Please forgive us for inventing the best of science, literature, and medicine. We know it must hurt your fee fees to know that just a handful of us have accomplished more than your entire group over the last one hundred years. We make the best movies, books, and paintings. You think you deserve more awards for Tyler Perry movies and … well, whatever books I’m sure you’re all busy reading right now. We apologize for being better than you, for being more conscientious towards each other and the environment, for being more willing to play by the rules you casually disregard. We’re sorry for bothering you with our many cerebral arguments: Kant or Nietzsche? All while you’re busy thinking, “MJ or Lebron?”

We’re sorry our endless pampering of you hasn’t made you feel better over the fact that we’re less racist than you, that our women live in much less fear of being raped or otherwise torn apart in our countries than yours. We beg forgiveness for the moon landing; we know you’ll get there any time now. Most of all, we’re sorry for being us, which is innate. No matter how many undeserved plaques you get, at the end of the day we’re still us and you’re not…and we know that must make you very angry indeed. We’re sorry.

I join in your humble apologies, but would like to add, while looking down at my shoes, apologies on behalf of: surgeons, airline pilots, rescue swimmers, electricians and other skilled tradesmen, and the student bodies of N.Y. City’s strictly-merit-admission high schools.

If the Spaniards must apologize to the Aztecs, must the Aztecs apologize to the tribes they conquered? Bad as the Spaniards may have been, they never went in for wholesale human sacrifice.

And yet you will not find more devout Catholics than our Mexican friends. Simply astounding…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannibalism_in_pre-Columbian_America

They sort of did, they just didn’t eat them– because pretending that eating a wafer makes up for your sins was a fine substitute.

As an Aryan I have no dog in this fight.

Apologies, whether sincere or insincere, are cheap – it’s easier than having to return the loot. The Spanish state & the Church at Rome have a lot to apologize for. Both have been deeply authoritarian institutions throughout most of their respective histories; & have often worked hand in glove to extend & maintain their own mutually reinforcing power. But it’s not just the native populations that experienced their heavy hands, their own populations suffered under their yokes down through the centuries, as well. Unlike in North America, where the colonists established English democracy very early, the Latin American countries – just like Spain itself (and Portugal) – were under fascist rule up until very recently; with full support of the ‘Holy See’. So apologies all around. After all, it doesn’t cost any extra. Moral shakedown artists are much less expensive than monetary shakedown artists in search of the benjamins for reparations. Or the contemporary capitalist conquistadors who are still screwing everyone over.

Or is there never a justification for one nation to invade another, conquer its people, impose its rule, and uproot and replace its culture and civilization?

Whence came that justification? Pat Buchanan is all of a sudden justifying US invading Afghanistan, Middle East, former Czechoslavakia, and now Vanenzuela or does he feel that the West is justified in invading any country it feels like doing it. Whence came that justification?

Have the Western peoples who conquered and changed much of the world been, on balance, a blessing to mankind or a curse? Is the history of the West, though replete with the failings of all civilizations, not unique in the greatness of what it produced?

Indeed! All US wars, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Eastern Europe, have on balance, been blessing to mankind. Just ask those people the US invaded. They are dancing, in gratitude, in the streets of Kabul, Baghdad, and Damascus. People of Venezuela are eagerly awaiting this blessing.

I am not saying that countries should apologize for something that happened 500 years ago but they do need to apologize for what is going on now. Perhaps Buchanan’s white race has the moral justification to kill and starve women and children of Yemen and Afghanistan, or starve to death 500,000 plus children in Iraq. Whence came that justification? Who knows 500 years later Buchanan’s future generation may credit the US for any develoment these countries may achieve inspite of these destructions.

Powerful elites often commit crimes when it is in their self-interest to do so. Pat Buchanan — of Irish Catholic ancestry — surely must understand that. Such crimes are not something unique to the West. When demands are made solely for Western apologies, it is, of course, hypocritical.

Anyone who doubts reality should get a serious history book.

For the entire existance of pre-humans and humans, up until recently, ALL human clans, tribes, and societies were fierce, territorial, and warlike, otherwise they were destroyed by their neighbors.

Almost always, when a powerful tribe encountered a weak tribe, the weak tribe was destroyed or absorbed into the stronger society. Do you really think it could be different?

And it continues even as we speak: Jews vs, Palestinians, Chinese vs. Tibetians. On the other hand, and against all history and logic, most Western nations today eagerly embrace the invasian of their lands, relacement of their people, and destruction of their society and culture by weaker, less-successful tribes. Tribes who could never counquer by war.

Spain’s Foreign Minister Josep Borrell said it was “weird to receive now this request for an apology for events that occurred 500 years ago.”

I humbly apologize for my country’s fraudulent entry into the Spanish-American War.

Please feel free to take Puerto Rico back. Please, please, please…

As an Aryan I have no dog in this fight.

People who defecate from horseback wouldn’t.

The dominance of one culture or civilization is overwhelmingly about power. Regarding Mexico, the Aztec Empire was a triple alliance of the city states of Tenochtitlan, Texcoco and Tlacopan. At its height, and dominated by Tenochtitlan, the empire controlled much of central Mexico and imposed an annual tribute on conquered tribes. When the Spanish, led by Hernán Cortés, landed in Yucatán in 1519, they quickly allied with the local Totonac people, who were happy with the opportunity to stop paying the Aztec tribute tax.
The pattern of history is clear. Power (manifested as interest) has been present in every conflict of the past – no exception. It is the underlying motivation for war. Other cultural factors might change, but not power. Interest cuts across all apparently unifying principles: family, kin, nation, religion, ideology, politics – everything. We unite with the enemies of our principles, because that is what serves our interest. It is power, not any of the above concepts, that is the cause of war.
Before deciding what apologies are owing, we all need to learn the lessons history – before it is too late.
https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/

Excellent.

Must the West Beg the World for Forgiveness?

Yes being the best at things of importance is unforgivable.

To be fair, people whose ancestors were demonstrably enslaved might have a reasonable claim against those people who have inherited fortunes founded on that enslavement. Some might also consider making a claim against their African kin who sold them to predominantly Islamic and sometimes Jewish slave traders and the slave traders themselves. Interestingly, slavery was not outlawed until 2007 in Mauritania and still persists to this day.

https://www.antislavery.org/what-we-do/mauritania/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIlovN546n4QIVw7ztCh0jAQ4oEAAYASAAEgIDR_D_BwE

Similarly many Irish people whose ancestors were kidnapped and deported to the colonies to spend their lives in indentured servitude (slavery under another name) might also have a reasonable claim.

On the other hand, racial reparations, claims made by people who share the same ancestry as some people who were enslaved, against anyone who has the same colour skin as some people who were slave owners, that is racist nonsense.

We apologize for being better than you, for being more conscientious towards each other and the environment, for being more willing to play by the rules you casually disregard.

Says the SJW himself.

Unlikely to get an apology from the king, Lopez Obrador may do better with Pope Francis

Much better. He would treat Obrador to the best foot bath eva and maybe throw in a few pre-teen boys if that wasn’t enough.

Have the Western peoples who conquered and changed much of the world been, on balance, a blessing to mankind or a curse?

Considering the entire third world wants to get in to white, Western nations by any means necessary I’d say a blessing and any third world peoples who say otherwise are rank hypocrites.

They built their churches on top of the temples.”

temples to sadistic human sacrifice. Does he long for the ‘good ol days’?

He demanded that the king and the pope ask for “forgiveness for the abuses inflicted on the indigenous peoples of Mexico.”

he should apologize personally

he (and his blonde wife) are as white (and therefor evil and guilty) as your typical citizens of Spain.

Did the Aztecs have a right to be left alone by the European world?

if the Maori of New Zealand (of recent moral sanctimony) were still eating their neighbors, would it be best to leave them to it?

Are all civilizations and cultures equal, or are some more equal than others? Are some superior?

Cannibalism vs. modern day New Zealand. Hmmm..

Is the white race, as Susan Sontag wrote, “the cancer of human history”?

you’re getting warmer Pat..

As we see the monuments and memorials to the great men of our past desecrated and dragged down, the verdict among a slice of our ((intellectual and cultural elites)) is already in. Thumbs down. They agree with the moral shakedown artist of Mexico City.

[‘echoes’ added for clarity]

Or is a deep-seated national guilt, such as that which afflicts many Germans today, a permanent incapacitating feature of a nation’s existence?

[emphasis mine]

and bingo!

The West has a stark choice. It either wrestles control of central banking away from the Fiend, or it continues with the long, humiliating slog into the mire. Ultimately to see its people inundated and driven into the ground by armies of hatred-consumed POC. Filled to the brim with a ((carefully crafted)) rancor for the people who they’ve been taught have and are oppressing them.

We can’t have it both ways. We can’t continue to allow The Fiend to print unlimited money, to corrupt virtually every institution of the West, and still pretend that there’s some kind of hope for the future without widespread bloodshed.

As long as Susan Sontag’s tribe is in control of our governments and institutions, we’re going to continue down the path of cultural and ethnic and civilizational dissolution/hatred/strife/misery/moral degeneracy/corruption/Eternal Wars/and seething tribal malignancy.

Germany heroically tried to save itself, and by extension the rest of us. But we were too stupid, greedy, short-sighted, vain and duped to comprehend the stakes involved. General Patton only realized it once it was too late.

Ironically, Putin of Russia, may be the last great hope for Western Civilization.

(and hence, the ((ubiquitous idiotic hysteria)) over ‘Russia did it!!!’)

What moon landings?

Jews, niggers, and the rest of your motley collection of aggrieved brown pets can kiss both sides of my white ass. And that goes for you as well, you simpering Leftist faggot.

“The age of guilt is over. We will not apologize for our achievements. Our history cannot be used as a weapon against us. We are in debt to no-one. Our glorious past is a matter of pride and joy to us. Whatever we have done in the past only inspires us today for even greater deeds tomorrow. Those who feel that we have wronged them should be happy they are still alive.”

Agreed. One minor quibble though: most people in the world think that Europe is the supreme manifestation of the white civilization.

Westerners will get butthurt when they read this. Western colonization of the world resulting in stealing of land, resources, slavery,has caused enormous destruction of the colonized territories in Latin America, Africa, Mid East and Asia. Indigenous industries were dismantled to prevent competition and to advance the growth of industries in the western country; this was clearly the case in India. In China, opium was pushed onto the populace after the China’s defeat in the Opium Wars. It set back the progress of these colonized countries by decades if not centuries.

There was a tremendous transfer of wealth from the colonies to the western countries laying the foundation and momentum for the progress and development of the western countries.

To posit that that the victimised countries would not progress if left to their own independent development is an untenable assumption.

Good comment!

“One culture, one civilization was imposed upon another,” wrote President Lopez Obrador: “There were massacres and oppression. The so-called conquest was waged with the sword and the cross. They built their churches on top of the temples.”

My suggested response: Yeah, and we were good at it!

“Now no one denies that great sins and crimes were committed in that conquest. But are not the Mexican people, 130 million of them, far better off because the Spanish came and overthrew the Aztec Empire?”

Rob Peter to pay Paul.

“Did not 300 years of Spanish rule and replacement of Mexico’s pagan cults with the Catholic faith lead to enormous advances for its civilization and human rights?”

Forced conversion.

“Or is there never a justification for one nation to invade another, conquer its people, impose its rule, and uproot and replace its culture and civilization?”

How about asking nicely?

“Is “cultural genocide” always a crime against humanity, even if the uprooted culture countenanced human sacrifice?”

So long as the Spanish got all the gold and silver!

“Did the Aztecs have a right to be left alone by the European world? If so, whence came that right?”

Yes. Corinthians 6:1-12–When one of you has a grievance against another, does he dare go to law before the unrighteous instead of the saints? Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life! So if you have such cases, why do you lay them before those who have no standing in the church? I say this to your shame. Can it be that there is no one among you wise enough to settle a dispute between the brothers, …

“The West has a stark choice.”

Americans in generally do not view themselves as “Westerners”.

“We can’t have it both ways. We can’t continue to allow The Fiend to print unlimited money, to corrupt virtually every institution of the West, and still pretend that there’s some kind of hope for the future without widespread bloodshed.”

Assuming that there is this “fiend”.

“As long as Susan Sontag’s tribe is in control of our governments and institutions, we’re going to continue down the path of cultural and ethnic and civilizational dissolution/hatred/strife/misery/moral degeneracy/corruption/Eternal Wars/and seething tribal malignancy.”

So if you feel this strongly about what is happening right now, do you not have a duty to stop it dead in its tracks? Or are you one of those armchair warriors who waits for someone to actually do something about it, and say “you go girl”? See, if you truly cared about our “civilization dissolution”, then you would be leading the charge to stop it. But I get it, you are impotent.

“Germany heroically tried to save itself, and by extension the rest of us. But we were too stupid, greedy, short-sighted, vain and duped to comprehend the stakes involved.”

Through its own brand of propaganda and jackbooting.

“General Patton only realized it once it was too late.”

He realized that the Germans were in his way and he bulldozed them into submission.

“Ironically, Putin of Russia, may be the last great hope for Western Civilization.”

LOL. The ex-head of KGB and a plutocrat.

What is it with your obsession with “Western Civilization”?

“Please forgive us for inventing the best of science, literature, and medicine.”

You mean various groups of people invented those things. Of course, it helped to have the “baseline knowledge” culled from ancient civilizations (e.g. Mesopotamia, Indus River Valley, Yellow River Valley), Greek and Roman civilizations, and the Muslims who preserved such knowledge when Europe was in underpants (the “Dark Ages”).

You didn’t build that. It’s not who we are.

Perhaps Buchanan’s white race has the moral justification to kill and starve women and children of Yemen and Afghanistan, or starve to death 500,000 plus children in Iraq.

Pat Buchanan has been a relentless voice pointing out the folly of the illegal wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and Yemen. And rightly so. All the Eternal Wars for Israel that the ZUS has participated in, are indefensible, and that includes WWI and II.

But he’s not talking about that. Rather, he’s talking about invading lands centuries ago that practiced mass-human sacrifice (or cannibalism or the kind of savage horrors the Apache or Comanche were known to practice on their rival tribes) hundreds of years ago.

Should a white child born in America today feel guilt for things Europeans did 500 years ago? Things that most people today would agree with, like ending a culture based on cutting the hearts out of living men?

If I ran into a culture based on cannibalism, I don’t care if it was 500 years ago, or today, I’d want to put an end to it.

The people of Mexico (and retrograde cultures the world over) are incalculably better off due to the technological marvels made possible by Western civilization, and not just the technological marvels, but inventions like human freedom, and the rule of law, and so many other blessings I can’t even count.

But if anything, all of that only inspires more and more envy, and there is no hatred on this earth, like the hatred born of envy.

What is it with your obsession with “Western Civilization”?

it is the very thing that all butt-hurt soy-boy crybabies are butt-hurt about in the first place.

You of all people should know that corvy.

And that is because Western Civilization is far, far superior to anything that a butt-hurt crybaby could ever even conceive of, let alone accomplish.

It is because of its towering greatness, that there are throngs and hoards of butt-hurt soyboys 😉 all clamoring like peed-on Lilliputians, trying to tie it down. Or at least denigrate it, because like Jusie Smallett, its very existence is a hurtful and bitter reminder of their own pathetic mediocrity.

Superb as usual Rurik. Thank you!

You didn’t build that. It’s not who we are.

Cheap trolling.

the Muslims who preserved such knowledge when Europe was in underpants (the “Dark Ages”).

Quite possibly untrue I hear as not much of the “preserved knowledge” made it up into Europe. Indeed the “preservation” was done by locals.

Anyway, there was massive immigration and population churn going on (including visits from steppe people, black deaths and whatnot), one has the right to lose a few books over that, eh?

Furthermore, how come Europe has “Dark Ages” but nobody else has? The Middle East was in flames pretty much regularly and the whole of Egypt got pillaged by sub-saharan enrichments, China was in ultrakill mode more often than not, yet “Dark Ages” are not on?

The one where initially the US Surveyor 3 unmanned lunar lander landed and then the Apollo 12 crew walked over to and removed it’s camera and returned it to earth, and is now on public display?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveyor_3

https://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/documents/NTRS/collection2/NASA_SP_284.pdf


Video Link

“It is because of its towering greatness, that there are throngs and hoards of butt-hurt soyboys 😉 all clamoring like peed-on Lilliputians, trying to tie it down.”

The only “butt-hurt soyboy” is you. Tens of millions of white Americans, strong and able-bodied, make their own decisions about race and culture every single day. Must everyone abide by your principles lest they be labeled in that manner? Do normies not have the liberty to choose their own path?

That is fine if you tout “Western Civilization”. But you are in the minority here, and deep down that chafes you.

The only “butt-hurt soyboy” is you.

we’ve both participated on this site for a while now corvy, and I’d simply put it to the readers out there which one of us might be perfectly represented in this charming photo

But you are in the minority here, and deep down that chafes you.

The only thing I can recall that’s ever chafed me, was a new Bullpup Semi-Auto Shotgun I was playing with a while back.

That damn thing was so much fun, I brought down a couple medium sized trees with it!

(but you have to be careful, but if you empty enough magazines, the darn thing will chafe your deltoids)

Wow, sad story bro. I just had to crack open a new box of Puffs. Last time I did that was when I watched Roots and Shindlers List back to back.

“Cheap trolling.”

You mean effective rhetoric.

“Quite possibly untrue I hear as not much of the “preserved knowledge” made it up into Europe. Indeed the “preservation” was done by locals.”

Read Jonathan Lyons, who published ‘The House of Wisdom” (2009), a riveting history which reveals the vital role the Islamic civilization played in knowledge creation and how this treasure reached the West and, in doing so, laid the foundations of what we now call the Renaissance.

“Furthermore, how come Europe has “Dark Ages” but nobody else has?”

Of course other continents have their “Dark Ages”. It is just that if those white people insist they created everything good, they have to acknowledge their destruction as well.

“The Middle East was in flames pretty much regularly…”

So was Europe at various points in time.

“and the whole of Egypt got pillaged by sub-saharan enrichments”

Who/Whom?

“China was in ultrakill mode more often than not?

When? Where?

Those bad ol’ “Dark Ages”. Back when everyone was slogging around in the mud with frowns on their faces. In between dying of the plague or being burned at the stake, people still found time to build beautiful inspiring structures like this.

Amazing!

Can’t make this stuff up anymore. Just can’t.

“Decolonisation” and “liberation” and its attendant propaganda amount in many cases to a confidence trick. What has actually happened is that a foreign exploitative elite was replaced by an indigenous one that, exactly because it was indigenous, was not restrained by some measure of control from the metropolitan center. As a consequence corruption greatly increased, respect for the rule of law decreased and it is very much the question whether the average denizen of those regions is actually better off.

Indonesia is a case in point. Andre Vitchek called it in a recent book “the Achipelago of Fear”, a fitting name for a country where one of the greatest massacres in recent history, that following the failed coup of September 1965, still cannot be openly discussed.

Indonesia is very much a colonial construction. It actually consists of a motley collection of islands with their own ethnic groups and languages. The Dutch forged it into some kind of administrative unity under the name of “Netherlands Indies”, mainly through their military activity at the beginning of last century. In Indonesian eyes these were criminal. Yet its leading independence activists did not hesitate to profit from these to lay claim to the whole of this “crime based”
 construction including its most unlikely part, West Papua.

The struggle for West Papua, mainly waged by Sukarno with the ultimate connivance of the Kennedy administrration after the independence of the rest of Indonesia had been assured, was aimed at the “liberation” of the Papuans who were allegedly suffering under the Dutch colonial yoke. That the Papuans didn’t feel it this way and were looking forward to independence which was scheduled for 1970 was totally disregarded by the rulers in Jakarta.

Ultimately Indonesia got hold of the territory by a plainly fraudulent plebiscite and the Papuans’ non-existent yoke was replaced by a very real one based on land theft, torture and massacres. The number of Papuan victims is estimated by some to amount to about 150,000 – and this on a total population at “liberation time” of about 800,000. Still the Indonesians talk unashamedly of “liberation” (“pembebasan”) and have erected a large monument in Jakarta depicting a Papuan couple breaking its chains.

If one is looking for the prime “liberation”confidence trick, aided and abetted by the anti-colonial ideology of the post war West, one can find it here.

“You mean various groups of people invented those things.”

Various groups of Europeans, for the most part. And Europeans by far made the most substantial contributions to every one of those fields. The Chinese may have put papyrus together, but Europeans wrote the best books with it. Phoenicians may have sailed the seas but Europeans traversed the Atlantic and built a civilization that put men on the moon.

“of course, it helped to have the “baseline knowledge” culled from ancient civilizations”

Excuses, excuses. What stops American blacks from making similarly great contributions considering they are more culturally immersed in baseline knowledge than 50% of the world’s population and 100% of Africa? And Europeans invented quite a bit of their “baseline” knowledge from scratch.

“You didn’t build that. It’s not who we are.”

We built that and you can’t – ever. That’s why you’re jealous. We’re just plain better than you in every conceivable way. That’s why you have to make up victim status: you can’t compete so you have to imagine that you’re oppressed; the reality is that we’re just better than you and you know it.

“Read Jonathan Lyons, who published ‘The House of Wisdom” (2009), a riveting history which reveals the vital role the Islamic civilization played in knowledge creation and how this treasure reached the West and, in doing so, laid the foundations of what we now call the Renaissance.”

Nonsense. I can water a field but that doesn’t guarantee crops. Europeans deserve all the credit for their wonderful genius. The comparatively minor contributions of others pale in comparison. The Renaissance would have happened regardless of what happened elsewhere in the world. We built that. You didn’t.

“Of course other continents have their “Dark Ages”.”

Most of them are still there.

“It is just that if those white people insist they created everything good, they have to acknowledge their destruction as well.”

We sort of did. We certainly made the best contributions to nearly every field of study. Putting a magnetized piece of metal in some water and calling it a compass hardly compares to European development of the technology. Same for most of your other arguments.

“they have to acknowledge their destruction as well.”

I’m sure they were building rocket ships in Africa before Europeans can along and tore them down /s.

“So was Europe at various points in time.”

But Europe recovered and prospered in spite of that. We didn’t need victim excuses because we are naturally very capable.

“The only “butt-hurt soyboy” is you.”

Uh, you’re the obsessive Russiagate conspiracy theorist who stalks this site at 2am. I’m totally sure you’re a well-adjusted married man with kids just like you say /s.

“That is fine if you tout “Western Civilization”. But you are in the minority here, and deep down that chafes you.”

A majority of whites vote republican. He’s definitely not in the minority unless your logic is that the inmates get to run the insane asylum along with the guards.

“But you are in the minority here, and deep down that chafes you.”

Actually Corvie it is you who are “in the minority here”, which is of course exactly why your kind are trying to bring in shit tons of blacks and browns as quickly as possible.

I recall one of your “journalist” chums remarking how different and scary the world was outside his little urban cocoon just prior to Trump’s upset election victory.

And then of course there’s this gem from your boy Peter Strozk when he found himself 6o miles south of the DC beltway. “It’s real scary down here”.

Or is there never a justification for one nation to invade another, conquer its people, impose its rule, and uproot and replace its culture and civilization?

Or maybe he’s alluding to Israel.

And what Rurik said.

” still cannot be openly discussed.”

A movie was made and it was shown on a local public television station.

Video Link

Amlo cant stop the cartels. He cant stop the gasoline thiefs. He cant make better schools. A huge part of the population wants to move to a better country. He is hopeless, but he can blame the Spaniards, sound familiar?

Did the Aztecs have a right to be left alone by the European world?

If so, whence came that right?

Did the European world have the right to invade and conquer the Aztecs?

If so, whence came that right?

Which leads to another question: Are all civilizations and cultures equal, or are some more equal than others? Are some superior?

Western Civilization is superior to others, but does not give the right to invade and conquer other civilizations.

“Various groups of Europeans, for the most part.”

If you want to get technical, it was primarily Northern and Western Europeans.

“And Europeans by far made the most substantial contributions to every one of those fields.”

Only due to the foundation by other groups.

“The Chinese may have put papyrus together, but Europeans wrote the best books with it.”

That would be an opinion.

“Phoenicians may have sailed the seas but Europeans traversed the Atlantic and built a civilization that put men on the moon.”

Did that even really happen?

“What stops American blacks from making similarly great contributions…”

You.

“We built that and you can’t – ever. That’s why you’re jealous.”

Again, if you want to get technical, it was primarily Northern and Western Europeans. Now, unless you can show us your specific contribution to art, architecture, mathematics, or technology, you are not included in this “we”.

“We’re just plain better than you in every conceivable way.”

You mean plain better at pillaging and plundering and jackbooting.

“Actually Corvie it is you who are “in the minority here””

Dude, I’m white.

“And then of course there’s this gem from your boy Peter Strozk when he found himself 6o miles south of the DC beltway. “It’s real scary down here”.”

Cool story, bro.

“we’ve both participated on this site for a while now corvy, and I’d simply put it to the readers out there which one of us might be perfectly represented in this charming photo”

You looked OK in your younger days.

“That damn thing was so much fun, I brought down a couple medium sized trees with it!”

Like I said, you are impotent.

I don’t have much sympathies for the Indians. The British pretty much gifted them a country complete with infrastructures such as the railways, various civilian and military institutions and when the British left and the natives became their own master they behave exactly like the British. In other words bullying and land grabbing their neighbors. Today Kashmir is brutally occupied with thousands of mass graves, Sikkim was invaded and annexed and Bhutan has to make sure they are subservient enough to avoid the wrath of India.

Indeed! All US wars, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Eastern Europe, have on balance, been blessing to mankind. Just ask those people the US invaded.

He’s not referring to those wars, he has steadfastly opposed those, and you seem informed enough to know that every one of those wars was instigated by America’s Jewish occupation government, so what’s the reason for your disingenuity?

Perhaps Buchanan’s white race has the moral justification to kill and starve women and children of Yemen and Afghanistan, or starve to death 500,000 plus children in Iraq.

When has Buchanan ever argued for this? Again and in fact he’s on record as opposing those wars. You’re letting your Muslim brothers in Saudia Arabia off the hook as they have gleefully done all of the killing and starving of their fellow Muslims of Yemen, albeit with Western supplied military hardware.

It was Jewess Madeline Albright who was responsible for the sanctions that claimed the lives of 500,000 innocent Iraqis and not white nationalists who were some of the first to call attention to that shameful atrocity and the (((forces))) behind it.

Dude, I’m white.

Yeah, so I’ve heard. Maybe, maybe not.

That’s not what I meant, genius. Self-hating, Marxist indoctrinated white traitor shitlibs like you are a minority here as well as in Europe.

Hope you can stick around for the finish.

In a spasm of cultural and religious triumphalism, octogenarian Paddy fails to mention the Incan and Aztec empires were severely debilitated by a smallpox epidemic introduced by Europeans at least a decade before Cortes and Pizarro showed up. With no immunity, many millions of Indians died and many more never fully recovered. This epidemic was probably not purposeful….the Spics just got lucky. Although have read that the vile Brits used smallpox as germ warfare in the French and Indian Wars, so it is entirely possible the Spics knowingly introduced smallpox into the New World. Nothing is beyond the bounds of decency for a follower of the Whore of the Seven Hills, eh Paddy? Torturing scientists….great. Screwing little crippled kids….wonderful. Worshiping a mythical joo zombie……..splendid. Insisting their customers breed like flies and dwell in filth……marvelous.

Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador(El Presidente de Mexico) has written Pope Francis I and King Felipe VI to demand their apologies for the Spanish conquest of Mexico that began 500 years ago with the “invasion” of Hernando Cortez… “One culture, one civilization was imposed upon another… There were massacres and oppression… They built their churches on top of the temples.”
…Now no one denies that great sins and crimes were committed in that conquest. But are not the Mexican people, 130 million of them, far better off because the Spanish came and overthrew the Aztec Empire? Did not 300 years of Spanish rule… lead to enormous advances for its civilization and human rights? Or is there never a justification for one nation to invade another, conquer its people, impose its rule, and uproot and replace its culture and civilization? …Did the Aztecs have a right to be left alone by the European world? If so, whence came that right?

All throughout history and all around the world, people have been conquering each other. Demanding apology for past imperialism is stupid. The entire world was about small imperialism and big imperialism. Vietnamese were carving up Cambodia before the French arrived. Zulus conquered other tribes in southern Africa. Even before the Europeans arrived in the New World or some non-white part of the world, the native peoples had been bashing and invading one another. Incas, Aztecs, and Mayans(though gone before the Europeans arrived) were imperialists in their own right. American Indians of the Great Plains were no strangers to ceaseless warfare. Mongols were among the greatest conquerors. Ottoman Turks controlled much of Southern Europe for centuries.
Now, not all peoples at all times were into imperialist mode, and there were long stretches of history in certain areas of the world when certain peoples mainly kept to themselves. Japanese were perhaps the most famous example of this. After Hideyoshi’s failed attempt to conquer China by the way of Korea, Japan mostly looked inward and shut itself from the bigger world. Finally, it was pried open by the West. And even though China was more of an imperial power, it had no interest in expanding across the seas. (Even Chinese territorial expansions were oftentimes less the work of Chinese themselves than of peoples who’d conquered the Chinese and then pushed beyond existing borders. In time, as the conquerors themselves were absorbed into China, their conquests ended up in Chinese hands.) Still, the concept of respecting borders and sovereignty of nation-states is a relatively recent idea, at least as a ‘right’ as an ethical principle. Therefore, it should be morally applied only to the world after World War II when most peoples came to an agreement of national independence and sovereignty. It’s like condemnation of past slavery makes little sense because most of the world not only practiced it but didn’t find it particularly evil.

Not true. The British introduced tea into India and built railways and bridges.

Pat Buchanan: “Query: Can peoples who are ashamed of their nation’s past do great things in its future?”

So-called “white guilt” has been an integral part of the past of the United States even from the days of its founding by those Christian religious fanatics, the Puritans. Guilt over “sins”, real or imaginary, is a big part of the Christian religion. Rabbi Jesus’ crucifixion is believed by Christians to be for nothing but an expiation of human guilt.

Still invoked by numerous modern presidents (e.g., JFK, Reagan, Obama) the Puritan John Winthrop’s speech to his co-religionists onboard the Arabella as it approached the New World was above all not, as it is commonly but erroneously interpreted, a justification for “American exceptionalism”, but an exhortation for them to remain humble. Today’s American neo-Puritans are still following his advice. How better to remain humble than to constantly apologize for past sins? They may have abandoned many of the details of Christianity, but in this they are still Christians through and through.

Being ashamed of the nation’s past is certainly nothing new, though some would have you believe that it only started in the 1960s with attacks such as Sontag’s. But Sontag’s remark was well within the American Christian tradition. For example, Abraham Lincoln’s Second Inaugural address was little but an apology for two hundred and fifty years of slavery, for which the war was depicted as divine punishment. It was a groveling apology in the true Christian spirit, and has been a big success with its guilt-ridden people; considered today one of his best speeches. It’s also no mere coincidence that the man instrumental in starting the bloodbath of the American Civil War was John Brown, referred to by his contemporaries as “the last Puritan”.

Logically, if you believe that America was ever great, then you must believe that this kind of insane guilt was an important ingredient in making her so. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

You’re going to have to explain that one, Reg… is it perhaps a “designated” joke? A dig at my Hibernian origins? If the former, haha. If the latter, any fool will tell you we’re too drunk to ride horses, and that the sink is our preferred defecation location.

“That’s not what I meant, genius. Self-hating, Marxist indoctrinated white traitor shitlibs like you are a minority here as well as in Europe.

Ma’am, I’m not a liberal. Just an educated, married white man with children you can think for himself when it comes to race and culture.

“Hope you can stick around for the finish.”

And what finish could that be?

Still cannot be openly discussed, I said. The makers of this movie, the “Act of Killing”, had to pretend that they were going to glorify the killers. The Guardian about its performance: “Through a network of underground distributors and social media, The Act of Killing has now been viewed by millions of Indonesians. Government and anti-communist organisations continue to try to stop its distribution, but their efforts are ultimately futile in the internet age.”

Jews, niggers, and the rest of your motley collection of aggrieved brown pets can kiss both sides of my white ass. And that goes for you as well, you simpering Leftist faggot.

We got us a ‘tough guy’.

A real keyboard warrior.

Here’s one way to respond to anti-White guilt-tripping ingrates:

“We’ll apologize (for the 1,492nd time) for what we did wrong, if you’ll thank us (for the 1st time) for what we did right.”

Reread the speech. Lincoln is saying that the South started this and they’re getting what they deserve. There’s no shame expressed by Lincoln on his part or on the North’s.

*YAWN*

Easily tough enough for you, Biff.

Let me know if you’d like to find out.

Ma’am, I’m not a liberal. Just an educated, married white man with children you can think for himself when it comes to race and culture.

Uh huh, I believe you, Corvie.

Don’t be unnecessarily stupid.

The correct response?

Show me the Aztec law that made invasion by force illegal.

“So-called “white guilt” has been an integral part of the past of the United States even from the days of its founding by those Christian religious fanatics, the Puritans. Guilt over “sins”, real or imaginary, is a big part of the Christian religion. Rabbi Jesus’ crucifixion is believed by Christians to be for nothing but an expiation of human guilt.”

It is not called “white guilt”, it is simply referred to as “guilt”, nor was it founded by “Christian religious fanatics”, nor should sins be in italics.

“the Puritan John Winthrop’s speech to his co-religionists onboard the Arabella as it approached the New World was above all not, as it is commonly but erroneously interpreted, a justification for “American exceptionalism”, but an exhortation for them to remain humble.”

According to what sources are you basing this “exhortation”?

“It was a groveling apology in the true Christian spirit, and has been a big success with its guilt-ridden people; considered today one of his best speeches.”

Please be more specific here. In what ways was it a “groveling apology”?

When has Buchanan ever argued for this? Again and in fact he’s on record as opposing those wars. You’re letting your Muslim brothers in Saudia Arabia off the hook as they have gleefully done all of the killing and starving of their fellow Muslims of Yemen, albeit with Western supplied military hardware.

I know he is not talking about those wars but the principle is the same, when he says

Or is there never a justification for one nation to invade another, conquer its people, impose its rule, and uproot and replace its culture and civilization?

Israel is doing just that, in the Middle East, with the support of the so-called civilized super power. Furthermore, I am not letting Saudi Arabia off the hook. Saudi Arabia could not do anything without the support of the US and Israel. Who is supplying the weapons and technical expertise to Saudi Arabia to wage this war? The US and Israel. All this to suck Iran into this mess so the US can attack Iran for the sake of her masters. Does anyone think that if Saudi Arabia did not have oil, US would have allowed its citizens to die for those Arabs.

The only purpose every “civilized” western power ever invaded another country or civilization was to plunder its natural resources. Whether it be the British, the French, the Dutch, or the US, all they did was to take the wealth from the countries they invaded. All these colonies are still considered third world countries.

So I say, stop playing God. Let the countries be. Evolution is a natural process. Civilizations come and go. People stay.

If there is any cosmic justice it should be Tenzin Gyatso, aka the fourteen Dalai Lama who should apologize to the Tibetan people and the Han people for the many things he has done. The MSM builds him up into some kind of moral authority doesn’t mean he is one. He is, in a sense a product of British imperialism when Britain has an empire in India and Tenzin Gyatso becomes China’s Ahmed Chalabi.

An excellent comment, if I may say.
Paul Gottfried wrote about the issue, too.

Would you be willing to expand the point a bit, please?
Namely, what’s that in a Christian, even human, mind, psyche, soul, whatever, which creates that “sin” thing? Why that obsession with sin?
Where does it come from?
What’s the source of that insanity?

I guess if we could find that we could tackle it somehow, hopefully.

And if it can be tackled, well……..maybe the chance for successfully challenging, even changing, the current paradigm could go up.

David: “Reread the speech. Lincoln is saying that the South started this and they’re getting what they deserve. There’s no shame expressed by Lincoln on his part or on the North’s.”

You’re simply wrong. Lincoln plainly says both sides are being punished for the “sin” of slavery.

… [God] gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, …

Regarding slavery as a sin was a widespread point of view among American Christians, and a failure to abolish slavery upon the nation’s founding was regarded as a kind of national original sin, denounced by some even at the time of the ratification of the Constitution, which it was said did not live up the Jefferson’s bold rhetoric in the Declaration of Independence. Certainly that was Lincoln’s opinion. As early as 1855, in a private letter to his best friend Joshua Speed, Lincoln revealed himself as a dyed-in-the-wool egalitarian.

As a nation, we began by declaring that “all men are created equal.” We now practically read it “all men are created equal, except negroes.” When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read “all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and catholics.” When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty— to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.

This is the characteristic Christian attitude. Christians enjoy rolling in shame and guilt like a pig enjoys rolling in slop!

Corvinus: “According to what sources are you basing this “exhortation”?”

The exhortation to remain humble is in the sermon itself. Winthrop said:

Now the only way to avoid this shipwreck, and to provide for our posterity, is to follow the counsel of Micah, to do justly, to love mercy, to walk humbly with our God.

Also see:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/01/our-first-and-scariest-inaugural-address-courtesy-of-the-puritans/267299/

Saudi Arabia could not do anything without the support of the US and Israel. Who is supplying the weapons and technical expertise to Saudi Arabia to wage this war? The US and Israel.

Perhaps not but they don’t have to take part in the slaughter of Yemenis yet they willingly are. The last I checked KSA is not exactly an unwilling participant in the carnage.

The only purpose every “civilized” western power ever invaded another country or civilization was to plunder its natural resources.

In most cases the Western colonialists exploited the natural resources that the natives didn’t know existed and/or didn’t possess the know how and technology to extract them. And the natives often reaped the benefits.

Under white rule Rhodesia was one of the two most successful African nations, the other being Dutch & English ruled S.Africa. After the whites of Rhodesia were forced to give up political control to the black communists the nation quickly devolved into a black supremacist, third world hell which it remains today. Ditto for S. Africa.

Whites made America into the greatest nation on earth and the fact that you and so many others from the non-white world wish to come here proves that. You wouldn’t be here if it was still peopled by Indians wielding tomahawks and scalping knives that white men defeated and subdued.

And if European colonialists were so awful how come black Africans, Indians and Muslims have eagerly followed their former white colonial masters back to Europe and the U.K. ?

So I say, stop playing God. Let the countries be.

I agree totally but let’s not forget that Muslims were invading the world and playing God from 711 until 1683. And now the growing Muslim populations throughout Europe are behaving more like aggressors and colonizers instead of fellow citizens so perhaps the non-white European world and people need to practice what they preach.

Hell yes the west should apologize …. for bringing the world to the edge of nuclear annihilation.

Then, we should do something about it.

But that topic is ignored. It would be unbelievable if it were not happening.

Replace Thanksgiving with Sackcloth and Ashes day. A day when whites sit moaning and chanting in a squalid gloom wearing hairshirts as atonement for the sins of their European ancestors.

Sounds like a typical day of much of the world before those Europeans came along.

The answer my friend, is simple : SADOMASOCHISM.. The Fever of the derangement..

Let me know if you’d like to find out.

You’ve got more than all CAPS with a bold? I want to find out!

hatred born of envy.

Exactly this! The more I watch these non-whites, the more I realize that they envy us. Historically, this manifested through them sucking up to whites. Now, they hate whites. But it comes from the same emotion: desire to be like us.

They can never be us, which is why the Jews are pushing the mixed race agenda. Negroes yelling ebonics and commiting crime, is their way of trying to get our attention.

Nothing bothers non-whites more than being ignored by whites.

Dude, I’m white.

Unfortunately, you are not White. I can ALWAYS tell . Never have I been wrong. I’m sorry about your inferiority complex, but.

so perhaps the non-white European world and people need to practice what they preach.

They don’t care at all about honestly. All they care about is conquest and domination, a natural human instinct. They know that they can guilt many whites into letting them in by putting on the “poor me” air. So that’s what they do.

Don’t think for a second non-whites actually care about human rights or honesty.

Yeah I dont get that joke either. I would have made a joke about hibernians being stubby.

With a name like Dannyboy, thats the alcohol talking.

Get serious, that was built by Africans during a Kwanza gathering.

said:
“So-called “white guilt” has been an integral part of the past of the United States even from the days of its founding …”

But it was the fake “holocaust” that really sealed the deal on guilt.

After all, we really should have bombed the impossible “gas chambers”.

http://www.codoh.com

Anyone ignorant enough to believe in the existence of the “Dark Ages” really should remain silent and be thought a fool rather than post comments and remove all doubt.

Show me the relevance of your response. Talk about stupid! lol

Crime: something reprehensible, foolish, or disgraceful

— Merriam-Webster dictionary

Get a dictionary, and learn to read it.

“Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged.”

I.e., we’re right and they’re wrong but let’s move past that…

“Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman’s two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said ‘the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.’”

I.e., now we’re committed to being a instrument of divine wrath even if it costs the South everything. We’re not doing anything wrong — we don’t need to feel ashamed — in killing our brothers. They deserve it.

Tossing in a truism like “we’re all sinners” and “it’s all part of God’s will” is the 1860’s equivalent to saying “that’s not who we are” or “the right side of history.” It’s just boilerplate, it’s not the argument.

I should have written “So perhaps the non-white & Muslim world and their diaspora people living throughout the West should practice what they preach”. But you are correct that all they care about is conquest and domination and they aren’t the least bit sentimental towards whites. Just look at how most of them are behaving in America and elsewhere throughout the West.

If whites ever lose power there won’t be any minority rights, affirmative action set asides and state protections for us like we currently and idiotically bestow upon them.

Booth opened the door, stepped forward, and shot Lincoln from behind with a derringer. The bullet entered Lincoln’s skull behind his left ear, passed through his brain, and came to rest near the front of the skull after fracturing both orbital plates. Lincoln slumped over in his chair and then fell backward.

You can add that to the list of “Things White Americans Aren’t Sorry For” …lol

In any event, apologies or even dialogue with dishonest, morally deformed ideologs engaged in a never ending shakedown/psyop is an exercise in futility. In addition the “democratically elected” Leftist stooges making these ridiculous proclamations in no way speak for the majority of white European people. They know it and so does everyone else.

“Unfortunately, you are not White. I can ALWAYS tell . Never have I been wrong. I’m sorry about your inferiority complex, but.”

You mean you think that you can tell that someone from a blog is other than white. Obviously, it is easier for you that way to make assumptions.

“Don’t think for a second non-whites actually care about human rights or honesty.”

Do you enjoy making wild generalizations?

“the Puritan John Winthrop’s speech to his co-religionists onboard the Arabella as it approached the New World was above all not, as it is commonly but erroneously interpreted, a justification for “American exceptionalism”, but an exhortation for them to remain humble.”

This is the claim you made. In defense of it, you simply gave a quotation from Winthrop’s speech about being humble, rather than a thorough explanation on how and why he was his message was other than offering a formulaic, and unfailingly effective, image of national purpose, i.e. American exceptionalism.

David: “Tossing in a truism like “we’re all sinners” and “it’s all part of God’s will” is the 1860’s equivalent to saying “that’s not who we are” or “the right side of history.” It’s just boilerplate, it’s not the argument.”

I think you make a severe mistake in underestimating the influence of Christian self-reproach over slavery as a cause of the war. The state of being a sinner groveling for an imaginary God’s forgiveness isn’t a truism, it’s the whole basis of Christianity, which back in those days people took a lot more seriously. The North wasn’t just inflicting damage on people in the South. They were suffering grievously themselves. More Northerners died in the war than Southerners.

Also, let’s back up a bit in the speech.

“Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh.” If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came …

Lincoln did not say “Southern slavery.” By saying “American slavery,” Lincoln asserts that North and South must together — inclusively — own the offense.

But it was the fake “holocaust” that really sealed the deal on guilt.

I’ve always found it odd that the U.K. broke Germany’s enigma codes early in the war and the predominantly Jewish “red orchestra” spy ring penetrated elite circles in Nazi Germany and abscond with l German battle plans on the Eastern front yet never uncovered any evidence of the supposedly occurring holocaust.

Who cares what the west does or doesn’t do ? The crimes are too awful to even contemplate. I say FUCKKK them. They are on the skids to oblivion.

I believe you are making a significant error in overestimating the impact of Christian guilt on the American nation, then and now. Besides, a Christian man or woman does not “grovel” for forgiveness; rather, it is an acknowledgement of their transgression before God. The repentance for one’s sins in Christianity is one of several acts in that religion, not the “whole basis”.

ROTFL

MUSLIM LEADER DEMANDS APOLOGY FROM SPAIN

Video Link

Mr Lincoln being a shrewd politician blew that smoke at Gettysburg because he knew the war was still far from over and needed the excuse of slavery as a moral fig leaf to continue it. Outside of a handful of self righteous hard core abolitionists of the John Brown sort, most people in the North did not care about it, (certainly not to the point of going to war over it) not even Lincoln himself, as he clearly stated numerous times. His main concern was “preserving the Union”, (i.e. preserving the political, cultural and economic dominance of the Republican New England elite). His main impetus for the Emancipation Proclamation was equally pragmatic, given that his ambassador to Spain ( a German 48’er Communist) informed him that European recognition of the Confederacy was indeed a very real possibility.

The children of the Puritan Pilgrim Fathers have always been a confused guilt ridden bunch. Of course that never deterred them from making money from slavery as well as from the importation of slaves right up to the eve of the war, even after they had abolished the practice.

http://slavenorth.com/

Southerners, on the other hand, have never been ashamed of their history, not then and not now. And that is exactly why when (((The Usual Suspects))) gained the upper hand in the 60’s the culture war against them commenced full force and continues unabated as we speak.

Corvinus: “I believe you are making a significant error in overestimating the impact of Christian guilt on the American nation, then and now. Besides, a Christian man or woman does not “grovel” for forgiveness; rather, it is an acknowledgement of their transgression before God. The repentance for one’s sins in Christianity is one of several acts in that religion, not the “whole basis”.”

On the contrary, the crucifixion of Jesus is at the center of the Christian religion, which was supposedly a sacrifice to expiate man’s guilt. It’s the whole point. Remove that from Christianity, and not much is left.

Groveling is accurate, though maybe you don’t understand this because of your poor grasp of English.

**************

Definition of grovel in English:

grovel

verb
[no object]

1Lie or crawl abjectly on the ground with one’s face downwards.
‘he grovelled at George’s feet’

1.1 Act in an obsequious way in order to obtain someone’s forgiveness or favour.
‘they criticized leaders who grovelled to foreign patrons’

Origin

Middle English: back-formation from the obsolete adverb grovelling, from obsolete groof, grufe ‘the face or front’ (in the phrase on grufe, from Old Norse á grúfu ‘face downwards’) + the suffix -ling.

**************

The West has been steeped in Christianity for two thousand years. A culture shaped by religious insanity can be expected to develop behaviors like the one Buchanan is complaining about above. The paradox is that the act of begging forgiveness seems to a Christian and his cultural descendants to be proof of their virtue. That’s why they simply can’t seem to get enough of it. These people need to beg and grovel for forgiveness like a junkie needs heroin. It’s the only way they can feel good about themselves.

@patbuchanan

First, this is not about “the West,” it is about the intrepid and valiant Spaniards (Note: almost all of their descendants reside in Spanish America) who created or invented America and “the West” (prior to 1492 western Europe was a poor region, an economic backwater).

Interestingly, Mr. Buchanan, an ostensible Irishman (that is, a descendant of a people who have been throughout their history the victims of Western imperialism) seeks to contrast himself with Mr. Lopez Obrador (who Buchanan implicitly dismisses as non-White by virtue of being “Mexican”), a descendant of those intrepid Spaniards who invented and/or created “the West” (Spain gave Mr. Lopez Obrador a copy of his Grandfather’s birth certificate who was born in Cantabria, Spain).

In short, Buchanan, an Irishman (a victim no different than the Aztec of Western Violence and dehumanization) is taking credit for what Mr. Lopez Obrador descendants accomplished.

This is the classic definition of cognitive dissonance. Here, “the West” is used to camouflage the fact that a few groups of Men mostly from Spain, England, and Portugal were responsible for inventing Europe (the term “European” was first used in the 1600’s) and a thug like Buchanan seeks to aligned himself with the winners instead of the conquered (the Irish, Aztecs, etc.), his folks.

Dannyboy: “Outside of a handful of self righteous hard core abolitionists of the John Brown sort, most people in the North did not care about it, (certainly not to the point of going to war over it) not even Lincoln himself, as he clearly stated numerous times.”

You revisionists kill me. You swear Lincoln was truthful when he says abolishing slavery wasn’t his motive, but don’t believe him here, in his Second Inaugural, when he very clearly states that slavery was the cause of the war. Please keep in mind that Lincoln is the same fellow who shrewdly observed that you can fool some of the people all of the time. I suggest you consider that you and your fellow revisionists may be the ones he was referring to.

You’d be better off to pay attention to what he actually did, not just what he said. While verbally he was on both sides of the slavery issue, no one man is more responsible than Lincoln for the racial disaster currently afflicting white America. It is obvious that his real sympathies were with the abolitionists. See the private letter from Lincoln to Joshua Speed, which I quote from above in #70.

As for what the people at large believed, Uncle Tom’s Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe was a tremendous best seller, exceeded in those days only by the Bible, and it would not have been so popular had anti-slavery sentiment not been widespread. Lincoln is reported to have exclaimed upon meeting her, “So you’re the little lady who wrote the book that started this great big war!”

A classicist told me the Ostrogoths never left their mounts, even to sleep or defecate. Whether other “Aryans” did the same, I couldn’t tell you, but they no doubt had similar idiosyncrasies.

Slavery and diversity fit together like hand and whip glove. Those in the prudently lily-white states would have more than one reason to oppose it.

Mr. Buchanan, an ostensible Irishman

Scots-Irishman. On his father’s side; his mother was German.

A lot closer to Donald Trump than to Joe Biden.

I am of the opinion that the issue of slavery was not Mr Lincoln’s prime motivation for prosecuting the war. I fail to see how that makes me a “revisionist. I understand that he and his Republican political allies mentioned slavery as a cause of the war, that is to be expected. All savvy political animals need a virtuous excuse for going to war. I also understand that a good portion of the New England elite were most likely abolitionists themselves, but I don’t believe Mr Lincoln really cared one way or another about slavery as long as he got his war.

If he thought that, why not make the Emancipation Proclamation at the start of the conflict, instead of two years in? Add to this the fact that in the first year of the war he forbade his Commanders from issuing regional emancipation to slaves in captured territories. The reasoning behind this was that there were slaveholding Unionist sympathizers in several border states who would revolt against the Confederacy if given time.

Dannyboy: “I am of the opinion that the issue of slavery was not Mr Lincoln’s prime motivation for prosecuting the war. I fail to see how that makes me a “revisionist.”

Historians generally agree that slavery was an important cause of the war, and that Lincoln was personally opposed to it. Very common on the racial right though are people who are of the opinion that it wasn’t, and that he wasn’t. I call them revisionists because they wish to revise the usual understanding. On the whole, they seem to me poorly educated on the subject. For example, I’ve yet to encounter one of them who knows that in his last public address before being assassinated, Lincoln advocated making citizens and voters out of the freed slaves.

If you doubt Lincoln’s long-standing hatred of slavery and want to see a collection of Lincoln’s anti-slavery quotations this one is fairly extensive, though it claims to be only a small sampling. Many are linked to sources so you can verify them.

http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/slavery.htm

A couple of choice Lincoln utterances:

I have always hated slavery, I think as much as any Abolitionist.
–July 10, 1858 Speech at Chicago

I am naturally anti-slavery. If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong. I can not remember when I did not so think, and feel.
–April 4, 1864 Letter to Albert Hodges

That’s a great comment, sir.

Pat starts by questioning the D party’s quarreling over reparations. To me, the fact that Kamala and Pocahontas Warren (there are surely others) can advocate FOR reparations and still be considered viable candidates for our nation’s highest office shows how weak and decrepit our shrinking white majority has become. Surely their pollsters must tell them that the white votes they may lose will be more than offset by the POC votes they will gain. Perhaps forty percent or so of whites will vote for their own extinction and be proud of their open mindedness.

Perhaps the Christian “virtue” of “groveling for forgiveness” is the reason Christian America has been lost to the Jews, who seem to be not burdened by such an affliction.

“IF whites ever lose power” should be replaced by WHEN. Outside of successful mass secession, which I do not find believable, our coming minority status is baked in the cake.

Dr. Morgan wrote: “Sontag’s remark (that the white race is the cancer of human history) was well within the American Christian tradition.” That’s interesting, since Sontag (born Rosenblatt) was Jewish.

Also, you write that “the man instrumental in starting the bloodbath of the American Civil War was John Brown.” So, you blame it on a nobody, a crazed Christian fundamentalist? Did Lincoln take his marching orders from deceased abolitionist John Brown? That is lunacy. There was only one man who started that terrible war, the greatest killer in US history, the man who is quite naturally revered as our greatest president.

Indonesia is very much a colonial construction.

That simply borrowed a historical imperial construct. The foot print of modern-day Indonesia is basically the same as the old Majapahit Empire (the first attempt at uniting the islands under a sea-faring power):
West Papua has been a late addition and really doesn’t precede Dutch Indonesia (as you pointed out).

That entire set of islands has always been held together by military force projected from the most populous and powerful island in the area, Java, with buy in from Sumatra. The other islands have little choice but to go along if the deal is generally beneficial to their interests.

For instance, East Timor gained independence, but it cost them many lives and they are now economically on their own and reliant on:
https://borgenproject.org/causes-of-poverty-in-timor-leste/

As opposed to the province of Aceh, which also lost many lives in its independence bid, but came to the table with the federal government after the disastrous tsunami in 2004. While also not fully recovered and still dealing with conditions of poverty, they did receive plenty of aid and reconstruction investment from Jakarta:
http://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/report/100972/acehs-unfinished-recovery

So it’s a cost-benefit analysis for each of the islands. Overcrowding in some islands has been negotiated by the federal government by allowing organized settlement into other islands – for instance, from Bali to lower Sumatra (obviously, this doesn’t come without its own issues that need to be negotiated). But the Jakarta has made it clear (through the statements of its military command) that national unity is “not negotiable” and that any attempts at secession can expect a couple brigades of the dreaded Kopassus to be deployed in your province the purge the insurgency with a sledgehammer (ask the Acehnese or West Papuans). Each island has to take that into their calculation. East Timor was let go of simply because it was not worth the effort.

Peace.

“Perhaps the Christian “virtue” of “groveling for forgiveness” is the reason Christian America has been lost to the Jews, who seem to be not burdened by such an affliction.”

Right, because the Jews are the source of every single affliction known to human kind. Do you check for them under your bed and in your closet?

“IF whites ever lose power” should be replaced by WHEN. Outside of successful mass secession, which I do not find believable, our coming minority status is baked in the cake.”

Majority peoples becoming a minority is part of our human existence. Just ask the WASPs, who had to experience the indecency of being overrun by Southern and Eastern Europeans.

Although, most American whites do not seem to be all in a tizzy, considering that, in an ironic twist of fate, they can use discrimination laws to their advantage.

“There was only one man who started that terrible war, the greatest killer in US history, the man who is quite naturally revered as our greatest president.”

You ought to change your moniker to Folly Of Common Sense. There are a number of factors that caused the Civil War. Certainly the South’s opposition to Lincoln and their belief that he would stop slavery dead in its tracks played an integral role. But he is not the “greatest killer in US history”, nor did he start that conflict.

One could make the case that whites have already lost political power given the almost daily rhetorical attacks on our character by journos, celebrities, politicians and virtually every quarter of the (((establishment))). And the fact that every racial and religious group except whites has the right to advocate for its group interests except whites makes us about 10th class citizens.

We’re behind enemy lines and owe this nation nothing.

HA, HA! I looked thru a few of your recent comments, Corvinus, and see that you are quite a combative fellow. That’s quite a leap of logic for you to infer that I believe that “Jews are the source of every single affliction know to human kind.” My criticism was leveled at Christians (of which I am not one), not Jews. The fact that they now control the USA is not the fault of Jews. It is the fault of the very dumb and weak Christian majority. Indeed, Christians should be more like them.

Per HistoryNet, estimates of Civil War deaths are generally between 640,000 and 700,000 (that is ALL deaths, not just ones from combat). As a percentage of today’s population, the toll would (ironically) have been equivalent to 6 million souls. Prior to that ghastly war, (really a war of Northern Aggression, not a civil war), the belief was that the union was VOLUNTARY. Thus, did not the South have a right to peacefully secede? If, indeed, the union was voluntary, then, ipso facto, waging genocidal war on the South made Lincoln the greatest killer in US history, bar none.

“On the contrary, the crucifixion of Jesus is at the center of the Christian religion, which was supposedly a sacrifice to expiate man’s guilt. It’s the whole point. Remove that from Christianity, and not much is left.”

The death of Jesus is one of several major tenets of the Christian faith. YOU are characterizing it as being “the center”. John 14:6–I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. In this statement, Jesus declares the reason for His birth, death, AND resurrection to provide the way to heaven for mankind, who could never get there on their own.

“Groveling is accurate, though maybe you don’t understand this because of your poor grasp of English.”

It is other than accurate. Christians do not act a groveling worm, forever in fear of God’s condemnation. Christians a beloved child of God who is instructed in Scripture itself to approach God’s throne of grace with confidence, Jesus welcomes you there. That is what Scripture says.

You are bastardizing the faith for your own grandstanding.

“A culture shaped by religious insanity can be expected to develop behaviors like the one Buchanan is complaining about above. The paradox is that the act of begging forgiveness seems to a Christian and his cultural descendants to be proof of their virtue. That’s why they simply can’t seem to get enough of it. These people need to beg and grovel for forgiveness like a junkie needs heroin. It’s the only way they can feel good about themselves.”

You are arguing from a false premise. The American culture was in large part shaped by faith whose adherents were sane and rational in their pursuit of salvation. There is no “begging for forgiveness”; rather, the Christian, when seeking God’s forgiveness, sets aside the excuses and the blame-shifting. Self-examination is God’s examination. “Search me, O God, and know my heart! Try me and know my thoughts! And see if there be any grievous way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting!” (Psalm 139:23–24).

“While verbally he was on both sides of the slavery issue, no one man is more responsible than Lincoln for the racial disaster currently afflicting white America. It is obvious that his real sympathies were with the abolitionists.”

Please understand you are only offering an opinion here. Indeed, Lincoln had sympathy for abolitionists, as slavery was a political and moral scourge, but you are only offering an opinion about his alleged “top dog” status as being squarely responsible for America’s racial animus.

Not at all. If you are of the mindset that America has been “lost” due to Jewish “control”, it is reasonable to assume that you are insisting that their “rule” has been totally and utterly “detrimental” and the source of every single affliction known to human kind. Just be honest about it.

“My criticism was leveled at Christians (of which I am not one), not Jews. The fact that they now control the USA is not the fault of Jews. It is the fault of the very dumb and weak Christian majority. Indeed, Christians should be more like them.”

You mean your criticism is leveled at whites who happen to be Christians. Praytell, how is it possible that the majority of white people with high IQ’s and high time preferences would be snookered and hoodwinked by Jews? What made them somehow not even realize they were being overrun? More importantly, what makes you seemingly immune to Jewish charms?

“Prior to that ghastly war, (really a war of Northern Aggression, not a civil war), the belief was that the union was VOLUNTARY.”

This belief in the Union far as being permanent or voluntary was other than settled before the Civil War, not “a war of Northern Aggression”.

“Thus, did not the South have a right to peacefully secede?”

There were a considerable number of Southerners who were opposed to secession. These Southern Unionists viewed the federal government as worthy of defending because it had provided political and economic security.

“If, indeed, the union was voluntary, then, ipso facto, waging genocidal war on the South made Lincoln the greatest killer in US history, bar none.”

Do you need a virtual brown paper bag for your hyperventilating?

Video Link

sweet..my periodic dose of comedy when I really need a laff. I come to the Repug-heads of UNZ and am never disappointed.

and the older Pat Buchanan gets the sharper becomes his comedy, his irony. way to go Pat. keep it up. you not getting older..just better

Corvinus: “Christians do not act a groveling worm, forever in fear of God’s condemnation. Christians a beloved child of God who is instructed in Scripture itself to approach God’s throne of grace with confidence, Jesus welcomes you there. That is what Scripture says. ”

This is both ignorant and stupid. Try cracking open a Bible sometime. Like most Christians, it seems you’ve never read it. Thus, ignorant.

Stupid because the essence of the Christian life is slavery to Christ. In the Bible, all of the apostles call themselves slaves of Christ. It’s their favorite term for themselves and other believers.

Are you under the impression that a slave and his master are of equal status? Pals? Best buddies? That’s equally stupid. They are not. The slave grovels, because that’s what slaves do. The slave also grovels because he knows that disobedience or rebellion against the master is punished with death and eternal damnation. Consequently, the Christian or slave is barely even a man anymore, because he has no will of his own, but must instead do his master’s will. A slave lives or dies at his master’s whim; he’s totally dependent. His life is no longer his own.

Corvinus: ” The American culture was in large part shaped by faith whose adherents were sane and rational in their pursuit of salvation. ”

Sane and rational people don’t grovel before imaginary beings. They don’t aspire to become slaves to Christ or anyone else. Can you imagine how low an opinion you must have of yourself to want to become a slave? Only very sick people would have such a desire or such a damaged self-concept. If you consider yourself a Christian, you’d be better off booking an appointment with a psychiatrist than going to church with your fellow lunatics.

this thread is a huge white cry for help. here’s a bit of it..help!
all of this is what white people have done to this planet..forced such a life style on people globally..then killed every leader who came out against it, led in different direction..called them socialist and killed them, invaded their countries and destroyed these countries…made things worse

whatever white western people developed was not done so in a vacuum but in a capitalist mode and frame that raved the earth, to secure and concentrate wealth in few hands..ultimately in Khazar/Zionist hands, whose policy of life as the ‘chosen people of god’ we are all now aware of as the major threat to continued human survival on planet earth

this is why Sontag called while people Cancer..because you are in opposition to nature, to god really..never seeking harmony only plunder. we we have seen where that leads.

existence is an integrated whole, no part disconnected from the rest. all social organizational systems must be in line, in tune with nature or the whole goes out of sync and life is threatened. that is why the great thinkers came up with systems that keep humans in tune with nature..that no system prevents humanity for understanding and working to put the best ways into practice..the ways that sustain life

the point and purpose of that is living. we do not need presidents and congresses and parliaments and all of that to live. we need to understand and know nature and how nature permits us to live, what we can build in order to go on. all there is is nature… and us of it and in it, conscious and with in-built imperatives to survive by the sustainable means and content in nature.

nature, knowledge of it is not a democracy. ti is what it is..we do not have a choice about truth. reality is here, there, we are a part of it..it is what it is and we must come to know it in order to enhance our chances. and one we come to know something there is no argument about it..no choice to be made..it is what it is given by nature that we must accept for what it is, adjust to it to be able to deal with it as it is

that truth tells us how we must live. and all we know tells us how to live..and nothing that we actually know tells us that we must live as we do but in almost every way different to the way we have chosen to live..totally wrong and opposed to nature. and we face the horrible consequences of such choices. and those wrong choices have been made by the dominant white groups and elites for 500 years now and counting. and the world is in a mess as a result and humanity is sitting on its very likely last legs as we speak because of white behavior on planet earth

to be decent Pat Buchanan is a man invested in the wrong of white domination of planet earth. and all who support his outlook are the same. but in the face of the catastrophe that has been white domination of planet earth Buchanan should know better. but he does not clearly. his head s harder than mine. he cant learn..so what he speaks in the face of the catastrophe resulting from white domination is very funny indeed..except that it is as serious as it is extremely funny…and human life depends on an opposite change from what Buchanan represents to what a whole lot of people have come to realize about our world…that capitalism, the white way, is insane and we must find a different way to live that sustains life..not constantly threatens life

white people have built nuclear weapons….NUCLEAR weapons!!! that can vaporize life on planet earth. there is no truth in existence that warrants any such development, save the experience of cold adapted people, who in the warmth after the ice has retreated fail to learn the lessons of the most advanced sections of the people of the sun. white people in whole or majority have failed to moderate or eliminate their cold developed insecurity and general pathologies that have made them the cancer they are, the massive human insecurity they suffer as a collective, cannot come into acceptance of nature and what understanding or nature reveals to us about who we are, what we are etc

and consequently white people have developed their insecurity into systems of massive social organizing that has taught the world lies about itself..and we are being eaten by those lies..so much so we see it regurgitated here in the nonsense that is spewed in support of Buchanan’s dangerous, sectarian and racist nonsense

well we have arrived at the limits of white nonsense, of human nonsense. we come into nature now, accept who we are what we know we are, and come into harmony with nature, into human spirituality in tune with the universe which is an integrated whole regardless of its extent… or die as a species, cause our own extinction..led to such an end by white people..President Repug Buchanan

Video Link

follyofwar: “That’s interesting, since Sontag (born Rosenblatt) was Jewish.”

This guy is just sharp as a tack, isn’t he? It’s plain to see you’ve gotta get up pretty early in the morning to put one over on follyofwar.

Still, since self-reproach is the American tradition we’re discussing, and the topic of Buchanan’s column, Sontag’s remark does indeed fall within that tradition.

follyofwar: “So, you blame it on a nobody, a crazed Christian fundamentalist? Did Lincoln take his marching orders from deceased abolitionist John Brown? That is lunacy. ”

No, silly. Lincoln took his marching orders from the Jews, of course.

follyofwar: “There was only one man who started that terrible war, the greatest killer in US history, the man who is quite naturally revered as our greatest president.”

Given your other bizarre statements, I’m almost embarrassed to say that I mostly agree with you here. I’d even say further that by the same token, one of the nation’s greatest patriots was none other than John Wilkes Booth, who is “quite naturally” one of American history’s most hated men .

Every new archaeological find in Latin America seems to have lots of male, female and child skulls and other evidence of torture and sacrifice. Africans were heavily involved in the slave trade. China, Japan, Korea have inflicted enormous suffering on each other. Sunnis and Shia have been hating each other for well over a thousand years. Tutsi vs Hutu in Rwanda involved machetes and blunt instruments on a massive scale.

@Taiha

You reacted to my statement that Indonesia is very much a colonial construction by saying that it “simply borrowed a historical imperial construct. The foot print of modern-day Indonesia is basically the same as the old Majapahit Empire.”

I know this is a beloved phantasy of Indonesian nationalists. Since very little is known about the actual extent of this empire they can say about it whatever they want. The late Mohammed Yamin, poet and one time Deputy Prime Minister, included virtually all of South East Asia in it.

Some of the main information about its extent is contained in the Nagarakretagama, an ode by the fourteenth century court poet Prapanca on the main ruler of this realm, Hayam Wuruk.

Prapanca’s phantasy matched that of Mohammed Yamin. The relevant article in the Encyclopedia Britannica says:

“Since the poem venerates the king, it is not surprising that more than 80 places in the archipelago are described as vassal territories and that the mainland kingdoms, with the exception of Vietnam, are said to be protected by the king. Prapancha, believing that the king’s glory extended in all directions, delineated in detail what he perceived to be the limits of relevant space.”

And Wikipedia:

“The nature of the Majapahit empire and its extent is subject to debate. It may have had limited or entirely notional influence over some of the tributary states, including Sumatra, the Malay Peninsula, Kalimantan, and eastern Indonesia, over which authority was claimed in the Nagarakretagama.”

Some more sober scholars believe that the more comprehensive power of Majapahit was limited to East Java and Bali, For the rest it was a matter of the domination of trade routes in the archipelago. There was at any case nothing that could be compared to the solidly wrought bureaucratic construction that the Netherlands Indies ultimately became.

This colonial state has had a very bad press after the war. There are various causes for this. The propaganda of the newly independent state the elite of which tried to hide its own generally miserable performance by blackmouthing the colonial past is one of them. The other is the long standing Anglo-Saxon tradition of speaking negatively about its main competitor in the Archipelago – a tradition that did not start with Sir Stamford Raffles but received a mighty impetus from him.

Yet I am convinced that by any criterion of good administration this colonial state was far superior to what followed. But Orwell rightly remarked that people will rather be governed badly by their own than well by foreigners. However, I would replace the word “people” in this sentence by “the indigenous elite” which obviously has”a vested interest in having the place all to itself.

I find your suggestion that East Timor might have made a different decision re its own independence on a sound cost benefit analysis and the comparison with Aceh ridiculous. I have little doubt that if Aceh had had, like East Timor did, the chance to decide its future in a plebiscite it would have left this Java centric state in a hurry. Should East Timor have made economic calculations after the years of widespread rape, torture and wanton killings that the Indonesian occupation brought in its wake? The same story holds for Papua.

There one of the mass killers of 1965, Gneral Sarwo Edhie Wibowo, was originally put in charge and performed as expected. At the end of his life he estimated that the killings of 1965 to which he so eagerly contributed had netted up to three million victims. He was officially made a “National Hero” (”pahlawan nasional”) for his pains .

“This is both ignorant and stupid. Try cracking open a Bible sometime. Like most Christians, it seems you’ve never read it. Thus, ignorant.”

You are going to have to do markedly more than making an ad hominem attack. Christians approach God’s throne of grace with confidence. We bear witness to His grace through Corinthians 13:6–love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. Love loves the truth. Love does not love evil. Paul taught that love does not enjoy or “delight in” such actions; rather, true love finds joy in truth and righteousness. By acknowledging one’s sins with dignity, we receive His truth and in the process receive salvation.

“Stupid because the essence of the Christian life is slavery to Christ. In the Bible, all of the apostles call themselves slaves of Christ. It’s their favorite term for themselves and other believers.”

Once again you are arguing from a false premise. Christians are “slaves” to truth. Christians are “slaves” to combat immorality. Christians are “slaves” to God’s love. It is the “the blending and absorption of my own will in His will”. It is not “I do what He wants for He owns me”. It is “As He teaches me and shows me more of Himself, I willingly conform to what He wants because it is the righteous path to salvation, as my life is His life and His life is my life. It is a symbiotic relationships”.

Clearly you lack a fundamental understanding of the Bible. I suggest you reach out to a man of the cloth to obtain basic knowledge of the Good Book rather than subject it to your whims.

“Sane and rational people don’t grovel before imaginary beings. They don’t aspire to become slaves to Christ or anyone else. Can you imagine how low an opinion you must have of yourself to want to become a slave? Only very sick people would have such a desire or such a damaged self-concept. If you consider yourself a Christian, you’d be better off booking an appointment with a psychiatrist than going to church with your fellow lunatics.”

You are doubling down on your false premise. Christians are not “groveling” before God–that is YOUR perverted characterization. The Book of Hosea urges God’s people simply to acknowledge him:

Let us acknowledge the LORD;
Let us press on to acknowledge him.
As surely as the sun rises,
He will appear;
He will come to us like the winter rains,
Like the spring rains that water the earth.

“No, silly. Lincoln took his marching orders from the Jews, of course.”

What specific evidence do you have to lend support to your assertion?

“I’d even say further that by the same token, one of the nation’s greatest patriots was none other than John Wilkes Booth.”

That would be your personal opinion. Certainly Southerners would agree with that assessment at that juncture.

In the end, you are bastardizing the faith for your own grandstanding.

You didn’t build that. It’s not who we are.

Corvie, you’re so fulla sheee-it. That’s who WE are, it’s not who YOU are. That’s exactly who WE are. WE invented it. I can say we because as a veteran, however misguided my adventures were back in the Cold War, I defended it. As an electrician, an IT and phone guy, I not only maintain and add to it, I IMPROVE it. As do my fellow we-people. You tear down. WE build, maintain, improve.

Because that’s who WE are. You’re who YOU are, a leech, feeding off what we built. And without it all, no one would even know who the Hell you and your people are.

Lots to agree with here. To commence…

Some more sober scholars believe that the more comprehensive power of Majapahit was limited to East Java and Bali, For the rest it was a matter of the domination of trade routes in the archipelago.

Agreed. These are the things historians and academics debate. Those leaning towards a centralized state will obviously tout the interpretation of a more solid empire, those that favor independence will lean towards the interpretation of minimal influence. This is fairly consistent for the mythos needed for any nation state and far more for a non contiguous one like Indonesia.

What is the modern context of a pre-modern “vassal state”? Is it good enough to be incorporated into a nation with allowance for semi-autonomous local governance and minimal tax contribution? And let the central government with the means and capability handle the external defense of the nation? Because, let’s be honest, the Javanese are the most capable in this regard.

I don’t know the right answer, but these are things to think about. A great set of short, but comprehensive, videos about Majapahit, is included under the MORE tag.

There was at any case nothing that could be compared to the solidly wrought bureaucratic construction that the Netherlands Indies ultimately became.

Sure, agreed here. Especially due to technology and means of modern communication.

This colonial state has had a very bad press after the war.

Sure, that’s how it works. The Ottomans still get fairly bad press to this day in parts of Eastern Europe, when some local kingdoms actually aligned with them and preferred to be vassals to them than be taken over by a rival kingdom. Everyone spins history this way.

There are various causes for this.

I agree with your statements and, because it seems the Dutch are not interested in making the opposite case, it will probably remain this way. What is fairly clear is that there was resistance to Dutch take over in the first place. But of course the sultanates were divided (even in Java) and sometimes at war with each other so the resistance wasn’t as effective as it could have been. And, if we are honest, one must recognize that some local sultanates actually allied with the Dutch against others (similar to the previous point I made about the Ottomans in Eastern Europe). If they would have united more and done what the Sultanate of Aceh did in appealing to Ottoman help against the Portuguese, that may have resulted in a different outcome:

Yet I am convinced that by any criterion of good administration this colonial state was far superior to what followed.

Possibly, I’d like to see comparisons.

But Orwell rightly remarked that people will rather be governed badly by their own than well by foreigners.

Often true. I made a similar point about this on another thread regarding how the Arabs helped kick out the Ottomans for the privilege of losing multiple wars against Israel under their own Arab (often inept) military command structure.

I have little doubt that if Aceh had had, like East Timor did, the chance to decide its future in a plebiscite it would have left this Java centric state in a hurry.

I agree, but that wasn’t my point. The issue is that Jakarta has made it clear it will go postal on any province that wants to split. That has to be taken into the calculation, not simply the results of some “people-power” vote. This is similar to the situation of certain provinces and territories in other nations from China to India to Nigeria.

Should East Timor have made economic calculations after the years of widespread rape, torture and wanton killings that the Indonesian occupation brought in its wake?

No, that conflict was set in stone. There was no turning back point. That one was an example for the rest of the provinces – that is what you are likely to face if you really, really want out. Those guys have to make the economic calculation versus the other alternative.

Aceh was a somewhat different case. Since it was mostly a Muslim province, there was less of a contrast between the central government and the locals. Also, that tsunami had a huge effect of effectively ending the insurgency:
“When the ocean swallowed much of the province’s coastline, it did more than liberate Irwandi, who had been captured by Indonesian intelligence months earlier in Jakarta: the disaster halted the violence to give space for humanitarian response and unprecedented cooperation between Jakarta and the rebels…Fresh rounds of peace negotiations started months after the disaster, and within a year of the tsunami, GAM was disarmed, TNI operations ratcheted back, and post-conflict programming after three decades of fighting was under way.”
https://reliefweb.int/report/indonesia/aceh-redux-tsunami-helped-stop-war

At the end of his life he estimated that the killings of 1965 to which he so eagerly contributed had netted up to three million victims. He was officially made a “National Hero” (”pahlawan nasional”) for his pains.

Doesn’t surprise me. That’s actually far less than some other people that are still held up by various nations as national heros. What’s that statement; “Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror.”

“Pahlawan” huh? Wow, they use Persian-originated words all the way over there? Incredible…

Peace.

“That’s who WE are, it’s not who YOU are. That’s exactly who WE are. WE invented it.”

WE has historically referred to the true Heritage Americans–WASPs. Are you able to trace your ancestry on both sides directly back to the 1600’s? If not, you have to go back. We all have to go back. That’s who we are.

“As do my fellow we-people. You tear down. WE build, maintain, improve.”

Dude, I’m white. German, Polish, and Dutch stock. So I am part of this “we”.

Corvinus: “Christians are not “groveling” before God–that is YOUR perverted characterization. ”

Now you are reduced to lying and slander, typical for a Christian. Consult Mark 7:24-30, where rabbi Jesus calls a white woman a dog, and forces her to say she is one before he will grant her a miracle. That is your master, dog. Now grovel! And go again to beg forgiveness of the Jews for your antisemitism, and beg the negroes to forgive you for slavery, for that is a great Christian pastime too. Prove your virtue by groveling before them, dog! Then get on your knees and lick your master’s hand like a good doggie.

“Now you are reduced to lying and slander, typical for a Christian.”

Apparently in your world offering the requisite explanation of Scripture to refute your position constitutes “lying and slander”. The ball is now in your court to provide a cogent counter argument rather than huff and puff your way to ad hominem.

Dude, I’m white. German, Polish, and Dutch stock. So I am part of this “we”.

Who knew? I thought you were part of the Tiny Duck Army. Why? Because those are your positions. You are a self-hating White. Hillary Clinton luuuuuvs yewwwwww!

Must the West Beg the World for Forgiveness?

for what, lifting the rest of the world out of poverty?

follyofwar: “That’s interesting, since Sontag (born Rosenblatt) was Jewish.”

This guy is just sharp as a tack, isn’t he? It’s plain to see you’ve gotta get up pretty early in the morning to put one over on follyofwar.

Still, since self-reproach is the American tradition we’re discussing, and the topic of Buchanan’s column, Sontag’s remark does indeed fall within that tradition.

how so, she’s not white and not American, she’s jewish

if she was around today she’d be the typical dual-citizen

anon[284]: “how so, [Sontag]’s not white and not American, she’s jewish”

Born in America, so American. But my main point is that self-critical remarks are typical of American Christians, and Sontag’s remark was accepted by the Christian culture at large as just another reason to beg forgiveness. Jews only get away with what whites raised in their masochistic Christian culture let them get away with; they only have as much power as whites give them.

What about Ghengis Kahn? He left a path of destruction, pillaging and murdering almost as far as France, but certainly occupied Russia. Maybe those in Mongolia should be apologizing to all the places they raided and conquered.

It actually sounds like a form of psychological warfare, just like the thousands of people at the borders insisting we let them in and pay them for living here.

There seem to be in the West bottomless wells of guilt feelings that can be tapped by legitimate victims and swindlers alike.

The Dutch government is no exception here. It has already apologized to Indonesia for having initially opposed decolonization because, as it said, in doing so it had resisted “the tide of history”. Was it the tide of history then that a wastrel President, the ego- and erotomaniac Sukarno should take power for about twenty years , only to be replaced by the tyrant and super sized robber Suharto who opened Indonesia up to international plunder accumulating himself a tidy bank account in the process (Ben Anderson talks about 73 billion dollars plus all the money that went to his wife (“Mrs. ten percent”), numerous offspring and further relatives. He could only be ousted half a century after gaining independence but the “tide of history” has since then not led to a half way decent society yet.

What I called the “confidence trick” of decolonization is the suggestion that by the mere ousting of a non-indigenouis elite at the top life will improve for the average denizen at the bottom. In many if not most cases the very opposite has happened. The foreign elite was replaced by a native one, far more ruthless, rapacious and overall reprehensible than their erstwhile colonial masters.

Mohammed Hatta, the co-signatory of the Declaration of Independence and later Vice-President of Indonesia, has oce stated that the great benefit of gaining indepence was losing their sense of inferiority. Perhaps that is a social psychological gain for the whole population but is it not offset by the social distance that the new elite has created between itself and the broad mass of the people? And what about the general fear that it has brought about and that inspired Andre Vitchek’s latest book (“Archipelago of Fear”).?

I think governments should think twice before they fall for the swindle and give the “tide of history” (or Macmillan’s “winds of change”) stamp of approval to the depredations by independence hucksters imploring meanwhile their forgiveness for having blocked their nefarious careers for so long.

“Who knew? I thought you were part of the Tiny Duck Army.”

That would be your bone to pick, not mine.

“Because those are your positions.”

Actually, my positions are a result of independent thought and critical analysis. You?

“You are a self-hating White.”

So anyone who opposes your line of thinking = self-hating white? Are you really that sensitive like an SJW?

In many if not most cases the very opposite has happened. The foreign elite was replaced by a native one, far more ruthless, rapacious and overall reprehensible than their erstwhile colonial masters.

In plenty of cases, I would definitely agree with this. And no doubt, many of these elites are ruthless and corrupt crooks.

A very important question here is also, why many of these local dictators were coddled, supported and sold plenty of military hardware by Western nations (often their previous colonial nations) without which local opposition may have been able to oust them. In Indonesia’s case, the US/UK brought in under their wing as a front in the Cold War. The Philippines is also another good example.

Perhaps that is a social psychological gain for the whole population but is it not offset by the social distance that the new elite has created between itself and the broad mass of the people?

Good question; you’d have to ask the locals to make that calculation – they are the ones dealing with the reality on the ground.

I think governments should think twice before they fall for the swindle and give the “tide of history” (or Macmillan’s “winds of change”)

Agreed.

Peace.

Or is there never a justification for one nation to invade another, conquer its people, impose its rule, and uproot and replace its culture and civilization? Is “cultural genocide” always a crime against humanity, even if the uprooted culture countenanced human sacrifice?
This Pat is what’s wrong with the USA in a nutshell.
If you have even a pretense of believing in christian doctrine or rule of law, even during the 15th century, this was an unwarranted invasion.
The only reason it was done was to loot and plunder. Thank goodness Pat failed to become POTUS, he would be even worse than the orange toadstool dick.

Nice flip, Corvie. Too bad only an idiot wouldn’t notice. MY original post stands. You lose.

“Nice flip, Corvie.”

No flip needed, just effective rhetoric to turn your world upside down.

“MY original post stands.”

On wobbly legs. Why do you hate your fellow white man?

“You lose.”

Ah, yes, a Secret King.

Corvie will just keep the bullshit flowing ad infinitum. He’s one of those gotta have the last word shitlib cucks.

“Corvie will just keep the bullshit flowing ad infinitum. He’s one of those gotta have the last word shitlib cucks.”

You mean you are one of those Alt Right fan bois who is in over their head intellectually. Would it be help if I provided you picture books to explain matters?

Meh, he can go smoke. When it’s apparent one of these sorts is just a troll, I check out. This joint had enough of that with cementhead and the 737MAX. Ye Gawds! That thing is headed for 800 posts.

Thanks again for proving my point, Corvie.

Speaking of Aztecs, I have been trying to find President Obrador’s letter in the original Aztec language. Surely the Mexican government must have posted the Aztec original somewhere?

In 1996 Daniel Goldhagen published his book “Hitler’s Wiling Executioners”, which was based on a dissertation that had netted him a Harvard Ph.D. It was a remarkable book. Goldhagen claimed that the Germans should be studied with the same detachment as one studies the Aztecs, as a remarkable variety of the human race, What made them remarkable? It was their “eliminationist anti-semitism” which had developed over the centuries, also because Germany had missed the Enlightenment. According to Goldhagen there was a straight line between Luther’s anti-semitism (“Von den Juden und ihren Lügen”- On the Jews and their lies) and that of Hitler and his countless “willing executioners”.

The book was a popular success but had a poor scholarly reception. The doyen of official holocaust studies, Raul Hilberg, called it “wrong about everything” and “worthless” and his Israeli counterpart, Yehuda Bauer, more or less agreed. Bauer also said to be amazed that Harvard had accepted it as a doctoral dissertation and claimed that he wouldn’t have done so.

Not long after the book was published Goldhagen toured through Germany to promote it. One would have thought that he would have got a chilly reception by a people he had described as one German review had it as a “nation of demons”, but not a bit of it. His tour is described as a “triumphal procession” with especially young people cheering and applauding him wherever he spoke. A German political journal awarded him its prize for democracy and the laudatio on that occasion was given by a prominent public intellectual, Jürgen Habermas.

The German press was in part quite critical of his work but that hadn’t lessened his popular appeal.

Now how to explain this popular appeal especially among the young. I can find no other explanation than the desire to disculpate themselves. “It was not us. It was our grandfathers or even great grandfathers. We have and want nothing to do with them”.

I had to think of this whole story when I became (from my very distant vantage point) aware of the amazing reaction in the Dutch press to the 2016 Swiss dissertation of the Swiss-Dutch historian Remy Limpach about Dutch violence in the four year long struggle (1945-1949) against Indonesian independence fighters. This dissertation appeared in book form with the rather lurid Dutch title “De brandende kampongs van Generaal Spoor” (“The burning villages of General Spoor” – Spoor was the Dutch commander in chief until his early death in May 1949).

There had of course been research about Dutch war crimes in that struggle before but they were regarded as excesses, that is as the incidental “derailment” as one of the early authors (Van Doorn) had it of military violence.

Limpach added a new term to the analysis – the violence was not a matter of incidental “excesses” it was “structural”. This term worked like magic and soon many a headline told us that it was, oh my, “structural” which in the sense given to it in the popular press meant “very frequent” and involving many people. Once again, as in the for the rest very dissimilar case of Goldhagen, I was struck by the avidity with which this was accepted. And I think the same psychological mechanism was involved: this was not us – our grandfathers did this. One article even stated that it was good that virtually all those pesky veterans (who had protested against earlier revelations) had died because research could now start in earnest (the Dutch government felt indeed compelled to organise this because of this “enthousiasm” – it had earlier declared to have been “on the wrong side of history” in this struggle and now it bravely prepared itself for facing unflinchingly these “black pages” of their national story).

Meanwhile it deserves to be mentioned that Limpach didn’t mean to imply with the word “structural” that it was frequently occurring or involving many people. In interviews he has explicitly stated that his research was “qualitative” rather than quantitative
because he couldn’t judge the frequency of this violent behaviour on the basis of the source material. But he felt convinced that the great majority of Dutch military men had had nothing to do with this. Why then the word structural? Limpach seems to suggest that “extreme violence” was a natural consequence of the frustrations engendered by the fact that this enormous archipelago had to be controlled with too scanty means (even though at its peak the Dutch army had 140,000 men there).Thus Limpach reserves the term “extreme violence” for the misdemeanors for which there was no strict military necessity.

The Australian Indonesianist Robert Cribb has pointed out that this is a rather arbitrary criterion. In the contra guerilla measures can be deemed necessary that to the military layman merely seem to be a form of gratuitous violence.

I would like to second that. Limpach wanted to avoid the term “war crimes” as being too legalistic. Also he didn’t want to put himself in the seat of the judge. But the term “extreme violence” in the meaning he gives to it implies that he puts himself in the place of the military professional.

Cribb’s second objection is also well taken. The term “extreme violence” doesn’t allow for the distinction between various grades of violence. Dutch violence in Indonesia could for instance not be compared with that of the Germans in wartime Belarus.

I think that most Dutch commentators would agree with that though Belasrus is often not more than a name for them. Their grandfathers and greatgrandfathers might have been bad but not as bad as the Germans. Oh deary me. No!

“Thanks again for proving my point, Corvie.”

Exactly, you are an intellectual lightweight. Appreciate you admitting that fact.

Morals are not relative. ‘Weaselly’ is what comes to mind when reading your comments and quotes.

Excellent comment and quite enlightening.

“It was not us. It was our grandfathers or even great grandfathers. We have and want nothing to do with them”.

I definitely believe the Germans have been guilt-tripped enough. There is no more reason to have them hate themselves over what somebody in the past did. I mean, how long does this get perpetuated? I don’t hold stuff against modern-day Mongols for what happened to Baghdad.

In the contra guerilla measures can be deemed necessary that to the military layman merely seem to be a form of gratuitous violence.

I haven’t read enough about Indonesia in this regard, but I have read plenty about, say, France in Algeria during the same time frame – similar approach to things, lot of slash-and-burn tactics against recalcitrant villages.

Also he didn’t want to put himself in the seat of the judge.

Don’t worry, everyone will get judged.

The term “extreme violence” doesn’t allow for the distinction between various grades of violence.

I agree here. There were battles that were extremely violent in the past. The Battle of Cannae was extremely violent, but it was mostly between two armies. This cannot be compared to burning down and eliminating everyone in a small village even though the death toll might be smaller. There is a distinction of morality and ethics between the violence and the word “extreme” doesn’t do it justice.

The Indonesians can better afford to let bygones be bygones; after all, they won.

Peace.

You wrote “morals are not relative”.

Alas, things are not that simple. Cp:

http://www.philosophersmag.com/essays/110-is-morality-relative

Also if your comment was induced by my last post and the question of “military necessity” you are barking up the wrong tree,

The question was not whether “military necessity” does allow one to inflict harm on or kill other human beings (a moral question) but, given that one accepts that there is such a thing as “military necessity,” what could possibly fall under it in asymmetrical warfare (a factual question).

Is there a way to convince these apology-demanders to give up speaking Spanish and return to the languages of their vaunted ancestors?

As a school teacher in California I frequently encounter entitled attitudes from Spanish-speaking students, parents, admins, and even other teachers. Each year they get bolder about insisting on public-radio-pronunciation-heroics. It’s not enough that I correctly pronounce all the syllables of their names with emphasis on the proper syllables, I am now being shamed for not saying their names with an authentic (thick!) Spanish accent. Yet it’s taboo to even notice that they still speak broken English after 15 or more years living here. And it would be career-ending to suggest that they make an attempt to adopt an American accent when speaking English.

If they are so keen to reject Spain’s influence on their proud heritage, then they should not only give up the Spanish language but they should actively condemn it. And I’d happily join the protest.

Oh yes, you do… whether you like it or not.

Pat knows the US is guilty of serious war crimes. And, yes, for that we should beg for forgiveness and try to make reparations (there’s no way to make up for the war crimes of Iraq and Yemen, in particular). But this article is focusing on crimes of the distant past. For those, we are not alone guilty. Besides being impossible logistically, it’s just not feasible or even realistic.