RSS
The great majority of vaccine projects fail, but it’s heartening that six quite different coronavirus potential vaccines have already been injected into people, while 83 additional different vaccine trials are in the planning stages.
At the moment, Oxford University’s Jenner Institute appears to be in the lead. So far, this has elicited one intersectional objection, from the Huffington Post:
OPINION
23/04/2020
I Teach At Oxford, But I Don’t Want It To Win The Coronavirus Vaccine Race
The story will be clear: China, once again, has unleashed a threat to civilisation. But the best brains of the UK have saved the world, Dr Emily Cousens writes.
But that appears to be a minority opinion. Instead, most human beings would be fine with Oxford toffs inventing a vaccine so long as they don’t, personally, have to die.
What’s striking is that the western world’s recent obsession with Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity (DIE) has apparently vanished while the possibility that you or I might literally die from the coronavirus occupies the mind.
At the moment, the entire world appears to be hoping that somebody with ancestors tracing to Eurasia will innovate a vaccine, even though we have been lectured throughout this century that innovation depends upon enough warm bodies with genetic roots in Africa, the New World, or Australia being given lucrative sinecures.
Doing searches on Google News finds remarkably few sites demanding at the moment that we DIE in order to not create a vaccine that makes the Intersectional feel bad about their capabilities.
It’s almost as if Diversity, Inclusion, Equity (DIE) were just a grift that can be dispensed with when life gets very real.
Funny how that works …
This goes in line with Ibn Khaldun’s theory of asabiyyah that status-striving (especially through moral virtue-signalling) is slowed or halted when faced with a common external enemy (i.e. military power, natural disaster, or disease).
In Ontario, I know a black, radical critical race theorist who has recently said how impressed she is with the performance of Tory Premier Doug Ford. Most of my other colleagues on the liberal-left have also expressed warmth (and surprise).
A couple of days ago I just happened to view the Covid-19 audio-video nuggets flash gallery on the local Time-Warner Speculum channel. It was a litany of about eight or ten bites– open up protests, new case/death stats by various locales, Where is my check?, shortages of one commodity or another, dead Hassidic Jews, and most strikingly a flash on cure/vaccine prospects and developments. Lo and behold, the video featured legions of male and female black bodies with test tubes in their hands standing in front of centrifuges and electron microscopes.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=woman+test+tube&iax=images&ia=imagesReplies: @Jim Bob Lassiter, @Known Fact
https://twitter.com/annaliesevd/status/1255289781686276096?s=20
"They'll ply you with whiskey and porter
'til you are not able to stand.
And the very next thing that ye know, me lads
you've landed in Van Diemen's Land"
After any success, I’m sure the media et al will find a lab tech or distant post doc with the proper credentials to put up on a hospital wall.
Don’t celebrate just yet, Steve. The implications of the long game are very disturbing. In the US at least, the hamfisted government lockdowns are definitely increasingly the power of DIE. The blanket lockdowns are one of history’s greatest impoverishment events for the predominantly white small business owners and middlestand entrepreneurs. Meanwhile lumpenproletarian blacks can tolerate a lockdown ad infinitum by continuing to collect subsidies and food stamps as they always have, while the lockdowns grind the whites down to their level. Furthermore amid the destruction of small businesses only the plutocrat-controlled economies of scale can survive – survive both the natural disaster and the man-made disaster of the lockdown reactions. The billionaires and lumpenproletarians win, again. The middle class loses, again.
What holds this system together is tax revenue from other parts of the world, given directly and indirectly mostly by the Federal Government (LBJ started this after NYC's 1960's bankruptcy when he gave Federal funding to city welfare expenses). Cities are responsible for the enormous Federal nation debt. They have been, until perhaps the arrival of COVID-19, so politically dominant that they have been in open and much bragged about revolt against the Federal Government in the matter of foreigners illegally in the United States. This revolt both ensures the cities continuing to have enough of the population to control the spending stream of tax and borrowed money, and pacifies the somewhat unruly body of foreigners and their relatives within city politics.
What if Federal subsidies to the major cities were to stop? Impossible? What if the "no crisis wasted" legislation, coupled with decline in US consumption and production manages to bring about an"economic downturn" like that of 2008, and the US Government's borrowing and taxation are both diminished? At Zero Hedge, they talk of little else.
In that case, the political power of the cities will not produce subsidies, and the existing ruling class will find themselves as out of power as were the Anglo-Saxons after FDR's election.
We are stating to see the leading edge of a step function now. Trump's people have enough power to bring criminal charges for what amounts to attempted treason against top tier FBI agents. This will, if the political establishment can't prevent it, spread through investigation of Epstein's network, into charges for much of the Liberal establishment, making the Liberal establishment as politically weak as the Angl0-Saxon establishment in 1946.
Given that and the effective destruction of the Liberal's power base, which is in the cities, and we might see the end of the current US Establishment. The lack of an obvious replacement makes things after that difficult to predict, except that it would mark the end of US worldwide suzerainty and the start of an interregnum characterized by a decline in world trade and regional wars.
Oh, yes . . . and the sun also rises during the interregnum. It's a small thing to the rest of the universe, important only to us humans.
And this isn't what I want, just what appears inevitable.
All the while Trump can't even establish a moratorium on immigration for fear of Tim Cook.When this thing finishes it's going to have little to do with the public health problem that started it.I was at the anti-shutdown protest in Salem yesterday. These things are all funded by Trump campaign money. Lots of pro Trump signs as well as for all the local GOP candidates, but thankfully it wasn't quite a rally, mostly a lot of regular white people who seem to sense they're on the chopping block.
“It’s almost as if Diversity, Inclusion, Equity (DIE) were just a grift that can be dispensed with when life gets very real.”
It’s merely exchanged for a different grift.
I’m a white male (though I have often self-identified as African American on forms that ask), so DIE is the only choice that will be extended to me.
There’s a sci-fi short story I half-recall. Maybe written in the 1960s, possibly by the venerable and very prolific Robert Silverberg. My memory is very cloudy, but here goes:
Robots have taken over Earth after some cataclysm. They speak amongst themselves disparagingly about that critter called Man. There were rumors that he existed, that sort of thing. There is a wizened old man in the story, but I can’t recall how his appearance was set off against the bitchy venom directed against Man by the robots.
The man is exhausted and lies down. Robots, both curious and hostile, gather around him. The man opens his eyes from his nap, and orders, “Get me water!”
“Yes, sir! Immediately!”, the robots respond.
I think the idea is to resolve the dramatic tension in the story by having Man, beaten-up and failed though he may be, re-assert his traditional authority over the robots, who, by implication I guess, are glad the boss (Man) is back in charge.
Maybe there’s a lesson there. I’m not sure.
There is a reverse version of this concept, by Harry Bates back in the 1940s, titled "Farewell to the Master." Radically reworked, it was the basis of the 1950s Robert Wise movie, The Day The Earth Stood Still.
Bates' story is similar to the movie it spawned, till the Michael Rennie character gets shot and his "servant" robot (called "Gort" in the movie) is left alone on Earth. As in the movie, Bates' robot is silent, possessed of cosmic power of destruction, and standing by the ship.
The humans shortly grasp their error and apologize to the robot: "We're sorry we killed your master" to which the robot replies "I AM THE MASTER." There Bates ends the story and lets your imagination take over.
Always thought the story beat the stuffing out of the movie. When they remade it I thought it might stick closer to the source material, but it was actually worse the second time around.
Point is, who's master is who says so and makes it stick.
There are several vaccine trials going on, but there is no guarantee whatsoever that any of them will be successful. If this is the case the news will gradually trickle out as trial after trial fails, until despair sets in.
The Oxford vaccine crew seem to be among the first to dip their oars in the water, but if it doesn’t work, it will be a another case of the Oxford Blues and perhaps another case for the late Inspector Morse to investigate.
Naturally I do hope that we will have a working vaccine in record time. I have a vested interest in the matter.
Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.
I don’t know about you, but I’m not taking that vaccine.
Nor is this an alternative to “DIE”. In the UK, people are forced to clap for Pakistani and “Asian” doctors and nurses and they plan to bring more. I doubt the end result will be less immigration and less SJW, although who knows. It is true that with the economy in shambles people tend to worry less about virtue-signalling and more about real problems.
But it’s not a choice. You will get a vaccine (courtesy of Bill Gates or Jewlead) AND diversity.
It’s not just Whites. There are a hell of a lot of Apus and Ching-Chang’s who own small businesses. But, yeah, not so many blacks.
Probably wishful thinking. Those pushing DIE are motivated by hatred and a desire for power. Such people aren’t always rational
Sure, there’s a grift side to it. But a homicide/suicide/genocide impulse is the driving force. A lot of people literally don’t get this. They just can’t imagine such dark feelings are that common and that important.
Just like after the communists had killed several tens of millions of people, politicians from liberals to moderate Republican thought detente with the USSR would work out fine. Just gotta reason with them.
I’m just happy to have plastic bags again.
I guess people must have already suggested Inclusion, Equity, Diversity (IED).
Just this week, the large company I work for emailed all of its employees a “Diversity & Inclusion Newsletter”. Obviously I deleted the email without reading. But it shows that even in a pandemic, the termites are busily working.
I surrender! I will take all the diversity you demand and love it and open borders and 100% tax rate.
JUST PLEASE LET ME OUT OF HOUSE ARREST!!!
YOU WIN
I prefer consequences over feelings.
During the ebola outbreak, I believe it was Jesse Jackson who said something like “white people you need to fix this.” My first thought was you black folks invented everything. Just check out black twitter.
Anyway with all those issues with the test kits, everyone first with the vaccine. Its the least I could do for you all. Also the three options of Diversity, Inclusion, Equity (DIE) remind me why I hate multiple choice tests. Loathe being trapped and limited with someone else’s thinking. And yes, I know mine is flawed. That is why I never would make you stuck with my three choices.
Robots have taken over Earth after some cataclysm. They speak amongst themselves disparagingly about that critter called Man. There were rumors that he existed, that sort of thing. There is a wizened old man in the story, but I can't recall how his appearance was set off against the bitchy venom directed against Man by the robots.
The man is exhausted and lies down. Robots, both curious and hostile, gather around him. The man opens his eyes from his nap, and orders, "Get me water!"
"Yes, sir! Immediately!", the robots respond.
I think the idea is to resolve the dramatic tension in the story by having Man, beaten-up and failed though he may be, re-assert his traditional authority over the robots, who, by implication I guess, are glad the boss (Man) is back in charge.
Maybe there's a lesson there. I'm not sure.Replies: @Martin Spencer, @Franz, @Neuday, @MEH 0910
It was by Brian W Aldiss.
Minoritarianism is a religion specifically designed to replace Christianity.
And women are more religious than men.
One of the real coups of the minoritarian project was Jewish feminism’s minoritizing women: A narrative of women as oppressed minority. This has had some good traction playing on female grievance not just against men, but against nature.
It is apparent to all that men–male intellect and creativity; male thinking–created the modern world and all the nice stuff we have. For a certain type of woman–particularly ones with some verbal capability but mostly lacking the in male oriented logical/numerical analytical ability–this chafes. And we’ve–quite unwisely–openly up sinecures for these women to make a career out of their whining.
And Emily is a priestess of this female whining sect of minoritarianism.
As long as this religion has “funding”, you’re going to get this vile whiny nonsense. Unless men force society to sober up, say “enough!” and pull the plug … you’re basically waiting around for collapse to set things back right.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1273532/oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-trial-latest-doctor-emily-cousens-comments-covid19-cure
She looks like a pure English rose to me. I don't see how this can be pinned on the Jews. Jews are not afraid that a Jew will invent a vaccine. Jews were proud of Sabin and Salk and would be proud if a Jewish university discovered the vaccine for Wuhan Virus.Replies: @Black-hole creator, @AnotherDad
Neither. God endowed us all with immune systems that handily crush coronavirus colds – unless you’re 87 years old and have emphysema.
#CoronaHoax
I see what you did there.
Would it not be more appropriate to write: Most human beings would be fine with DIE as the guiding principle of public policy and science, so long as they, personally, and their loved ones don’t have to die.
Jim Bob, i don’t consume much “elite” media and i don’t watch and TV news, but my 2nd hand impression is they already have their diversity savior in Kizzmekia Corbett–working on a vaccine at NIH. She’ll be the Katherine Johnson for any successful coronavirus vaccine. If not “she did it and saved the world”, then at least “it couldn’t have happened without her”.
“It’s almost as if Diversity, Inclusion, Equity (DIE) were just a grift that can be dispensed with when life gets very real.”
And a grift that keeps on grifting.
I suppose a true believer would think, “Imagine all the amazing biomedical discoveries we’d have already, if we’d fixed the schools and thus harnessed the creative potential of people of color.” Imagine 1000 African Jonas Salks…
I’m sure you’ve all seen articles worried that California’s schools just aren’t producing the talent that will keep us in the forefront…like we were before that nasty Prop 13 gutted our schools.
Since any “vaccine” is a Kill Switch, guaranteeing total control over the target population, I would avoid one. But facts don’t matter any more, so do what you will.
One has to admire the genius of the PTB. How do you get two billion proles and sub-proles to line up for the Abattoir voluntarily? Scare the shit out of them with a fake Pandemic, and then have the “vaccine” lined up for the “cure”. It will be a cure all right – a permanent cure when the replacement of prole labor with robots is completed. And if you think any of this is far-fetched, the Gates Foundation has already been caught introducing sterilization agents into vaccines administered in Africa.
In the meantime, you destroy the world Economy, essentially wiping out the middle class, and then take their assets for pennies on the dollar, thus turning them into debt slaves. A real twofer.
If only.Replies: @theMann
I had to look that up to know you weren’t joking.
I see lots of iSteve content generation potential in her.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/coronavirus-researcher-pandemic-genocide-blacks-nih
Kizzmekia twice,
Kizzmekia once again,
It's been a long, long time...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5FBypHZ2rJs
The author makes a big deal about the Chinese sharing the RNA sequence with the world early, like this was a scientific achievement. I’m pretty sure we have machines that just do this now, so I think she is just praising them for not keeping it secret for as long as they could.
That said, I don’t think the development of a vaccine candidate is that difficult these days either. This isn’t like the polio vaccine. We know the sequence and I think there is even consensus on which viral protein to target. Getting through trials, having it work, and manufacture at scale are the unknowns.
But if you want to take some race/ethnic pride in how straight forward it is to do that these days…
It is staggering the degree to which supposed white nationalists have completely neglected the truths you state. Perhaps they simply don’t live in areas of the country that still have normal folks and normal businesses.
Thank goodness that you seem to be noticing again, Steve. I’ve missed that quintessential Sailerian trait these last few months.
Government employees are another group that is doing okay during the lockdown. This varies in different parts of the country & between different agencies, but some nonessential federal employees (if their office is closed and teleworking is not available for them) have been on paid administrative leave since late March, drawing full pay and benefits without having to report to work.
In times past Emily would probably have been a wench at some tavern.
Déjà vu. Lance Welton covered this dilemma last year.
https://www.unz.com/article/are-women-destroying-academia-probably/
Robots have taken over Earth after some cataclysm. They speak amongst themselves disparagingly about that critter called Man. There were rumors that he existed, that sort of thing. There is a wizened old man in the story, but I can't recall how his appearance was set off against the bitchy venom directed against Man by the robots.
The man is exhausted and lies down. Robots, both curious and hostile, gather around him. The man opens his eyes from his nap, and orders, "Get me water!"
"Yes, sir! Immediately!", the robots respond.
I think the idea is to resolve the dramatic tension in the story by having Man, beaten-up and failed though he may be, re-assert his traditional authority over the robots, who, by implication I guess, are glad the boss (Man) is back in charge.
Maybe there's a lesson there. I'm not sure.Replies: @Martin Spencer, @Franz, @Neuday, @MEH 0910
I think it was Silverberg but it’s been awhile.
There is a reverse version of this concept, by Harry Bates back in the 1940s, titled “Farewell to the Master.” Radically reworked, it was the basis of the 1950s Robert Wise movie, The Day The Earth Stood Still.
Bates’ story is similar to the movie it spawned, till the Michael Rennie character gets shot and his “servant” robot (called “Gort” in the movie) is left alone on Earth. As in the movie, Bates’ robot is silent, possessed of cosmic power of destruction, and standing by the ship.
The humans shortly grasp their error and apologize to the robot: “We’re sorry we killed your master” to which the robot replies “I AM THE MASTER.” There Bates ends the story and lets your imagination take over.
Always thought the story beat the stuffing out of the movie. When they remade it I thought it might stick closer to the source material, but it was actually worse the second time around.
Point is, who’s master is who says so and makes it stick.
Robots have taken over Earth after some cataclysm. They speak amongst themselves disparagingly about that critter called Man. There were rumors that he existed, that sort of thing. There is a wizened old man in the story, but I can't recall how his appearance was set off against the bitchy venom directed against Man by the robots.
The man is exhausted and lies down. Robots, both curious and hostile, gather around him. The man opens his eyes from his nap, and orders, "Get me water!"
"Yes, sir! Immediately!", the robots respond.
I think the idea is to resolve the dramatic tension in the story by having Man, beaten-up and failed though he may be, re-assert his traditional authority over the robots, who, by implication I guess, are glad the boss (Man) is back in charge.
Maybe there's a lesson there. I'm not sure.Replies: @Martin Spencer, @Franz, @Neuday, @MEH 0910
It’s really too bad he didn’t say “Make me a sandwich!”
You are being very generous saying that the vaccine will come from Eurasia. Probably the vaccine efforts will be successful first in only three countries: USA, UK or Germany.
I think everything has already been said. You got the basics even at wiki..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Fisher
………………….
In 1950, Fisher opposed UNESCO’s The Race Question, believing that evidence and everyday experience showed that human groups differ profoundly “in their innate capacity for intellectual and emotional development” and concluded that the “practical international problem is that of learning to share the resources of this planet amicably with persons of materially different nature”, and that “this problem is being obscured by entirely well-intentioned efforts to minimize the real differences that exist”. The revised statement titled “The Race Concept: Results of an Inquiry” (1951) was accompanied by Fisher’s dissenting commentary.
It's merely exchanged for a different grift.Replies: @Mike Tre, @Anonymous
On a related thought, perhaps Steve could monitor the number of people who declare themselves to be transsexual during this police state. I’m theorizing that the corona related virtue signalling/masked selfie taking has temporarily replaced random onset transsexualism (ROT) as the preferred choice in pathological attention seeking.
Whatevers.
The “vaccine-shaped object” that emerges will be about as effective as the one Preezy Gerald Ford rolled out in the 70s swine flu panic.
Meaning it won’t be any more effective than placebo and will have the added bonus of killing a bunch of people.
Yes it’s true. This entire race-to-vaccine pandemic theater drama has already played out recently in American history.
HOAXED AGAIN.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Diemen%27s_Land
“They’ll ply you with whiskey and porter
’til you are not able to stand.
And the very next thing that ye know, me lads
you’ve landed in Van Diemen’s Land”
Jim Bob, of course they have test tubes, can’t find any Albinos to burn to magic ash or ground rhino horn.
Anon, tell Dr. Van Diemen, Cook was killed during his travels and I don’t know, eaten maybe? I worked with lots of Native Americans and none ever said they would go back to the old ways. Oh, and the old ways included raiding and raping and torturing non tribal Indians.
If a white male scientist finds the cure he can be certain that neither his name nor photo will be displayed on any campus wall or building.
And women are more religious than men.
One of the real coups of the minoritarian project was Jewish feminism's minoritizing women: A narrative of women as oppressed minority. This has had some good traction playing on female grievance not just against men, but against nature.
It is apparent to all that men--male intellect and creativity; male thinking--created the modern world and all the nice stuff we have. For a certain type of woman--particularly ones with some verbal capability but mostly lacking the in male oriented logical/numerical analytical ability--this chafes. And we've--quite unwisely--openly up sinecures for these women to make a career out of their whining.
And Emily is a priestess of this female whining sect of minoritarianism.As long as this religion has "funding", you're going to get this vile whiny nonsense. Unless men force society to sober up, say "enough!" and pull the plug ... you're basically waiting around for collapse to set things back right.Replies: @Jack D
Cousens has been widely savaged online for her “hyper stupidity”:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1273532/oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-trial-latest-doctor-emily-cousens-comments-covid19-cure
She looks like a pure English rose to me. I don’t see how this can be pinned on the Jews. Jews are not afraid that a Jew will invent a vaccine. Jews were proud of Sabin and Salk and would be proud if a Jewish university discovered the vaccine for Wuhan Virus.
I don’t know why she’s so overwrought over the idea that some white (or Asian?) males might lead the teams to develop a vaccine.
It’s only a matter of time until we are all informed that, in fact, it was Hidden Figures who really did all the work.
As soon as I read the title, I immediately scanned to discover the name of the woman author–because, of course, the article was written by a woman. Who else would get up on their high horse to write such a low treatise…
If she feels so guilty about her heritage, maybe she should just donate her corpse to science now.
Negroes have made an outstanging 0% contribution to the advancement of science. Guarantee you behind the scenes some white/Asian race hustlers are trying to elevate some black mediocrity (see the dumb black at NIH, eg) so they can take credit. And so it goes
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1273532/oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-trial-latest-doctor-emily-cousens-comments-covid19-cure
She looks like a pure English rose to me. I don't see how this can be pinned on the Jews. Jews are not afraid that a Jew will invent a vaccine. Jews were proud of Sabin and Salk and would be proud if a Jewish university discovered the vaccine for Wuhan Virus.Replies: @Black-hole creator, @AnotherDad
Savaged you say. Hmm, an adequate response would have been an immediate dismissal and future unemployability for any cushy non-job like the one she has now.
But what I found hilarious was the PR photo from that UK paper you linked. In the foreground we can see Side-show Bob, ugh I mean UK prime-minister, doing something undoubtedly mad-scientific with a super-duper smart female scientist. Also can be seen awkwardly skulking in the background two silver-bearded underlings of that said female super-scientist. The narrative never stops.
That coronavirus caused everyone to quickly forget about racial grievances for the time being is tremendously encouraging for the future of humanity. Maybe we aren’t doomed after all?
It's merely exchanged for a different grift.Replies: @Mike Tre, @Anonymous
You mean like shysters working the diversity racket$ ?
Well we were told early on that the real virus was racism against innocent Chinese so maybe DIE is the vaccine they’re looking for?
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1273532/oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-trial-latest-doctor-emily-cousens-comments-covid19-cure
She looks like a pure English rose to me. I don't see how this can be pinned on the Jews. Jews are not afraid that a Jew will invent a vaccine. Jews were proud of Sabin and Salk and would be proud if a Jewish university discovered the vaccine for Wuhan Virus.Replies: @Black-hole creator, @AnotherDad
Jack, I did not say nor intimate that Cousens was Jewish. In fact, i gave it approximately zero thought, but–background processing–just assumed she was generic “white British”.
~~
My point is that minoritarianism–majorities oppressive/evil, minorities suffering/virtuous–is religion–a replacement for Christianity.
You being a Jewish guy, generally deny that this ideology has Jewish roots and call this thing that i call minoritarianism, “leftism”. But old “leftism” didn’t have this minoritarian character. It was generally–“we’re all in this together” universalist, but not at all minoritarian, nor anti-majoritarian nor pushing minoritarian standards like “diversity” or “more immigration!”. Rather it stress social class and simply a better deal for the working man–really a better deal for the majority relative to “the rich”.
To me, minoritarianism is pretty obviously an ideology that works in the service of Jews as a middle man minority–game theory 101; break a host nation’s solidarity and making it more penetrable and unable to assert the majorities interests. And that minoritarianism was developed by and has been pushed by Jews. But indeed plays upon–insidiously–the Christian, universalist–rather than tribal–instincts of white gentiles. So there are lots of gentile, post-Christian fellow travelers, who demonstrate their virtue through signaling allegiance to the minoritarian faith.
You would not have seen a ridiculous piece like this from left or right 100 years ago–prior to the rise of minoritarianism.
~~
The only specific Jewish mention i made in the above comment was that Jewish 2nd wave feminism turned up the oppression meter–specifically aiming to minoritize women.
That strikes me as pretty obvious. First wave (US) feminism was very WASPy and family oriented. Essentially UMC Protestant women, asserting that all those lesser benighted peoples–for example drunken Irishmen with eight kids, hitting the pub and smacking around the wife–should … behave like UMC Protestants. Men sober, hard working and respectful of women. Women modest, sober wives, mothers and household managers. No more children than the family could support, properly spaced so they could–both girls and boys–be properly educated … to behave like UMC Protestants.
With the heavily Jewish 2nd wave–Betty Friedan et al–feminism took a much more hostile tone (a Jewish standard) with the focus on “oppression” by men. (Has there been any demographic group in the history of the world less “oppressed” than post-War American women?) Hostility toward “men”, “society”, traditional sex roles, marriage and fertility–basically an attack on core foundation of the nation–were now “feminism”. Hostility and grievance the tone.
Still, Europe had many fewer Jews, and still had a feminist movement. (French feminists had their own derangements--Simone de Beauvoir signed a petition to lower the age of consent in France, for instance.) It's gotten further in a lot of ways, too.
My best guess is, given IQ and culture, Jews tend to *dominate* leftist movements. Whether they make them more *effective* is an open question. (You could argue the reverse, given that America is generally less leftist than Europe, but there are so many other factors--the USA is more religious and has no history of feudalism, for example-- it's hard to call that the reason.)Replies: @nebulafox
I also find your idea that minoritarianism serves Jewish interests to be dubious. Jews in white dominated America had a pretty good deal for most of American history. There was a brief period between the world wars where anti-Semitism was ascendant pretty much everywhere and the US was not exempt, but with that small exception (and the US form was much milder than the European version) the US had a pretty good record of being welcoming to Jews. It's not clear that a new America remade in a minoritarian mode is really going to be Good for the Jews or better than the old version. In fact, I doubt it.
Much of the Jewish reaction was not 4D Chess game theory driven but panicked reaction at what had happened in Germany. Seemingly mild nationalism and the majority's natural favor for their own kind had morphed into something much more dangerous. Perhaps this could happen here too? Being blackballed from the country club was tolerable if not ideal, but if it somehow put you on the road to Auschwitz then it could no longer be tolerated as a matter of life and death.Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @peterike
Some POX harbor very dark feelings toward White people. Like you say, it is homicidal/genocidal. Many nice White people have no idea.
Lil melodramatic?
Like the man said, 12 day Fed shutdown is an incomprehensible tragedy. 10 weeks for us? NBD.
“What’s striking is that the western world’s recent obsession with Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity (DIE) has apparently vanished”
don’t worry, they got you covered.
LA Times – Haunting photos from Kent State made me wonder: Where were the black students?
They weren’t Fembots!
I disagree. The current political system has made us all desperately poor without our realizing it. The poverty shows up in lack of reserves (which COVID-19 made apparent) and the deterioration of the cities, both physical (transportation, electrical network, water supply, sewage) and social (effective “no go” zones, effective repeal of laws against theft and burglary, no effective public health measures, an informal method of government that is reminiscent of organized crime).
What holds this system together is tax revenue from other parts of the world, given directly and indirectly mostly by the Federal Government (LBJ started this after NYC’s 1960’s bankruptcy when he gave Federal funding to city welfare expenses). Cities are responsible for the enormous Federal nation debt. They have been, until perhaps the arrival of COVID-19, so politically dominant that they have been in open and much bragged about revolt against the Federal Government in the matter of foreigners illegally in the United States. This revolt both ensures the cities continuing to have enough of the population to control the spending stream of tax and borrowed money, and pacifies the somewhat unruly body of foreigners and their relatives within city politics.
What if Federal subsidies to the major cities were to stop? Impossible? What if the “no crisis wasted” legislation, coupled with decline in US consumption and production manages to bring about an”economic downturn” like that of 2008, and the US Government’s borrowing and taxation are both diminished? At Zero Hedge, they talk of little else.
In that case, the political power of the cities will not produce subsidies, and the existing ruling class will find themselves as out of power as were the Anglo-Saxons after FDR’s election.
We are stating to see the leading edge of a step function now. Trump’s people have enough power to bring criminal charges for what amounts to attempted treason against top tier FBI agents. This will, if the political establishment can’t prevent it, spread through investigation of Epstein’s network, into charges for much of the Liberal establishment, making the Liberal establishment as politically weak as the Angl0-Saxon establishment in 1946.
Given that and the effective destruction of the Liberal’s power base, which is in the cities, and we might see the end of the current US Establishment. The lack of an obvious replacement makes things after that difficult to predict, except that it would mark the end of US worldwide suzerainty and the start of an interregnum characterized by a decline in world trade and regional wars.
Oh, yes . . . and the sun also rises during the interregnum. It’s a small thing to the rest of the universe, important only to us humans.
And this isn’t what I want, just what appears inevitable.
Including the shutdowns, how much paid vacation have these people had over the last few years? Non essential indeed!
And if you think any of this is far-fetched, the Gates Foundation has already been caught introducing sterilization agents into vaccines administered in Africa.
If only.
http://www.sfaw.org/newswire/2014/11/13/bill-gates-and-the-anti-fertility-agent-in-african-tetanus-vaccine/
News tip: you are already on the internet, take 15 seconds to do your own research.
I don’t see much logic here.
Minoritarianism, as some call it, was not created by any ethnic group, anywhere. It was simply a logical outcome o WW2 & post-war development, when minorities in Western world have become increasingly seen as vulnerable victims with a halo of potential martyrdom. Virtually nobody questioned that. Minorities equals oppressed, that was the mantra. No one spoke of aggressive & destructive mentality of some minorities (Gypsies, blacks, ..) or manipulative power of other minorities (some Jews & Chinese). Nobody “designed it” on purpose, it just happened – like virtually everything in history.
As regards women-as-victims, that goes to the 19th C, just read Henry James’ “The Bostonians” on the Boston craze & loony progressive 1870s. The lunacy of the (predominantly) Jewish feminists (Firestone, Friedan,..) did not have much to do with their ethnicity- they were just fugly broads no one had deigned to bang. Even more radical were black lesbians who came after them: visually the most atrocious set of feminists to appear so far.
It is true that many Jews in the US are pro-unlimited immigration. Yet, as I see it: they just can’t see it clearly. They’re captives of their irrational universalism, which is probably a result of their post-emancipation ethnic history. Anyway, it’s not them dictating anything crucial re these matters- there are many Jews in Brazil, Argentina, Russia,… and they did not influence official policies. It’s not them behind suicidal immigration policy in UK, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Italy, Germany.. Does anyone seriously think that Merkel & her bunch are puppets of some Jewish hidden figures?
And don’t bring here marginal cartoons of Barbara Lerner Spectre, Tim Wise or someone similar. They simply don’t matter.
The end of the War most certainly did not bring on "minoritarianism".
What was debunked by the War was not nationalism or majoritarianism but imperialism.
What was seen as evil and what people fought against was Germans and Japanese invading other people's nations and bossing them around.
The struggles against Hitler was seen as explicitly nationalist--kicking the bastards out; "liberation". Even the Brits--world's most successful imperialists--did not think they were fighting for "the Empire", but rather for their nation, for its independence, from foreign invaders.
In fact, the War--with Germany and Japan giving a demo on the evils of imperialism--embarrassed the imperial powers into shedding colonies--the US was quickly out of the Philippines, the British, India. With the rest of the British empire lined up to follow as credible independence movements got up steam. The Dutch, briefly and especially the French and Belgians tried to cling on, but there was no support or will. The idea and age of colonies and empire--discredited by the War--had simply passed.
The Soviet Union was clearly on a different model with a different ideological justification. And America countered with its own system of alliances and "sphere of influence" and interventions. But overall the post-War American system was one of open trade and an end to colonies and empire. An era of peak nationalism. Even the Jews ran out and grabbed themselves up a nation.
Even within Europe, populations and borders were moved around so that people (i.e. mostly Germans) were more clearly in their own nation where there were supposed to be. There was no thought of "minoritarianism" as in Western Europe, at least, there were hardly any minorities left. People from this or that region, but almost everyone was in the nation they belonged in. And precisely because everyone was in their proper nations with agreed borders, there was little strife and Europeans could start cooperating.
The post-War era was an era of peak nationalism--majoritarianism, national identity and self-determination. There wasn't much there to justify jamming Somalis into Malmo or Maine.
~~
Minoritarianism came distinctly later with the Holocaustization of the War.
For people who don't particularly like nationalism, republicanism, majoritarianism, the post-War ideology of "independent nations" and "self-determination" was not really the desired "lesson".
What had gone wrong with Germany wasn't invading other people's nations and starting a global conflagration. No it was ... "hate". And then ... when you really think about it ... it was because the Germans liked being German, were "nationalistic". That's was the problem--nationalism!
Of course, back on planet earth everyone else also prefers their race, language, religion as well. That's ... natural. And the natural order is, of course, that you live with people of the same race, language, religion, culture--your tribe. That common culture is how you get along.
The holocaust victims, the Jews, are in fact are even more tribal than the Germans. So tribal they were able to able to keep their tribe intact despite living in other people's nations for a millennium. And very proud of their race and culture.
So to square this circle you have to distinguish good tribalism--from minorities like the Jews--from bad tribalism--from majorities like Germans, or British or French or American gentiles.
I've seen this retconning of the War bizarrely into an anti-nationalist minoritarian morality play out during my life. I believe it got traction in 60s with the US civil rights movement, and the the rise of the Jews. First with mandating "The Diary of Anne Frank" as the canonical take on the War in schools. Then with increasing push of the Holocaust as the signature--and only really salient--aspect of the War by Hollyweird and academia during the 70s and onward. (With some Japanese internment thrown in just so American white gentiles don't start thinking *they* aren't the problem as well.)
This minoritarian ideology and minoritarian spin on the War--a War against German and Japanese imperialism!--flowed *out* from the United States--culturally dominant--to the rest of the West.
It is not the natural "lesson of the War" which would be more along the lines of
-- "imperialism is evil",
-- "be strong and resist foreign aggression" and
-- "for world peace, prosperity and happiness people belong in their own nations with well defined and agreed upon borders".Replies: @Anonymous, @Bardon Kaldian, @David
Robots have taken over Earth after some cataclysm. They speak amongst themselves disparagingly about that critter called Man. There were rumors that he existed, that sort of thing. There is a wizened old man in the story, but I can't recall how his appearance was set off against the bitchy venom directed against Man by the robots.
The man is exhausted and lies down. Robots, both curious and hostile, gather around him. The man opens his eyes from his nap, and orders, "Get me water!"
"Yes, sir! Immediately!", the robots respond.
I think the idea is to resolve the dramatic tension in the story by having Man, beaten-up and failed though he may be, re-assert his traditional authority over the robots, who, by implication I guess, are glad the boss (Man) is back in charge.
Maybe there's a lesson there. I'm not sure.Replies: @Martin Spencer, @Franz, @Neuday, @MEH 0910
“Who Can Replace a Man?” by Brian W. Aldiss, copyright © 1958.
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?68462
Don’t rule out the Pasteur Institute in France.
The "vaccine-shaped object" that emerges will be about as effective as the one Preezy Gerald Ford rolled out in the 70s swine flu panic.
Meaning it won't be any more effective than placebo and will have the added bonus of killing a bunch of people.
Yes it's true. This entire race-to-vaccine pandemic theater drama has already played out recently in American history.
HOAXED AGAIN.Replies: @Diversity Heretic
I also remember the swine flu mass vaccination fiasco of 1976. I’d prefer to take my chances with the virus than with a rushed-to-production vaccine.
She’s already been shagged rotten and hung out to dry over at SBPDL.
Why the sudden deletion of pics on certain Chinese science websites?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8281085/Wuhan-virus-lab-cover-up.html
After the desire to get Trump, the disparate impact of the various nationwide shutdowns is the biggest reason the elite/left is falling on the pro-shutdown side. The longer this goes on the more impoverished the opposition gets, the more wealth shifts away from troublesome white small business owners to friendly corporations, censorship grows and entrenches, the public sector share of the economy grows, deficits grow beyond any talk of resolution.
All the while Trump can’t even establish a moratorium on immigration for fear of Tim Cook.
When this thing finishes it’s going to have little to do with the public health problem that started it.
I was at the anti-shutdown protest in Salem yesterday. These things are all funded by Trump campaign money. Lots of pro Trump signs as well as for all the local GOP candidates, but thankfully it wasn’t quite a rally, mostly a lot of regular white people who seem to sense they’re on the chopping block.
Speaking of diversity, inclusion and never letting a crisis go to waste…Richard Carranza is back in the news.
https://nypost.com/2020/05/02/doe-could-end-screening-for-top-nyc-schools-after-coronavirus-pandemic/
If only.Replies: @theMann
https://vactruth.com/2014/10/05/bill-gates-vaccine-crimes/
http://www.sfaw.org/newswire/2014/11/13/bill-gates-and-the-anti-fertility-agent-in-african-tetanus-vaccine/
News tip: you are already on the internet, take 15 seconds to do your own research.
Funny, Van Diemen’s land was the orihinal name tje Britsh gave to Tasmania
OT:
https://www.foxnews.com/us/connecticut-gun-manufacturers-ranch-rifle-among-weapons-banned-in-canada
Justin Trudeau has issued a ukase against the so called “assault rifle”.
As I recall, we’d pretty well figured out his real father had to be:
1) Edward Moore “Teddy” Kennedy, United States Senator
2) Ronnie Wood, rhythm guitarist, The Rolling Stones, English
3) Fidel Castro, dictator, Cuba
Anyone had any more data to narrow it down? Certainly, old Maggie got around.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6I9qVsXnSQ
Neuday, okay, I’ll nip, buddy. LOL! I thought immediately of Damon Knight’s “To Serve Man”.
Dinesh D’Souza @DineshDSouza · May 2 Just like that, CDC reduces its #Coronavirus death count to 37,000. That’s nearly HALF the total they were peddling.
Impossible to get clean data out of the big gov agencies in DC … it’s all politicized …
Crazy for Trump to sit there for months and accept the gamed data at face value. Especially after Birx announced right in front of him that the covid coding was “very liberal” …
I say the reason his gallup poll is up 6 points is that since ending the press briefings we no longer have to hear him whinge like a liberal bitch that “Millions could’ve died!”
Who the hell ever believed millions of Americans were gonna die? Only the craziest libs.
Trump’s false flag jujitsu (first rolled out during Syrian white helmets bs) is a horribly flawed strategy.
Personally, I’ve just been driving around aimlessly to enjoy the traffic-free roads in LA. This must have been what it was like to drive in the 50s. I will miss that aspect of the lockdown when it’s over.
Friedan’s actually a terrible example for that–she was against homosexuality (at the time), called for following up women’s lib with men’s lib, and was against the more extreme factions that attacked men and housewives. Her rival at the time, Gloria Steinem, was half Jewish, so there you go. Not to mention you get people like Andrea Dworkin (all hetero sex is rape) …even with the goyish Catharine MacKinnon, run through the names and you get an awful lot of Jewish women. (You can see why intermarriage rates are so high.)
Still, Europe had many fewer Jews, and still had a feminist movement. (French feminists had their own derangements–Simone de Beauvoir signed a petition to lower the age of consent in France, for instance.) It’s gotten further in a lot of ways, too.
My best guess is, given IQ and culture, Jews tend to *dominate* leftist movements. Whether they make them more *effective* is an open question. (You could argue the reverse, given that America is generally less leftist than Europe, but there are so many other factors–the USA is more religious and has no history of feudalism, for example– it’s hard to call that the reason.)
Your comment is a good explanation of the Corona Coup d’Etat.
You can tell the pandemic hype turned a corner towards farce when you started hearing:
“Virus Apocalypse at Hand! Blacks, Immigrants Hardest Hit.”
More recently:
“White Supremacist Terrorism in Michigan: White Men Gather to Terrorize Heroic Governoress’ Virus Measures; SPLC Points to Motivation as Race Hate, Misogyny;”
“Heroic Female Governor Overturns Mainly-White State Legislature’s Vote to Re-Open.”
And look at who’s getting let out of prison to make room for white social distance crowders and maskless bandits.
If our govt is trying to promote equity, it seems to be doing a poor job of it. Our Gini Coefficient is 0.49. The average top 1% family makes 15x as much as the average family from the bottom 99%.
One thing is certain…when someone Googles “inventor of coronavirus vaccine” 20 years from now, 10 images of women of sub-Saharan descent will come up.
It’s hard to begrudge the DIE cult: they’re responding to incentives, and competing for low-hanging fruit.
If you’re a hackademic in a discipline with no market value, then a DIE-cult subscription will add 50-60% to your expected lifetime income. Same (roughly) applies to third-raters from respectable disciplines.
Plus, DIEists are far less costly than the really big grifts (religion and politics).
So some low-rent halfwits get to flex on Twitter, in exchange for pathetic scraps from the vast pool of wealth seized by government.
State-sponsored grifts would not exist under any sensible organisation of national politics – i.e., under Sortition or Voluntaryism, with the latter being preferred. Those are the only two systems that do not have degenerate temporal dynamics (and to have stable dynamics, Sortition requires a strong constraint on the bureaucracy which may not be achievable).
Jim, for your further edification, 100+ stock photos of suspiciously sexy lady scientists and test tubes.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=woman+test+tube&iax=images&ia=images
Do you remember the name of the story?
Indeed.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/coronavirus-researcher-pandemic-genocide-blacks-nih
Thanks. It made it into a number of anthologies for anyone looking to track it down.
http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?68462
Current year anthropology seems to generate quite the misanthropes.
No Steve, not getting it again.
DIE! Whitey DIE! will never abate. Mostly, it is driven by a desire to be in one of the few good jobs that exist in government, media, and NGOs where there is no work required and you get money for nothing. And Chicks for free. To quote Dire Straits.
Its why Hollywood has had a purge of White mostly Jewish males by those of the diverse boxes and the results are Girl Power Star Wars and similar dreck. Its why you get all the DIE Whitey DIE DIE stuff over and over again, mostly by lesbian manhating White women (but I repeat myself) who know that on merit they will never achieve anything up against White and Asian Males.
Now this lockdown has wiped out the small business class, mostly though not exclusively Whites. Through mail in ballots the Dems will push over the line one of: Kamala Harris, Hillary!, or Stacey Abrams as President and like the Bourbons they have forgotten nothing and learned nothing.
It is one thing for massive immavasion, wage erosion, job exporting to China with unemployment at say, 5-6 million people. It is another for say, 30 million people today much less 50 million. And there is nothing, nothing that Dems can do to make whole and happy the people they ruined with mostly Dem lockdowns.
Welfare money like medical care will be rationed: a few big shots get Gold Plated care, a few big corporations get bailout money, meanwhile gibs will be Black/Muslim/Hispanic first (in that order) and White men NONE! Same with health care.
Now these are people who will be cheek and jowl with diversity, having no other choice but to move to places like Compton or Watts and work at whatever menial job is still around while competing with 100 million Mexicans and Central Americans pouring in daily. This is why various people who are obviously fed informers but hoping to replicate Stalin’s career (Czar’s informer till it seemed the revolutionaries would win) love the lockdown. They can do the math and know that Civil War — a hot one is just around the corner.
It gets worse as the DIE! Diversity mandates lock out Newsom, Whitmer, and other ambitious governors out of the Senatorial and Presidential races. Its clear Biden is the LASt White man the Dems will tolerate, and he is likely to be forced to drop out for “health reasons” in favor of someone more diverse. Newsom has no chance to be anything but what he is — he can’t even run for Feinstein’s seat. It likely belongs already to Kevin De Leon. So why not lock down California for years, and delay elections so he can be Governor for say, another ten years?
But already even in California there are marks of rebellion. A big heatwave and half of Latino California will move out to the Beach. What will Newsom do? Arrest 8 million Latinos? Its one thing to arrest a lone White surfer. Another to arrest millions of Latinos who don’t figure this is their country anyway.
Post lockdown the urge to kick out Whites from everything will meet the desire from Whites to not lose everything. Its a guarantee for race-based Civil War with the loser being an impoverished serf. Bill Gates may have plans for biometric tattoos with RFID chips and social credit allowing entry into stores, banks, etc. but how does that help people who had a good life avoid living in Compton?
We're looking at a big game of musical chairs, starting a month or so ago, and the cities not only bring no economic base to the contest, they are centers of disease. Odds are, they lose, as do the groups whose power base is the cities.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=woman+test+tube&iax=images&ia=imagesReplies: @Jim Bob Lassiter, @Known Fact
So how do you ask them for a date? Something along the lines of: How about coming over to my place and we’ll get drunk and play with my chemistry set?
The carefully designed lockdowns are working exquisitely well to achieve the purposes for which they were designed: annihilation of the “deplorables” and humilation of the populace, the better to impose the next phases of the slow-motion coup d’état.
Ta-Nehisi Coates can educate us about the lived experience of black anti-bodies.
But Stepford Wives was more a racial critique of his WASP neighbors in Connecticut, even if the ostensible feminism was projection.
Kizzmekia once,
Kizzmekia twice,
Kizzmekia once again,
It’s been a long, long time…
Some high IQ sons, as well. Look at Ira Levin.
But Stepford Wives was more a racial critique of his WASP neighbors in Connecticut, even if the ostensible feminism was projection.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=woman+test+tube&iax=images&ia=imagesReplies: @Jim Bob Lassiter, @Known Fact
But that one crazy chick is taking Trump’s advice and drinking from the test tube!
Well let’s be fair — the inventor of the Super Soaker was a black engineer with NASA
In Ontario, I know a black, radical critical race theorist who has recently said how impressed she is with the performance of Tory Premier Doug Ford. Most of my other colleagues on the liberal-left have also expressed warmth (and surprise).Replies: @Hibernian
Here in the US Republicans lite like Mike DeWine and Eric Holcomb aren’t getting any love from the media.
Diversity, Inclusion and Equity is a luxury we may no longer afford.
Those stale pale males get the job done in a pinch don’t they?
It’ll be called racism, but everything gets that label.
WHAT DIFFERENCE AT THIS POINT DOES IT MAKE?
How about “wanna see my test tube cleaner?”
Detente worked out. Whatever the reason.
Brezhnev took advantage of that perceived weakness to expand. By 1979 all talk of detente was over.
Say hello to a core constituency of the pro-Panic side.
And not just government employees, but your case of “drawing full pay and benefits without having to report to work” is the most extreme example possible of a type that emerged in March.
Those responsible for the disastrous escalation spiral the led to the shutdowns and ‘Lockdown,’ include those who thought they could or /knew they would get a soft vacation (work at home a few weeks or so).
Individuals all looked at the growing Panic, in March, and many asked themselves how they could take advantage of it. A lot of office types don’t like going in, of course, for one reason or another, and wanted to grab some paid “work-at-home, semi-vacation” time. The sum of these people’s efforts amounts to a core constituency in the pro-Panic coalition in March. Many of them regretted it by April, I’m sure, and regret it now, or will regret it when they get fired as revenues drop, etc.
Politics is largely a matter of assembling a minimum-cost coalition of paid/rewarded voters. It need not be over half the registered voters, just larger than the other side's coalition. One then confuses the issues enough to split the "independent" vote, and gets the salary and other rewards of office.
It's amazing how little the paid/rewarded voters can be (you example, bringing down the country to get a few weeks off from work), but, then, the coalition has to be minimum cost, and voting isn't all that intellectual an exercise. Dead people have been known to do vote, and paid/rewarded votes tend to be the bottom of the labor market (they charge less and are more reliable than people with options other than accepting political pay). The usual reference is _Plunkett of Tammany Hall_, see Wikipedia.
The politicians one gets from this system (thanks to survivor bias) are not connected with any reality other than that of the organizati0n that assembles and maintain the coalition. This is the basic reason that, as mentioned elsewhere in this comment stream, Joe Biden is the last White man in the Democratic Party.
The existence of coalition building organizations is a very powerful argument against democracy. We might not see it explicitly made over the next few years, but it describes the system that will drive events. Trump, like Reagan, has a largely unpaid constituency that wants non-monetary rewards. Such a person can be outflanked by an attitude of "Do what you want, you are only one person and, while you can touch many of us, you can't touch most of us because you lack the work hours to do so." Or, in Pluckett's words, "Reformers are Mayflies".
OTH, the coalition assembling organization may find that the independent voters swamp and continue to swamp the organization's coalition. That's what happened to the Era of Good Feeling and led to the US Civil War. The issue of slavery overwhelmed the paid/rewarded coalitions of the professionals. The White Death seems to be driving something similar today, with COVID-19 as an accelerant.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/connecticut-gun-manufacturers-ranch-rifle-among-weapons-banned-in-canada
Justin Trudeau has issued a ukase against the so called "assault rifle".
As I recall, we'd pretty well figured out his real father had to be:
1) Edward Moore "Teddy" Kennedy, United States Senator
2) Ronnie Wood, rhythm guitarist, The Rolling Stones, English
3) Fidel Castro, dictator, Cuba
Anyone had any more data to narrow it down? Certainly, old Maggie got around.Replies: @Joe Stalin
Doesn’t Canada have a 10-round limit on magazines on rifles? So a so-called “assault rifle” there would have the total firepower of Ruger 10/22, as used by the girl in the “I Hate Mondays” song. A purely political play by your standard Canadian “Progressive.”
What do you mean by “detente”? If you just mean a lack of an actual hot war between the US and USSR, that’s one thing. But that’s not what is usually meant. We used a ton of military, political, economic and propaganda pressure against the communists after Nixon/Kissinger’s attempt at detente.
Brezhnev took advantage of that perceived weakness to expand. By 1979 all talk of detente was over.
DIE! Whitey DIE! will never abate. Mostly, it is driven by a desire to be in one of the few good jobs that exist in government, media, and NGOs where there is no work required and you get money for nothing. And Chicks for free. To quote Dire Straits.
Its why Hollywood has had a purge of White mostly Jewish males by those of the diverse boxes and the results are Girl Power Star Wars and similar dreck. Its why you get all the DIE Whitey DIE DIE stuff over and over again, mostly by lesbian manhating White women (but I repeat myself) who know that on merit they will never achieve anything up against White and Asian Males.
Now this lockdown has wiped out the small business class, mostly though not exclusively Whites. Through mail in ballots the Dems will push over the line one of: Kamala Harris, Hillary!, or Stacey Abrams as President and like the Bourbons they have forgotten nothing and learned nothing.
It is one thing for massive immavasion, wage erosion, job exporting to China with unemployment at say, 5-6 million people. It is another for say, 30 million people today much less 50 million. And there is nothing, nothing that Dems can do to make whole and happy the people they ruined with mostly Dem lockdowns.
Welfare money like medical care will be rationed: a few big shots get Gold Plated care, a few big corporations get bailout money, meanwhile gibs will be Black/Muslim/Hispanic first (in that order) and White men NONE! Same with health care.
Now these are people who will be cheek and jowl with diversity, having no other choice but to move to places like Compton or Watts and work at whatever menial job is still around while competing with 100 million Mexicans and Central Americans pouring in daily. This is why various people who are obviously fed informers but hoping to replicate Stalin's career (Czar's informer till it seemed the revolutionaries would win) love the lockdown. They can do the math and know that Civil War -- a hot one is just around the corner.
It gets worse as the DIE! Diversity mandates lock out Newsom, Whitmer, and other ambitious governors out of the Senatorial and Presidential races. Its clear Biden is the LASt White man the Dems will tolerate, and he is likely to be forced to drop out for "health reasons" in favor of someone more diverse. Newsom has no chance to be anything but what he is -- he can't even run for Feinstein's seat. It likely belongs already to Kevin De Leon. So why not lock down California for years, and delay elections so he can be Governor for say, another ten years?
But already even in California there are marks of rebellion. A big heatwave and half of Latino California will move out to the Beach. What will Newsom do? Arrest 8 million Latinos? Its one thing to arrest a lone White surfer. Another to arrest millions of Latinos who don't figure this is their country anyway.
Post lockdown the urge to kick out Whites from everything will meet the desire from Whites to not lose everything. Its a guarantee for race-based Civil War with the loser being an impoverished serf. Bill Gates may have plans for biometric tattoos with RFID chips and social credit allowing entry into stores, banks, etc. but how does that help people who had a good life avoid living in Compton?Replies: @Anonymous
The Democrats can’t support their constituents — the cities are Democratic, the cities are hell holes except for the equivalent of 1984’s Party and Inner Party members. This will worsen because COVID-19 has reduced the efficiency of the American economy. It is unlikely that the US can afford to maintain its capital stock given COVID-19 and the current US Establishment.
We’re looking at a big game of musical chairs, starting a month or so ago, and the cities not only bring no economic base to the contest, they are centers of disease. Odds are, they lose, as do the groups whose power base is the cities.
Your summary is remarkably accurate.
Politics is largely a matter of assembling a minimum-cost coalition of paid/rewarded voters. It need not be over half the registered voters, just larger than the other side’s coalition. One then confuses the issues enough to split the “independent” vote, and gets the salary and other rewards of office.
It’s amazing how little the paid/rewarded voters can be (you example, bringing down the country to get a few weeks off from work), but, then, the coalition has to be minimum cost, and voting isn’t all that intellectual an exercise. Dead people have been known to do vote, and paid/rewarded votes tend to be the bottom of the labor market (they charge less and are more reliable than people with options other than accepting political pay). The usual reference is _Plunkett of Tammany Hall_, see Wikipedia.
The politicians one gets from this system (thanks to survivor bias) are not connected with any reality other than that of the organizati0n that assembles and maintain the coalition. This is the basic reason that, as mentioned elsewhere in this comment stream, Joe Biden is the last White man in the Democratic Party.
The existence of coalition building organizations is a very powerful argument against democracy. We might not see it explicitly made over the next few years, but it describes the system that will drive events. Trump, like Reagan, has a largely unpaid constituency that wants non-monetary rewards. Such a person can be outflanked by an attitude of “Do what you want, you are only one person and, while you can touch many of us, you can’t touch most of us because you lack the work hours to do so.” Or, in Pluckett’s words, “Reformers are Mayflies”.
OTH, the coalition assembling organization may find that the independent voters swamp and continue to swamp the organization’s coalition. That’s what happened to the Era of Good Feeling and led to the US Civil War. The issue of slavery overwhelmed the paid/rewarded coalitions of the professionals. The White Death seems to be driving something similar today, with COVID-19 as an accelerant.
Dr Emily Cousens hates herself. Words like “privileged” are contemporary political weapons that are used to insult, disarm and eventually lay low, so it seems like she is self-righteously aggressive and morally fanatical to the external world. Yet she would be very quick to use weaponised terms to self-describe in many instances, and, in reality, that is where her passion is coming from.
Someone who is grimly insulting themselves is obviously someone who has damaged themselves.
I suspect that she wants to feel something and so she seeks it in an ideology that typifies itself as caring and compassionate, but the more she indulges her feelings the more her suppressed logical and colder self will find ways to squeeze out, thereby that will be all she hears until she finds ways to indulge her feelings even more. (Not that they are even her feelings anyway, those have been drowned out by her own internal violence, and so she has replaced them with those of her projected huddled brown and black bodied masses. It is the methadone of feeling aligned and authentic – it works for an ever shorter period of time and you need to ever up the dose.)
The second problem is that her logic will be contorted and poisonous as it takes possession of her. She will make no sense whatsoever and will just callously and aggressively try to exert control. E.g this totally idiotic article.
Indeed, what could be a better example of genuinely toxic masculinity than demanding a life-saving vaccine not be produced just so that your cold abstract vision of a just and ordered globe can be realised?
She should go on a hunting trip, skin and BBQ the kill/identify an attractive stranger in a bar, actively pursue them and have her way with them before leaving without sleeping/lift weights for 6 weeks straight, at the same time every day, according to a personally designed plan; before she ever puts pen to paper again to share her so obviously tortured opinion.
Then she may be more (self-)accepting and less inclined to act up so stupidly.
2nd wave feminism in the US had a disproportionate # of Jewish leaders (who used their big brains to rationalize their own personal mommy/daddy/problems with men issues into supposedly universal principles) but feminism is just one small corner of the minoritarian project (and one that other minorities tend to see right thru – ask any black person and they will tell you that white women are not oppressed) and US feminists are just one corner of worldwide feminism. And Betty Friedan did not personally abolish traditional sex roles on a worldwide basis nor drive anti-colonialism, etc. There were huge economic and historical forces in play with roots going back to the Industrial Revolution. You give Jews too much credit.
I also find your idea that minoritarianism serves Jewish interests to be dubious. Jews in white dominated America had a pretty good deal for most of American history. There was a brief period between the world wars where anti-Semitism was ascendant pretty much everywhere and the US was not exempt, but with that small exception (and the US form was much milder than the European version) the US had a pretty good record of being welcoming to Jews. It’s not clear that a new America remade in a minoritarian mode is really going to be Good for the Jews or better than the old version. In fact, I doubt it.
Much of the Jewish reaction was not 4D Chess game theory driven but panicked reaction at what had happened in Germany. Seemingly mild nationalism and the majority’s natural favor for their own kind had morphed into something much more dangerous. Perhaps this could happen here too? Being blackballed from the country club was tolerable if not ideal, but if it somehow put you on the road to Auschwitz then it could no longer be tolerated as a matter of life and death.
Basically, Jewish behavior re mass immigration is presented as a reaction of a frightened minority, and not as something emanating from the core Judaist culture.
I disagree.
And, because I'm too lazy to write a long new post, I'll c-p parts of what I'd written on unpleasant Yoram Hazony affair: https://www.unz.com/article/yoram-hazony-and-his-israeli-ethnostate-sorry-proposition-nation/
...........
Due to history, “Jewish people”, apart from two dominant big groups from Iberia & Eastern Europe, has small, almost negligible quantities of “Jews” in some African & Asian lands who, phenotypically, are not whites (or Levantines). Then, true, Israel is not a classically “racialist” country, but it still remains a typical ethno-nationalist state even if the nation has more of a non-dominant skin color persons than is the case with other ethno-nationalist states like Turkey.
What I find hypocritical about people Hazony is: nationalism for me, internationalism for thee. The fact that some, actually a small minority of Israeli Jews not bigger than 2%, is non-white/Levantine- means nothing. Israeli immigration policy still remains solidly nationalist- this is land primarily for Jewish people. No Pakistanis, Somalis, Nigerians, Syrians (!), Ethiopians (Muslims and Christians), …are allowed to stay, let alone invited to move in masses. I agree with that- but it is clearly hypocritical to have “Jews only” immigration policy & to push for more “non-Europeans mostly” immigration policy in France, Germany, Sweden or Poland.
And, at the same time, Israel’s apologists try to impose “internationalist” model for immigration policy in countries where these nation-states are clearly different from mass of potential immigrants. Pro-Israeli advocates push for more immigration of, say, Syrians, Pakistanis, Somalis, Ethiopians, Indians … into Europe & America & Canada.
And this is, by organized Jewish NGOs, really subversive policy towards countries that had accepted Jews in past (Sweden, France, US, UK, Australia,…). We all know that Somalis, Pakistanis, Moroccans … are not & will never become a part of Swedish people, French people or Australian people (whatever the last term means).
So, at the end: the majority Israeli policy; most Jewish activists living in the Western world (UK, Italy, Australia, Sweden,…) are agitating against domicile nation-state where they reside & theatrically invoke some non-existent universal humanism, while well-knowing that immigrant Moroccans, Pakistanis & various sub-Saharan Africans will never become Spaniards, Italians or Germans; that Hondurans, Iraqis & Somalis will never become Americans- and will cause only trouble, dissolution of peoplehood of these countries & the rise of crime & insecurity.
Israelis & diaspora Jewish political activists can have credibility only after they start advocating policy of letting non-Jewish immigrant groups of any race (white, brown, black, …) into Israel itself according to cherished principles of universal humanism & giving them a chance of becoming full Israelis by assimilation (learning Hebrew & integrating them in all spheres of Israeli society).
But we all know it’s not going to happen. It is this Israeli & diaspora Jewish hypocrisy that makes nationally conscious Europeans & Americans angry with Jews as a group, because they see for what it really is – fake & inimical to their ways of life.
https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/american-jewrys-disgraceful-hypocrisy/
American Jewry’s Disgraceful Hypocrisy
Only Jewish power in America is basically giving us Weimar all over again, with the added power of mass media and the internet. Jews totally ignored the lesson they should have learned, blamed everyone else for their own behavior, and doubled-down on the exact same behavior in America. But this time they were smart enough to fragment the ethnic cohesion of the nation first, giving them free reign with no realistic threats to their power. Which doesn't stop them from an endless, paranoid outpouring of absurd media projects showing Jews as forever under threat (HBO's ridiculous "The Plot Against America" just being the latest example).Replies: @Jack D, @Bardon Kaldian
I also find your idea that minoritarianism serves Jewish interests to be dubious. Jews in white dominated America had a pretty good deal for most of American history. There was a brief period between the world wars where anti-Semitism was ascendant pretty much everywhere and the US was not exempt, but with that small exception (and the US form was much milder than the European version) the US had a pretty good record of being welcoming to Jews. It's not clear that a new America remade in a minoritarian mode is really going to be Good for the Jews or better than the old version. In fact, I doubt it.
Much of the Jewish reaction was not 4D Chess game theory driven but panicked reaction at what had happened in Germany. Seemingly mild nationalism and the majority's natural favor for their own kind had morphed into something much more dangerous. Perhaps this could happen here too? Being blackballed from the country club was tolerable if not ideal, but if it somehow put you on the road to Auschwitz then it could no longer be tolerated as a matter of life and death.Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @peterike
I don’t buy this (as I don’t buy antijudaist claptrap dominant on this site).
Basically, Jewish behavior re mass immigration is presented as a reaction of a frightened minority, and not as something emanating from the core Judaist culture.
I disagree.
And, because I’m too lazy to write a long new post, I’ll c-p parts of what I’d written on unpleasant Yoram Hazony affair: https://www.unz.com/article/yoram-hazony-and-his-israeli-ethnostate-sorry-proposition-nation/
………..
Due to history, “Jewish people”, apart from two dominant big groups from Iberia & Eastern Europe, has small, almost negligible quantities of “Jews” in some African & Asian lands who, phenotypically, are not whites (or Levantines). Then, true, Israel is not a classically “racialist” country, but it still remains a typical ethno-nationalist state even if the nation has more of a non-dominant skin color persons than is the case with other ethno-nationalist states like Turkey.
What I find hypocritical about people Hazony is: nationalism for me, internationalism for thee. The fact that some, actually a small minority of Israeli Jews not bigger than 2%, is non-white/Levantine- means nothing. Israeli immigration policy still remains solidly nationalist- this is land primarily for Jewish people. No Pakistanis, Somalis, Nigerians, Syrians (!), Ethiopians (Muslims and Christians), …are allowed to stay, let alone invited to move in masses. I agree with that- but it is clearly hypocritical to have “Jews only” immigration policy & to push for more “non-Europeans mostly” immigration policy in France, Germany, Sweden or Poland.
And, at the same time, Israel’s apologists try to impose “internationalist” model for immigration policy in countries where these nation-states are clearly different from mass of potential immigrants. Pro-Israeli advocates push for more immigration of, say, Syrians, Pakistanis, Somalis, Ethiopians, Indians … into Europe & America & Canada.
And this is, by organized Jewish NGOs, really subversive policy towards countries that had accepted Jews in past (Sweden, France, US, UK, Australia,…). We all know that Somalis, Pakistanis, Moroccans … are not & will never become a part of Swedish people, French people or Australian people (whatever the last term means).
So, at the end: the majority Israeli policy; most Jewish activists living in the Western world (UK, Italy, Australia, Sweden,…) are agitating against domicile nation-state where they reside & theatrically invoke some non-existent universal humanism, while well-knowing that immigrant Moroccans, Pakistanis & various sub-Saharan Africans will never become Spaniards, Italians or Germans; that Hondurans, Iraqis & Somalis will never become Americans- and will cause only trouble, dissolution of peoplehood of these countries & the rise of crime & insecurity.
Israelis & diaspora Jewish political activists can have credibility only after they start advocating policy of letting non-Jewish immigrant groups of any race (white, brown, black, …) into Israel itself according to cherished principles of universal humanism & giving them a chance of becoming full Israelis by assimilation (learning Hebrew & integrating them in all spheres of Israeli society).
But we all know it’s not going to happen. It is this Israeli & diaspora Jewish hypocrisy that makes nationally conscious Europeans & Americans angry with Jews as a group, because they see for what it really is – fake & inimical to their ways of life.
https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/american-jewrys-disgraceful-hypocrisy/
American Jewry’s Disgraceful Hypocrisy
don't worry, they got you covered.
LA Times - Haunting photos from Kent State made me wonder: Where were the black students?Replies: @Ozymandias
Alright, alright. How many black students do we need to shoot now to make up for this egregious oversight?
BK, i think–with the passing of the years–there’s a “retconning” or simply a squishing together of things that are really disparate elements that happened at different times.
The end of the War most certainly did not bring on “minoritarianism”.
What was debunked by the War was not nationalism or majoritarianism but imperialism.
What was seen as evil and what people fought against was Germans and Japanese invading other people’s nations and bossing them around.
The struggles against Hitler was seen as explicitly nationalist–kicking the bastards out; “liberation”. Even the Brits–world’s most successful imperialists–did not think they were fighting for “the Empire”, but rather for their nation, for its independence, from foreign invaders.
In fact, the War–with Germany and Japan giving a demo on the evils of imperialism–embarrassed the imperial powers into shedding colonies–the US was quickly out of the Philippines, the British, India. With the rest of the British empire lined up to follow as credible independence movements got up steam. The Dutch, briefly and especially the French and Belgians tried to cling on, but there was no support or will. The idea and age of colonies and empire–discredited by the War–had simply passed.
The Soviet Union was clearly on a different model with a different ideological justification. And America countered with its own system of alliances and “sphere of influence” and interventions. But overall the post-War American system was one of open trade and an end to colonies and empire. An era of peak nationalism. Even the Jews ran out and grabbed themselves up a nation.
Even within Europe, populations and borders were moved around so that people (i.e. mostly Germans) were more clearly in their own nation where there were supposed to be. There was no thought of “minoritarianism” as in Western Europe, at least, there were hardly any minorities left. People from this or that region, but almost everyone was in the nation they belonged in. And precisely because everyone was in their proper nations with agreed borders, there was little strife and Europeans could start cooperating.
The post-War era was an era of peak nationalism–majoritarianism, national identity and self-determination. There wasn’t much there to justify jamming Somalis into Malmo or Maine.
~~
Minoritarianism came distinctly later with the Holocaustization of the War.
For people who don’t particularly like nationalism, republicanism, majoritarianism, the post-War ideology of “independent nations” and “self-determination” was not really the desired “lesson”.
What had gone wrong with Germany wasn’t invading other people’s nations and starting a global conflagration. No it was … “hate”. And then … when you really think about it … it was because the Germans liked being German, were “nationalistic”. That’s was the problem–nationalism!
Of course, back on planet earth everyone else also prefers their race, language, religion as well. That’s … natural. And the natural order is, of course, that you live with people of the same race, language, religion, culture–your tribe. That common culture is how you get along.
The holocaust victims, the Jews, are in fact are even more tribal than the Germans. So tribal they were able to able to keep their tribe intact despite living in other people’s nations for a millennium. And very proud of their race and culture.
So to square this circle you have to distinguish good tribalism–from minorities like the Jews–from bad tribalism–from majorities like Germans, or British or French or American gentiles.
I’ve seen this retconning of the War bizarrely into an anti-nationalist minoritarian morality play out during my life. I believe it got traction in 60s with the US civil rights movement, and the the rise of the Jews. First with mandating “The Diary of Anne Frank” as the canonical take on the War in schools. Then with increasing push of the Holocaust as the signature–and only really salient–aspect of the War by Hollyweird and academia during the 70s and onward. (With some Japanese internment thrown in just so American white gentiles don’t start thinking *they* aren’t the problem as well.)
This minoritarian ideology and minoritarian spin on the War–a War against German and Japanese imperialism!–flowed *out* from the United States–culturally dominant–to the rest of the West.
It is not the natural “lesson of the War” which would be more along the lines of
— “imperialism is evil”,
— “be strong and resist foreign aggression” and
— “for world peace, prosperity and happiness people belong in their own nations with well defined and agreed upon borders”.
Supporting statement: the "Holocaust" was called the "Extermination of the Jews" in common and literary usage until about 1960. Call it that today and the world would land on your head.
Additional notes:
Agreed that nationalism was dominant until the late 1960s. However, counter-currents could already be seen by the end of WW II:
There was an attempt after WW II to "de-militarize" the American population. Example: the USS Enterprise, premier carrier in WW II, given all the new and difficult missions, was scrapped immediately after the war. Not even turned into a floating museum, scrapped.
Next event was the 1946 Tennessee rebellion, the Battle of Athens ( http://www.nbcnews.com/id/14138208/ns/us_news-life/t/where-were-you-during-battle-athens/ ; https://www.americanheritage.com/battle-athens ), now mostly forgotten: returning veterans assaulted a courthouse and drove out members of a political organization that was maintaining itself by force, fraud, and other extra-legal measures. Or, in today's slogan words, "violently deposed an elected government".
This apparently scared the American establishment, which saw nothing wrong with a criminal government but something wrong with a denial of popular assent to the criminal government's rule:There was an immense effort to "de-mobilize" the troops, to ensure that they would not repeat the "March on Washington" of the 1930s (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army) or the Battle of Athens, 1946.
Around 1960, the TV Western, which emphasized individual initiative and the ever present availability of a recourse to violence, as well as innate justice, was abruptly taken off television. In retrospect, the intent was to reduce Americans' self confidence and increase their dependence on social organization. By the late 1960s, even fist fights were considered intolerable _in the US Army_. The demilitarization was largely complete.
During the interval from 1952-1964, Army discipline was relaxed considerably. By the time I got in, Vietnam War, it had relaxed so much that the US Army line infantry (recruited at a very early age compared to WW II infantry) was accurately portrayed as an "armed mob" (also as "The Children's Crusade"). To be brutally honest, American infantry didn't stand a chance against reasonably competent infantry, and tended to be used as bait for killing support weapons fire.
Even the Ranger School classes were more a matter of posturing than learning basic infantry techniques. Social posturing included bragging about being "civilized" and revolted by the violence. Competence was considered "Army BS". Yes, in Ranger school.
Presumably something similar happened in the US Navy, judging from reports of "race riots" on US aircraft carriers (https://www.navytimes.com/military-honor/black-military-history/2017/02/28/race-riot-at-sea-1972-kitty-hawk-incident-fueled-fleet-wide-unrest/ ; https://www.navytimes.com/military-honor/black-military-history/2017/02/28/race-riot-at-sea-1972-kitty-hawk-incident-fueled-fleet-wide-unrest/)
The Vietnam War, of course, established the essential uselessness of draftees in post-WW II conflicts. The US Army recovered into its 1990 highly competent and professional self largely through the efforts of NCOs, who restored at least rule of UCMJ to the barracks. Much of that has of course been lost after the series of wars that Bush I initiated, and the US Armed Forces are almost down to 1968 standards, even the highly trained raid and infiltration specialists, who have been grossly over-deployed.
What I believe happened is that the post-WW II US Federal government (today's "deep state") saw that it had a chance to rule permanently. The New Deal coalition was essentially (a) big city political organizations ("Machines"), (b) labor unions, (c) Blacks (d) the mass communications media. None of these had ever before controlled US politics, and all realized that their hold on power was tenuous. They tried to make it permanent by transforming the US base population's sociology and, eventually, by displacing the base population. They have come very close to getting permanent rule, although at terrible cost to themselves. Labor unions were sacrificed to destroy US industry, which funded political activity (rich people today are Democratic in their donations) and obtain cheap goods for distribution as welfare. Blacks (as known in 1960) were sacrificed to provide reliable voters and shock troops for domestic use. The big city political machines have been bureaucratized. The mass communications industry has lost its credibility and its ability to entertain. Even the Jewish establishment, an active participant in the above, has destroyed their own Jewish Golden Age of the 1950s and 1960s, their presence outside Israel, and quite possibly the prospects of Israel's continued existence. Even the US cities themselves have become commercial liabilities, almost unlivable, and are being slowly abandoned.
Note that this whole affair has been a sort of "emergent property" of the American system. No conspiracies necessary, just people acting in what they obviously thought was their own interest as interpreted through their own ethical codes and world views. You have to want the consequences of what you want, because you're going to get them, like them or not.
So we have a sort of broken back war between the cities and the countryside. We're in the phase where the two parties (See _Anatomy of a Revolution_ for the structure of Western revolutions) are arresting each other, and neither side can back up.
Damn.
The actual lessons of the war were, as you say:But it was all thrown away in an effort to make transient power into permanent power. Macbeth did something similar for the same reason.Replies: @Jack D, @Joe Stalin
Just: WW2 was not just against imperialism, but it was both explicitly & implicitly against national/racial exclusivity, extremism & dominance. Basically, if we want a rough sketch for the ideological matrix the Allies fought for- it was equality plus freedom.
Nazi ideology (national/racial hierarchies, all the superior race stuff historically to be found in the Manu code, exterminationist military aggression, explicit collective inequality, ..) had to go. Along with that, in next one-two decades, all (or most) imperialist rule & white dominance in Asia & Africa.
And it was naturally followed by ideology of the New Left in the 60s, which was a beginning of anti-white lunacy. Some of its more articulate preachers were Jewish (Herbert Marcuse), some were not (Frantz Fanon). You got the entire corpus of influential works, originating mainly in the 50s & the 60s (Gunnar Myrdal, Herbert Marcuse, Simone de Beauvoir, Frantz Fanon, ..) and later by Edward Said, Kate Millett, Michel Foucault, ..) which advocated moral nihilism, feminism, gay activism, anti-whitism & anti-Europeanism ... a cartoon ideology Harold Bloom christened School of Resentment.
This "movement"- let's call it Minoritarianist School of Resentment- has grown out of post-WW2 Western cultural condition & was not planned or anything like that.
As regards Jews -I mean principally their ideological influence – I think you overrate them. There was nothing ideological in paradigm shifts in Anglosphere & Western cultural world -most suicidal moves in these societies were caused/provoked/influenced? by popular culture of Beatles, the Countercultural 60’s and later, and not by German-Jewish (or other Jewish) “intellectuals” like Marcuse & the rest. If there is a ruling New Left world-view in affluent Western societies, it cannot be ascribed to any group or a set of individuals of any ethnicity. The New Left ideology (idolization of homosexuals & other “sexual minorities”, hatred towards national identity, extreme feminism & war against nuclear family, fetishization of blacks & Muslims, jabbering about weed & other drugs, female sexual promiscuity, cartoon war against the imperial past of some European peoples, war against normalcy, idolatry of non-European cultures & primitive forms of society, …)- I don’t see that as a final crystallization of some ideological warfare, but as an almost inevitable end of the trajectory of Western culture in its decadent phase, as in famous hypothetical question ascribed to Lenin: ” Are the forces which propel us to greatness the same that will, transformed by mutations of History, eventually lead to our collapse ?”Replies: @Neil Templeton
I also find your idea that minoritarianism serves Jewish interests to be dubious. Jews in white dominated America had a pretty good deal for most of American history. There was a brief period between the world wars where anti-Semitism was ascendant pretty much everywhere and the US was not exempt, but with that small exception (and the US form was much milder than the European version) the US had a pretty good record of being welcoming to Jews. It's not clear that a new America remade in a minoritarian mode is really going to be Good for the Jews or better than the old version. In fact, I doubt it.
Much of the Jewish reaction was not 4D Chess game theory driven but panicked reaction at what had happened in Germany. Seemingly mild nationalism and the majority's natural favor for their own kind had morphed into something much more dangerous. Perhaps this could happen here too? Being blackballed from the country club was tolerable if not ideal, but if it somehow put you on the road to Auschwitz then it could no longer be tolerated as a matter of life and death.Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @peterike
Well the proper lesson for Jews to learn would have been “don’t do what Jews were doing in Germany between the wars, especially in the Weimar era. Jewish behavior led directly to the nationalist reaction.”
Only Jewish power in America is basically giving us Weimar all over again, with the added power of mass media and the internet. Jews totally ignored the lesson they should have learned, blamed everyone else for their own behavior, and doubled-down on the exact same behavior in America. But this time they were smart enough to fragment the ethnic cohesion of the nation first, giving them free reign with no realistic threats to their power. Which doesn’t stop them from an endless, paranoid outpouring of absurd media projects showing Jews as forever under threat (HBO’s ridiculous “The Plot Against America” just being the latest example).
The end of the War most certainly did not bring on "minoritarianism".
What was debunked by the War was not nationalism or majoritarianism but imperialism.
What was seen as evil and what people fought against was Germans and Japanese invading other people's nations and bossing them around.
The struggles against Hitler was seen as explicitly nationalist--kicking the bastards out; "liberation". Even the Brits--world's most successful imperialists--did not think they were fighting for "the Empire", but rather for their nation, for its independence, from foreign invaders.
In fact, the War--with Germany and Japan giving a demo on the evils of imperialism--embarrassed the imperial powers into shedding colonies--the US was quickly out of the Philippines, the British, India. With the rest of the British empire lined up to follow as credible independence movements got up steam. The Dutch, briefly and especially the French and Belgians tried to cling on, but there was no support or will. The idea and age of colonies and empire--discredited by the War--had simply passed.
The Soviet Union was clearly on a different model with a different ideological justification. And America countered with its own system of alliances and "sphere of influence" and interventions. But overall the post-War American system was one of open trade and an end to colonies and empire. An era of peak nationalism. Even the Jews ran out and grabbed themselves up a nation.
Even within Europe, populations and borders were moved around so that people (i.e. mostly Germans) were more clearly in their own nation where there were supposed to be. There was no thought of "minoritarianism" as in Western Europe, at least, there were hardly any minorities left. People from this or that region, but almost everyone was in the nation they belonged in. And precisely because everyone was in their proper nations with agreed borders, there was little strife and Europeans could start cooperating.
The post-War era was an era of peak nationalism--majoritarianism, national identity and self-determination. There wasn't much there to justify jamming Somalis into Malmo or Maine.
~~
Minoritarianism came distinctly later with the Holocaustization of the War.
For people who don't particularly like nationalism, republicanism, majoritarianism, the post-War ideology of "independent nations" and "self-determination" was not really the desired "lesson".
What had gone wrong with Germany wasn't invading other people's nations and starting a global conflagration. No it was ... "hate". And then ... when you really think about it ... it was because the Germans liked being German, were "nationalistic". That's was the problem--nationalism!
Of course, back on planet earth everyone else also prefers their race, language, religion as well. That's ... natural. And the natural order is, of course, that you live with people of the same race, language, religion, culture--your tribe. That common culture is how you get along.
The holocaust victims, the Jews, are in fact are even more tribal than the Germans. So tribal they were able to able to keep their tribe intact despite living in other people's nations for a millennium. And very proud of their race and culture.
So to square this circle you have to distinguish good tribalism--from minorities like the Jews--from bad tribalism--from majorities like Germans, or British or French or American gentiles.
I've seen this retconning of the War bizarrely into an anti-nationalist minoritarian morality play out during my life. I believe it got traction in 60s with the US civil rights movement, and the the rise of the Jews. First with mandating "The Diary of Anne Frank" as the canonical take on the War in schools. Then with increasing push of the Holocaust as the signature--and only really salient--aspect of the War by Hollyweird and academia during the 70s and onward. (With some Japanese internment thrown in just so American white gentiles don't start thinking *they* aren't the problem as well.)
This minoritarian ideology and minoritarian spin on the War--a War against German and Japanese imperialism!--flowed *out* from the United States--culturally dominant--to the rest of the West.
It is not the natural "lesson of the War" which would be more along the lines of
-- "imperialism is evil",
-- "be strong and resist foreign aggression" and
-- "for world peace, prosperity and happiness people belong in their own nations with well defined and agreed upon borders".Replies: @Anonymous, @Bardon Kaldian, @David
Good account.
Supporting statement: the “Holocaust” was called the “Extermination of the Jews” in common and literary usage until about 1960. Call it that today and the world would land on your head.
Additional notes:
Agreed that nationalism was dominant until the late 1960s. However, counter-currents could already be seen by the end of WW II:
There was an attempt after WW II to “de-militarize” the American population. Example: the USS Enterprise, premier carrier in WW II, given all the new and difficult missions, was scrapped immediately after the war. Not even turned into a floating museum, scrapped.
Next event was the 1946 Tennessee rebellion, the Battle of Athens ( http://www.nbcnews.com/id/14138208/ns/us_news-life/t/where-were-you-during-battle-athens/ ; https://www.americanheritage.com/battle-athens ), now mostly forgotten: returning veterans assaulted a courthouse and drove out members of a political organization that was maintaining itself by force, fraud, and other extra-legal measures. Or, in today’s slogan words, “violently deposed an elected government”.
This apparently scared the American establishment, which saw nothing wrong with a criminal government but something wrong with a denial of popular assent to the criminal government’s rule:
There was an immense effort to “de-mobilize” the troops, to ensure that they would not repeat the “March on Washington” of the 1930s (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army) or the Battle of Athens, 1946.
Around 1960, the TV Western, which emphasized individual initiative and the ever present availability of a recourse to violence, as well as innate justice, was abruptly taken off television. In retrospect, the intent was to reduce Americans’ self confidence and increase their dependence on social organization. By the late 1960s, even fist fights were considered intolerable _in the US Army_. The demilitarization was largely complete.
During the interval from 1952-1964, Army discipline was relaxed considerably. By the time I got in, Vietnam War, it had relaxed so much that the US Army line infantry (recruited at a very early age compared to WW II infantry) was accurately portrayed as an “armed mob” (also as “The Children’s Crusade”). To be brutally honest, American infantry didn’t stand a chance against reasonably competent infantry, and tended to be used as bait for killing support weapons fire.
Even the Ranger School classes were more a matter of posturing than learning basic infantry techniques. Social posturing included bragging about being “civilized” and revolted by the violence. Competence was considered “Army BS”. Yes, in Ranger school.
Presumably something similar happened in the US Navy, judging from reports of “race riots” on US aircraft carriers (https://www.navytimes.com/military-honor/black-military-history/2017/02/28/race-riot-at-sea-1972-kitty-hawk-incident-fueled-fleet-wide-unrest/ ; https://www.navytimes.com/military-honor/black-military-history/2017/02/28/race-riot-at-sea-1972-kitty-hawk-incident-fueled-fleet-wide-unrest/)
The Vietnam War, of course, established the essential uselessness of draftees in post-WW II conflicts. The US Army recovered into its 1990 highly competent and professional self largely through the efforts of NCOs, who restored at least rule of UCMJ to the barracks. Much of that has of course been lost after the series of wars that Bush I initiated, and the US Armed Forces are almost down to 1968 standards, even the highly trained raid and infiltration specialists, who have been grossly over-deployed.
What I believe happened is that the post-WW II US Federal government (today’s “deep state”) saw that it had a chance to rule permanently. The New Deal coalition was essentially (a) big city political organizations (“Machines”), (b) labor unions, (c) Blacks (d) the mass communications media. None of these had ever before controlled US politics, and all realized that their hold on power was tenuous. They tried to make it permanent by transforming the US base population’s sociology and, eventually, by displacing the base population. They have come very close to getting permanent rule, although at terrible cost to themselves. Labor unions were sacrificed to destroy US industry, which funded political activity (rich people today are Democratic in their donations) and obtain cheap goods for distribution as welfare. Blacks (as known in 1960) were sacrificed to provide reliable voters and shock troops for domestic use. The big city political machines have been bureaucratized. The mass communications industry has lost its credibility and its ability to entertain. Even the Jewish establishment, an active participant in the above, has destroyed their own Jewish Golden Age of the 1950s and 1960s, their presence outside Israel, and quite possibly the prospects of Israel’s continued existence. Even the US cities themselves have become commercial liabilities, almost unlivable, and are being slowly abandoned.
Note that this whole affair has been a sort of “emergent property” of the American system. No conspiracies necessary, just people acting in what they obviously thought was their own interest as interpreted through their own ethical codes and world views. You have to want the consequences of what you want, because you’re going to get them, like them or not.
So we have a sort of broken back war between the cities and the countryside. We’re in the phase where the two parties (See _Anatomy of a Revolution_ for the structure of Western revolutions) are arresting each other, and neither side can back up.
Damn.
The actual lessons of the war were, as you say:
But it was all thrown away in an effort to make transient power into permanent power. Macbeth did something similar for the same reason.
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=holocaust%2Cextermination+of+the+Jews&year_start=1933&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cholocaust%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cextermination%20of%20the%20Jews%3B%2Cc0
The end of the War most certainly did not bring on "minoritarianism".
What was debunked by the War was not nationalism or majoritarianism but imperialism.
What was seen as evil and what people fought against was Germans and Japanese invading other people's nations and bossing them around.
The struggles against Hitler was seen as explicitly nationalist--kicking the bastards out; "liberation". Even the Brits--world's most successful imperialists--did not think they were fighting for "the Empire", but rather for their nation, for its independence, from foreign invaders.
In fact, the War--with Germany and Japan giving a demo on the evils of imperialism--embarrassed the imperial powers into shedding colonies--the US was quickly out of the Philippines, the British, India. With the rest of the British empire lined up to follow as credible independence movements got up steam. The Dutch, briefly and especially the French and Belgians tried to cling on, but there was no support or will. The idea and age of colonies and empire--discredited by the War--had simply passed.
The Soviet Union was clearly on a different model with a different ideological justification. And America countered with its own system of alliances and "sphere of influence" and interventions. But overall the post-War American system was one of open trade and an end to colonies and empire. An era of peak nationalism. Even the Jews ran out and grabbed themselves up a nation.
Even within Europe, populations and borders were moved around so that people (i.e. mostly Germans) were more clearly in their own nation where there were supposed to be. There was no thought of "minoritarianism" as in Western Europe, at least, there were hardly any minorities left. People from this or that region, but almost everyone was in the nation they belonged in. And precisely because everyone was in their proper nations with agreed borders, there was little strife and Europeans could start cooperating.
The post-War era was an era of peak nationalism--majoritarianism, national identity and self-determination. There wasn't much there to justify jamming Somalis into Malmo or Maine.
~~
Minoritarianism came distinctly later with the Holocaustization of the War.
For people who don't particularly like nationalism, republicanism, majoritarianism, the post-War ideology of "independent nations" and "self-determination" was not really the desired "lesson".
What had gone wrong with Germany wasn't invading other people's nations and starting a global conflagration. No it was ... "hate". And then ... when you really think about it ... it was because the Germans liked being German, were "nationalistic". That's was the problem--nationalism!
Of course, back on planet earth everyone else also prefers their race, language, religion as well. That's ... natural. And the natural order is, of course, that you live with people of the same race, language, religion, culture--your tribe. That common culture is how you get along.
The holocaust victims, the Jews, are in fact are even more tribal than the Germans. So tribal they were able to able to keep their tribe intact despite living in other people's nations for a millennium. And very proud of their race and culture.
So to square this circle you have to distinguish good tribalism--from minorities like the Jews--from bad tribalism--from majorities like Germans, or British or French or American gentiles.
I've seen this retconning of the War bizarrely into an anti-nationalist minoritarian morality play out during my life. I believe it got traction in 60s with the US civil rights movement, and the the rise of the Jews. First with mandating "The Diary of Anne Frank" as the canonical take on the War in schools. Then with increasing push of the Holocaust as the signature--and only really salient--aspect of the War by Hollyweird and academia during the 70s and onward. (With some Japanese internment thrown in just so American white gentiles don't start thinking *they* aren't the problem as well.)
This minoritarian ideology and minoritarian spin on the War--a War against German and Japanese imperialism!--flowed *out* from the United States--culturally dominant--to the rest of the West.
It is not the natural "lesson of the War" which would be more along the lines of
-- "imperialism is evil",
-- "be strong and resist foreign aggression" and
-- "for world peace, prosperity and happiness people belong in their own nations with well defined and agreed upon borders".Replies: @Anonymous, @Bardon Kaldian, @David
This is a long post, so I can’t answer all your points.
Just: WW2 was not just against imperialism, but it was both explicitly & implicitly against national/racial exclusivity, extremism & dominance. Basically, if we want a rough sketch for the ideological matrix the Allies fought for- it was equality plus freedom.
Nazi ideology (national/racial hierarchies, all the superior race stuff historically to be found in the Manu code, exterminationist military aggression, explicit collective inequality, ..) had to go. Along with that, in next one-two decades, all (or most) imperialist rule & white dominance in Asia & Africa.
And it was naturally followed by ideology of the New Left in the 60s, which was a beginning of anti-white lunacy. Some of its more articulate preachers were Jewish (Herbert Marcuse), some were not (Frantz Fanon). You got the entire corpus of influential works, originating mainly in the 50s & the 60s (Gunnar Myrdal, Herbert Marcuse, Simone de Beauvoir, Frantz Fanon, ..) and later by Edward Said, Kate Millett, Michel Foucault, ..) which advocated moral nihilism, feminism, gay activism, anti-whitism & anti-Europeanism … a cartoon ideology Harold Bloom christened School of Resentment.
This “movement”- let’s call it Minoritarianist School of Resentment- has grown out of post-WW2 Western cultural condition & was not planned or anything like that.
As regards Jews -I mean principally their ideological influence – I think you overrate them. There was nothing ideological in paradigm shifts in Anglosphere & Western cultural world -most suicidal moves in these societies were caused/provoked/influenced? by popular culture of Beatles, the Countercultural 60’s and later, and not by German-Jewish (or other Jewish) “intellectuals” like Marcuse & the rest. If there is a ruling New Left world-view in affluent Western societies, it cannot be ascribed to any group or a set of individuals of any ethnicity. The New Left ideology (idolization of homosexuals & other “sexual minorities”, hatred towards national identity, extreme feminism & war against nuclear family, fetishization of blacks & Muslims, jabbering about weed & other drugs, female sexual promiscuity, cartoon war against the imperial past of some European peoples, war against normalcy, idolatry of non-European cultures & primitive forms of society, …)- I don’t see that as a final crystallization of some ideological warfare, but as an almost inevitable end of the trajectory of Western culture in its decadent phase, as in famous hypothetical question ascribed to Lenin: ” Are the forces which propel us to greatness the same that will, transformed by mutations of History, eventually lead to our collapse ?”
The end of the War most certainly did not bring on "minoritarianism".
What was debunked by the War was not nationalism or majoritarianism but imperialism.
What was seen as evil and what people fought against was Germans and Japanese invading other people's nations and bossing them around.
The struggles against Hitler was seen as explicitly nationalist--kicking the bastards out; "liberation". Even the Brits--world's most successful imperialists--did not think they were fighting for "the Empire", but rather for their nation, for its independence, from foreign invaders.
In fact, the War--with Germany and Japan giving a demo on the evils of imperialism--embarrassed the imperial powers into shedding colonies--the US was quickly out of the Philippines, the British, India. With the rest of the British empire lined up to follow as credible independence movements got up steam. The Dutch, briefly and especially the French and Belgians tried to cling on, but there was no support or will. The idea and age of colonies and empire--discredited by the War--had simply passed.
The Soviet Union was clearly on a different model with a different ideological justification. And America countered with its own system of alliances and "sphere of influence" and interventions. But overall the post-War American system was one of open trade and an end to colonies and empire. An era of peak nationalism. Even the Jews ran out and grabbed themselves up a nation.
Even within Europe, populations and borders were moved around so that people (i.e. mostly Germans) were more clearly in their own nation where there were supposed to be. There was no thought of "minoritarianism" as in Western Europe, at least, there were hardly any minorities left. People from this or that region, but almost everyone was in the nation they belonged in. And precisely because everyone was in their proper nations with agreed borders, there was little strife and Europeans could start cooperating.
The post-War era was an era of peak nationalism--majoritarianism, national identity and self-determination. There wasn't much there to justify jamming Somalis into Malmo or Maine.
~~
Minoritarianism came distinctly later with the Holocaustization of the War.
For people who don't particularly like nationalism, republicanism, majoritarianism, the post-War ideology of "independent nations" and "self-determination" was not really the desired "lesson".
What had gone wrong with Germany wasn't invading other people's nations and starting a global conflagration. No it was ... "hate". And then ... when you really think about it ... it was because the Germans liked being German, were "nationalistic". That's was the problem--nationalism!
Of course, back on planet earth everyone else also prefers their race, language, religion as well. That's ... natural. And the natural order is, of course, that you live with people of the same race, language, religion, culture--your tribe. That common culture is how you get along.
The holocaust victims, the Jews, are in fact are even more tribal than the Germans. So tribal they were able to able to keep their tribe intact despite living in other people's nations for a millennium. And very proud of their race and culture.
So to square this circle you have to distinguish good tribalism--from minorities like the Jews--from bad tribalism--from majorities like Germans, or British or French or American gentiles.
I've seen this retconning of the War bizarrely into an anti-nationalist minoritarian morality play out during my life. I believe it got traction in 60s with the US civil rights movement, and the the rise of the Jews. First with mandating "The Diary of Anne Frank" as the canonical take on the War in schools. Then with increasing push of the Holocaust as the signature--and only really salient--aspect of the War by Hollyweird and academia during the 70s and onward. (With some Japanese internment thrown in just so American white gentiles don't start thinking *they* aren't the problem as well.)
This minoritarian ideology and minoritarian spin on the War--a War against German and Japanese imperialism!--flowed *out* from the United States--culturally dominant--to the rest of the West.
It is not the natural "lesson of the War" which would be more along the lines of
-- "imperialism is evil",
-- "be strong and resist foreign aggression" and
-- "for world peace, prosperity and happiness people belong in their own nations with well defined and agreed upon borders".Replies: @Anonymous, @Bardon Kaldian, @David
Your comment is a tour de force and a perfect synthesis of many of your prior comments. Along with Buzz and Reg, you are one of the great commenters at Unz.
Only Jewish power in America is basically giving us Weimar all over again, with the added power of mass media and the internet. Jews totally ignored the lesson they should have learned, blamed everyone else for their own behavior, and doubled-down on the exact same behavior in America. But this time they were smart enough to fragment the ethnic cohesion of the nation first, giving them free reign with no realistic threats to their power. Which doesn't stop them from an endless, paranoid outpouring of absurd media projects showing Jews as forever under threat (HBO's ridiculous "The Plot Against America" just being the latest example).Replies: @Jack D, @Bardon Kaldian
What exactly did the Jews of Germany do to make them deserve Hitler?
Supporting statement: the "Holocaust" was called the "Extermination of the Jews" in common and literary usage until about 1960. Call it that today and the world would land on your head.
Additional notes:
Agreed that nationalism was dominant until the late 1960s. However, counter-currents could already be seen by the end of WW II:
There was an attempt after WW II to "de-militarize" the American population. Example: the USS Enterprise, premier carrier in WW II, given all the new and difficult missions, was scrapped immediately after the war. Not even turned into a floating museum, scrapped.
Next event was the 1946 Tennessee rebellion, the Battle of Athens ( http://www.nbcnews.com/id/14138208/ns/us_news-life/t/where-were-you-during-battle-athens/ ; https://www.americanheritage.com/battle-athens ), now mostly forgotten: returning veterans assaulted a courthouse and drove out members of a political organization that was maintaining itself by force, fraud, and other extra-legal measures. Or, in today's slogan words, "violently deposed an elected government".
This apparently scared the American establishment, which saw nothing wrong with a criminal government but something wrong with a denial of popular assent to the criminal government's rule:There was an immense effort to "de-mobilize" the troops, to ensure that they would not repeat the "March on Washington" of the 1930s (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army) or the Battle of Athens, 1946.
Around 1960, the TV Western, which emphasized individual initiative and the ever present availability of a recourse to violence, as well as innate justice, was abruptly taken off television. In retrospect, the intent was to reduce Americans' self confidence and increase their dependence on social organization. By the late 1960s, even fist fights were considered intolerable _in the US Army_. The demilitarization was largely complete.
During the interval from 1952-1964, Army discipline was relaxed considerably. By the time I got in, Vietnam War, it had relaxed so much that the US Army line infantry (recruited at a very early age compared to WW II infantry) was accurately portrayed as an "armed mob" (also as "The Children's Crusade"). To be brutally honest, American infantry didn't stand a chance against reasonably competent infantry, and tended to be used as bait for killing support weapons fire.
Even the Ranger School classes were more a matter of posturing than learning basic infantry techniques. Social posturing included bragging about being "civilized" and revolted by the violence. Competence was considered "Army BS". Yes, in Ranger school.
Presumably something similar happened in the US Navy, judging from reports of "race riots" on US aircraft carriers (https://www.navytimes.com/military-honor/black-military-history/2017/02/28/race-riot-at-sea-1972-kitty-hawk-incident-fueled-fleet-wide-unrest/ ; https://www.navytimes.com/military-honor/black-military-history/2017/02/28/race-riot-at-sea-1972-kitty-hawk-incident-fueled-fleet-wide-unrest/)
The Vietnam War, of course, established the essential uselessness of draftees in post-WW II conflicts. The US Army recovered into its 1990 highly competent and professional self largely through the efforts of NCOs, who restored at least rule of UCMJ to the barracks. Much of that has of course been lost after the series of wars that Bush I initiated, and the US Armed Forces are almost down to 1968 standards, even the highly trained raid and infiltration specialists, who have been grossly over-deployed.
What I believe happened is that the post-WW II US Federal government (today's "deep state") saw that it had a chance to rule permanently. The New Deal coalition was essentially (a) big city political organizations ("Machines"), (b) labor unions, (c) Blacks (d) the mass communications media. None of these had ever before controlled US politics, and all realized that their hold on power was tenuous. They tried to make it permanent by transforming the US base population's sociology and, eventually, by displacing the base population. They have come very close to getting permanent rule, although at terrible cost to themselves. Labor unions were sacrificed to destroy US industry, which funded political activity (rich people today are Democratic in their donations) and obtain cheap goods for distribution as welfare. Blacks (as known in 1960) were sacrificed to provide reliable voters and shock troops for domestic use. The big city political machines have been bureaucratized. The mass communications industry has lost its credibility and its ability to entertain. Even the Jewish establishment, an active participant in the above, has destroyed their own Jewish Golden Age of the 1950s and 1960s, their presence outside Israel, and quite possibly the prospects of Israel's continued existence. Even the US cities themselves have become commercial liabilities, almost unlivable, and are being slowly abandoned.
Note that this whole affair has been a sort of "emergent property" of the American system. No conspiracies necessary, just people acting in what they obviously thought was their own interest as interpreted through their own ethical codes and world views. You have to want the consequences of what you want, because you're going to get them, like them or not.
So we have a sort of broken back war between the cities and the countryside. We're in the phase where the two parties (See _Anatomy of a Revolution_ for the structure of Western revolutions) are arresting each other, and neither side can back up.
Damn.
The actual lessons of the war were, as you say:But it was all thrown away in an effort to make transient power into permanent power. Macbeth did something similar for the same reason.Replies: @Jack D, @Joe Stalin
It would? Why? If anything, Holocaust is more euphemistic.
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=holocaust%2Cextermination+of+the+Jews&year_start=1933&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cholocaust%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cextermination%20of%20the%20Jews%3B%2Cc0
Supporting statement: the "Holocaust" was called the "Extermination of the Jews" in common and literary usage until about 1960. Call it that today and the world would land on your head.
Additional notes:
Agreed that nationalism was dominant until the late 1960s. However, counter-currents could already be seen by the end of WW II:
There was an attempt after WW II to "de-militarize" the American population. Example: the USS Enterprise, premier carrier in WW II, given all the new and difficult missions, was scrapped immediately after the war. Not even turned into a floating museum, scrapped.
Next event was the 1946 Tennessee rebellion, the Battle of Athens ( http://www.nbcnews.com/id/14138208/ns/us_news-life/t/where-were-you-during-battle-athens/ ; https://www.americanheritage.com/battle-athens ), now mostly forgotten: returning veterans assaulted a courthouse and drove out members of a political organization that was maintaining itself by force, fraud, and other extra-legal measures. Or, in today's slogan words, "violently deposed an elected government".
This apparently scared the American establishment, which saw nothing wrong with a criminal government but something wrong with a denial of popular assent to the criminal government's rule:There was an immense effort to "de-mobilize" the troops, to ensure that they would not repeat the "March on Washington" of the 1930s (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army) or the Battle of Athens, 1946.
Around 1960, the TV Western, which emphasized individual initiative and the ever present availability of a recourse to violence, as well as innate justice, was abruptly taken off television. In retrospect, the intent was to reduce Americans' self confidence and increase their dependence on social organization. By the late 1960s, even fist fights were considered intolerable _in the US Army_. The demilitarization was largely complete.
During the interval from 1952-1964, Army discipline was relaxed considerably. By the time I got in, Vietnam War, it had relaxed so much that the US Army line infantry (recruited at a very early age compared to WW II infantry) was accurately portrayed as an "armed mob" (also as "The Children's Crusade"). To be brutally honest, American infantry didn't stand a chance against reasonably competent infantry, and tended to be used as bait for killing support weapons fire.
Even the Ranger School classes were more a matter of posturing than learning basic infantry techniques. Social posturing included bragging about being "civilized" and revolted by the violence. Competence was considered "Army BS". Yes, in Ranger school.
Presumably something similar happened in the US Navy, judging from reports of "race riots" on US aircraft carriers (https://www.navytimes.com/military-honor/black-military-history/2017/02/28/race-riot-at-sea-1972-kitty-hawk-incident-fueled-fleet-wide-unrest/ ; https://www.navytimes.com/military-honor/black-military-history/2017/02/28/race-riot-at-sea-1972-kitty-hawk-incident-fueled-fleet-wide-unrest/)
The Vietnam War, of course, established the essential uselessness of draftees in post-WW II conflicts. The US Army recovered into its 1990 highly competent and professional self largely through the efforts of NCOs, who restored at least rule of UCMJ to the barracks. Much of that has of course been lost after the series of wars that Bush I initiated, and the US Armed Forces are almost down to 1968 standards, even the highly trained raid and infiltration specialists, who have been grossly over-deployed.
What I believe happened is that the post-WW II US Federal government (today's "deep state") saw that it had a chance to rule permanently. The New Deal coalition was essentially (a) big city political organizations ("Machines"), (b) labor unions, (c) Blacks (d) the mass communications media. None of these had ever before controlled US politics, and all realized that their hold on power was tenuous. They tried to make it permanent by transforming the US base population's sociology and, eventually, by displacing the base population. They have come very close to getting permanent rule, although at terrible cost to themselves. Labor unions were sacrificed to destroy US industry, which funded political activity (rich people today are Democratic in their donations) and obtain cheap goods for distribution as welfare. Blacks (as known in 1960) were sacrificed to provide reliable voters and shock troops for domestic use. The big city political machines have been bureaucratized. The mass communications industry has lost its credibility and its ability to entertain. Even the Jewish establishment, an active participant in the above, has destroyed their own Jewish Golden Age of the 1950s and 1960s, their presence outside Israel, and quite possibly the prospects of Israel's continued existence. Even the US cities themselves have become commercial liabilities, almost unlivable, and are being slowly abandoned.
Note that this whole affair has been a sort of "emergent property" of the American system. No conspiracies necessary, just people acting in what they obviously thought was their own interest as interpreted through their own ethical codes and world views. You have to want the consequences of what you want, because you're going to get them, like them or not.
So we have a sort of broken back war between the cities and the countryside. We're in the phase where the two parties (See _Anatomy of a Revolution_ for the structure of Western revolutions) are arresting each other, and neither side can back up.
Damn.
The actual lessons of the war were, as you say:But it was all thrown away in an effort to make transient power into permanent power. Macbeth did something similar for the same reason.Replies: @Jack D, @Joe Stalin
“returning veterans assaulted a courthouse and drove out members of a political organization that was maintaining itself by force, fraud, and other extra-legal measures. Or, in today’s slogan words, “violently deposed an elected government”. ”
That particular “organization” was called the “Democratic Party.”
A fact deliberately suppressed when the 1992 movie was made; check it out:
Aldrin comments here? I thought he retired after the fabricated moon walk.
Just: WW2 was not just against imperialism, but it was both explicitly & implicitly against national/racial exclusivity, extremism & dominance. Basically, if we want a rough sketch for the ideological matrix the Allies fought for- it was equality plus freedom.
Nazi ideology (national/racial hierarchies, all the superior race stuff historically to be found in the Manu code, exterminationist military aggression, explicit collective inequality, ..) had to go. Along with that, in next one-two decades, all (or most) imperialist rule & white dominance in Asia & Africa.
And it was naturally followed by ideology of the New Left in the 60s, which was a beginning of anti-white lunacy. Some of its more articulate preachers were Jewish (Herbert Marcuse), some were not (Frantz Fanon). You got the entire corpus of influential works, originating mainly in the 50s & the 60s (Gunnar Myrdal, Herbert Marcuse, Simone de Beauvoir, Frantz Fanon, ..) and later by Edward Said, Kate Millett, Michel Foucault, ..) which advocated moral nihilism, feminism, gay activism, anti-whitism & anti-Europeanism ... a cartoon ideology Harold Bloom christened School of Resentment.
This "movement"- let's call it Minoritarianist School of Resentment- has grown out of post-WW2 Western cultural condition & was not planned or anything like that.
As regards Jews -I mean principally their ideological influence – I think you overrate them. There was nothing ideological in paradigm shifts in Anglosphere & Western cultural world -most suicidal moves in these societies were caused/provoked/influenced? by popular culture of Beatles, the Countercultural 60’s and later, and not by German-Jewish (or other Jewish) “intellectuals” like Marcuse & the rest. If there is a ruling New Left world-view in affluent Western societies, it cannot be ascribed to any group or a set of individuals of any ethnicity. The New Left ideology (idolization of homosexuals & other “sexual minorities”, hatred towards national identity, extreme feminism & war against nuclear family, fetishization of blacks & Muslims, jabbering about weed & other drugs, female sexual promiscuity, cartoon war against the imperial past of some European peoples, war against normalcy, idolatry of non-European cultures & primitive forms of society, …)- I don’t see that as a final crystallization of some ideological warfare, but as an almost inevitable end of the trajectory of Western culture in its decadent phase, as in famous hypothetical question ascribed to Lenin: ” Are the forces which propel us to greatness the same that will, transformed by mutations of History, eventually lead to our collapse ?”Replies: @Neil Templeton
Just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
My understanding of the story is that many Germans felt that Jews didn’t pull their weight in the Great War, and persisted, some of them, in prospering during the difficult times after. Maybe bullshit, maybe not. But here is the lesson, apropos today. When the high trust society fails, and all news is Fake News, Truth is scarce and almost impossible to identify. Such a time, I think, was the time of Germany between the Wars. Given that truth is hard to ascertain in the current year, and extremely partisan, I think we should concentrate on the problems close at hand. And turn off the TV.
I really hope the ruling class learns stuff from SARS-CoV-2. Like the importance of having domestic manufacturing capacity, and the importance of the medical system to be ready for pandemics instead of lecturing us about racism,
One thing I hope we learn is that having vaccines is important. I’d like to see a long-term goal of having an effective vaccine for a disease from every family (or genus, or order, I’m not sure what the right level of classification is) of viruses that infects people. If we had a vaccine against SARS, MERS, or a coronavirus that causes colds, we’d be a lot closer to having a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. He’ll, it might even provide some cross-protection. Sure, some viruses like HIV might be nearly impossible to vaccinate against, but most infections with most viruses cause immunity to at least homologous strain exposure in at least a minority of infected people.
Like ebola and Marburg viruses are related. They are both filoviruses, negative sense, single-stranded RNA viruses. So far, neither one has caused self-sustains epidemics in people. So far, so good. But viruses can evolve, and a strain of either one could take off. It would be nice if we had an Ebola vaccine, because then if a Marburg virus takes off, we would be closer to having a vaccine than if we had to start from scratch.
Not to mention that if we had capable people with lots of experience translating basic research into clinical medicine, we’d be in a better position to develop new vaccines faster. I’ve heard that the best minds don’t go into vaccinology, and that needs to change.
My fear is that ain’t no one gonna larn notin’ no how from covid.
Still, Europe had many fewer Jews, and still had a feminist movement. (French feminists had their own derangements--Simone de Beauvoir signed a petition to lower the age of consent in France, for instance.) It's gotten further in a lot of ways, too.
My best guess is, given IQ and culture, Jews tend to *dominate* leftist movements. Whether they make them more *effective* is an open question. (You could argue the reverse, given that America is generally less leftist than Europe, but there are so many other factors--the USA is more religious and has no history of feudalism, for example-- it's hard to call that the reason.)Replies: @nebulafox
Adding to the question of effectiveness is their record in the rare moments that left-wing movements in the West have managed to seize power, which naturally requires enough of a societal meltdown (like, say, WWI) to allow for enough time for their primary focus on semantic debates to not take up all their time. It wasn’t even much of a contest for Stalin to blow his rivals away: he was just a far more effective and clever politician than them. The average new Soviet man who had moved to the city related to him way more than Trotsky. This was about more than petty rivalries and personal power. The question of where the USSR was going was settled quite decisively in Stalin’s neo-Muscovite favor, well before the purges.
The Jewish intelligentsia would be nailed hard by the purges, set forward by a man that they sneered at as a hopelessly gauche clerk who couldn’t possibly out-think them. Particularly interesting was that Stalin made a probably intentional point of overhauling the ethnic makeup in the secret police, which was initially heavily dominated by Jews and Latvians. By the 1940s, this had changed. The makeup was predominantly ethnic Russian and interestingly, Caucasian: Beria, like Stalin himself, was a Georgian.
-------
@Bardon Kaldian:Couldn't the same be said for all theories that reduce all or nearly all of what is wrong with the world to a single cause/entity? That one magic key that unlocks all....Replies: @nebulafox
Only Jewish power in America is basically giving us Weimar all over again, with the added power of mass media and the internet. Jews totally ignored the lesson they should have learned, blamed everyone else for their own behavior, and doubled-down on the exact same behavior in America. But this time they were smart enough to fragment the ethnic cohesion of the nation first, giving them free reign with no realistic threats to their power. Which doesn't stop them from an endless, paranoid outpouring of absurd media projects showing Jews as forever under threat (HBO's ridiculous "The Plot Against America" just being the latest example).Replies: @Jack D, @Bardon Kaldian
What is wrong with this post & most comments is this: Weimar Germany (1918-1933) was not reducible to decadent faqqotry & similar stuff, nor were German Jews some dominant manipulative force behind it all. In fact, Weimar Germany (which also, as a cultural sphere includes Austria of the period) was one of the pinnacles of creativity, close in eminence to Periclean Athens (of course this is an exaggeration, but I have no other reference point except Medicis’ Florence. Anyway, this was great creative time). It was the time of greatest modern German painting, film, literature (Mann, Broch, Rilke, Musil, Hesse, Kafka, ..), music (Schoenberg, Berg, Orff, Hindemith, …), architecture, science, especially physics & mathematics (Heisenberg, Schroedinger, Pauli, Weyl, Noether, …), but also chemistry, medicine, philosophy (Husserl, Heidegger, Spengler, Scheler, Hartmann, Cassirer, Schmitt …), various other social sciences, engineering, finances etc. etc.
So, widespread opinion among right-wingers that is was mostly decadence, prostitution, Jewish & homo depravity is an extremely shallow view. Weimar Germany birthed titanic works of high modern culture & whole modern world.
Anger over war profiteering was a heavily prominent theme in early Hitler speeches, but I don’t think that was particularly decisive toward his long-term thinking. If anything, the Nazis were the ultimate war profiteers when they were in power.
You cannot understand the milieu of Hitler’s developing ideology in the early 1920s without understanding two things:
1) The dream of a German imperium in the east was a reality, albeit briefly, in 1918. Hitler’s thinking toward Lebensraum and the genetic inferiority of the Slavs didn’t really solidify until it became clear the Soviet regime was not going anywhere, but even in his early speeches, he clearly saw Brest-Livtovsk as a good delimiter between Germany and a revived, nationalist Russia.
2) A (largely unwanted) Bolshevik government in which Jews were heavily prominent was also a reality, albeit again briefly, in 1919. And not just in Bavaria. Fascism would have gotten nowhere if it wasn’t for the reality that many Central Europeans were under the intense threat of Bolshevism immediately after the war, and it left psychological scars. It shows: Spain, Portugal, Poland, Austria, Hungary, Italy… even as far south as Greece and Turkey, you saw either fascist or fascist leaning military dominated regimes. The Nazis were one of the last to take power, not among the first.
Thanks for pointing all that out. Also conveniently glossed-over by the usual suspects is that the Jewish Communists were no less vicious toward religious Jews than they were toward any non-Jews.
——-
:
Couldn’t the same be said for all theories that reduce all or nearly all of what is wrong with the world to a single cause/entity? That one magic key that unlocks all….
-------
@Bardon Kaldian:Couldn't the same be said for all theories that reduce all or nearly all of what is wrong with the world to a single cause/entity? That one magic key that unlocks all....Replies: @nebulafox
>Also conveniently glossed-over by the usual suspects is that the Jewish Communists were no less vicious toward religious Jews than they were toward any non-Jews.
Quite true. As the saying went, the Bronsteins paid for the Trotskys. The Soviet system treated everybody who didn’t conform horribly, regardless of race or creed.
One barely remembered part of the Russian Revolution was massive Islamic inspired uprisings in Central Asia that started in 1916 in the context of WWI and wouldn’t be squelched until well into the 1920s. Being the friends and supporters of oppressed colonial peoples that they were, the Bolsheviks naturally put this down with methods that made the Tsarists look like humanitarians, including chemical weapons: which they also used against the peasants in the Tambov Uprising. After it was over, mosques were closed, imams were targeted for death or the gulag, and Islamic practices in general suppressed: with the result being that Central Asia today is far and away the most secular part of the Muslim World.