European & Asian Regional Alliance

Posted by DanielS on Saturday, 02 January 2016 03:46.

While I am adamant about the right and oughtness of fighting when one’s own borders and EGI are being infringed upon, I am not a hawk. Geopolitical warfare has never been something that appealed to me, let alone with any sort of passion.

I’m very averse to the idea of going beyond my national boundaries to fight, particularly when my own nation is totally screwed-up, needs tending and where innovative thinking might solve problems as opposed to trying to solve them by resorting to warring abroad.

The problem is that there are valid arguments that there are vital requirements along the Silk Road, in the Middle East and in Africa - resource and population management that is indispensably necessary even to the most innovative and independent peoples. In these concerns, I’m going to invite the reader to consider with me the possibility of re-drawing ethno-nationalist and regional lines on this map.

As you can guess, conversations with Kumiko have got me taking these matters under consideration, and I hope that she will soon put up an article discussing issues that the neo-cons have failed to make in clear and persuasive terms.

Tangential to neo-con issues is an interesting philosophical question for another day: how, in detailed form, to set up a rule structure which will sort out and punish the genetic legacy of criminals; and facilitate the rebirth of those genetic components that have suffered unjustly at the hands of criminals in previous generations. In this case, I am thinking more in terms of those who have historical grievances with Russians - while it is true that I don’t feel this grievance as do some others that I’ve known, it is nevertheless only practical to set the question aside for the time being - though it is a question that can apply to any people who have benefited or suffered from historical atrocities.

Europeans, now, are asked even more fundamental questions than relative guilt and merit, but are asked to address the matter of our identity, period - that we are a people (different from Jews and others), to establish who we are, what the nature of our common moral order is, to understand that the obfuscation of that would-be peoplehood is a part of a war against us - and that there is, indeed, a war against us; finally, we are asked what is the nature of that war and what it consists over?

When considering these matters from a White Nationalist perspective, Russian people are not conceived as inherent enemies, nor, even, is the humongous expanse of their nation high on the list, if on the list at all, of things intolerable to allow to remain. At first blush, I can imagine living with it - it’s always been that way in my lifetime; its reach contracted after the fall of The U.S.S.R., but still remains bigger than Pluto.


Nevertheless, we ought to reconsider this from an Asian perspective, and from a perspective of acute European interests.

I didn’t expect to have occasion at this point to consider aloud the possibility of attempting to align formal industrial military objectives with ours as White Nationalists. Oil, resources, even absurd and brutal regimes in the Middle East and Africa inflicting harm upon their own do not stir any passion in me to fight. The function of Asian countries and Western countries do, however, have requirements and rationale to get these nations under compliance. And in hopes of facilitating the human resource of Kumiko’s military perspective, I am going to imagine empathic military geo-political objectives, so that we might envisage a grand chess board result in our victory.

From that standpoint I attend to the fact that as nationalists and as White people in particular, fighting for the survival and sovereignty of our nations, that militarization and the geopolitics of resource and population management will ultimately be necessary.

Asia and the West have things that we need from one another, including cooperation against antagonisms from the Middle East and Africa.

Not only do we need resources from these places but we need mutual help in border control and repatriation projects.

What about Russia? It is so big. Why not just work with them and allow its vast space to become a place for White people to grow into?

While it is true that another traditional passion for some war mongers is hating Russians and maybe I should hate them, I don’t hate them. Nor do I care if people want to move there; furthermore, I completely understand not wanting to fight them. I don’t want to fight Russians; the war in Ukraine has been instigated by Judaized and neo-liberal means and motives and it disgusts me.

Even so, WN tendencies to look upon Russia as the great White hope ignore the propositional, neo-liberal, mercantile and Judaized aspects of Russia - as if its political class has no corruptions analogous to The US that will wreak havoc with such projects to connect with Russia as a partner in White Nationalism.

On the other hand, while I favor Ukrainian and Belarusian sovereignty, as I favor all ethnonational sovereignty, I am opposed to a hot war approach with Russia to increase their sovereignty.

But neither am I in favor of a hot war approach to defending Russia’s humongous eastern stretch and southern conflicts.

Rather than abandon to foreign invaders the natural ethnonationalist homelands of our European evolution and engage in White flight to move into lands that apparently represent imperialist aggrandizement - beyond ethnonational mandate - on the part of Russia, to reiterate, neither am I particularly interested in fighting to protect Russia’s imperial overreach.

In a word, defending what is apparently an imperial over-reach is Russia’s problem and an issue that can be turned to our advantage as Europeans in order to gain cooperation with our EGI, its borders and vital resources.

We need Chinese, Japanese and other Asian cooperation more than we need Russia’s imperialist headaches; and China and Japan are not about to start loving Russia more than their own interests which are impacted by Russia’s Eastern and Southern interference.

We need cooperation with Asia to compel compliance with regard to resource, EGI and border management. And we might compel Russia’s compliance as well with those needs by means of the West’s regional alliance with Asia.

Thus, while we might not engage a war of maneuver in either Russia’s west nor east, we might well consider lending approval to Asian positioning in Russia’s east and south.

That is, allowing the “stick” (as opposed to “carrot”) of some of these lands as potentially sovereign Asian places: with enclaves Russian and enclaves Asian, the farther east you go, the more the general area would be Asian with fewer Russian enclaves and vis a versa - the farther West, the fewer Asian enclaves until you reach a point where it would be a Russian only ethnostate. And the carrot to Russia would be less contentious relations with its neighbors, more secure borders, and more cooperation in resource garnering, management and use. That is not necessarily a bad deal.


Toward an Asian-Atlantic regional cooperation.

1. The genetic-make-up and territorial boundaries of the European ethno-states shall be restored, maintained and protected.

2. To achieve this end we propose alignment with the Asian ethno-states and region.

3. Something like the E.U. and North Atlantic would be necessary to achieve that alliance and its success.

However, it will also involve some quid pro quo.

4. First, we see it as being in both of our interests to secure our peoples against impositions of Middle-Eastern and African populations; against imposition of the Abrahamic religions; and against interference of these peoples and religions in our vital resources.

5. Toward that end, it is in the interest of both Asians and Europeans to remove these populations to the greatest extent possible from our geo-political territories; and, again, to remove significant imposition/interference upon our mutual vital resource interests.

6.  Sacrosanct European territories in the Americas, Australia and New Zealand will likely need to become smaller at any rate in order to be maintained and defended. But with the increased manageability of defense will come an opportunity to offer cooperation to Asians to have some sacrosanct territories of their own in these places. We will respect and cooperate with one another toward the defense of our territories in diaspora, seeing African and Middle-Eastern (saliently Jewish and Muslim) populations as those who must be guarded against and compelled to as great a distance from our people as possible, removed from civic nationalization and its proximity.

7. Russia/ns will be seen as having an analogous situation to White Americans. In order to have a safer, more manageable ethno-state and something to offer in exchange with the Euro-Asian regional alliance, they will be required to contract in size considerably, particularly from its expanse eastward into Asia and its geo-political interference there and to its south, unilaterally along the Silk Road. Russia’s ethno-state will be more secure as it will be forced into a more cooperative and less antagonistic relation with the rest of the geo-polity.

The key deal is this: we will compel Russia to relinquish parts of its territory (leaving it no good choice but to comply). In exchange we will require Asian assistance in cleansing and defending our territories from imposition by non-natives - particularly Africans, Middle Easterners, Muslims and Jews. And we will require compliance in securing our vital resources and transportation routes.

The advantages to European peoples and Asians in this alliance is clear.

But what regional and national lines might you imagine and what advantages to Russia and others do you see for compliance? Discuss.

As there are no Russian cities larger than 600,000 east of lake Baikal (near the city of Irkutsk, centrally to the north of Mongolia), and only four larger than 300,000, one way of arranging the pockets, enclaves, ethno-state outposts as it were, would be to have a symmetrical “M.C. Escher-like” arrangement (as in the image called “Day and Night” above), i.e., an entering of these enclaves into the others general regional sphere - enclaves which would, nevertheless, represent sovereign states. 

The plan would emphasize deportation and re-doing citizenship in favor of native lines, viz., on the basis of ethnostates. That is unlike the Moscow - Berlin - Paris axis, which apparently seeks to reconstruct the same old right-wing, propositional/objectivist oil interests.

Note: I can see how this could create incentive for Eastern European nations to cooperate - from a position of strength and in cooperation with White diaspora (note the interview of Tomasz Szczepański under the fold).

The Eastern European nations may agree to cooperation despite history of disputes (sometimes serious), and facilitate this ethno-nationalist and regional cooperation if their borders and native populations are guaranteed. If they are a part of a plan that guarantees that and necessary resources from the Silk Road - accomplished by increased cooperation with Asia and a Russia dealing from a cooperative position; then perhaps ethnonational and regional alliance with Asia can work. I.e, Russia has to offer more than trade in natural resources garnered through its vast expanse and fist waving at anybody who doesn’t see their interests being secured inasmuch.

The area that is to be reserved as sacrosanct to the Russian ethnostate would be contracted from imperial dimensions and more in line with ethno-national proportions.

It is a contraction in concession to cooperation with other ethno-European nations that WN America will likely need to undergo as well.

This will make Russia more defensible and more worth cooperating with for the rest of Europe and Asia - as they will be required to join this Euro-Asian regional cooperation against middle eastern interference - whether Arab, Islamic or Jewish, they will be beholden to our terms and we will have the necessary resources of the Silk Road.


The other side of the deal for compliance and cooperation to garner vital resources, is that our vital EGI will be cooperated with in protection as well - including not only in border defense, repatriation and de-nationalization of the majority of non-natives from European and Asian countries, but most strictly the border defense, de-nationalization and removal of non-natives from European nations; while allowing for some accountable quota of Asians and Europeans in one another’s nations and regions.



* There are a few mistakes in Szczepański’s analysis below - e.g., the idea that it would be “good for Poland and East Europe if Western Europe were to suffer greatly with floods of immigration”; secondly, the supposition that “Germany has never officially given up its claim” to the Western third of Poland; finally, even I wonder about his position with regard to what is now called Kaliningrad. However, as a geopolitical argument, in many other respects it is commendable.

The Intermarium Project
First introduced as a part of ideology of the Polish state by the Chief of State Józef Piłsudski in 1918-1922.

Counter-Currents, ‘The Other Europe: An Interview on Intermarium’, 18 Nov 2015:

The Other Europe: An Interview on Intermarium with Tomasz Szczepański. Interview and translation by Jarosław Ostrogniew

Tomasz Szczepański (Barnim Regalica) was born in 1964 in Szczecin (Poland). He is a historian (Ph.D. in humanities), writer, essayist, and activist. An advocate of Zadruga (Polish pagan nationalism) and indigenous Slavic faith.

He was an anti-communist activist beginning in 1984, a member of the illegal Polish Socialist Party, and a member of the Confederation of Independent Poland since 1987. From 1987 to 1989 he edited the underground bulletin Intermarium.

After the collapse of communism he became an opponent of the democratic-liberal establishment. He was an organizer and participant in numerous anti-communist and anti-establishment patriotic and nationalist demonstrations. He taught history for 11 years and is currently an employee of the Polish Army Museum in Warsaw.

Tomasz Szczepański has advocated the idea of Intermarium and worked for its realization since the 1980s. He is the founder and leader of the Association for Tradition and Culture “Niklot” (active since 1998) and the metapolitical quarterly Trygław.

    What are the theoretical foundations and origins of the Intermarium project?

The foundation of the Intermarium project is the aim of creating in Eastern Europe (or East-Central Europe), understood as the area between Russia and Germany, a pole of power able to counterbalance the power of either of these two neighbors. The aim of creating such a pole is to secure the area from imperial attempts by Russia and Germany and to create conditions for unconstrained development of the nations of the region.

The countries of the area are often divided into two sub-regions, the Carpathian Mountains being the borderline: the proper Baltic-Black Seas Intermarium (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Belarus, Ukraine) and the Danube-Balkan segment. Both sub-regions are collectively called the ABC area after the Adriatic, Baltic, and Black (Czarne in Slavic languages) Seas.

In addition to geographical, economic, and cultural factors, the basic element creating unity in the area is the fact that it has been and still is an object of constant expansion by Russia and Germany, and historically also of Sweden and Turkey. And the political elites – and probably large parts, or even the vast majority, of the Russian and German nations – treat expansion into this area as legitimate, the evidence of which are their geopolitical doctrines: “Mitteleuropa,” “Lebensraum,” “the Brezhnev doctrine,” and the “near abroad.”

Attempts to realize the Intermarium project after 1918 were connected with two waves of democratization in Middle Europe (1918-1921 and 1989-1991), hence the common association of this concept with the idea of exporting the democratic state model to the East. This is not precise. It used to be this way, but it does not need to be this way, as the aim of the Intermarium project is independence, and democracy is a secondary issue. We can imagine that, for instance, a democratic counter-candidate of Aleksandr Lukashenko in Belarus could be simultaneously a pro-Moscow agent, thus in this case the advocates of Intermarium would support Lukashenko as the candidate securing – in his own interest – the separation of Belarus from Russia.

Intermarium should be also considered as a political expression of cultural distinctiveness of Central (Eastern) Europe from both its neighbors. Although politically it is a project countering primarily Russian imperialism, culturally it is rather an anti-occidentalist project.

I do not agree with the thesis that this area is a transition between the East (Eurasia) and the West, as this perspective considers the main feature of the region as simply the “attenuation” of occidental traits. Thus the uniqueness of the Intermarium is constituted only by the lack of its own features. Let us focus on what is culturally unique in this area. First, there is a powerful agrarian element in the national cultures of the area. Almost all of the nations have reconstructed their elites after a long period of time on the basis of the peasantry, or in the case of the Poles and Hungarians, and partly the Romanians, their elites consist of a nobility connected with the rural culture. However, in all of these nations the local bourgeoisie was weak, consisting mostly of ethnically alien elements. Thus, except for the Czechs, bourgeois cultural traits are very weak in the nations of this region.

Second, this is Slavic Europe. The examples of the Baltic countries, Hungary, and Romania only apparently deny this fact. Their strong connection with Slavic cultures, as well as the absorption of Slavic elements by the Hungarian and Romanian ethnos in the process of their development, is well-known.

Third, in the 20th century all countries of the region were subject to communism – the most destructive social experiment known in human history. This has unified social experience of these nations, enabling common understanding among them.

Finally, the concept of the nation understood in ethnic (anthropological) categories dominates in the whole region, contrary to Western Europe, where mere civic nationalism is more common. A member of a nation is a person who is connected with the nation by origin, language, and common culture (often also by religion); citizenship plays a much more minor role.

  How was the idea of Intermarium developed in Poland and in Europe?

Although there were historical precedents, the Intermarium project was first introduced as a part of ideology of the Polish state by the Chief of State Józef Piłsudski in 1918-1922.

It is commonly identified with Polish federalism, which is not completely true. Polish federalism aimed at creating a common federal state from all the countries of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, and the idea of Intermarium aims to create an alliance of independent states.

The Peace Treaty of Riga between Second Polish Republic and the USSR in 1921 meant the resignation to the political impossibility of this concept – not a complete resignation, as it remained both in the political thought and in the semi-unofficial practices of certain institutions of Second Polish Republic. The Polish army, during preparations for a war with the USSR, created the so-called “contract officers”: these were military-men from the nations conquered by the USSR, who were not Polish citizens, but who served on the terms of a contract. It was anticipated that in the case of a war with the USSR, soldiers of the Red Army who were willing to fight against Bolshevism would contact Polish Army units. The leadership of army units consisting of such soldiers (which could form the nucleus of future allied armies) would be entrusted to these contract officers. Due to their nationality and lack of Polish citizenship they would be considered more credible. Also émigré periodicals fom the USSR were supported, not only in the case of Intermarium nations, but also peoples of the Caucasus, Urals, and even the Kalmyks. Of course, Polish intelligence services cooperated with pro-independence organizations among these nations.

The concept of Intermarium was taken up by the young generation of Polish conservatives during the Interwar period. We often associate the idea of Intermarium with the Piłsudski’s political camp, and although this association is true, it is noteworthy that the Polish nationalist political camp has also embraced this concept, with one of the versions elaborated by Adam Doboszyński.

Nevertheless, it must be emphasized that up to 1939, Intermarium was on the margins of the Polish political mainstream, which rather aimed at defending the Versailles status quo. After the beginning of the Second World War, however, various concepts of a Central European federation had many influential proponents among Polish emigres.

The project has been revivified in political thought in Poland with the foundation of Confederation of Independent Poland (Konfederacja Polski Niepodległej – KPN, the first oppositional political party since the incapacitation of the Polish People’s Party in 1947 by the Communists). The KPN harkened back to the Piłsudski’s pro-independence movement, so it could not remain indifferent to its geopolitical thought. After 1980, when the collapse of the USSR and of the broader “socialist camp” seemed more and more inevitable, some of the other oppositional circles began to more or less openly refer to the Intermarium project. It must nevertheless be emphasized that this agenda was embraced by only a minority of the opposition.

In July of 1994 a League of Parties of Intermarium Countries was proclaimed in Kiev. The League consisted of pro-independence parties from six countries (Belarus, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, and Ukraine). The Confederation of Independent Poland, the Third Republic Movement, and the marginal Polish Republican Party–Third Power represented Poland in the League. Congresses of the League took place in 1995 (Jarosław nad Sanem, Poland), 1996 (Minsk, Belarus) and 1997 (Kiev, Ukraine). There was also an attempt to create a common bulletin, two issues of which were published. This initiative died by the end of ‘90s as a result of political changes in the countries involved – including marginalization of the main advocates of the project. It is noteworthy that some non-political social initiatives, undertaking the questions of Central Europe, have referred to this idea. These initiatives usually died after a few years, due to the lack of state support and inability to find other sponsors.

Although the Intermarium idea has been promoted by circles which have never exercised real state power, it must nevertheless be emphasized that some of the official policies of the Third Polish Republic (in 1989-2004) can be considered as more or less direct references to this idea. I consider the Central European Initiative (Hexagonale) and Central European Free Trade Agreement to be examples of this. The Visegrad Group is also an example to a lesser extent – mainly due to its limited potential and the declared aim of the group, which is the support of the countries of the group on the path to European Union membership, thus de facto cooperation in liquidating the sovereignty of the region. However, Polish policy after the collapse of communism was essentially aimed at entering the main structures of the Western world, that is NATO and the European Union. All alternatives to this aim – and Intermarium is such an alternative, especially in regard to EU – were fundamentally rejected by the establishment. If certain elements of the project were used, it was rather as a medium of realizing the idea of the occidentalizaton of Central-Eastern Europe. After the Third Polish Republic entered the European Union, elements of the Intermarium agenda were visible in the policy of President Lech Kaczyński.

Nevertheless, realization of the Intermarium project appears the most effective way of securing the independence of Poland.

  What possibilites for and obstacles to the realization of the Intermarium project do you see?

The entrance of most of the countries of the area into the EU has basically undone the possibility of realizing this project in the conceivable future. Although we must remember that it does not rule out creation of a regional bloc inside the Union; there are still institutional frameworks enabling cooperation in the spirit of Intermarium, created before entrance into the EU, such as the Visegrad Group, which can be filled with a new content in a new political configuration.

Discussion of the Intermarium idea makes sense, especially if we assume the collapse of the European superstate project.

The main opponents of the realization of the Intermarium project are Russian and German imperialists as well as advocates of the European superstate.

Why are the Russian imperialists? This is obvious and does not need a detailed elaboration. However, we must notice that despite the evident successes of Vladimir Putin in overcoming domestic troubles and in international relations, the systematic demographic tendency to a decreasing Russian population has not changed. Taking into consideration neighboring China and the already existing presence of not only Chinese capital, but also of a few million Chinese in Siberia (with a tendency to increase in number), the loss of a part of Siberia in favor of China, in one form or another, seems quite probable within a generation. Finally, the Russian economy, based mainly on natural resources, is dependent on the international prices of these raw materials.

Furthermore, after departing from communism, Russia has not found an alternative ideological foundation for the reconstruction of the empire. Despite official support, Orthodox Christianity has not come out of the post-communist crisis. Eurasianism could be such a foundation, but it would mean breaking with the hopes of parts of Russian elite for the occidentalization of Russia.

That Intermarium is obsolete from the perspective of German policy is also a point that probably does not need much elaboration. Let us focus on the convergence of German and Russian interests, apart from certain economic complementarity (on the one hand a developed and energy-consuming economy, on the other a provider of almost inexhaustible energy resources). If we assume that the aim of German policy is the regaining of losses – including immaterial ones, such as international position – which the country suffered after the defeat in the Second World War, it is difficult to conceive Germany regaining territory in Central Europe if the region creates a strong political structure. And such a structure would also not be in favor of Russia, thus the German-Russian cooperation against the countries of Intermarium (especially against Poland as a potential leader of the region) is completely natural.

Thus we arrive at the last group of opponents of the Intermarium project: the advocates of the EU as a superstate. Contrary to the previous ones, they do not represent interests of a certain state or nation, but a certain ideological project, for the EU is also an ideological project. It is a democratic-liberal scheme, aimed against all strong national and religious identities, striving to create a “European” identity by uprooting national identities. The Intermarium project must provoke dislike in these circles for at least two reasons.

First, are “cultural” reasons: nations inhabiting the region, due to the common experience of communism, are more attached to their identities which have so often been threatened. Thus, they are unwilling to renounce these identities for the sake of a European mirage, especially when they see that it is often a tool hiding national interests of the old members of the EU. Second, the Intermarium nations have also the experience of Russian hegemony. It induces them to cooperate with the United States, which – even if the US provokes some objections – is nevertheless appreciated as an ally possessing not only real strength but also the will to use it. And the EU as a geopolitical project aims at pushing Americans out of Europe.

  What possibilities do you see of persuading the closest neighbors of Poland to become involved in realization of the Intermarium Project?

The alliance of two of the strongest countries of the region, Poland and Ukraine, is the spine of the geopolitical concept of Intermarium. One needs only to take a look at any map and calculate the potentials to know the reasons.

Ukraine — or rather a large part of the Ukrainian elite arising from the anti-communist tradition — never had to be strongly persuaded to get involved in this project. The prejudice against Poles is very weak, as Ukraine is simply a large country and will remain such, even without Crimea. And a new generation has already grown up for whom an independent Ukrainian state is something obvious. Furthermore, the war in Donbass has strengthened Ukrainian distinctiveness (including the Russian-speaking Ukraine). Simply put: war favors clear self-definitions.

Belarus – here, when it comes to anti-communist elites, the situation is similar, despite larger fears of Polish revisionism. The problem however is that these elites are sparse, which is connected with the weakness of Belorussian state traditions. Furthermore, the “pro-Western” elites supported by the grant system have a tendency to support the cultural postulates of the sponsors, which will not bring success in the Belorussian society. (There is some analogy to the supposedly anti-Putinist actions of Femen, which have done far more to help than harm Putin.) It seems that some hope may be pinned on the evolution of the “Lukashenkian” elites, which are rather willing to rule their own state, not to be functionaries of the Muscovite empire. This of course applies also to Lukashenko himself.

Lithuania is the most difficult element of the puzzle, because the Lithuanian elites have defined Poland and Poles as the worst threat, and the Lithuanization of Poles of the Vilnius Region is a demand of the Lithuanian raison d’etat. We cannot consent to this, and this has nothing to do with Polish revisionism. Besides, participation in the EU and NATO gives them a sense of security, which makes it easier to quarrel with Poland.

We surely share a fear of German revisionism with the Czechs. The question is: how much have the Czech elites made their peace with German domination? If they go much further, it would almost constitute consent to becoming some kind of a new Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia – with a similar territory. Acceding to the demands of Sudetenland Landmaschafts can lead to this. I cannot answer this question. But the reaction of our elites on the issue of German demands toward the Czech Republic was surely petty-minded, if not even cowardly. After all, in this issue we are in the same boat.

The question is whether Polish policy can influence and moderate the relationship of Hungary with her neighbors, which is a key issue for the peace in the region. Hungarians have the right to defend their minorities in other countries, but it must be clearly stated that one glance at the ethnic map proves that Transylvania just cannot be regained by Hungary. Anyway, Poland should act in an mitigating way as much as we can, as the quarrels in our region will be used by external factors.

It is even possible to establish positive relations between the Intermarium and Russia – but with a Russia which is reconstructed mentally, not only politically and socially.

This would be (speaking in certain mental shortcuts) a Russia of Boris Savinkov or Alexiey Shiropayev. By the way, the latter should be promoted in Poland. It is noteworthy that nobody is doing it, perhaps because of Shiropayev’s opinion on the role of Jews in the history of Russia.

The problem with Russian imperialism is that it is not only a geopolitical concept, something serving the national interests and thus something which can be rejected if it does not serve them anymore. It is an effect of mentality shaped by Orthodoxy synthesized with the Mongol tradition and German bureaucracy: “the Knouto-Germanic Empire” as it was once brilliantly stated by Mikhail Bakunin. If Russia is the “Third Rome” (and this was the official doctrine of Muscovite Orthodoxy, to which Russia is now returning), then it even has an obligation to be an empire. Preventing this means the breaking of not only the physical (which is currently already taking place in Russia through its demographic crisis), but also the spiritual foundations of Russian imperialism.

And that is why with great fondness I welcome the current renaissance of Slavic religion, which does not have a “Weltmacht” aspect. Some hope lies in the rebirth of the tradition of Novgorod as an alternative model of Russian development to Moscow. But all those anti-imperial currents of Russian thought are marginal, at least at the moment.

However, all hopes that this problem can be dealt with through the officially proclaimed reconciliation of the Roman Catholic Church in Poland with the Moscow Patriarchy of the Orthodox Church, which is one of the pillars of imperialism, are in my opinion without sense.

Let us add that dealing with the Königsberg question must be a certain element of the normalization of Polish-Russian relations. This geopolitical absurdity threatens us by its mere existence, not only as a base for possible aggression. It also creates a field for Russian-German cooperation, which is always a lethal threat for Poland. Nobody can guarantee that Moscow would not be willing to give it back to Germany, for instance by simply selling it. Thus, we must search for such a solution for this Oblast, which will not be connected with its belonging either to Russia or to Germany.

What is your view of the possibility of realizing the Intermarium project in light of recent events: armed conflict in Ukraine, the immigration crisis in Europe, or the recent Presidential and Parliamentary elections in Poland?

Russian aggression in Ukraine has proven to all interested parties the durability of Russian imperialism, and it is far less significant whether the leaders in Moscow honestly wish to rebuild the empire or if it only uses imperialism as a tool of internal politics. For if it is only an example of the latter, it speaks a lot about Russian society itself. Without a doubt the ruling Law and Justice party and President Andrzej Duda are better prepared for this imperialist recidivism of Moscow, about which they have actually warned others before. From this point of view the last elections in Poland are a good change.

Regarding Ukraine, the war has strengthened Ukrainian identity; an enemy easily cements a community and defines the political horizon, which we already know from Carl Schmitt.

The war has also been an alarm bell for other states of the post-Soviet area, which is also useful.

It has also hampered the actions of the pro-Moscow lobby in Western countries, especially in Germany, Italy, and France, although I have no illusions regarding position of these countries; they want to do business with Russia, and they are ready to sell our independence for this business, just as Roosevelt and Churchill sold us out in Teheran and Yalta. Regardless of that, they had to do something; hence the sanctions.

The immigration crisis weakens Europe, but from our perspective this is good, as the contingent pressure which can be put on us – especially by Germany – will be weaker. Please remember that Intermarium is supposed to secure us not only from Russia but also from Germany, and the German constitution still states that the legal borders of Germany are those from 1937. From our perspective it is good that our historical enemies have internal problems.

The annexation of Crimea had a side-effect: it has complicated relations of Russia with the Muslim world (the issue of Crimean Tatars), and the Russian involvement in Syria has complicated them even more.

In Russia: Russian opposition against imperialism has emerged, this time of a nationalist, not demo-liberal character (for instance: Russians from the Russian Federation, who are volunteers fighting on the Ukrainian side, and I am not speaking about mercenaries). Although the information about this is, due to various reasons, unclear in regard to the number and extent, it is still an interesting phenomenon.

I don’t want to play a prophet here, but the initial successes of Moscow in the Crimea and Donbass (although the latter is quite limited) might be a beginning of very serious problems.

*There are a few mistakes in Szczepański’s analysis - e.g., the idea that it would be “good for Poland and East Europe if Western Europe were to suffer greatly with floods of immigration”; secondly, the supposition that “Germany has never officially given up its claim” to the Western third of Poland; finally, even I wonder about his position with regard to what is now called Kaliningrad. However, as a geopolitical argument, in many other respects it is commendable.




Posted by Putin names US threat to Russian security on Sun, 03 Jan 2016 17:36 | #


Reuters, ‘Putin names United States among threats in new Russian security strategy’ 2 Jan 2016:

MOSCOW (Reuters) - A new appraisal names the United States as one of the threats to Russia’s national security for the first time, a sign of how relations with the west have deteriorated in recent years.

The document, “About the Strategy of National Security of Russian Federation”, was signed by President Vladimir Putin on New Year’s Eve. It replaces a 2009 version, endorsed by then- President Dmitry Medvedev, the current prime minister, which mentioned neither the United States nor NATO.

It says Russia has managed to heighten its role in solving global problems and international conflicts. That heightened role has caused a reaction by the West, it says.

“The strengthening of Russia happens against the background of new threats to the national security, which has complex and interrelated nature,” the document says.

Conducting an independent policy, “both international and domestic” has caused “counteraction from the USA and its allies, which are striving to retain their dominance in global affairs.”

That in turn is likely to lead to “political, economical, military and informational pressure” on Russia, the document says.

Relations between Russia and the West reached a low after Russian forces annexed the Crimean peninsula from Ukraine in March 2014, after protests in Ukraine forced its pro-Moscow president to flee to Russia.

Since then, the West has accused Russia of aiding insurgents in eastern Ukraine. Moscow denies actively assisting the rebels.

The United States and the European Union have since imposed wide-ranging sanctions against Russian individuals and companies. Moscow has reacted by restricting food and other goods from the EU.

The document says that the United States and the EU have supported an “anti-constitutional coup d’etat in Ukraine”, which led to a deep divide in Ukrainian society and a military conflict.

It also names the expansion of NATO as a threat to Russia’s national security and said that the United States has expanded its network of military-biological laboratories in neighboring to Russia countries.

The document, which serves as a basis for planning strategy related to national security by different state bodies, does not mention Syria. On Sept. 30, Russia began air strikes against anti-government rebels opposed to the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, a Russian ally.

(Reporting by Vladimir Soldatkin)


Posted by Nobody on Sun, 03 Jan 2016 18:18 | #

The US a threat?  Not much of one.  The US will be an irritation at most.  And the schmucks in Washington know this as well.  Not that they won’t try stupid shit, but that’s about it.


Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 04 Jan 2016 18:43 | #

Daniel, we are a Master Race.  We do not deign to give land and resources to our racial inferiors in exchange for brownie points.


Posted by DanielS on Mon, 04 Jan 2016 19:52 | #

It’s not brownie points, it’s quid pro quo.

They have a great deal of manpower, incentive etc. to cooperate in alliance.


Posted by Critical Resources Institute on Tue, 05 Jan 2016 17:51 | #

Critical Resources Institute

The rare earth elements (REE) are widely used in modern technologies varying from wind turbines to hard disk drives, low energy lighting to electric cars. They are recognised as critical raw materials by the European Commission and other authorities, because of security of supply concerns. Recent work has highlighted neodymium (Nd) and the heavy rare earth elements (HREE) as being most at risk of supply disruption in the near future.

The major challenge is to develop new Nd and HREE deposits that can be exploited in an environmentally friendly and economically viable way, so that the use of REE in new technologies can continue to expand.

The SoS RARE project aims to understand the mobility and concentration of Nd and HREE in natural systems, and to investigate new processes that will lower the environmental impact of REE extraction and recovery. It brings together an interdisciplinary team of researchers to look at aspects of REE geology, chemistry and metallurgy, and will study both conventional REE deposits and ion adsorption clays (currently the world’s major source of HREE).


Posted by miltary dictatorship, imperial overstretch on Tue, 05 Jan 2016 20:39 | #

...inability to reform.

fall of Soviet Union and similarities in The US.

Paul Gottfried

I think that the most critical issue in our society was the October of 2002 vote by our Congress to give the President the right to go to war when he wanted-to on his decision alone, including the use of nuclear weapons.

John Adams, easily the most important author of our constitution, said that the clause in the Constitution reserving the right to go to war to the elected representatives of the people is the single most important clause in the Constitution. Never, ever should such a power be entrusted to a single man. In October of 2002 our Congress, bot parties, kissed-off the Constitution. And that’s the issue today.

That’s what’s at stake today.

Perhaps our most prominent critical philosopher in this country in the post war period was Hanna Arent, who once made the case in ‘The Origins of Totalitarianism’ that:

“Tyranny can always prevail over others because it doesn’t require consent. Its only cost is the destruction of its own society.

But even if you had an honest congress, you can’t do honest oversight when 40 percent of the defense budget is secret from everybody.

Two military generals who became President famously warned in their farewell addresses of the use of unauthorized military power; with that, the tendency to distort Republican government; I believe this distortion is now so advanced that one could wonder if it could be reversed in any such circumstances.


Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Wed, 06 Jan 2016 04:25 | #

Captainchaos wrote:

We do not deign to give land and resources to our racial inferiors in exchange for brownie points.

Captainchaos, it’s not really about anyone ‘deigning’ to ‘give land and resources’ for ‘brownie points’. It’s not a moralistic argument, it’s an argument which I would say is scientific, scientific in the sense that the world is interconnected and so there are scenarios in which you have to help—or at least support—others in order to help yourself.

The countries which you would want placed under Russian dominance would only remain backwaters as a result. Any hypothetical alliance between Europe and Russia (there are many who fantasise about such a thing, unfortunately) in a scenario where Russia would be permitted to re-integrate itself with the international markets, to try to maintain Russian dominance over the Caucasus, Siberia, and Central Asia, would in fact arrest the development that could otherwise take place in those regions, and perpetuate super-exploitation, which would in turn act as a shot in the arm for global capitalism.

Assuming that you want to avoid giving global capitalism a shot in the arm later on, you ought to in fact support the eventual national liberation of the nations which have historically been held captive in the Russian sphere.

If those nations remain captive, they would only be used by Russian companies as places of super-exploitation. Super-exploitation is a term that describes how an imperial power can create a ‘satisfied’ strata of labourers inside the first world by selling and exchanging products in dollars or euros, after those products were first purchased or produced under comprador regimes which use weaker currencies. Upon bringing such products to the first world store shelves, the selling price is increased in order to give all the intermediaries the level of profit they desire.

First, the comprador factory owner in the producing nation, the corporation whose branding is being used, and the store owner in the first world destination, all are seeking to profit from the enterprise. The excess which the capitalists choose not to allocate to themselves, is then allocated to the first world service workers who are selling the item in the store (not so much the producers!), indefinitely.

Secondly, a result of this process is that the first world service workers would, despite the plateauing wages over the past 30 years, still be able to easily afford a decent standard of living as a result, despite being in that plateau, because the ‘economic punishment’ is being geographically shifted onto the back of the third world worker through enforced stagnation.

Thirdly, the result of this shift or displacement of ‘economic punishment’, means that the social and material conditions which would normally produce an environment in which revolution could take place, are forestalled in the west for as long as that situation continues.

In other words, the call for an ‘Imperium spreading from Lisbon to Vladivostok’, is actually a retrograde call for an extension of liberal-capitalism’s life-span, through allowing European and Russian finance capital to ‘make nice with each other’ and agree on totally retarded policies in the Caucasus, Central Asia, and Siberia.

On the other hand, supporting tendencies that lead to Russia losing its preponderance over those territories, creates the circumstances under which they might be able to take the path of national liberation, and gradually raise their wages until they cannot so easily be used as part of a framework of super-exploitation.

Absent the framework of super-exploitation, the ‘bread and circuses’ would be a less viable economic strategy in the west, and thus, the ideological opponents which we are all struggling against would not be able to buy their way out of every economic crisis by milking the Third World harder.


Posted by DanielS on Wed, 06 Jan 2016 15:54 | #

Who might be among constituents of border enforcement?

Chinese delegations for one example.

People like this. They are trained in counter terrorism as well.

There would be equivalent numbers of Chinese men and women who would live with each other in encampment villages.

We already have Chinatowns. Now there could be some intermittently disbursed along the borders of the Mediterranean and among European cities with border and migrant control an explicit part of their mandate.

Their numbers could be monitored with the agreement that their primary purpose in Europe is to protect European EGI.

In fact, their camps/villages would be more frequent along a new border outside of Europe proper and created across North Africa and along the Silk Road.


Posted by North Africa Containment on Wed, 06 Jan 2016 16:23 | #

North African Containment area


Posted by Yes we would ally with them on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 04:21 | #

Yes we would ally with them.


Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 05:16 | #

Well, Daniel, those are some pretty good remixes! The T-ara - So Crazy remix which appears at 06:05 is the best one, I think.

No one does pop music quite like Korea does it. It’s a great song in the first place, and even better in that remix somehow. Full version of it is here: [Link]


Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 05:33 | #

What is the view in Asia of China’s treatment of the Tibetan people:


Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 05:57 | #

I think it depends ideologically on who is being asked.

For those who are okay with the annexation of Tibet, they will say that Marxism-Leninism-Maoism produced an objectively productive outcome because it removed the feudal Lama-led bureaucracy and replaced it with a progressive state that walked toward modernisation and the introduction of modern labour laws and mandatory public schooling and so on. They’ll also tend to add the opinion that had any other nation overtaken Tibet, they would have done nothing fundamentally different from what the Maoists did.

For those who remain opposed to the annexation of Tibet, they will say that there has been no real border controls maintained across the boundary between Tibetans and the rest of China, and that this has resulted in Chinese people basically moving into Tibet. They’ll also submit the opinion that the movement of Chinese into Tibet actually confuses the figures that are used to gauge Tibet’s progress, and that what is really happening is a defacto imposition of Chinese bodies into the territory so as to ensure that a demand for a removal of Chinese government there could not be easily actualised, and that even if it did occur, the demography would be such that countries like Japan, Korea, or the US, could not unify Tibet against China. In other words the imposition of Chinese bodies into Tibet would function as an ‘insurance policy’ in case any other geopolitical player gets any funny ideas.

My own view of it is that the truth is somewhere a mixture between the two views.


Posted by DanielS on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 07:43 | #

Yes, with ethno-nationialist thinking, the Tibet question was the first to occur to me as well. Of course I’m for Tibetan sovereignty.

Interestingly and hypocritically by its own borderless liberalism, Western media expresses concern for the national sovereignty of Tibet.

But when do we ever have occasion to contemplate VladivastoKorea?

Since when is Vladivastok a natural and rightful place of Russian ethno-nationalism?

Russia has apparently been playing nasty games with North Korea for some time in terms of ideology, geopolitics, military strategy and exploitation of its labor.



Posted by right-wingers objective border guard on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 15:43 | #

Of course, right-wingers would perhaps rather this sort encamped as co-defenders of our borders and people…
Assertive, determined

Strong, faster-twitching muscle-fibers..

Confident, unflappable

The kind that should have weapons

DM, ‘The active MARINE arrested for shooting dead sorority sister, 20, on New Year’s Eve after getting into road rage spat over ‘very derogatory sexual comments’ he made about her and her friends’ 7 Jan 2016:

Cpl Eric Jamal Johnson charged at air base in Yuma, Arizona, on Tuesday
He is an administrative specialist based in Arizona since August 2013

Sara Mutschlechner was driving friends home after party in Denton, Texas

SUV pulled up beside her and there was an argument with the occupants

Within minutes, shots were fired, and Mutschlechner was shot in the head

Witnesses said two people in the SUV had been at the same party as them

Parents of University of North Texas junior say she was an organ donor

Police are examining surveillance footage which shows the SUV involved

A Marine has been arrested on suspicion of murdering a 20-year-old sorority sister after harassing her and her friends on New Year’s Eve.

Cpl Eric Johnson, of Marine Aviation Weapons and Tactics Squadron-1, was arrested at his air base in Yuma, Arizona, on Tuesday morning - five days after University of North Texas student Sara Mutschlechner was fatally shot in the head as she drove three friends home from a party.

According to police, shots were fired from a black SUV that pulled up beside her as she was driving through Denton, Texas, in the early hours of New Year’s Day.

Daily Mail Online understands Johnson, 20, is an administrative specialist and had been stationed at the Marine Corp Air Station in Yuma since August 12, 2013. It is unclear if he was on holiday leave.

He will be detained in Yuma County Jail until he is extradited to Texas.

Johnson was at the same party as Sara and her friends. He left at around the same time with two of the party’s performers of the rap collective Dayonta Boyz, as well as two other African American males in a black SUV.

She was the designated driver.


Posted by Just Sayin' on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 19:19 | #

Kumiko’s presence has taken this site in an odd, neo-connish direction, which I guess is not surprising given her connections to ZOG.

More wars in the middle east, grand strategic plans for containing Russia, not the white left we need, but the left we already have.


Posted by DanielS on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 19:52 | #

I told her that she was going to get comments like this. I’d hoped that she would, for starters, elaborate with a comment about the situation of the Vladivastok - North Korean area…

That comment might have gone up this evening but apparently she got called away.

She needs to build her case so that people like you don’t try to hang the “neocon” label on her. She isn’t as familiar with the landscape of White nationalism, what they think they know and what they don’t know - particularly regarding legitimate grievances about Russia.

I am actually a good mediator in that regard, as I am not inclined to look at Russia very negatively - am inclined to look at them favorably.

In fact, the ‘grand view’ of the map of bloated Russia was my idea.

She needs to make her case because there will be people who either don’t know what they are talking about or do not want other people to know what is going on, who’ll look for opportunities to portray her as a ZOGbot.

Until she can make her case, quiet (I know where you are coming from and it isn’t a friendly place to MR’s platform). This comment is useful nevertheless, as it provides occasion to take on issues she’ll be confronted with by the same old WN Right Wing of America.

I’ll try to make sure that she starts with a comment about that (Vladivastok) area in the morning…

It is a good place to start.


Posted by Nobody on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 21:33 | #

“Since when is Vladivastok a natural and rightful place of Russian ethno-nationalism?”

Russia is an empire, they took it.  Just like the way the Han took Tibet.  Natural and rightful have nothing to do with it. 



Posted by DanielS on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 21:38 | #

A point of departure for discussion about claims to injustices in those areas is the point. 1860 (the year Vladivastok was founded) is not a long time ago.

And, natural evolutionary claims to an area do have something to do with warrant.


Posted by Nobody on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 22:57 | #

—A point of departure for discussion about claims to injustices in those areas is the point. 1860 (the year Vladivastok was founded) is not a long time ago.

And, natural evolutionary claims to an area do have something to do with warrant.—

A tough call.  Lenin ain’t all european.


Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 03:20 | #

The upshot of all of this is to enable China as an expansionary power.  Why must we cooperate in awarding these chinks lebensraum across the globe?  Because we need to subcontract our border security to them!  Lulz What a crock of shit.


Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 03:26 | #

Just Sayin’ on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 00:19 wrote:

Kumiko’s presence has taken this site in an odd, neo-connish direction, which I guess is not surprising given her connections to ZOG.

What ‘connections to ZOG’? How is anything that I’ve been saying even slightly beneficial to ZOG?

I think that you are the one that is unwittingly defending a ‘ZOG’ here, given that Russia is essentially a very Jewish government.

On the flip-side the nations of East Asia have exactly 0% Jews in government.

You basically could not ask for less than 0%.

Furthermore, almost 100% of the forces that have arisen in opposition to Russia in this era have been not only objectively antisemitic, but in fact often subjectively antisemitic as well. A fact that Russia itself does not hesitate to point out on a perpetual basis in all of its whiny propaganda.

My position is probably the most antisemitic position on the earth, strategically speaking.

Just Sayin’ on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 00:19 wrote:

More wars in the middle east,

I have not called for anything more than there already is, I think.

The only persons who are presently calling for ‘more wars’, which is to say, the opening of new fronts, are the people who support Donald Trump, given that Donald Trump’s advisors are in favour of opening an insane, idiotic, and suicidal front against Iran while making peace with Russia.

I’m against any war in Iran, and I’m against Donald Trump. I’m also against pandering to Russia.

Just Sayin’ on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 00:19 wrote:

grand strategic plans for containing Russia,

Such plans have existed since the year dot. Various European countries have been struggling against Russia for about 400 years now, and East Asian countries have been dealing with Russian nonsense for about 700 years now.

Was there ever a sensible non-Russian on earth that didn’t want to contain Russia? What do you think would happen if you didn’t contain them? Russia has historically had designs on basically everything you care to name. Russia is a country that even seriously had designs on India, and was only halted because the British Empire frustrated them in Peshawar province. Even the roots of the conflict in Afghanistan actually stems back to a need to prevent Russian dilettante meddling.

Any conscientious reading of military history will reveal Russia as a deadly opponent.

Russia is also a country which has fought four wars against Japan and Korea in the 20th century. First was the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-1905, second was the war in Manchuria in 1938-1939 which they provocatively waged right under the very nose of the whole world, and then thirdly Russia’s invasion of Manchuria and Korea in 1945, and fourthly Russia’s participation in the war in Korea in 1950-1953. I’ll say more about this later, but it’s not like Russia is just sitting there doing nothing.

On a meta-level also, it seems strange to me that I’m constantly being accused of being anti-Russian like if that is supposed to be some kind of shameful thing. Why should it be shameful to be anti-Russian? Bringing harm to Russia is both strategically sensible, and would be enjoyable.

Just Sayin’ on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 00:19 wrote:

not the white left we need, but the left we already have.

Is it really, though? Because last I checked, the ‘left you already have’ (which looks something like Code Pink), is a left that would like to cancel all the presently-running wars in the Middle East, let ISIL take over all the oil refineries and jack up the oil prices globally, and then after that they’d also like to make peace with Russia because ‘war is bad mkay’, and then after that they’d also like to cancel all the FTAs with Korea, stop the FTA with Japan from being signed in the EU, and cancel the Trans-Pacific Partnership, because ‘dey took our jobs’, and then when there is an inevitable shortage of economic demand, they’d like to address that by inviting half the population of the Middle East to enter the EU just out of some weird anti-European spite because supposedly ‘refugees are welcome’, even though that has only a negative effect.

That’s the ‘left’ you already have. I sometimes call it the ‘opposite day left’, because it’s a left that is just automatically against everything no matter what it is.

Nobody on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 03:57 wrote:

Russia is an empire, they took it.

And it can be taken back. Sometimes crises come, and empires eventually find themselves breaking up slowly over time. Russia’s economy is pretty ossified, and they haven’t really engaged in the reforms that would have been needed since the early 2000s in order for them to compete on the global stage in the long term, so that gives an opening where Europeans can make Russia’s economy scream simply by refusing to trade normally with them, and by letting Russia’s rivals economically penetrate the regions surrounding Russia.

Another good move would be to have China build a transit route for goods, that connects to Central and Eastern Europe whose path goes around Russia. Which is already happening of course. Victor Orban also seems to agree with all of this, and he seems to be a pretty reliable person too, so it’s not like this is a viewpoint that is confined to the ivory tower or something. Sometimes it’s just common sense.


Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 04:16 | #

Captainchaos on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 08:20 wrote:

The upshot of all of this is to enable China as an expansionary power.  Why must we cooperate in awarding these chinks lebensraum across the globe?

No livingspace is being awarded to anyone at the expense of Europeans. China is also not even the sole country concerned with this. Also, if East Asian countries enter mutually-beneficial security arrangements with the EU and USA, regarding border enforcement in the way that Daniel is providing an example of, one of the first places that would have to be dealt with is actually Libya. Would anyone really be opposed to having East Asian countries deal with Libya alongside Europeans in a multinational array of forces?

Captainchaos on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 08:20 wrote:

Because we need to subcontract our border security to them! Lulz What a crock of shit.

It’s not like it hasn’t been done before. When the Italians were looking for new partners to help them jointly patrol East Africa’s coast to facilitate the flow of oil tankers without interruption, they chose to ask China and India to join them in doing that, and they had a lot of productive and friendly military-to-military contact from that, and there was plenty of talk about best-practices. There’s only a matter of time before someone decides to invite Korea and Japan to that scene, I think.

Also, Japan literally has a base in Djibouti, which is in the American sphere, which Japan uses for collaborative efforts alongside the USA, for taking actions against threats arising in Africa.


Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 13:20 | #

I’ve got a better idea - use Japan and Korea to keep China boxed in.


Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 13:30 | #

It’s not too difficult to keep China in check in the South China Sea, since that’s a matter of ‘good fences make good neighbours’, and JADGE being really well-maintained.

But Japan and Korea have no capability to prevent China’s westward movement (for obvious geographical reasons), nor is there any reason to prevent such a thing.


Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 18:09 | #

I wish China good luck moving westward against nuclear armed Pakistan and India!


Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sat, 09 Jan 2016 00:25 | #

And here I was thinking that you were complaining about the expansion of Chinese influence into Central Asia and Eastern Europe.

Given that those things are west of China’s position.


Posted by Tom on Sat, 09 Jan 2016 00:40 | #

The problem is government policy, not lack of border guards. There’s a lack of will on the part of European governments to prevent migration, and even a desire to invite and accept migrants. If we were ever in a position to hire Chinese border guards to prevent to prevent migration, we wouldn’t need to. With government policy changed to focus on preventing migration, domestic border guards would be sufficient.

At any rate, all this seems to be fantasizing to me, no different from playing the board game of Risk. What is the point of fantasizing about these thing when even being in a position to orchestrate these sorts of things would require many challenging intermediate steps like winning power domestically?


Posted by DanielS on Sat, 09 Jan 2016 01:27 | #


The very nature of the very real ‘game’ is international coordination.

The matter already goes beyond national governments, even beyond EU enforcement - which is itself International from the onset.

There is more border than just our own in Europe, say, along the Mediterranean.

There is the border in North Africa and all along the Silk Road.

Our common interests are not at all fantasy, they are very real.

Moreover, there is the fact that we would be working with a group - Asians - who have sufficient skill and manpower against hostile, hard-to-deal-with and/or incompetent groups - Middle Easterners and Africans.

As Kumiko said, there are already motivations and arrangements of this sort in place on the basis of these realities - which need to be better orchestrated.

With regard to manning our borders with some foreign delegation, well, inasmuch as we don’t need them, we wouldn’t have to use them - foreign and domestic delegations are meant to fill a need; but they could conceivably help; where they were to exist, we already have models of insular foreign towns, such as Chinatowns, in Europe; which tend to preserve their own kind and ways; and might be of service, having a common interest to preserve the European type and having capacity and motivation in a negative sense to deal with Muslims, Africans and Jews.


Not only Chinese, but Indians (Hindus) are potentially a valuable Ally as they are ideologically opposed to Islam - Pakistan, e.g.


Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sat, 09 Jan 2016 02:24 | #

I also think it’s pretty strange to see accusations of ‘playing risk’, given that all I’ve done in this thread really is defend things that are already happening.

1. Russian containment is already happening.
2. China being an economic component of that containment is already happening.
3. EU FTA with Japan is already being negotiated.
4. EU FTA with Korea already happened.
5. Trans-Pacific Partnership is already happening.
6. Joint patrols with Europeans and Asians in the Indian Ocean near Africa, already happening.
7. Central and Eastern Europe working together with China on infrastructure projects including rail-based train routes connecting Asia to Central Europe, already happening.
8. Chinese RMB currency accepted as part of the SDR basket by the IMF, already happening.
9. China making strategic gains against Russia in Central Asia by using SCO, already happening.
10. India, Japan, Vietnam, and the Philippines working with the United States on maintaining balance in the South China sea in case China suddenly does something weird or unexpected, already happening.
11a. Establishing a nuclear deal with Iran and scaling back sanctions so that trade can proceed normally, and [b.] so that Iran can act as an alternate energy source for the EU to offset Russian preponderance, and [c.]so that Asia can take its pick from a whole range of suppliers at cheap prices, and so that [d.]Iran can be tempted to act as a swing-power in the Caucasus sponsoring political developments that may be disadvantageous to Russia.

If there’s anything that I could be accused of, it’s of not advocating anything different from what has already been set in motion, but I can’t be accused of ‘playing risk’. I did of course support all of those things before they started happening as well, but the point remains.


Posted by DanielS on Sat, 09 Jan 2016 04:00 | #

Kumiko, can you elaborate on how North Korea is a Russian doing?


Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sat, 09 Jan 2016 08:12 | #

Well, that was already explained in one of the earlier links. One of the easiest and most straightforward ways to understand North Korea is basically that it is a total wasteland which has been situated in the Korean peninsula because Russia desired that it should be there.

North Korea tends to be a pretty complicated subject, so that’s the best concise statement that I can give without it diverting the entire topic onto the subject of North Korea.


Posted by North Korea on Sat, 09 Jan 2016 13:17 | #

I know that you don’t want to open-up a can of worms about North Korea, but I am looking to adumbrate the critical view, a working hypothesis, of it as a proxy interest and exploitation of Russia:

1. Russia wanted to take over the whole peninsula but was prevented from taking over completely; South Korea has, in effect, become like an island nation as it does not have free travel by land through North Korea. Nevertheless, South Korea has, by contrast to North Korea, shown what these people are capable of with the correct leadership and politico/economic system (third way) as opposed to North Korea’s quasi-Sovietism inculcated of Russia.

2. With the geo-political menacing from that in-your-your face imposition, Russia has destabilized the native area, creating a notoriously dangerous, volatile regime and circumstance though its impositions.

3. They and the corrupt regime that they prop-up exploit the North Korean people as veritable slave labor - Russia is the prime beneficiary and it provides no approximate value in return.


Posted by Nobody on Sat, 09 Jan 2016 21:26 | #

I wish China good luck moving westward against nuclear armed Pakistan and India!

As do I.  And before they move westward, I hope that they hit both those shithole “nations”  with nuclear weapons and fry those stunky bindis ASAP.


Posted by DanielS on Sun, 10 Jan 2016 03:55 | #

So, your angle here, “Nobody”, is to not take your thoughts seriously.

The status quo and where things are headed on its trajectory is very good for you, I suppose


Posted by Nobody on Sun, 10 Jan 2016 09:38 | #

The status quo and where things are headed on its trajectory is very good for you, I suppose

Daniel, I find subcontinentals disgusting.  The less the better.  I just happened to like the Captain’s idea of a war with the Han crushing them like the maggots they are.  BTW, I like what you write, cool stuff.  When the SHTF in the US, the issues of the Chinese ripping the subcons to pieces will be on page 58 of the NYT.


Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 10 Jan 2016 16:40 | #

The only ally the White man needs to wrangle the 85 IQ shitskins that constitute “Islam” is his own balls.  That being the case - and it manifestly is - why should Whites make unnecessary concessions to gooks to facilitate an unneeded alliance?  There is no good reason.


Posted by DanielS on Sun, 10 Jan 2016 16:59 | #

Though you are capable of very intelligent comments, CC, that wasn’t a particularly good one. Furthermore, it’s a straw man.

85 I.Q. Muslims in the Middle East aren’t the only people that we need to contend with.

Then there is the matter of vast populations and their biopower in places beyond Europe, along the Silk Road and elsewhere.

Asians are the best possible allies among the non-Whites to help secure and cultivate resources and get these populations under control.

As for what might be “conceded to them”...that’s supposed to be the point: to open discussion of what cooperation already exists, where we could use help, what we need and what we don’t need.

Quite to the contrary of having set anything in stone and having given them anything, I am opening the topic of negotiating alliance and requirements thereof for discussion.


Posted by property tax funding the free corps on Mon, 11 Jan 2016 07:42 | #

Lest someone accuse me of trying to transform “Euro man” and his individuality into an a-sexual and eusocial insect (or turn us directly over to control of the Chinese red army ants), Bowery has made his by-now standard recommendation over at Occidental Observer.

There is merit to it (though, as usual, it probably veers too much away from praxis and goes “scientistic” in not differentiating humans quite enough, for their “human nature”, from other natural forms):

James Bowery, January 10, 2016 - 7:45 am | Permalink

Mercenaries such as the Freikorps need payment. Governments control the money supply and they are paying foreign mercs to come to Europe and gang rape European women. The cost of importing legitimate refugees may be seen as the cost of disinformation. The European “police” are local mercs paid to protect the foreign mercs as they get their sexual compensation — protect them from men who would kill the foreign mercs, and probably the local mercs aiding the foreign mercs and maybe even the government leaders responsible.

The government leaders are too clever by half in all this because they forgot 2 founding principles of civilization:

1) Civilization (as we know it at least) can form only by the consent of men who agree to give up their natural right to challenge any “leader” to natural duel to the death — a natural right enjoyed by individual males of all sexual species.

2) This consent can only be attained only by the government, in turn, guaranteeing _collective_ territorial defense to the men as well as material rights accruing from the network externalities created by property rights — the protection of which is a service of the government paid for by those enjoying said property rights.

When governments not only shift the tax base from property rights to economic activity (such as income, value added, etc.), but cease performing the primordial function of territorial defense, they are asking for a new monetary base to be formed by men who agree to reinstitute those 2 founding principles.

It is simple enough, really:

Just issue Freikorps currency backed by the property rights respected by the Freikorps. Cease respecting all other property rights. Charge the owners of respected property rights an insurance premium and distribute the revenue evenly to all members of the Freikorps — with the understanding that they are to arm themselves, train and protect those legitimate property rights — even coming to the aid of property owners to indemnify them against loss.

Smart as they are, these guys who formed “Atavistic Intelligentsia” are saying some stupid things - e.g., “Being is for girls”, and not, say, the very essence of what White males do not have sufficiently and what they need as an essential warrant to the survival of our race - seems strikingly similar to the opinions of those who want to oppose things that I say…well, just because, you know…


Posted by DanielS on Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:45 | #

Posted by Captainchaos on Sun, 10 Jan 2016 21:40 | #
The only ally the White man needs to wrangle the 85 IQ shitskins that constitute “Islam” is his own balls.  That being the case - and it manifestly is - why should Whites make unnecessary concessions to gooks to facilitate an unneeded alliance?  There is no good reason.

Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 08:20 | #

The upshot of all of this is to enable China as an expansionary power.  Why must we cooperate in awarding these chinks lebensraum across the globe?  Because we need to subcontract our border security to them!  Lulz What a crock of shit.

Captainchaos (from Johnfriend talk at Age of Treason), 2 January 2016 at 5:11 pm
I’m sure the Jews will try to subvert a WN revolution, or at least attempt to blunt its impact. How can that be prevented? How can it be assured that the 14 words are achieved? There must be an idea which forms the steely core of WN thought that is, by its very nature, not capable of being compromised. That idea is the creation of the Northwest American Republic; within its boundaries there will be total politically sovereign and territorial separation from muds and Jews. Only White people will be allowed to reside there.

CC, you say that you don’t want to make any concessions to “chinks, gooks” etc.. and that we should not give them “liebensraum.”

Aren’t you making concessions with your Northwest ingathering concept?


Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:58 | #

Yes, it would seem that he’s making concessions to basically every African-American person in the United States.

How does Captainchaos even have the time to hate Asians this much, or the audacity, given that he is in fact the one making the concessions?


Posted by DanielS on Tue, 12 Jan 2016 10:14 | #

Can you imagine giving-up California, Colorado, West Virginia, Florida, South Carolina, Mississippi, the Caribbean Islands, etc. to blacks?

You are giving them paradise. Who are the losers?

CC, you have some life experience…when as a child you watched red army ants fight black ants, which won?

I have 1,406,477,219 billion red army ants on my side. I’ll take them, on my side, the “gooks” and “nips” too: they have the volume, I.Q. and the ethnocentrism to assist in holding up to our enemies ranging from Jew cleverness and Muslim fanaticism to black biopower.


Posted by 19 largest cities east of Baikal on Tue, 12 Jan 2016 20:37 | #

While there are cities and regions to the West of Lake Baikal which may be contestable as to whether or not they should be Russian or, in fact, enclaves of other peoples; cities and regions along the South and Western borders of Russia that may be similarly contestable; and we will look into those disputable territories, whether or not they should be enclaves; and we will also look into some interesting stories that go along with these places later; to begin, lets take a look at the largest cities East of Lake Baikal, as of the 2010 census:

Of 319 Russian cities larger than 50,000, there are only 19 East of Lake Baikal. None of these cities East of the lake were as large as 600,000; only four were larger than 300,000; only three were larger than 400,000.

The largest is Vladivastok, which is Russia’s 22nd largest city at 592,034 022

1) 22 Vladivostok, Primorsky Krai, 592,034

2) 26 Khabarovsk, Khabarovsk Krai 577,441

3) 45 Ulan-Ude, Republic of Buryatia 404,426

4) 56 Chita, Zabaykalsky Krai 324,444,_Zabaykalsky_Krai

5) 68 Yakutsk, Sakha Republic 269,601


6) 70 Komsomolsk-on-Amur Khabarovsk Krai 263,906

7) 87 Blagoveshchensk, Amur Oblast 214,390

8) 99 Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Sakhalin Oblast 181,728

9) 100 Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, Kamchatka Krai, 179,780

10) 110 Nakhodka, Primorsky Krai 159,719

11) 111 Ussuriysk, Primorsky Krai, 158,004

12) 158 Artyom, Primorsky Krai 102,603,_Russia

13) 178 Magadan, Magadan Oblast 95,982

14) 215 Birobidzhan, Jewish Autonomous Oblast 75,413

15) 229 Belogorsk, Amur Oblast 68,249,_Amur_Oblast

16) 260 Neryungri, Sakha Republic 61,747

17) 281 Svobodny, Amur Oblast 58,778,_Amur_Oblast

18) 291 Arsenyev Арсеньев, 56,750

19) 295 Krasnokamensk, Zabaykalsky Krai 55,666,_Zabaykalsky_Krai


Of geographical note:

146 Kyzyl, Tuva Republic 109,918 claims to be located in central asia.

But a good place to draw a Western line in the sand to begin critical territorial dispute might be Ulan-Ude, just South East of Lake Baikal.

45 Ulan-Ude, Republic of Buryatia 404,426:

Interestingly, regarding this, the third largest city East of Lake Baikal:

The first occupants of the area where Ulan-Ude now stands were the Evenks and, later, the Buryat Mongols. Ulan-Ude was settled in 1666 by the Russian Cossacks as the fortress of Udinskoye. Due to its favorable geographical position, it grew rapidly and became a large trade center which connected Russia with China and Mongolia and, from 1690, was the administrative center of the Transbaikal region.


The Evenks (also spelled Ewenki or Evenki) (autonym: Эвэнкил Evenkil; Russian: Эвенки Evenki; Chinese: 鄂温克族 Èwēnkè Zú; formerly known as Tungus or Tunguz; Mongolian: Хамниган Khamnigan) are a Tungusic people of Northern Asia. In Russia, the Evenks are recognized as one of the Indigenous peoples of the Russian North, with a population of 35,527 (2002 Census). According to the 2010 census, there were 37,843 Evenks in Russia. In China, the Evenki form one of the 56 ethnic groups officially recognized by the People’s Republic of China, with a population of 30,875, as per the 2010 Census. There are also 535 Mongolized Evenki in Mongolia, referred to as Khamnigan.

The Buryats (Buryat: Буряад, Buryaad; Mongolian: Буриад/Buriad), numbering approximately 500,000, are the largest indigenous group in Siberia, mainly concentrated in their homeland, the Buryat Republic, a federal subject of Russia. They are the major northern subgroup of the Mongols.


Posted by Ulan-Ude on Wed, 13 Jan 2016 08:05 | #

That’s Ulan-Ude here, to the South-East of Lake Baikal in the upper left hand corner of this map image.


It is the third largest city in Russia east of Lake Baikal, while Vladivastok (red arrow) is the largest Russian city east of Lake Baikal.


Posted by Turkel, Merkel, Bloody Dwarf on Wed, 13 Jan 2016 13:50 | #


Posted by Thorn on Wed, 13 Jan 2016 19:44 | #

Sunday, January 10, 2016

Throwing Russians Under the Bus, Part 1


Majority Rights jumping the shark.

I have previously written about the despicable Silver’s contribution to the destruction of Majority Rights.  What’s going on in the rubble of MR land? They have an East Asian female (female - of course) - which, despite the Japanese-sounding anime name may well be that “Chinese Nationalist Maiden” creature haunting pro-White blogs in recent years - making such wonderful contributions such as this:

Read more>>


Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Thu, 14 Jan 2016 06:17 | #

Thorn wrote:

Read more>>

I see that Thorn is making several delirious demands as well, as though he has the right to demand anything from Japanese people at this point.

I stand by everything I’ve said. Him quoting myself back to me is not going to make a difference.


Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Thu, 14 Jan 2016 06:24 | #

Also, it’s interesting how Thorn couldn’t make his response inside of the thread that the conversation was actually occurring in, because the arguments going on there were too strong. I find it really interesting that all of the pro-Jewish unstable lunatics also happen to be Christians who want to cuddle with Russia at the same time. It’s almost like these things are really correlated.


Posted by Russan Federation population density on Fri, 15 Jan 2016 06:32 | #

Population density by Russian Federation “Oblasts” (subregions)


Posted by DanielS on Fri, 15 Jan 2016 08:20 | #

Kumiko, I moved Thorn’s comment here because, as you note, this is where it belongs, if anywhere besides the trash.

Thorn is a long standing troll on behalf of Jews, a man dedicated to sucking Jewish cock. Hence, his new found “affinity for Russians” has everything and only to do with a Jewish strategy of tying to counter a European-Asian alliance.

He and his Jewish masters know that this alliance will crush the hegemony of his Jewish god, will not only put an end to their hegemony, but will put an end to his faggot, Jew sucking self.

He will only tactfully distance himself from Jews in an attempt to not be too obvious in his allegiance. But at bottom, Thorn is a man dedicated to sucking Jewish cock and that is what is behind his concern for Russians as White - i.e., he wants to see Jews as White too and mix them up with Russian interests as much as possible in order to play them off of a European-Asian alliance.

Sunday, January 10, 2016

Throwing Russians Under the Bus, Part 1


Majority Rights jumping the shark.

I have previously written about the despicable Silver’s contribution to the destruction of Majority Rights.  What’s going on in the rubble of MR land? They have an East Asian female (female - of course) - which, despite the Japanese-sounding anime name may well be that “Chinese Nationalist Maiden” creature haunting pro-White blogs in recent years - making such wonderful contributions such as this:

Read more>>

Kumiko is Japanse.

I am not against Russians, I wish them health, happiness and home - a sound and safe ethnostate.

However, looking at the map and history from an ethno-national standpoint, it appears as if the Russian Federation may be more of an empire than an ethnostate. Therefore, it is worth considering if they are occupying / controlling lands that should be the ethnostates of other peoples. If they have aggrandized land wrongly at other people’s expense, have killed and are exploiting people in those places, I see no obligation to stand by them in that over-reach, “no mater what”. And particularly not in as much as it expresses Jewish power and influence (which Thorn sucks).


Posted by Crime falls in Japan to post war low on Fri, 15 Jan 2016 13:22 | #


Japan Today, ‘No. of crimes in Japan falls to postwar low in 2015’ 15 Jan 2016:


The number of crimes in Japan in 2015 hit a postwar low, the National Police Agency said Thursday, citing an increase in security cameras as well as raised public awareness of crime prevention.

Overall penal code violations decreased 9.3% from the previous year to 1,099,048, falling below the previous record of 1,190,549 set in 1973, the agency said in a preliminary report.

All categories of crimes marked declines from 2014.

The number of thefts, which account for more than 70% of crimes in Japan, dropped to 807,605 from 897,259. Murders fell to 933 from 1,054 with fraud cases down to 39,439 from 41,523.

The crime clearance rate, or the ratio of cases solved by police to total reported crimes, improved to 32.5% from 30.6%, with the ratio for murder and other violent crimes rising to 72.3% from 68.2%, topping 70% for the first time in 16 years.

By age of those subject to police action, the number of juveniles aged between 14 and 19 sharply fell to 39,501 from 142,594 in 2002, when the total number of penal code violations peaked.

That of the elderly aged 65 or older, meanwhile, nearly doubled to 47,643 from the 2002 figure of 24,241, reflecting Japan’s graying society.


Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sat, 16 Jan 2016 04:20 | #

Interesting development, Daniel, but that fall in the crime rate could be because there are less young males in Japanese society, as the population seems to be contracting with an aim to go back to the level it was at in the 1860s or something. That’s not bad of course, every boom ought to be followed by a bust, and it’s better to let the air out of the population bubble slowly than to do it suddenly.

I see over at Thorn’s blog, Thorn (or whoever he’s co-writing it with?) is still trying to elicit some kind of angry response from me with his verbal attacks against East Asia as though I’m going to be offended. He’s also openly declared himself to be in the tank for Russia in all contexts, which would explain why the attacks are coming, and would also explain why the execution is so hamfisted. I’d also like to see at some point how he plans to explain or justify the fact that he is supporting Russia against himself, because it really just looks like he’s come down with a case of ‘opposite day’.

He asks why it is that Asians came to western countries. It’s easy, someone decided to build a ‘multiethnic empire’ and a collection of interlocking defence agreements based on utilising the skills and talents of an array of partners so that the Soviet Union could be contained during the Cold War or whatever other war they felt like having, and some enlightened people in Asia (and mercenary types also) found it lucrative and convenient to support the Anglo-American order after losing the Second World War. While it ostensibly was all about doing whatever Anglo-Americans wanted, the open world economic structure that was created to facilitate containment of the Soviet Union provided economic benefit to those who participated in that containment, and was wisely used to accelerate development of Asian economies. The ability of ‘job creators’ (or just high IQ people in general) to migrate from one place to another simply allowed people to get closer to the centre of the action. Of course, to some extent this logic is still playing out today with the TPP. If Thorn hasn’t read the article and comments on the TPP, he ought to.

Anglo-Saxon geostrategists have a storied history of asking other population groups to make Faustian pacts with them under certain circumstances, pacts which usually involve hurting Russia. I can’t imagine why that’s mystifying to Thorn at this stage. He only needs to know the military history of the UK to know that ‘Anglos are gonna Anglo’, and that usually it’s not a bad thing.


Posted by Thorn on Sat, 16 Jan 2016 17:19 | #

“I see over at Thorn’s blog, Thorn (or whoever he’s co-writing it with?)....”

For the record: Thorn is neither the owner nor a co-writer/contributor at EGI Notes. My interest in EGI Notes is that of readership only. The owner of EGI Notes is JWH a/k/a [Thorn gives a name but MR knows him as Sallis] used to be a regular contributor/commenter to

The main purpose of my post was to let you guys and gals know people in the alt right blogosphere are critiquing MR. Unfortunately for y’all the reviews aren’t very favorable. HEH! 


Posted by DanielS on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 02:48 | #

“I see over at Thorn’s blog, Thorn (or whoever he’s co-writing it with?)....”

For the record: Thorn is neither the owner nor a co-writer/contributor at EGI Notes. My interest in EGI Notes is that of readership only. The owner of EGI Notes is JWH a/k/a Michael [MR is withholding name - pen name is Sallis] used to be a regular contributor/commenter to

Thorn is neither the owner nor a co-writer/contributor at EGI Notes.

Perhaps not, but Thorn is a piece of shit troll who wants to suck Jewish cock. He has nothing constructive to say at Majorityrights and his only purpose here is to try to harass MR and to try to discredit it in any way that he might. However, he cannot, because he cannot even assimilate the skills to do so.

The Thornblossom remarks further:

The main purpose of my post was to let you guys and gals know people in the alt right blogosphere are critiquing MR. Unfortunately for y’all the reviews aren’t very favorable. HEH!

Oh really? Well let me turn attention then to “the alt right blogosphere”, i.e., Sallis, then.

I have never talked with [ ], a.k.a. “Ted Sallis”

I have not thought a great deal about him, but I will put forth what I know about him, as I understand him at present:

He left Majorityrights before I came here.

He went on and has published a few articles at Occidental Observer and even more at Counter Currents.

He is a genetecist or in some ancillary vocation of genetic science.

He worked at The Max Planck Institute and knows Frank Salter from there.

Without having made a study of his political outlook, I cannot vouch for where I agree or disagree with him; but the funny thing to me, generally, about whatever complaints that he may have with MR, and with me, is that I have tended to generally like his articles, as I recall them, finding them to be logical and sincerely motivated defense of European people.

Speaking out of hand, my criticisms would be things that he could easily correct, if he wanted to. He doesn’t seem to like my re-casting of the term and content of the term “the left”, to the “White left”, and he seems to be among the first to write articles doubling-down on casting “the left” as the enemy (I have criticized that on his part, and I still do); although content-wise, it seems that I can usually agree with most of what he says besides that difference on rubric. Along with that insistence on remaining in the right-wing box, or the “right-left is not a useful paradigm” box (yes, a no box-box of itself) he seems to be a bit stuck in a conservative mindset altogether. It’s a little disappointing and a minor frustration to me in regard to a guy who writes some good articles. Again, I tend to like his stuff; and he’s quite intelligent; quite logical.

It isn’t like Thorn, who there could be no point talking-to because he has no other motive than to disparage; because one might hope that constructive conversation could be had with Sallis, who seems to be acting in good faith. Maybe he is. Maybe he is operating under some false assumptions and reacting to them.

That would seem to require a bit of background, however.

Here is what jumped out to me with regard to Sallis’ motivation.

When GW and I were trying to propose an interview of Frank Salter, GW sought Sallis’  advice because Sallis knew Salter from the Max Planck Inst.

Sallis fired-back an angry e-mail, saying that he would implore Salter to not talk to Majorityrights.

GW was surprised and asked me what I thought. Knowing far less about this man than GW, my guesses could only be more wild as to what his misgivings might be.

MR is too “anti-Semitic”? That could be a motivation - don’t know. Or was it that MR is not too anti-Semitic, but Salter can’t risk his professional reputation because we’re too blatant in our position? Plausible. That could be a reason, but then why would Salter talk to Red Ice, who are not only anti-Semitc but pro-Hitler, which neither MR nor Salter is - Salter has been careful and clear about that.

What is emerging as my best guess is that Sallis (who is at least part Italian/American) is still sore at MR from its days when there were quite a few Nordicists here, such as Desmond Jones, et al. People like that could be caustically anti-Southern and Eastern European; and especially because I am half Italian and half Eastern European, I can understand the frustration of being attacked and vilified by people who you are treating as being on your side and are trying to help.

That’s just a guess, but why it is my guess is because when I was talking with GW and Per about an author named McCullough (I think that’s how you spell it), GW mentioned that he had been discussed at MR at one time but Sallis freaked-out big time because he found McCullough to be too Nordicist and disparaging of Southern Europeans; and that “this kind of perspective was one of the major problems with the struggle.”

Funny thing, I can relate to Sallis’ frustration - though I don’t perhaps feel it quite so acutely, being half “Northern European”, I still don’t think Northern Europeans should throw Southern Europeans under the bus - not only a sentiment, but a term that I’ve used exactly.

Always being conscientious to include all people of European extraction in my EGI defense group thus, it is mildly disconcerting to be falsely accused by him of “throwing Russians under the bus”  - which I am not doing.

What I am saying is, while Sallis may have had a legitimate grievance with MR at one time for its being anti-Southern or Eastern European, he should not be against it for those reasons now: because it has taken on a more distinctly ethnonationalist direction as opposed to the Nordicist/or strictly NW European position it once trafficked-in more frequently.

Nevertheless, that of itself would not explain his beef with Silver, who claimed to be Southern European mixed with Middle Eastern parentage.  Lets set-aside the fact that if Sallis is sincere about White/European interests then he should recognize that Silver is not sincere about European interests - he was no less a troll than Thorn.

But none of this explains Sallis defending Dr. Frank Salter, or those who hold fast to Salter’s EGI framework which apparently sees Italians and Greeks in the same family of genetic interests as Jews and other Middle Easterners and clearly distinct from Northern European EGI.

If Sallis’ grievance is with Nordicism then, why be so defensive of Salter?

Or perhaps he does not want to equip us with Salter, thinking that we are Northwestern European bigots?

That could be, because he is quite defensive of Russians, alleging that I am throwing them under the bus.

But I am not throwing Russians under the bus and I am not against them.  I am considering the strategy of looking at their huge Federation as problematic from an ethnonationalist point of view; and considering the Asian point of view on its vast expanse, empathizing with it as a part of a program for what I see as a necessary alliance with Asians.

I have not done more than give a cursory glance at his blog and I barely feel obliged to address charges that I am inviting China into Europe, when in fact I am considering, just considering at this stage, a discussion of the possibility, among other possibilities, of using Asian regiments among others in border garrisons. The idea, at any rate, is to protect European EGI - which Sallis purports to be concerned about.

I am told his blog has posts making negative accusations about MR. The bits that I saw briefly were blatantly false, with little or no attempt to be accurate to what we are saying here and so I am not inclined to bother reading through, though I might later, I don’t know.

However, Sallis is not Thorn. From what I know of his articles at Counter Currents, Sallis has half a brain. If he wants to come here and discuss things, criticize, offer suggestions, I am open to that. If he wants to talk with us in a podcast, I would welcome that too. He should see that he should not have a beef with us after all.  Either that or we will find that he is a rat.​


Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 08:07 | #

Thorn on Sat, 16 Jan 2016 22:19 wrote:

My interest in EGI Notes is that of readership only. The owner of EGI Notes is JWH [Sallis]

Okay, that makes things more clear. I wasn’t able to recognise that the initials were those of a past contributor, since unfortunately no one provided me with that context.

Thorn on Sat, 16 Jan 2016 22:19 wrote:

The main purpose of my post was to let you guys and gals know people in the alt right blogosphere are critiquing MR. Unfortunately for y’all the reviews aren’t very favorable. HEH!

You have one person who is clearly a disgruntled past contributor. In his lastest post he is ‘now becoming serious’ by:

1. Asking ‘who would you support’ and presenting the dichotomy of supporting the USSR on one hand or the PRC on the other.

The answer to that question is already known, Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford supplied that answer. In the circumstances that had come to exist at the time, that was the best possible choice that could have been made.

2. He also is fulminating against the Anglo-Japanese Alliance from around 1914, the terms which were laid out by Japan at that time, which I of course 100% agree with, was basically a coded message that either the British Empire would allow Japanese people to migrate into British colonies in the Eastern hemisphere, or otherwise ‘it would be unsafe’. Uneven economic development caused by previous accumulation in a competitive world can often be pretty unsafe for many people. And unsafe it was, as Britain first did not allow co-operation to take place, and then secondly the British Empire chose to side with the United States and its interests, as well as the interests of international finance in the City of London in the Second World War that was coming. Realistically, by the time of 1935, it was abundantly obvious to everyone that it would be war. All other roads were excluded because the BUF was unfortunately prevented from being able to make the internal structural changes to British society which would have been required to move Britain into the Axis camp.

Is that supposed to be Japan’s fault? If Sallis is so upset, maybe he should be asking why it had to be that way, why Britain chose to join the Allies rather than Axis, and he should not be asking why an Asian nation which espoused pan-Asian ideology was trying to create the circumstances for the realisation of pan-Asian goals.

ALSO: Given the rhetoric that he is throwing around, I wouldn’t be surprised if Sallis will next declare that Adolf Hitler and the entire general staff of the German Army in NS Germany, as well as Benito Mussolini and the whole PNF, were somehow magically ‘race traitors’ to the European peoples because they chose to work with or enable the following militant groups of people against certain European groups:

Japan, Korea (yes, large sections of Korean society fought in the IJA and collaborated with Axis), the Burmese National Army, the Indian National Army, Indonesian National Army, Young Malays Union, Thailand, the Philippines, Formosa (non-KMT Han in Taiwan and Taiwanese aboriginals), Mongolia, Crimean Tatars, Hmong tribes, Khmer Issarak (Cambodian and Khmer), Cambodia, Laos, Cochinchina (later part of Vietnam), Annam (later part of Vietnam), Tonkin (later part of Vietnam), Manchuria, Tibet, Assam, Bengal.

I can’t wait to see the rationalising or perhaps the spinning that will happen next.


Posted by DanielS on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 08:18 | #

The answer to that question is already known

While Sallis apparently bemoans the Soviet sufferings in the example of the Sino-Soviet border conflict of 1969, the normal answer/position for anyone who cares about Europeans and European EGI: with regard to which side to take in the Sino-Soviet conflict is of course the Chinese side.


Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 08:38 | #

DanielS on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 13:18 wrote:

While Sallis apparently bemoans the Soviet sufferings in the example of the Sino-Soviet border conflict of 1969, the normal answer/position for anyone who cares about Europeans and European EGI: with regard to which side to take in the Sino-Soviet conflict is of course the Chinese side.

This is like a case of chess vs. checkers. If you are playing checkers (which apparently Sallis is doing) then you’ll scream, “Russians are white and therefore they should be blindly supported no matter what they do, because their skin is very white!”

Or, you could play chess and realise that the Sino-Soviet split was one of the most exploitable things that ever happened for people who were struggling against the Soviet Union.

With regards to Japan, ‘coincidentally’ (actually it is no coincidence), Japan immediately sought to re-establish diplomatic relations with China in 1972 at the same time that the United States was doing it, and by 1976 Japanese investment in China was rising, and by 1978 Nitchu Heiwa Yuko Jouyaku was signed, while the USSR was panicking. Japan benefited from that choice.

For the United States and for countries in Europe, the geostrategic benefit of maintaining the Cold War as a three-way struggle (West-Aligned vs. Soviets vs. China) instead of a two-way struggle (West-Aligned vs. Red Flags), is just obvious, and the business opportunities were also obvious.

In the end, who failed and who survived? The Soviet Union is the one that ended up in total economic collapse. And it indeed ought to have collapsed.


Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 18:42 | #

Sallis is back again with [1]another post in which he believes he’s ‘fisking’ MR, and one where [2]he accuses Daniel of just about any and everything imaginable. So let’s see what’s in store this time!

I have tried to cut through to the elements that I think are most in need of correction or questioning, rather than doing some kind of line by line response. All quotes are from those two links as they appeared at 2330 today:

Sallis wrote:

That’s right. I’m clearly no damn good.  How about removing my EGI PDF from your anti-White Yellow Supremacist website?  How many goddamn times do I have to ask, Madame Butterfly?

I’m not aware of any ‘yellow supremacy’ going on here. Furthermore, this is the second time you’ve asked me to remove it, if I count your first request as being the one that was sent via Thorn in a comment here that has since been removed.

But wait, you don’t know who Thorn is, I thought?

Sallis wrote (emphasis added):

It seems like the geniuses at MR have discerned that I am not “Thorn” (whoever the hell that is) – and only because “Thorn” himself told them.

So you don’t know Thorn, but he’s carrying messages for you? I don’t know whether to marvel at Thorn’s ability to find and latch onto anyone who is criticising Majorityrights, or whether to marvel at your ability to deputise a guy who you don’t even know.

Sallis wrote:

By the way, anyone familiar with my work knows full well I do not conflate race to skin color.

I know you don’t, but I was if anything only doing to you what you’ve been doing to my words for this entire exchange. I have a sense of humour too!

Sallis wrote:

Or you can play “chess” and realize that the Yellow Peril is the ultimate long-term threat to the White race,

I’m quite flattered, since it is true that Asians—being as we are—have been the only people so far to have given Western Europeans a run for their money (both literally and metaphorically) on anything, and we are presently the only people on this planet with the potential to do so again.

Of course, because of the way that the world has developed, we can’t spend our time constantly trying to kill each other for frivolous reasons, when co-operation in areas of shared interest is so much more lucrative. The threat to the integrity of European population groups is a serious threat with implications that stretch beyond Europe’s borders, and so it’s only natural that many Asian people would have an interest in working with Europeans. I have a feeling that you won’t quote this paragraph when/if you respond to me, but surprise me and do it.

It’s like when powerful mafia families decide to stop fighting each other. It’s understandable that some people may have fears and uncertainties, but what you do is create economic frameworks which reduce the propensity for war between the participants.

Sallis wrote:

Don’t seem to remember either individual (Adolf or Benito) proposing Chinese colonization of White lands so that White faglets can be protected by buck-toothed, flat-chested Chinese girls with guns.

I don’t seem to recall anyone at Majorityrights arguing in favour of Chinese colonisation of white lands either. Unless you happen to be talking about ‘Russian’ so-called ‘land’, which is just ridiculous.

Sallis wrote:

And I note that Hitler quashed von Ribbentrop’s triumphalist announcement of the Fall of Singapore (which Hitler regretted)

Yet it fell anyway, much like everything else around it was going to fall. Oh, sorry, I meant, rise, it was rising because the actual people who lived on that land were working together to deter aggression from a ridiculous colonial elite which had de facto placed itself in the service of international finance at a key conjuncture in history.

The UK had a choice, it made the wrong choice that time.

Sallis wrote:

The alliance with Japan was due to the UK’s refusal to see reason,

Yes, the UK’s leadership deliberately and consciously siding with international motherfucking Jews, Soviets, and Americans led by Franklin D. Roosevelt, when given a chance to choose otherwise, does tend to cause a Hitler to want to look for friends further afield.

And given that Japanese fascist ideology—more accurately ‘Japanese Right-Socialism’—had been developing since at least the late 1920s, it was pretty easy to find that friend.

Sallis wrote:

the crafty nips stabbed Adolf in the back by signing a non-aggression treaty with the USSR,

Or, we ‘craftily’ realised that after the undeclared border war in 1938—1939 in Manchuria, it was going to be impossible to actually win against the Soviet Union unless Japan could first carve out and secure an economic zone to the south, the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, which necessitated the removal of the United States Navy and the myriad British installations in that region, so that the liberal international cunts couldn’t just shut down all of Japan’s productive capacity in a day.

The fight for the south, was the fight to attain and integrate a supra-national body that would be capable of eventually taking on the Soviet Union with reasonable chances of success. Japan signed a non-aggression treaty and went south first, for the same reason that Germany signed a non-aggression treaty and went west first.

The intention of Japan was absolutely to violate the non-aggression treaty, as soon as the objectives in the south were completed. Unfortunately it was there that all of the problems would manifest.

Sallis wrote:

but - again, of course - expected German support after Pearl Harbor (which they got, proving again that Euro-Asian alliances are for the benefit of Asians only).

Actually, here’s a whole article about the number of ways in which Germany was carrying out a disproportionate number of self-serving actions, many of which actually impeded the progress toward fulfilling strategic objectives in the war: [Link]

Sallis wrote:

Further, both sides in both world wars made use of colored auxiliaries;

Yes, welcome to life.

Sallis wrote:

both sides were at fault,

Are you fucking kidding me?

Sallis wrote:

and both are worthy of condemnation, you mendacious Asiatic.

Hahaha, wow, you are seriously drawing an equivalence between the two sides? Are you all seeing this?

Sallis wrote:

By the way, one can make all sorts of excuses for arrogant Japanese behavior, re: 1914 and English overseas colonies.

We don’t make excuses for being arrogant, it’s part of being arrogant.

Sallis wrote:

I can’t wait for the “spin and rationalizations” for the protests of Asian nations, including Japan, for America’s Asian exclusion acts.

There is no spin or rationalisation. If you are prancing around in Asia acting like you own the place, for example, then you should expect some international trolling to be directed your way.

Sallis wrote:

Oh, you see, White lands are obligated

Nope, you are not forced to say ‘yes’ to every request made by other countries!

Sallis wrote:

Perhaps, gook, we’ll know what the “right choice” was when the final information is at hand.

We already do know what the ‘right choice’ is. The USSR was destroyed, and then it degenerated into a capitalist restoration federation staffed by a collection of bloated ex-Stalinist thugs, who we will also systematically destroy.

Sallis wrote:

Me, I think Nixon should have agreed to let the USSR nuke China.

Too bad for you that Richard Nixon was too much of an antisemite to allow the humongous filthy Russian-Jew USSR to get away with anything like that. Just kidding, I doubt that Nixon’s foreign policy preferences were motived by anti-semitism, but he achieved objectively antisemitic results in 1972, so it’s marvellous.

Sallis wrote:

If the White world ends up buried under a Yellow mudslide

I’ll take “shit that absolutely won’t happen” for 800 dollars, please. Japan, China, and South Korea are literally giving out free money to South East Asians in ODA and FDI so as to create jobs there and prevent them from exiting their countries, and you are hyperventilating about the tiny to negligible number of business-orientated and well-educated Asians who are inside the western world right now?

I don’t know if you fucking noticed, but there’s a literal swarm of crazed Arabs and Africans rampaging around in continental Europe right now like diseased gibbering monkeys, and you are meanwhile complaining about Asians?

Sallis wrote:

Therefore, prudence and plain common sense (or as Danny puts it, “half a brain”) would strongly suggest that you do not publicly post any information that is not already online someplace.  In other words, nothing new. So, yes, my MR debates with the likes of Desmond Jones and Silver are a matter of public record (and a waste of digital pixels for all the good it did); on the other hand, my private correspondence with GW, or anyone else, is not, and should not be, a matter of public record.

And yet it is a matter of public record: [Link]

At the end of that comment on 01 Apr 2015, DanielS apparently makes reference to the Salter interview issue that you’re talking about. That only took me five minutes to find, and it clearly was indeed a matter a public record.

Sallis wrote:

If you guys post intimate personal details on public forums

Ever since I’ve been brought on to Majorityrights, I’ve done everything to ensure that such things cannot happen. In fact, your supposed friend who you don’t know, Thorn, actually tried to post your real name in a comment here, and we decided to censor that attempt.

Why? Because despite everything, we adhere the basic principle of trying not to be leaky.

Sallis wrote:

The “movement” claims that they are “in a war to the death with ZOG” and they agonize over “NSA surveillance” and then they proceed to use “movement” blogs, websites, and meetings as the equivalent of social media, spewing forth personal information with all the enthusiasm of a blushing schoolgirl.

I’ve spoken out against this trend numerous times as well. In the context of Majorityrights, the transition to using HTTPS, the refusal to take on any advertising CDNs, and a refusal to integrate any social media APIs, a refusal to use Disqus, and even a refusal to use Cloudflare, along with a refusal to even use Google Analytics, are all decisions that were made by me in light of the fact that I really do believe that words should be backed up by at least basic actions.

Majorityrights is possibly the only ethno-nationalist site where if you choose to make a post anonymously, it is actually anonymous.

We’re also the only ones who have a privacy policy which allows users to request removal of personal information capable of identifying a user to be removed if it should happen by some unfortunate accident to become exposed and the person had not intended it to be exposed.

Sallis wrote:

Silver screeching about “shiteaters”

I’ve asked Daniel about that, to see what he knows of Silver. He says that he drove Silver away eons ago.

Sallis wrote:

J Richards’ crude anti-Semitic cartoons

J Richards is gone and he’s never coming back. Most of his really questionable webdesign choices are also gone!

Sallis wrote:

I’ll pass on the invitation to a podcast.

Oh come on, podcasts are given an SHA-1 checksum before they get uploaded to the site, so we can’t re-edit the podcast after it’s been put up even if we wanted to. We’re completely transparent.

Don’t be a chicken!


Posted by DanielS on Mon, 18 Jan 2016 05:57 | #

Ok, it is clear that I gave Sallis an overly charitable altercast. Much too charitable, in fact.

He plainly ignores what I am saying, the facts here and simply dumps false accusations and attributions on me/us without any concern for truth, but only for the purpose of trying to distract from and discredit what I/ we say at Majorityrights.

He tries, but the truth, which he will not confront by speaking with us directly, is plain for anybody who looks at what has been said here, who has said it, and in what sequence.

I am forced to change my assessment of Sallis: I no longer respect him as a sincere actor in concern of European interests.

If it were the case that he was sincere, he could not render the conclusions that he does, say the things that he does, and refuse to talk with us in order to arrive at a correct understanding.

Not only do I no longer trust his judgment and assessment, but I do not recommend that others treat his motives as sincere - particularly on the Jewish issue.

In confirmation of what Kumiko says, there are concrete accusations that he uses to distract, which I will quickly disabuse for anybody who bothers to look at his chimera:

First, he charges that I exposed his privacy unnecessarily. In fact, Thorn had posted a comment with Sallis’ real name and I took care to take it out and replace it with his pen name - Ted Sallis, where I used his name at all.

What I did expose and would do again, was not the email but his ill motivated malice expressed in an email in concern to Majorityrights, i.e. for some reason (no good reason that we could tell) that he would try to prevent Salter from speaking with us.

I took some small issue with that, made it public long ago, and do readily again make known his effort to dissuade Salter from speaking with us, because there is no good reason why Salter should not speak with us. To try to prevent that was a disservice to advocacy of European EGI and unnecessary. Particularly given the fact that Salter is not so sensitive about his reputation or concerned that his interviewing interlocutors share his platform so as not to speak with Red Ice - he did speak with them, despite the fact that they traffic in Holocaust denial and the denial that Hitler/Nazi Germany could do anything particularly wrong - positions that Salter is careful to reject, seeing these claims as “unnecessary to ethnonationalism” - a position with which I concur.

As for my reserving epithets, profanity and vitriol for particular people, in places they deserve it, yes - I’ll do that with post modern prerogative, a means of coherence that will not leave us rigidly defenseless in adherence to tradition and protocol while our enemies will get down, dirty and play unfair with us. Rather, I will treat people as adults and when they need to know simply and clearly, without unmerited attention to detail and elaboration, that someone like Thorn is not acting in good faith to arrive at the truth and defense of White people, but is just trying to subvert our position (just as I now believe Sallis to be doing), I will make the quick work of him that he deserves done: Thorn is not strictly concerned with the interests of European peoples; he wants to subvert our defense - in shorthand terms, he is a man wants to suck Jewish cock. I don’t use such vulgarisms lightly and commonly, but Thorn has harassed me for years, with an aim toward subverting the most important, grounded defense of European peoples. Thorn is operating in Jewish interests.

Next, Sallis talks about Richards and Silver as if I am in unanimity with them, and as if MR remains in unanimity with them. We had to distance ourselves from Richards years ago because he came unhinged in speculation, particularly about the Jew thing. As for Silver, he was a troll who was antagonistic to me and antagonistic to true White interests. His whole angle was to try to associate MR with a ‘moderate and tolerant” position toward other races, with regard to Jews and other middle Easterners particularly; and to associate White advocacy with a pro-Hitler, pro-Christian position. I had to drive him away. He would not leave me alone for not accepting those positions.

On a more significant level of how it is looking now, Sallis has been spinning a very subtle yarn to say that yes, Jews are White, but they do not identify as White. However, while he will acknowledge that Jews, particularly organized Jews, can be destructive to Whites, and that they do not identify as White, what he seems to be doing with this idea that “Jews are White” is to be creating enough theoretical ambiguity, if not confusion, in order to provide for a way in which at least partial Jews can wangle their way into circles identifying as White. The rest can potentially be collaborative advisers “in good faith” from a distance, I suppose. If you don’t already know about how letting Jews into your circle ends up, you should know (try reading Mullins’ The Biological Jew).

On a broad scale in that regard now, Sallis wants Jews and Russian Whites to be confused as one, so that he can use “Russian advocacy” to try to head-off the European / Asian alliance. He not only tried to say that I was trying to provide for Chinese and other Asian colonization of White lands (rather than what I was saying, i.e., better Asians than blacks in disputed territories; and Asians in Asian territories), but that I was “throwing Russians under the bus” - and not that I was disputing the borders of Russia, aggrandized at the expense of other peoples; with a keen eye as to where these expansions and exploitations express Jewish interests and the interests of internationalists sell-outs. As the White Left, we do not see fit to approve and stand-by exploitation by any elite “objectivist”, internationalist sell-outs, not Russian ones either, nor do we stand-by undue exploitation of other peoples, let alone ours.


Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:11 | #

R[ ] should guard against so easily getting his panties in a twist.

Not one square inch of Russian territory will be given to the yellow hordes unless it is over Putin’s dead body.

Silver is a kike with keyboard.  Why should R[ ] care if Silver facetiously accuses him of eating shit unless…there is just enough truth in the accusation to hurt? 

Northern Europeans are racially superior to all other branches of the White race and hence would be fools to breed en masse with those other branches.  Nordicism is only good sense on the part of Northern Europeans.  If R[ ], his panties, or anyone else has a problem with that, that is tough shit for them - the shiteaters!  Lulz


Posted by DanielS on Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:50 | #

One thing at a time, CC.

R[ ] should guard against so easily getting his panties in a twist.

With regard to the name thing, I blanked it this time (at least) because I don’t know if he willingly reveals it at this point. Why would he call himself Ted Sallis otherwise? Maybe he cares, maybe he doesn’t care, but I don’t know.

Not one square inch of Russian territory will be given to the yellow hordes unless it is over Putin’s dead body.

My position is that it’s not my problem. Cooperation with Asia is the better option than trying to protect the Russian Federated Empire - which is propositional by definition anyway (in addition to being how much Jewy?), not White by definition. Not my problem anymore than say, if some Western leader, operating in propositional and collaborative Jewish interests, took over vast territories and nations of native others, exploited and killed them, while allowing long established if not native European territories to go to hell. Its Putin’s problem; while Native European territories and consolidated territories established as White in the America’s and Australia/NZ are our problem. I’ll grant, without dispute, that Western Russia - “Muscovy” - is native Russian; in the West, up to the borders of Belarus and Ukraine (I wouldn’t endorse a hot war method of achieving greater - though correctly increased - autonomy for those nations). As a hypothesis Eastward, I won’t dispute Russia’s claim up to The Urals; certainly not up to the 55th Meridian East; the 85th Meridian would include Russia’s third and fourth largest cities; and to begin quite charitably, I would not contest their reach to include Lake Baikal, i.e., up to around the 111th Meridian. Though really, these places apparently start to become more of a natural Asian habitat, at least after that point. As I’ve said before, there is some ambiguity in those areas. Somewhere around Kazakhstan a proto-Asian-European people (both) evolved. I’d handle disputes with increasingly sovereign enclaves and finally sovereign ethno nations where possible.

Silver is a kike with keyboard.  Why should R[ ] care if Silver facetiously accuses him of eating shit unless…there is just enough truth in the accusation to hurt?

LOL. Silver said he wouldn’t be surprised if he were part Jewish. He refused to identify as White even when offered the altercast by dint of being “European enough.” Besides saying that he had an affinity for Anatolia and the Levant, he was constantly giving bum steers and acting like a Jewish middleman. A kike with a keyboard, quite possibly partly enough, an entire cunt with a keyboard, definitely.

Northern Europeans are racially superior to all other branches of the White race and hence would be fools to breed en masse with those other branches.  Nordicism is only good sense on the part of Northern Europeans.  If R[ ], his panties, or anyone else has a problem with that, that is tough shit for them - the shiteaters!  Lulz

It’s probably the case as with all races and subcategories that they are better in some ways and not in others.

When I see Northern European women walking around with niggers, and Northern European men making every cucked excuse in the world as to why it is not a problem, or even “good”, that is not a reflection of superiority. And when I see them writing-off Southern and Eastern European mudsharks as not their concern, that does not express superiority either.

If they don’t have the judgment to cooperate with their European neighbors and allow them to serve buffering and cooperative functions, but rather war with them, try to exploit or throw them under the bus, that is not superiority.


Posted by 55th Meridian East on Mon, 18 Jan 2016 20:59 | #


Posted by 111th Meridian East on Mon, 18 Jan 2016 21:16 | #

Includes Novosibirsk & Ekataninbourg, Russia’s 3rd (1,473,754) & 4th (1,349,772) largest cities within its bounds as well as Irkutsk (587,891) and Krasnoyarsk (1,035,528).


Posted by Between the 55th and 111th Meridian on Mon, 18 Jan 2016 21:25 | #

Area between the 55th and 111th Meridians


Posted by 85th includes Novosibirsk & Yekaterinburg on Mon, 18 Jan 2016 22:22 | #

85th Meridian includes Novosibirsk & Ekataninbourg, Russia’s 3rd (1,473,754) & 4th (1,349,772) largest cities within its bounds.


Posted by Yakov Sverdlov on Mon, 18 Jan 2016 22:35 | #

Statue of Yakov Sverdlov in Ekataninbourg


Posted by 111th Meridian with major cities on Tue, 19 Jan 2016 05:12 | #

The 111th Meridian passes through the Chinese city, Hohhot.

In Russia, it is to the East of Lake Baikal.

Vladivastok (592,034)  and Khabarovsk (577,441) are the largest Russian cities to the East of that Meridian.


Posted by East of 111th Meridian, more cities on Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:08 | #

Vladivostok, Primorsky Krai, 592,034

Khabarovsk, Khabarovsk Krai 577,441

Chita, Zabaykalsky Krai 324,444,_Zabaykalsky_Krai

Yakutsk, Sakha Republic 269,601

Komsomolsk-on-Amur Khabarovsk Krai 263,906

Blagoveshchensk, Amur Oblast 214,390

Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Sakhalin Oblast 181,728

Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, Kamchatka Krai, 179,780

Nakhodka, Primorsky Krai 159,719

Ussuriysk, Primorsky Krai, 158,004

Artyom, Primorsky Krai 102,603,_Russia

Magadan, Magadan Oblast 95,982

Birobidzhan, Jewish Autonomous Oblast 75,413

Belogorsk, Amur Oblast 68,249,_Amur_Oblast

Neryungri, Sakha Republic 61,747

Svobodny, Amur Oblast 58,778,_Amur_Oblast

Arsenyev, Primorsky Krai 56,750

Krasnokamensk, Zabaykalsky Krai 55,666,_Zabaykalsky_Krai


Posted by Strategic location Birobidzhan on Thu, 21 Jan 2016 05:40 | #

Strategic location Birobidzhan, Jewish autonomous Oblask.

It conveniently protrudes, gerrymandering to border on Khabarovsk, the second largest city in the Russian Far East, after Vladivostok; as of the 2010 Census, Khabarovsk having a population was 577,441 - and sea access:

Amur River

The Amur River (Even: Тамур, Tamur; Russian: река́ Аму́р, IPA: [ɐˈmur]) or Heilong Jiang (Chinese: 黑龙江; pinyin: Hēilóng Jiāng, “Black Dragon River”; Manchu: ᠰᠠᡥᠠᠯᡳᠶᠠᠨ
ᡠᠯᠠ; Möllendorff: Sahaliyan Ula; Abkai: Sahaliyan Ula, “Black Water”) is the world’s tenth longest river, forming the border between the Russian Far East and Northeastern China (Inner Manchuria).

The river rises in the hills of western Manchuria at the confluence of its two major affluents, the Shilka River and the Ergune (or Argun) River, at an elevation of 303 metres (994 ft). It flows east forming the border between China and Russia, and slowly makes a great arc to the southeast for about 400 kilometres (250 mi), receiving many tributaries and passing many small towns. At Huma, it is joined by a major tributary, the Huma River. Afterwards it continues to flow south until between the cities of Blagoveschensk (Russia) and Heihe (China), it widens significantly as it is joined by the Zeya River, one of its most important tributaries.

History and context

In many historical references these two geopolitical entities are known as Outer Manchuria (Russian Manchuria) and Inner Manchuria, respectively. The Chinese province of Heilongjiang on the south bank of the river is named after it, as is the Russian Amur Oblast on the north bank. The name Black River (sahaliyan ula) was used by the Manchu and the Ta-tsing Empire who regarded this river as sacred.[citation needed]

The Amur River is an important symbol of, and geopolitical factor in, Chinese–Russian relations. The Amur was especially important in the period following the Sino–Soviet political split in the 1960s.[citation needed]

For many centuries the Amur Valley was populated by the Tungusic (Evenki, Solon, Ducher, Jurchen, Nanai, Ulch) and Mongol (Daur) people, and, near its mouth, by the Nivkhs. For many of them, fishing in the Amur and its tributaries was the main source of their livelihood. Until the 17th century, these people were not known to the Europeans, and little known to the Han Chinese, who sometimes collectively described them as the Wild Jurchens. The term Yupi Dazi (“Fish-skin Tatars”) was used for the Nanais and related groups as well, owing to their traditional clothes made of fish skins.

Goldi village along Amur, north of Khabarovsk

Russian Cossack expeditions led by Vassili Poyarkov and Yerofey Khabarov explored the Amur and its tributaries in 1643–44 and 1649–51, respectively. The Cossacks established the fort of Albazin on the upper Amur, at the site of the former capital of the Solons.

The Amur River (under its Manchu name, Saghalien Oula) and its tributaries on a 1734 map by Jean Baptiste Bourguignon d’Anville, based upon maps of Jesuits in China. Albazin is shown as Jaxa, the old (Ming) site of Aigun as Aihom and the later, Qing Aigun, as Saghalien Oula.

At the time, the Manchus were busy with conquering the region; but a few decades later, during the Kangxi era, they turned their attention to their north-Manchurian backyard. Aigun was reestablished near the supposed Ming site in about 1683–84, and a military expeditions was sent upstream to dislodge the Russians, whose Albazin establishment deprived the Manchu rulers from the tribute of sable pelts that the Solons and Daurs of the area would supply otherwise. Albazin fell during a short military campaign in 1685. The hostilities were concluded in 1689 by the Treaty of Nerchinsk, which left the entire Amur valley, from the convergence of the Shilka and the Ergune downstream, in Chinese hands.

The Russian proselytization of Orthodox Christianity to the indigenous peoples along the Amur River was viewed as a threat by the Qing.

The Amur region remained a relative backwater of the Qing Empire for the next century and a half, with Aigun being practically the only major town on the river. Russians re-appeared on the river in the mid-19th century, forcing the Manchus to yield all lands north of the river to the Russian Empire by the Treaty of Aigun (1858). Lands east of the Ussury and the lower Amur were acquired by Russia as well, by the Convention of Peking (1860).

The acquisition of the lands on the Amur and the Ussury was followed by the migration of Russian settlers to the region and the construction of such cities as Blagoveshchensk and, later, Khabarovsk.



Posted by Putin welcomes Jews to Russia on Thu, 21 Jan 2016 09:26 | #

Putin Welcomes Jews to Russia. Geo-strategic aims evident.

Kantor expresses concern of persecution in host Europe. Putin welcomes them to flee back to Russia

The president of the European Jewish Congress, Moshe Kantor said the number of Jews fleeing Europe is on the rise.


“The situation with the Jews in Europe is the worst it has been since the end of the Second World War,” said Kantor. “The Jews are again in fear and a Jewish exodus from Europe is quite real. There are more Jews fleeing France, which is considered very secure, than from civil-war-torn Ukraine.”


“Let them come here,” said Putin. “They emigrated from here under Soviet Union, but now they can come back.”



Posted by Eastern Europe defending Western civilizaiton on Wed, 17 Feb 2016 02:34 | #

As it is able to maintain its ethno-states, perhaps in an Intermarium coalition that staves-off Eastern and Western imperialism, East Europe can become they keystone to defending Western civilization

TNO, ‘Eastern Europe “Defender of Civilization” 16 Feb 2016:

There is little doubt that within the very near future, Eastern Europe will take on the mantle of defender of European civilization, and, ultimately, the European heartland which will serve as a homeland and regeneration point for the European people, according to a new article on the Project Nova Europa website.

Eastern Europe “Defender of Civilization”

There is little doubt that within the very near future, Eastern Europe will take on the mantle of defender of European civilization, and, ultimately, the European heartland which will serve as a homeland and regeneration point for the European people, according to a new article on the Project Nova Europa website.

The Project Nova Europa website is part of the Nova Europa movement, which seeks to offer a solution to the impending crisis facing white people all over the world by creating a European homeland, or ethnostate.

Titled “Eastern Europe Comes into Focus,” the article goes on to point out that in the face of the mass nonwhite invasion of Europe, the reactions of the Eastern European nations has been dramatically different to those of Western Europe.

“Eastern Europe is, as predicted in Nova Europa, rapidly coming to the fore as a bastion for the preservation of European civilization. For this, we can ironically thank western European liberals and Angela Merkel in particular, who, for reasons of their own, have decided to dramatically accelerate the nonwhite invasion of Europe,” it starts off by saying.

“As pointed out in Nova Europa, Western Europe, for the last thirty years, has been steadily taking in an increasing number of Third World immigrants, driven by their deliberately race-blind worldview.

“The same process has been underway in the US ever since the 1965 Immigration Act, and shortly after that, in Australia as well, where immigration policies were deliberately shifted away from their previously European origins to allow mass Third World immigration.
READ The Antithesis of Apartheid

“This steady stream of Third World immigration has been much like the proverbial ‘frog in the boiling water’ analogy—where, as the theory goes, a frog in a pot of water which is slowly heated up is cooked before it realizes it is in trouble, having steadily adjusted to the gradual temperature change.

“The parallel being that Europeans—and Americans—have gradually adjusted to Third World immigration to the point where they now stand at the point of becoming minorities in their own countries.

“Eastern Europe has, for a number of reasons, been largely spared this process: firstly, due to the fact that until 1990 they were locked down behind the Iron Curtain, and secondly, because the richer west of Europe offered better pickings for the Third Worlders.

“The sudden mass invasion of Europe which started in 2015 when Merkel officially opened Germany’s doors has disturbed this frog in the boiling water scenario. Now, no longer is the water slowly heating up, but it is suddenly scalding.

“Eastern Europe has reacted as one would expect all healthy life forms to react: with horror at the thought of being boiled alive, or, in real terms, being overrun by the Third World within a generation (as Germany seems intent on doing).

“It is the Eastern European nations which have built the fences to keep out the invaders.


Posted by problem of manning Russia on Wed, 16 Mar 2016 22:27 | #

Putin Country

Some interesting insights into Russia, even if by a liberal American correspondent: Ann Garrels talks about events from the Soviet era in the early 1980’s to the present day in Russia, with a special focus on the Chelyabinsk region - a remote industrial region (on the border of Kazakhstan) which suffered particularly after the collapse of the Soviet Union; but which remains important to Russia in particular as the seat of a significant part of its nuclear weapons arsenal. It bounced back under Putin and like most of Russia, remains quite loyal to him despite his corruption; and what is particularly noticeable in that region - a return to some KGB style clamp-downs on the population.

The most relevant point of the interview for this thread, however, was Garrels remark that Russia was going to have a great deal of difficulty manning the vast territories of its Federation.

Radioactive contamination:


Posted by Armenian / Azerbaijani conflict on Mon, 04 Apr 2016 14:28 | #

Armenian / Azerbaijan border conflict

Between 1 and 2 April, heavy fighting along the Nagorno-Karabakh frontline left 18 Armenian and 12 Azerbaijani soldiers dead. Two civilians,including a 12-year-old Armenian child, also died. During the clashes, an Azeri military helicopter was shot down and an Azeri tank was damaged.

Armenia is apparently a Russian Federation proxy in this war.


Posted by Map of Armenia / Azerbaijan conflict on Sun, 10 Apr 2016 12:54 | #

Map of Armenia / Azerbaijan conflict areas and front


Posted by Frozen Conflict: Armenians / Azerbaijanis on Mon, 11 Apr 2016 17:35 | #

The World Weekly, “A long-frozen conflict in the South Caucasus comes to the boil” 7 April 2016:

Frozen conflicts

When a ceasefire was called, the war in Azerbaijan’s Nagorno-Karabakh enclave cooled down as fast as it had heated up days before. But with long-running local grievances and regional rivalries at stake, a return to open conflict is distinctly possible.

Armenians and Azerbaijanis agreed on Tuesday to a cease-fire after four days of fighting along the border of a disputed region, putting to rest, at least for now, fears that the outbreak of ethnic strife might spiral into a wider war.

With almost palpable relief, mediators, including the United States, France and Russia, issued statements commending the halt in clashes along the line of contact of the Nagorno-Karabakh region, an ethnic Armenian enclave in Azerbaijan.

By Tuesday evening, the truce seemed to hold, though the Karabakh military reported isolated instances of mortar and tank fire from the Azerbaijani side.

In a statement, Azerbaijan’s Defense Ministry said that “on the basis of mutual agreement, the military actions on the contact line betweenArmenia and Azerbaijan are halted.”

Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, called President Ilham Aliyev ofAzerbaijan and President Serzh Sargsyan of Armenia to urge both to fully adhere to the truce, a Kremlin statement said.

“Expressing serious concern in connection with the wide-scale military clashes that led to multiple victims, Putin called on both sides to immediately support a full halt in combat actions,” the statement said, the Interfax news agency reported.

With the cease-fire in place, this latest bloody flare-up in the quarter-century Nagorno-Karabakh conflict appeared to end as it had begun, with the adversaries at or close to their previous positions but no nearer to a final settlement.

The separatist region of Nagorno-Karabakh in the South Caucasus. Bourrichon via Wikimedia

After four days of battle, Azerbaijan’s military said 16 of its soldiers had been killed, while the Karabakh army said it had lost 29 soldiers. In addition, 101 were reported wounded, and 28 were missing in action.

A war between the two former Soviet States over Nagorno-Karabakh, a highland region of mountains, alpine meadows and small villages, halted in 1994 with an earlier cease-fire but no political resolution. That war killed more than 20,000 people and displaced thousands of others. The majority ethnic Armenian population declared an independent state that Azerbaijan rejects.

The weekend fighting seemed pregnant with the risk of a wider war. Russia has backed mostly Christian Armenia, while Turkey, at odds with Russia as the two countries back opposite sides in the Syrian civil war, has supported Azerbaijan.

Heavy fighting between the armed forces of Azerbaijan and Armenia… has highlighted the unresolved disputes and chronic internal instability that still affect key strategic areas of Europe, even as the political and security focus has shifted to external threats.”  Simon Tisdall , The Guardian

A mediating organization known as the Minsk Group, led by Russia, the United States and France and operating under the auspices of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, issued a statementpraising the cease-fire. It said it welcomed diplomats’ “plans to undertake direct consultation with the sides as soon as possible.”

The European Union’s foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini, issued astatement calling for observance of the cease-fire and saying that “a large-scale conflict is in the interest of no one.”

Characteristic of the fighting of the past days, and its risks in an unsteady region, Iran reported stray shells had landed on its territory near the south of the disputed region, which borders Iran.

In this region, the mountains taper into an area of rolling, grassy hills eerily dotted with the ruins of Azerbaijani villages, their inhabitants long ago dead or driven away as refugees from the last war.

Some of the clashes seesawed over these same ruins this time, however little there seemed left to fight over; all that remained were heaps of brick and tipped-over stones of Muslim graveyards, overgrown with thistles.

The Karabakh military escorted reporters to the area to see an impact from a stray rocket, a large so-called Smerch ground-to-ground rocket that had landed in one such ruined village, about a mile from the border with Iran.

“The policy of our country is aimed at a peaceful settlement,” Col. David Davidsyan, with the Karabakh military, said in an announcement of the cease-fire. “But the Karabakh army is ready to solve this question by force if needed.”

“Any truce is temporary,” one soldier, Pvt. Never Grigoryan, said in an interview at a Karabakh artillery position outside a ruined village, Marjalu. He stood amid a heap of empty, green wooden boxes that had held artillery shells.

“We will be ready,” he said.


Indeed, Azerbaijan’s government claimed on April 6 that the first 24 hours of ceasefire had seen 115 violations. The hostilities stirred patriotic protests in both Baku and Yerevan, as well as among Turkish and Azeri supporters in Berlin.


Posted by European/Asian Alliance: It's happening on Mon, 11 Apr 2016 17:44 | #

The World Weekly, “Why tiny Djibouti matters to the world’s powers” 7 April:

Djiboutian Politics

A home to military bases for the US, France and soon China, Djibouti may be the most important tiny African state you’ve never heard about.

At the close of another hot day on the coast of Djibouti, a tiny country on the Horn of Africa, workers are clambering over huge concrete cubes beneath a red crane. One by one, the 2,500-tonne blocks are being submerged in the water: part of a plan to stun the shoreline into submission and create a vast new port at the heart of global trade.

“We’re going to fill in the sea,” Abdo Mohammed, the logistics manager for the $590m project, tells me with quiet glee.

Thirty per cent of all shipping in the world passes this point on the north-east edge of Africa, where the water narrows to a few kilometres opposite Yemen. A former French colony that became independent only in 1977, Djibouti sits at the southern entrance to the Red Sea, en route to the Suez Canal — a waypoint between Africa, India and the Middle East. Over the past 15 years, the country has set about capitalising on its location at the nexus of international trade: once completed, the Doraleh Multi-Purpose Port will be the largest of eight ports that together will handle containers, livestock, oil, phosphates and more.

But the geostrategic ambition of the small, authoritarian state — which at 23,200 sq km (8,950 sq miles) is only slightly larger than Wales — does not stop there. The US, several European countries and Japan have all pinned global military ambitions on Djibouti. Now China is set to do the same.

Construction began on the new port in 2013. “But then [last year] we had to change things around,” says Mohammed. He gestures with his phone in the direction of the arid land behind us. “We had to make a new section over there, beside the mountain, inside the port. That’s where the Chinese military base will be.”

The sun, by now a giant orange disc, slips behind the sea. Mohammed’s nonchalant disclosure marks the culmination of the search that brought me here. China is planning its first overseas military base at Doraleh, within a few kilometres of America’s largest military outpost in Africa.


Posted by Jewish take-over through Soviet Union on Wed, 27 Apr 2016 00:28 | #

Rafael Johnson: The Jewish take-over of Russia - a deception of terms.

Putin is not on as good terms with China as Johnson thinks.


Posted by Russian Federation offering land in its far east on Sat, 07 May 2016 16:36 | #

It looks like the Russian Federation is trying to take steps to secure just about the far eastern part that I’d just as soon see Asia take as a part of deal for more stable and cooperative relations with Europe and along The Silk Road.

TNO, “Russia Offers Free Land to Foreigners” 7 May 2016:

The Russian state parliament will pass a bill on April 12, 2016, which will offer free one hectare (about 2.5 acres) of land in that country’s Far Eastern Federal District to both Russians and non-Russian nationals wishing to settle the region.

Originally, the scheme was limited to Russian nationals only, but the new version of the bill has extended this right to carefully-screened non-Russians as well.

According to a report in the RT news service, the plots of land will be handed over to Russians and foreigners who want to build homes or start businesses in agriculture or tourism in the region.

The Russian lower house Committee for Real Estate and Construction recommended that the State Duma approve the bill in the second reading in a session next week. The parliament already approved the draft in the first reading on December 18, 2015.

According to the 2010 Census, the Far Eastern Federal District has a population of 6,293,129. The population has been in decline ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union, dropping by 14 percent in the last fifteen years.

The Russian government—aware that unless the European element of the population is rapidly increased, the region will quickly become majority Chinese—has been actively working on repopulation plans since 2010.

Initially the plan was to attract Russians from those former Soviet Union states which had become independent following the breakup of the USSR. This program met with limited success, and then the program was opened up to resettle refugees and illegal immigrants from the Ukraine.

As a result, what are called “ethnic Russians” and Ukrainians make up the majority of the population. In Russian parlance, “ethnic Russian” means European.

However, the new bill to be passed next week contains a clause allowing foreign citizens to apply for land as well. Foreign nationals will be allowed to use the land on lease from the state for a period of five years.

After five years, the foreign nationals will be able to apply for naturalization as Russian citizens, and then acquire full property rights to the land they have been working.

The explanations attached to the bill state that the government expects the free land handover to attract more people to the Far East Federal District, to slow or stop the outward migration of locals, and to boost the socioeconomic development of the territory.

A view of the town of Nevelsk on Russia’s Sakhalin Island.

Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev has also ordered the development of a special web service that will allow interested applicants to obtain all the necessary papers confirming their property rights remotely and with a minimum of red tape.

Russian president Vladimir Putin personally endorsed the idea when it was first mooted in 2015 by Deputy Prime Minister and presidential envoy to the Far East Federal District, Yuri Trutnev, who said that such a step would “strengthen the tendency of people’s migration to the Far East.”

Trutnev said at the time that Putin called the idea right in principle and noted that similar programs had been successfully implemented in Siberia. Putin urged all responsible officials to be precise and cautious when detailing the conditions for land ownership.

Trutnev’s initial suggestion was to “create a mechanism for the free allocation of a 1 hectare (2.5 acres) plot of land to every resident of the Far East and to anyone who is willing to come and live in the region so that they could start a private business in farming, forestry, game hunting, or some other enterprise.”

The Far East Federal District is a huge territory, uniting nine federal regions with a total area of over 6 million square kilometers. Included in the Far East are the gold-rich Magadan Region and the diamond-mining Sakha-Yakutiya republic, as well as important seaports and salmon-rich rivers. The district borders China by land and Japan and Alaska by sea.


Posted by Russian free land offer to foreigners not true on Wed, 18 May 2016 04:32 | #

TNO, “Russian “Free Land”: Media was Wrong”, 17 May 2016:

The Russian government has not offered free land to foreigners, as claimed by the Russia Today (RT) service, a spokesman for the Russian Duma (parliament) has confirmed to the New Observer.

The law, passed by the Russian Duma on May 2, specifically limits the offer to Russian citizens, and the media has incorrectly interpreted the law to mean “foreign citizens,” the Duma spokesman said in reply to an official query.

The bill, titled “On peculiarities of allocating land plots in the Far East Federal District,” provides for allocation of up to one hectare of land per person to Russian citizens in the Far Eastern region for long-term lease, with a possibility of acquiring property rights.

The reason for the misinterpretation of the law’s contents revolves around a section which states that the land is available to “Russian citizens or Russian compatriots applying for Russian citizenship.”

The spokesman said that by “Russian compatriots applying for Russian citizenship” is meant those Russian-origin persons who might wish to return to Russia, or who are in the process of taking up Russian citizenship once again.


Posted by Brzezinski on Russia / China on Wed, 25 May 2016 08:12 | #

Brzezinski acknowledges U.S. mistakes in Middle East, recommends a more modest U.S. to cooperate with others in the Middle East and with growing Asian power; but also recommends a more modest, more European Russian ethnostate in order to adjust to growing Chinese power:

Episode 116: Zbigniew Brzezinski on Global Realignment, 8 May 2016:

Zbigniew Brzezinski ‏@zbig May 6

The US needs a strategic rethink of its evolving global role given China’s rise and Russia’s perplexity.

Dr Brzezinski discusses the chances that the world’s power’s might work together in the Middle East..

        Strategic Vision

Toward a Global Realignment, 17 April 2016:

Zbigniew Brzezinski

As its era of global dominance ends, the United States needs to take the lead in realigning the global power architecture.

Five basic verities regarding the emerging redistribution of global political power and the violent political awakening in the Middle East are signaling the coming of a new global realignment.

The first of these verities is that the United States is still the world’s politically, economically, and militarily most powerful entity but, given complex geopolitical shifts in regional balances, it is no longer the globally imperial power. But neither is any other major power.The second verity is that Russia is experiencing the latest convulsive phase of its imperial devolution. A painful process, Russia is not fatally precluded – if it acts wisely – from becoming eventually a leading European nation-state. However, currently it is pointlessly alienating some of its former subjects in the Islamic southwest of its once extensive empire, as well as Ukraine, Belarus, and Georgia, not to mention the Baltic States.The third verity is that China is rising steadily, if more slowly as of late, as America’s eventual coequal and likely rival; but for the time being it is careful not to pose an outright challenge to America. Militarily, it seems to be seeking a breakthrough in a new generation of weapons while patiently enhancing its still very limited naval power.


Posted by If you can't get away from it in Omsk.. on Wed, 15 Jun 2016 11:26 | #

Russia Beyond The Headlines, “Photo of the day” - June 15, 2016:

“A kiss goodbye: Military graduation in Omsk”

Now, if you can’t get away from this in F-ing OMSK, Russia, where can you get away from it?

There is something a seriously wrong with a lot of White women.

How could anyone kiss that thing? Utterly disgusting!



Posted by Tweet from Zbigniew Brzezinski on Wed, 15 Jun 2016 13:49 | #

Twitter, Zbigniew Brzezinski, 15 June 2016:

Why is the US endangering its interests by creating a situation in Asia where China feels no choice but to wrench up relations with Russia?


Posted by UYGUR DNA on Thu, 16 Jun 2016 16:47 | #



Posted by Russian colonization of central Asia on Fri, 08 Jul 2016 23:10 | #

Atavistic Intelligentsia, “The Gates of Siberia- The Russian City of Tyumen” 8 July 2016:

- Vincent Law

I’ve heard this myth a lot. And it goes that there are these “Soviet” peoples that are part of the Russian experience. The truth is that Russia reduced these people to dhimmitude and expends considerable resources on making sure that they stay that way now as well. Whereas France colonized Africa, Russia colonized Central Asia, with different, but arguably similar results. Resentment towards the Russians, coupled with mass migration into the Russian Federation characterized much of the 90’s and 00’s. Many Russians fled the stans and returned to the motherland because of local intolerance and discrimination policies. Naturally, the upper classes got out first, leaving behind many of their co-ethnics to rough it out. This prompted Solzhenitsyn to make calls for the annexation of Western Kazakstan, on the same grounds that many called for the annexation of Novorussia now. There has been a stabilization of the situation, however. And things have markedly improved from the Брат, or the Exile’s depiction of Russia in the 90s.

A short story told to me by a local married (sigh) Patriot Russian girl: there was a Chechen woman that parked right over a tramway rail in Ekatirinburg one day and caused a massive traffic backup. Some Russian volunteer teenagers that shame bad parkers and drivers by stickying their cars with an insulting monicker- “Road Hog”-came up to sticky her car. She freaked out and called in the cavalry. About 40 Chechens showed up and beat up the zealous Russian student do-gooders.

This racewar situation however was promptly diffused by the personal intervention of Ramzan Kadyrov. It turns out the Chechen woman was the wife of a regional governor. Kadyrov summoned the woman’s husband, dressed him down and fired him on the spot- at least the story goes. And its part of this greater trend, the stabilization of relations between Russians and Chechens. Kadyrov punishes anyone who steps out of live in the Chechen diaspora by torturing or killing their family members left in Chechnia or ordering hits on them by loyalist Chechens.

And he manages to keep the peace.

Funny enough, the liberasts of course condemn this, and the country of Chechnia. They want to do the White Nationalist approach and let the Chechens succeed from the RF.

These are the same liberasts that were calling foul and howling about human rights abuses when Russian forces invaded first under Yeltsin and then Putin. They want to do the same for Tatarstan. But now they’ve changed their tune and agitate for the further break-up of the Russian empire by reminding people about the criminality of these “nations of criminals.”

I’m all over the place today, but a few more thoughts on the ethnic diasporas. The Chechens have been tamed, the Armenians are loyal. The Georgians too. The Kazaks that move to Russia are the upper classes- the “sovietized” families, and the Russian tribal peoples continue to drink themselves to death and cause little trouble.

The problem is the Uzbeks and the Tajiks, for the most part. I have yet to find anyone, liberal or other, that can tolerate them. But most Russians do not reject them on any HBD grounds or any Alt-Right idea. Mostly its just this personal dislike of them and a belief that Russia should take care of its own first. Still, they have no rights here and they behave for the most part. I enjoy the spectacle of seeing them get harassed by the police in St. Petersburg on a bi-weekly basis…


Posted by Putin: Russia’s Borders Don’t End Anywhere on Sat, 26 Nov 2016 17:04 | #

Breitbart, “Putin’s Geography Lesson: ‘Russia’s Borders Don’t End Anywhere”, 25 Nov 2016:

Appearing at an awards ceremony for young students at the Russian Geographical Society, President Vladimir Putin took issue with nine-year-old Miroslav Oskirko’s statement that Russia’s borders “end at the Bering Strait with the United States.”

“Russia’s borders don’t end anywhere!” Putin corrected the boy, giving him a hug.

“That is a joke,” he clarified a moment later.

Somehow the citizens of Ukraine and of nervous Baltic republics circling an increasingly adventurous Russia managed to contain their mirth.

The UK Daily Mail quotes Twitter user Dmitry Kasatkin asking Putin, “Are we talking about culture here, or the S-400?” The S-400 is a Russian air defense missile that has lately been turning up in all sorts of interesting places.

As the UK Independent notes, “Russia’s borders” became a top trend on Twitter within minutes of Putin’s geopolitical standup comedy routine.

The BBC points out that Putin has seriously argued Russia has no borders, at least when it comes to defending what he called, “the rights of Russians, our compatriots abroad.”

BBC also picked up on a more subtle example of Putin’s wit: when he asked five-year-old Timofey Tsoi to name the country whose capital city is called Ouagadougou:

  Timofey correctly answered “Burkina Faso”, but struggled when asked what the country’s old name was. Mr. Putin helped him out, saying: “Upper Volta! Good lad!”

  In its dying days, the Soviet Union was sardonically described as “Upper Volta with rockets.”


Posted by dsc on Thu, 22 Dec 2016 22:09 | #

There’s a new movement started by Stark’s co-host called “Asian Aryanism”


Posted by DanielS on Thu, 22 Dec 2016 23:02 | #

It is not new movement. Anything that comes from Stark’s cohorts is Jewish bullshit… misdirection.


Posted by dsc on Fri, 23 Dec 2016 00:50 | #

Wasn’t Stark in WN circles a while back. What happened to him? Some of his earlier interviews with Greg Johnson and Tom Sunic were alright. I didn’t know he was Jewish.


Posted by DanielS on Fri, 23 Dec 2016 04:30 | #

Stark is not Jewish, or not much (only 1/16th), but for whatever reasons, tends to collaborate with Jews or people who are defensive of Jews and their participation in “the Alt-Right.”

Part of his reasoning seems to be a career move (commonly known as selling-out).

For another reason, he is probably honestly not anti-semitic - or not nearly sufficiently to protect White advocacy from Jewish infiltration; just the opposite, he is providing a gateway for their entry.

Lastly, he apparently has a mandate to work from a Jewish friendly tent of the alt-right tentosphere.

His participation at VoR and with Johnson, Sunic and Richard Spencer had the same mandate - “the tentosphere concept” that the “Alt-Right” has adopted - they began with a mandate that was born of interaction between Paul Gottfried and William Regnery; and was popularized by Richard Spencer.

That is, there is a quid pro quo which allows participation in the Alt-Right from Jewish and Abrahamic tents in exchange for allowing for Whites to express stigmatic, anti-social, right wing positions from other tents - the Nazi tent, the scientistic tent, the Jesus tent, the anarchist and liberal tents - in a word, Jews and deracinated elite sell-outs are allowing Whites to participate in ways that will be divisive of Whites and largely scary or offensive to what might otherwise have been broad social, ethno-national support.

Incidentally, I consider you a troll. No person with White interests at heart would be promoting “pill eater” and Alex Von Goldstein.


Posted by dsc on Mon, 02 Jan 2017 19:27 | #

Greg Johnson talks Alt-Left and Asian-Aryanism:

JQ talked about on the Stark Truth. 8 minutes in. Blonde Jewish Girls and Asian Jewish identity.


Posted by (((Alt Left))) is a Jewish ruse on Tue, 03 Jan 2017 00:00 | #

I don’t know who this DSC guy is, but I suspect that it is (((pilleater)))

Pilleater (in glasses)

Aha, no, chances are DSC is Robert Stark (i.p. address Santa Barbara)
Only (((1/16th))) but very Jewish friendly.

But whoever left the comment above, both Stark and Pilleater participate in the conversation linked by dsc and the audience should look upon “The Alt Left” as a colossal pile of Jewish steered bullshit.

These people are going by its newly coined moniker devised in large part as (((controlled opposition))) and to counter Majoirtyrights platform and awareness. They are playing a game to bury Majoirityrights legitimate White Left platform and to obfuscate White leftism properly defined by equating it instead with liberalism and entryism - for Jews especially.

(((The Truth Will Live))) - Ruth: Rather, the lies will try to live, but they’re not White, they’re Jewish.

Millennial Woes, who apparently made the deal with the tentosphere, demanded that his link be removed from Majorityrights when I (DanielS) rejected (((The Truth Will Live))) as “one of us” and even more importantly, her capacity to define our terms, viz. “right and left,” for us.

Alt-Left is poison.

This is not the first time that Greg Johnson has been fooled by or has bought into stewarding this kind of nonsense. Greg Johnson buys into the Alt-Right tentosphere game.

Johnson’s article “West Coast White Nationalism” featured an image of Hitler in lovebeads. The article was meant to obfuscate the platform that I (DaneilS) was developing and re-direct its strands into right wing bullshit. He says “Rabbit”, the owner of the “Alt-Left” site, a guy who is into Pat Buchanan and goes along with the tentosphere’s entryism of Jews, well represents “Leftism.”

In this discussion Johnson defines “Alt Left” as being against “equality” oblivious to how that angle serves Jews now that they are on top of the game.You don’t want to be one of those “lefties” who wants to take away things from us (((Jews))) do you?”

Notice how concerned they (((The Alt Left))) are to confuse and misdirect Majorityrights’ platform: i.e., as explicated on this thread.


Posted by Iran certifies 29nations bid on oil/gas projects on Tue, 03 Jan 2017 07:52 | #

Euractiv, 3 Jan 2017:

Iran certifies 29 international companies to bid for oil, gas projects


Posted by dsc on Wed, 04 Jan 2017 14:38 | #

LOL. That picture you posted is Haarlem Venison. Haarlem and Pilleater have been on a show at the same time. Two different people.

Robert Stark, Pilleater, and Haarlem Venison talk to Liberal Revolution.

Millennial Woes talks to Pilleater.



Posted by DanielS on Wed, 04 Jan 2017 15:28 | #

Well, they are both Jews or may as well be, since they are working from Jewish scripts (that’s why it was hard to tell the difference) -  Pilleater is a Jew shill at any rate - his definition of “the alt left” is a served up Jewish pile of shit: “friends, family, freedom” ...that’s his definition of “the left”? Who told him to say that? Paul Gottfied or Alex von Goldstein?

You are walking on thin ice trying to promote this (((“alt-left”))) shit here.


Posted by Bill on Thu, 05 Jan 2017 06:02 | #

Britain’s Alt–Left.

Ever since Tony Blair threw his core support under the bus at the 1994 labour party conference with the ditching of Clause Four, a new party was born - New Labour.  Little did the nation know that another satellite party was incubating in the wings - an evolving Alt Left.

Britain’s traditional left was always socially conservative and economically Left.  It took the British masses sometime to cotton on to Blair’s New Labour was a massive hike in the global cultural revolution, in fact, the mass of Britain’s population didn’t even know there was a revolution in progress.

Fast forward to Blair, Cameron and Farage and an embryo movement emerged akin to Alt-Left.  Forage’s UKIP is the Alt-left of Blair’s long defunct New Labour.  It’s early days as to how all this will pan out - what with Brexit an’all

The core question is, will the Britain-America axis endure?  There seems few similarities between the two nations people politically. 

Enter in Britain one Jeremy Corbyn to set the cat among the pigeons, wherein a bloodbath between the Blairites of New labour and Corbyn’s old new old left is still being slugged out.  To anyone with half a brain cell on active duty (as Icke says), it should be amply apparent that Britain’s age old political system is a dissolving corpse in a bath of acid.

Britain’s current political canvas is a headless chicken, the chaos continues and the inexorable direction is to the denouement of the globalist’s goal.

As an aside, here’s something I read this morning here at MR I hadn’t seen before, it was like a blast from the past.  About Ten years ago I commented at the then very embryo BNP website the question, will the last circling of the wagons of whites be in Russia?  As I say, funny that!

I ‘m aware I found it difficult to get my ducks in a row on this comment, but I didn’t feel like writing a lengthy meandering piece.  Perhaps a few words to explore the above would be helpful.


Posted by DanielS on Thu, 05 Jan 2017 09:19 | #

Decent comment and question, Bill.

There are many interesting matters to address regarding Russia, China, The US and The UK’s historical and emerging stances toward each other, but I’ll wait for Kumiko to respond so as not to step on her toes.

As for the so-called (((Alt-Left))), it’s best not to dignify with attention. It is a sudden, would-be false opposition, performing a disservice under the guise of promoting popular entryism - it performs entryism alright, but to those who would confuse and misdirect our terms, notably Jews and what are really liberals and right wingers otherwise - hence it is very counterproductive. Hasbra for what it’s worth.

We want “leftism” to correspond with racial national and sub racial national unionization - a new form of syndicalism. The (((Alt-Left))) is doing something quite different.

As for parallels between old British left and the left nationalist platform being promoted here, probably not a good comparison either.


Posted by Japan dispatches largest naval vessel since WWII on Mon, 01 May 2017 06:59 | #

DM, 1 May 2017:

“Japan dispatches its biggest warship since WWII to protect a US supply ship from Kim Jong-un’s missiles”

Izumo, a helicopter carrier, is being sent by Japan to protect a US supply ship The American vessel is thought to be supplying the USS Carl Vinson strike group Deployment marks the first time Japan has used new powers allowing its military to carry out actions that are not strictly in self-defense Comes as North Korea threatened to carry out a sixth nuclear test at ‘any time’

Japan has deployed the Izumo, its largest ship built since the Second World War, to escort a US supply vessel which is believed to be supporting the carrier USS Carl Vinson

The 800ft Izumo, a helicopter carrier, left its port near Tokyo on Monday and is thought to be making a 400 mile trip to the waters near Shikoku alongside the US vessel

The Izumo’s deployment marks the first time Japan has used new powers which allow its military to carry out actions that are not purely in self-defense

Post by DanielS


Posted by Thousands of abandoned Russian villages on Mon, 12 Jun 2017 02:43 | #

NBC News, “A Look at One of Russia’s Thousands of ‘Ghost Villages”, 11 June 2017:

The Russian countryside was once a symbol of the Soviet Union’s agricultural might. Today, according to the latest census, 20,000 villages are completely abandoned. Another 36,000 have fewer than 10 residents.


Posted by Getting comfy with Addidas-wear on Mon, 21 Aug 2017 14:10 | #



Posted by Chinese buying land on Lake Baikal on Thu, 04 Jan 2018 09:12 | #

Financial Times, “China land grab on Lake Baikal raises Russian ire”, 4 Jan 2018:

A sleepy tourist town on the shores of Siberia’s Lake Baikal has become an unlikely lightning rod among Russian nationalists after Chinese investors bought up properties on town’s lakefront.

Russian newspapers have inflamed public opinion over the town of Listvyanka, running headlines about a Chinese “invasion”, “conquest” and even China’s “yoke” — a reference to the Mongol invasions of the Middle Ages.

An online petition with 55,000 signatures (Listvyanka has a population of less than 2,000) claims that Beijing is seeking to transform the area into a Chinese province, and asks Russia’s President Vladimir Putin to ban land sales to the Chinese there.


The message fuels familiar Russian fears about its more prosperous and populous neighbour — the sparsely populated and economically undeveloped eastern third of Russia is seen as vulnerable to large scale Chinese immigration.

But these local tensions are at odds with the diplomatic efforts of both countries’ leaders, and threaten to frustrate grand designs of a budding Russian-Chinese pseudo-alliance.


Russia needs investment by China to help its economy, which has been hit by western sanctions in the aftermath of its invasion of Ukraine. Meanwhile, China has made a priority of investing in Russia and other Eurasian countries as part of its Belt and Road strategy of building infrastructure across the region.


“People really are worried about the Chinese buying everything here. They build huge hotels. They tear down and change the façades,” he said. “Their advertisements are everywhere, hanging from fences.”


But he said that Chinese tour groups made a point of telling visitors that Lake Baikal — the world’s deepest freshwater lake — was part of China during the Tang and Han dynasties. “People here say this means they want it back,” said Mr Sin’kov.

Indeed, Chinese tourism websites claim that Lake Baikal was once part of China.

Cassia, a Chinese travel agency, advertised trips to Lake Baikal recalling its Chinese past: “It was called the Northern Sea during the Han Dynasty . . . it had been China’s territory for a long time in history.”


Full story at source, FT

Post a comment:

Name: (required)

Email: (required but not displayed)

URL: (optional)

Note: You should copy your comment to the clipboard or paste it somewhere before submitting it, so that it will not be lost if the session times out.

Remember me

Next entry: Counter-cultural ruminations – Part 2, the culture war
Previous entry: Nikolai Tesla Biography

image of the day

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Establishment Problem



Endorsement not implied.


Islamist Threat

Anti-white Media Networks






Historical Re-Evaluation

Controlled Opposition

Nationalist Political Parties


Europeans in Africa

Of Note


Putinism commented in entry 'Putin's Revenge' on Fri, 19 Jan 2018 08:12. (View)

Jewish occupy, demonstrate for open borders USA commented in entry 'Africans Deported from Israel “Appear” in Rome' on Fri, 19 Jan 2018 02:08. (View)

question commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 23:15. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 17:43. (View)

Crazy Over You commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:22. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 13:24. (View)

I'm a Man commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 12:41. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Carolyn Emerick talks pagan folk culture and ethnonationalism with Tara's alt-right panel' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 08:15. (View)

uh commented in entry 'Spencer: My conception of the ethnostate is imperialist - true ethno nationalism is a zero sum game.' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 08:07. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Carolyn Emerick talks pagan folk culture and ethnonationalism with Tara's alt-right panel' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 07:18. (View)

100% European commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 06:39. (View)

The ancient is the modern commented in entry 'Snyder's lessons applied to reality now: universalized liberalism tyrannizing over ethnonationalism' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 02:19. (View)

100% European but you might not guess commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 00:45. (View)

Near 100% European commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 00:18. (View)

95% Native American (Central) commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Wed, 17 Jan 2018 11:11. (View)

20% sub-Saharan commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Wed, 17 Jan 2018 09:53. (View)

We knew these things commented in entry 'Hermeneutic construction of Putin and Trump's character, positions and relation:' on Wed, 17 Jan 2018 04:13. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Wed, 17 Jan 2018 01:18. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'MR Radio: Greg Johnson talks to GW and Daniel' on Wed, 17 Jan 2018 01:09. (View)

henry m commented in entry 'MR Radio: Greg Johnson talks to GW and Daniel' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 18:29. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 16:51. (View)

This is the Day commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 16:17. (View)

Emerald City commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:46. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'America: Making The World Safe for Hypocrisy' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:41. (View)

Anything, Anything commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:26. (View)

The Allman Brothers commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:04. (View)

Nobody to Depend on commented in entry 'America: Making The World Safe for Hypocrisy' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 14:56. (View)

Pearl Jam commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 14:09. (View)

John McLaughlin commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 13:55. (View)

Hatfield & the North: Mumps commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 13:29. (View)

My Love is Alive commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 13:23. (View)

Wild Swans Love Will Tear Us Apart commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:39. (View)

Happy commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:18. (View)

Wild Horses best version commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 12:13. (View)

Hangout, Johnson, Lewis, JF et al commented in entry 'MR Radio: Greg Johnson talks to GW and Daniel' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 11:44. (View)