "Out of Africa" as a kid) but you didn't expect the tribe to be living alongside you in St. Paul.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    The New England or Japanese village model where the hand of the law is light and yet people behave themselves anyway is the exception, not the rule

    On the contrary, agriculturalists living in a small village everywhere tend to have good social cohesion and are generally peaceful. When the bulk of one’s property is immovable, it’s difficult to engage in destructive behavior without ruining it for everyone.

    The major communal behavioral difference is not that between New Englanders/Japanese and everyone else – it is between high-density agriculturalists who tend to be more cooperative and docile and pastoralists/semi-nomadic people who are warlike, independent, and querulous. It’s for the same reason why Mongolians are far more violent and unruly compared to, say, South Koreans.

  104. @ATBOTL
    There is a larger point in this piece about the failure of white conservative individualist culture. The future belongs to tribes, not rugged individualists.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    There is a larger point in this piece about the failure of white conservative individualist culture. The future belongs to tribes, not rugged individualists.

    You don’t necessarily need a tribe, but you do need a community.

    “War Nerd” speaks to truth, when he says the following:

    If you’re really going to do it you can’t do that single-family stuff. Too easy to besiege and wipe out. You need a clan.

    I know lots of people who are survivalists and think that they are going to make it in a major infrastructure-disruption/disorder scenario, because they are armed and have some spare food and fuel.

    I always tell them they are simply being good (free) supply storage for organized people (e.g. gangs). It’s EASY to isolate and overrun single individuals and families tucked in somewhere, no matter how well-armed.

    If it were just me or perhaps just my wife and me, I might be able to disappear into the woods and make it a go and survive, even for the long-term (I happen to live where there is plenty of fresh water). When you have young children, that is absolutely impossible and you need a community, a defensible community, to stand a chance. Furthermore, that community has to be populated by people with good cohesion built on mutual trust (and that’s why gangs start with an advantage in such crises).

    And for goodness sakes, learn some basic medical care, including how to use an Israeli bandage:

    People without combat experience talk about guns and ammo (and maybe generator), but few if any of them seem to understand having a ready source of fresh water and access to trauma care.

  105. Anonymous[112] • Disclaimer says:
    @simple_pseudonymic_handle
    @Jim Don Bob

    > The War Nerd was a hoot. What happened to it?

    War Nerd (Gary Brecher) is an episodic nom de plume of John Dolan who has bounced around a lot of places. The John Dolan wikipedia page does not have a really linear continuous CV.

    My friends who are more paranoid would say this strongly resembles a spook-sponsored media project. A lot of his writings are complaints about the miserable compensation for a professional writer. If there is not a market for War Nerd columns as a full-time job that is truly disappointing. That thing somebody posted in the India-Pakistan thread about War Nerd's Pakistani taxi driving neighbors in Los Angeles is hilarious.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dolan_(writer)

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @Anonymous

    Was it Dolan or “Brecher” who wrote a piece comparing murderous Norwegian Death Metal-heads to American Neo-Conservatives? I wish I’d saved a link to it. It was one of the funniest things I’d read at the time.

  106. @Almost Missouri
    @Danindc

    My overarching recollection is that he was essentially an Irish nationalist posing as an American nationalist. He had the Irishman's verbal facility which he used to attack anything that smacked of Englishness, WASPs, the British Empire or any other traditional Irish hobgoblin. When his real name turned out to be Dolan rather than Brecher, the surprise level was zero. Still, I liked reading him in the old days.

    Replies: @Danindc

    That sounds right and I do see that a lot from my ppl…and try to discourage it

  107. @Merde
    @Dieter Kief

    “Somalis actually live the way these survivalist wackos up in the Idaho panhandle think they live: all on their own, protecting their families.”

    This is a funny line, but Idaho survivalist are not nomads. They are following their own traditions which have carried them from Western Asia across two continents. Build a homestead, protect the homestead, kill or chase away any strange or unfriendly neighbors, then move west and repeat the process.

    Replies: @Dieter Kief

    War Nerd digs your point and knows what the “survivalist wackos” have to do:

    ” (…) you don’t hole up in a log cabin with a bunch of motion sensors and polish your gun collection all day like a sitting duck. You move, you and your goats. You keep moving, keep watch, and don’t trust anybody outside the clan. If you’re really going to do it you can’t do that single-family stuff. Too easy to besiege and wipe out. You need a clan. ”

  108. @Almost Missouri
    This is something I've tried explaining to moderns: in its original spreading, Islam was usually the more civilized alternative. As the WN says, making robbery punishable by amputation, limiting war booty to four brides*, treating all Muslims—not just clan members—as brothers, etc., these were mercies compared to what went before.

    Coincidentally, Islam spread rapidly from its cradle in the nomad-heavy Arabian Peninsula until it ran up against other civilizations that already had functioning laws/customs for the above things. And even then, if those other civilizations had become decadent/dysfunctional, Islam quickly scarfed up the place: e.g., Egypt, North Africa, fratricidal Visigothic Iberia. A society need not have been advanced to resist the Islamic Borg assimilation, just modestly functional. Even the primitive Merovingians were able to break the Islamic wave at Tours. Strangely, the Merovingians' descendants, the modern European Union seems not able to duplicate this elementary feat...

    *I note that in anthropological studies of all-out warfare, e.g., rainforest cannibals or the Eastern Front in WWII, they typically find that 30%-40% or so of the men are killed and a like portion permanently maimed/incapacitated, so the four-women-per-(surviving)-man rule is not arbitrary. It reduces concubinage in violent societies through partial enfranchisement. Also in US ghettos. There are reasons that Louis Farrakhan and Nation of Islam have done well here.

    Replies: @m___, @Jimi, @Colin Wright, @Counterinsurgency, @Spangel, @Alden

    One thing Christianity and Islam have in common; both outlawed infantacide which was common practice in ancient pagan times.

    Before Christianity was legalized it was wide spread. One reason Christianity grew so much before legalization was that Christians went to the village garbage dumps and picked up and raised the abandoned babies thus increasing the number of Christians.

  109. Oh God,

    off topic the local news is showing another Holocaust hootenanny in an expensive venue in Beverly Hills. Endless Versace suited, bejeweled , face lifted holocaust survivors. The youngest are only 73 74, so it’s another 25 years of them.

    It’s fundraising season. Last week’s Jewish journal was full of ads for Israel bonds ADL friends of the IDF fundraisers in the most expensive hotels in century city and Beverly Hills. One good thing about the Persian Jews infesting BH and WLA, they have no interest whatsoever in Holofraud, Israel, social justice, blacks gays and other Jewish causes

  110. @Achmed E. Newman
    The guy is a good writer, but his crack on survivalists in Idaho is just asinine. Idaho is not Somalia - people don't f__k goats or herd them around as a job, eat wacky weed all day, and hate everyone outside their families and "Klan" (haha). Survivalists always talk community, community, community, and they live it, as most are not the Ted Kazinsky type.

    They’re not stupid people. But they are nomads at heart, and nomads don’t really have the idea of a central government protecting everybody.
     
    Yes, actually, in terms of how Americans think, they are indeed stupid. No, they aren't stupid for Somalia, but they are stupid for America. Interestingly, the preppers, survivalists, and Constitutionalists also don't like the idea of a central governnment "protecting" the hell out of everybody. It's just that they have 1,000 years of British/American culture to back them up, and are much better regulated (in the 2nd- Amendment sense). Somalians are retards in comparison to Idaho preppers.

    "War Nerd" should have spent some time in northern Idaho, so he could understand the mindset as well as he seems to understand that of the Somalians.

    Replies: @william munny

    “War Nerd” should have spent some time in northern Idaho, so he could understand the mindset as well as he seems to understand that of the Somalians.

    I seem to recall listening to an episode of the podcast where he discussed looking for a home in Idaho, or something like that. He was terrified of locals so decided against it. He is afraid of rural American whites.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @william munny

    That might very well explain it, William. You'd think, at least, the "War Nerd" would be a gun guy. Maybe he might want to start looking for a home in Somalia ... or Minneapolis.

  111. @Danindc
    War Nerd- what are his politics?

    I remember being disappointed by them.

    Pleasant Hell was s very enjoyable read FYI.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @BB753, @Brutusale

    He’s an Irish-American poet who taught at UC Berkeley, so what do you think his politics are?

    • Replies: @Danindc
    @Brutusale

    they’re not as obvious as you make them out to be

  112. My favorite War Nerd column

    http://exiledonline.com/the-war-nerd-assassinations-where-accounting-meets-human-resources/

    But the man ordering an assassination has to think about more than the value of the target. He has to consider who’s going to replace him. If you’re facing a fool with a smart assistant, you want to leave the fool alone. Kill the assistant if you can, but don’t touch the fool in command. Kill him and you’re working as the enemy’s Human Resources Department, clearing out the dead wood for them.
    …………..
    If you’re running assassinations, you have to be as familiar with the enemy’s organization chart as their own HR people. In fact, you basically have to act like a Human Resources Department in reverse, deciding who the best of the enemy are, and taking them out—but also identifying the weak leaders and protecting them. (I know, I’m giving the average HR department WAY too much credit when I say “in reverse.” We all know a lot of HR jerks who spend their time protecting the idiots and weeding out the smart people, but I’m talking theory here.)
    ……………
    What really hits me, writing about assassination logic here, is how much more disciplined so many other places are in the way they spend lives. I guess that’s not really always a good thing, because those places—Iraq, Viet Nam during the war—are pretty miserable. But you can talk about the way assassination works there logically, without getting all distracted with wacko psychology. In a war zone, there isn’t much psychology going on, not personal Jared-Loughner type brain bubbles, anyway. Everybody has pretty much the same psychology. That’s why they call it “post-traumatic” stress, I suppose: because it has to wait until you’re out of the war zone.

  113. @william munny
    @Achmed E. Newman

    “War Nerd” should have spent some time in northern Idaho, so he could understand the mindset as well as he seems to understand that of the Somalians.

    I seem to recall listening to an episode of the podcast where he discussed looking for a home in Idaho, or something like that. He was terrified of locals so decided against it. He is afraid of rural American whites.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    That might very well explain it, William. You’d think, at least, the “War Nerd” would be a gun guy. Maybe he might want to start looking for a home in Somalia … or Minneapolis.

  114. @Brutusale
    @Danindc

    He's an Irish-American poet who taught at UC Berkeley, so what do you think his politics are?

    Replies: @Danindc

    they’re not as obvious as you make them out to be

  115. Anonymous [AKA "Hassan Mohamed Jama"] says:

    African = Af + erey + keen = Af (mouth) erey (word) keen (bring) we Somalis are the originators of the spoken word….see this link how every english word is of African Somali origin….
    https://www.somalinet.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=381964&p=4924203#p4924203

  116. @Spotted Toad
    Reminds me of the description of the Somalis at the beginning of Isak Dinesen/Karen Blixen’s 1937 Out of Africa, probably describing people and events she knew in the 20s; the more things change....

    The Somali town was farther away from Nairobi, on account, I think, of the Somali’s system of seclusion of their women. There were in my day a few beautiful young Somali women, of whom all the town knew the names, who went and lived in the Bazaar and led the Nairobi Police a great dance; they were intelligent, and bewitching people. But the honest Somali women were not seen in the town. The Somali town lay exposed to all winds and was shadeless and dusty, it must have recalled to the Somali their native deserts. Europeans, who live for a long time, even for several generations, in the same place, cannot reconcile themselves to the complete indifference to the surroundings of their homes, of the nomadic races. The Somali’s houses were irregularly strewn on the bare ground, and looked as if they had been nailed together with a bushel of four-inch nails, to last for a week. It was a surprising thing, when you entered one of them, to find it inside so neat and fresh, scented with Arab incenses, with fine carpets and hangings, vessels of brass and silver, and swords with ivory hilts and noble blades. The Somali women themselves had dignified, gentle ways, and were hospitable and gay, with a laughter like silver bells. I was much at home in the Somali village through my Somali servant Farah Aden, who was with me all the time that I was in Africa, and I went to many of their feasts. A big Somali wedding is a magnificent, traditional festivity. As a guest of honour I was taken into the bridal chamber, where the walls and the bridal bed were hung with old gently glowing weavings and embroideries, and the dark-eyed young bride herself was stiff, like a marshal’s baton with heavy silks, gold and amber.
    The Somali were cattle-dealers and traders all over the country. For the transport of their goods they kept a number of little grey donkeys in the village, and I have seen camels there as well: haughty, hardened products of the desert, beyond all earthly sufferings, like Cactus, and like the Somali.
    The Somali bring much trouble upon themselves terrible tribal quarrels. In this matter they feel and reason differently from other people. Farah belonged to the tribe of Habr Yunis, so that personally in a quarrel I sided with them. At one time there was a great real fight in the Somali town, between the two tribes of Dulba Hantis and Habr Chaolo, with rifle-shooting and fires, and ten or twelve people killed, until the Government interfered. Farah then had a young friend of his own tribe, by name of Sayid, who used to come out to see him at the farm, and who was a graceful boy, so that I was sorry when I was told by my houseboys that Sayid had gone round to visit a Habr Chaolo family in their house, when an angry member of the Dulba Hantis tribe had passed and fired two shots at haphazard through the wall of the house and broken Sayid’s leg. I condoled with Farah on his friend’s misfortune.—“What? Sayid?” Farah cried out with vehemence. “That was good enough for Sayid. Why must he go and drink tea in the house of a Habr Chaolo?”

    Replies: @Anon1, @Reg Cæsar, @EdwardM

    I have seen camels there as well: haughty, hardened products of the desert, beyond all earthly sufferings, like Cactus, and like the Somali.

    Fantastic sentence.

  117. @Achmed E. Newman
    @snorlax

    Welcome to the party, pal! (or pallette, I can't tell with that name).

    Anyone who hates Nancy Pelosi more than me is welcome anytime to our fraternity lacrosse league. First keg's on me!

    Replies: @BIll Jones

    I don’t know anything about you, so a good working hypothesis would be that I hate Pelosi more than I hate you.
    I am prepared to amend this at the drop of a hat, or course. Do I need to learn lacrosse?

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS