|
|
|
European & Asian Regional Alliance 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.
_________________________________________________________________
The Intermarium Project
Comments:2
Posted by Nobody on Sun, 03 Jan 2016 23:18 | # 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. 3
Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 04 Jan 2016 23:43 | # Daniel, we are a Master Race. We do not deign to give land and resources to our racial inferiors in exchange for brownie points. 4
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 05 Jan 2016 00:52 | # It’s not brownie points, it’s quid pro quo. They have a great deal of manpower, incentive etc. to cooperate in alliance. 5
Posted by Critical Resources Institute on Tue, 05 Jan 2016 22:51 | #
6
Posted by miltary dictatorship, imperial overstretch on Wed, 06 Jan 2016 01:39 | # ...inability to reform. fall of Soviet Union and similarities in The US.
7
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Wed, 06 Jan 2016 09:25 | #
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. 8
Posted by DanielS on Wed, 06 Jan 2016 20:54 | # Who might be among constituents of border enforcement? People like this. They are trained in counter terrorism as well.
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. 11
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 10:16 | # 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] 12
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 10:33 | # What is the view in Asia of China’s treatment of the Tibetan people: https://www.studentsforafreetibet.org/Plone/about-tibet/tibet-today 13
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 10:57 | # 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. 14
Posted by DanielS on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 12:43 | # 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.
15
Posted by right-wingers objective border guard on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 20:43 | # Of course, right-wingers would perhaps rather this sort encamped as co-defenders of our borders and people…
16
Posted by Just Sayin' on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 00:19 | # 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. 17
Posted by DanielS on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 00:52 | # 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. 18
Posted by Nobody on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 02:33 | # “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.
19
Posted by DanielS on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 02:38 | # 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. 20
Posted by Nobody on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 03:57 | # —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. 21
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. 22
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 08:26 | #
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.
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.
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.
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.
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. 23
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 09:16 | #
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?
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. 24
Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 18:20 | # I’ve got a better idea - use Japan and Korea to keep China boxed in. 25
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 18:30 | # 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. 26
Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 08 Jan 2016 23:09 | # I wish China good luck moving westward against nuclear armed Pakistan and India! 27
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sat, 09 Jan 2016 05:25 | # 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. 28
Posted by Tom on Sat, 09 Jan 2016 05:40 | # 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? 29
Posted by DanielS on Sat, 09 Jan 2016 06:27 | # Tom, 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. Captainchaos, Not only Chinese, but Indians (Hindus) are potentially a valuable Ally as they are ideologically opposed to Islam - Pakistan, e.g. 30
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sat, 09 Jan 2016 07:24 | # 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. 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. 31
Posted by DanielS on Sat, 09 Jan 2016 09:00 | # Kumiko, can you elaborate on how North Korea is a Russian doing? 32
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sat, 09 Jan 2016 13:12 | # 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. 33
Posted by North Korea on Sat, 09 Jan 2016 18:17 | # 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. 34
Posted by Nobody on Sun, 10 Jan 2016 02:26 | #
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. 35
Posted by DanielS on Sun, 10 Jan 2016 08:55 | # 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 36
Posted by Nobody on Sun, 10 Jan 2016 14:38 | #
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. 37
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. 38
Posted by DanielS on Sun, 10 Jan 2016 21:59 | # 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. 39
Posted by property tax funding the free corps on Mon, 11 Jan 2016 12:42 | # 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):
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… 40
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 12 Jan 2016 14:45 | #
Aren’t you making concessions with your Northwest ingathering concept? 41
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Tue, 12 Jan 2016 14:58 | # 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? 42
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 12 Jan 2016 15:14 | # 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. 43
Posted by 19 largest cities east of Baikal on Wed, 13 Jan 2016 01:37 | # 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 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladivostok 2) 26 Khabarovsk, Khabarovsk Krai 577,441 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khabarovsk 3) 45 Ulan-Ude, Republic of Buryatia 404,426 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulan-Ude 4) 56 Chita, Zabaykalsky Krai 324,444 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chita,_Zabaykalsky_Krai 5) 68 Yakutsk, Sakha Republic 269,601 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakutsk
6) 70 Komsomolsk-on-Amur Khabarovsk Krai 263,906 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komsomolsk-on-Amur 7) 87 Blagoveshchensk, Amur Oblast 214,390 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blagoveshchensk 8) 99 Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Sakhalin Oblast 181,728 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk 9) 100 Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, Kamchatka Krai, 179,780 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky 10) 110 Nakhodka, Primorsky Krai 159,719 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakhodka 11) 111 Ussuriysk, Primorsky Krai, 158,004 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ussuriysk 12) 158 Artyom, Primorsky Krai 102,603 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artyom,_Russia 13) 178 Magadan, Magadan Oblast 95,982 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magadan 14) 215 Birobidzhan, Jewish Autonomous Oblast 75,413 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birobidzhan 15) 229 Belogorsk, Amur Oblast 68,249 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belogorsk,_Amur_Oblast 16) 260 Neryungri, Sakha Republic 61,747 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neryungri 17) 281 Svobodny, Amur Oblast 58,778 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svobodny,_Amur_Oblast 18) 291 Arsenyev Арсеньев, 56,750 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenyev 19) 295 Krasnokamensk, Zabaykalsky Krai 55,666 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krasnokamensk,_Zabaykalsky_Krai ................................................................ Of geographical note: 146 Kyzyl, Tuva Republic 109,918 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyzyl 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: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulan-Ude Interestingly, regarding this, the third largest city East of Lake Baikal:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evenks
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buryats
44
Posted by Ulan-Ude on Wed, 13 Jan 2016 13:05 | # 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. 46
Posted by Thorn on Thu, 14 Jan 2016 00:44 | # Sunday, January 10, 2016 Throwing Russians Under the Bus, Part 1 By JHW 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>>http://eginotes.blogspot.com/2016/01/throwing-russians-under-bus-part-1.html 47
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Thu, 14 Jan 2016 11:17 | #
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. 48
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Thu, 14 Jan 2016 11:24 | # 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. 49
Posted by Russan Federation population density on Fri, 15 Jan 2016 11:32 | #
50
Posted by DanielS on Fri, 15 Jan 2016 13:20 | # 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.
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). 51
Posted by Crime falls in Japan to post war low on Fri, 15 Jan 2016 18:22 | #
52
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sat, 16 Jan 2016 09:20 | # 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. 53
Posted by Thorn on Sat, 16 Jan 2016 22:19 | # “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 Majorityrights.com. 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! 54
Posted by DanielS on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 07:48 | #
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.
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. 55
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 13:07 | #
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.
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. 56
Posted by DanielS on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 13:18 | #
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. 57
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 13:38 | #
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. 58
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Sun, 17 Jan 2016 23:42 | # 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:
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?
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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]
Yes, welcome to life.
Are you fucking kidding me?
Hahaha, wow, you are seriously drawing an equivalence between the two sides? Are you all seeing this?
We don’t make excuses for being arrogant, it’s part of being arrogant.
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.
Nope, you are not forced to say ‘yes’ to every request made by other countries!
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
I’ve asked Daniel about that, to see what he knows of Silver. He says that he drove Silver away eons ago.
J Richards is gone and he’s never coming back. Most of his really questionable webdesign choices are also gone!
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! 59
Posted by DanielS on Mon, 18 Jan 2016 10:57 | # 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. 60
Posted by Captainchaos on Mon, 18 Jan 2016 22:11 | # 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 61
Posted by DanielS on Mon, 18 Jan 2016 22:50 | # One thing at a time, CC.
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.
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.
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.
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. 63
Posted by 111th Meridian East on Tue, 19 Jan 2016 02:16 | #
64
Posted by Between the 55th and 111th Meridian on Tue, 19 Jan 2016 02:25 | # 65
Posted by 85th includes Novosibirsk & Yekaterinburg on Tue, 19 Jan 2016 03:22 | #
67
Posted by 111th Meridian with major cities on Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:12 | #
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. 68
Posted by East of 111th Meridian, more cities on Tue, 19 Jan 2016 14:08 | #
Vladivostok, Primorsky Krai, 592,034 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladivostok Khabarovsk, Khabarovsk Krai 577,441 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khabarovsk Chita, Zabaykalsky Krai 324,444 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chita,_Zabaykalsky_Krai Yakutsk, Sakha Republic 269,601 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakutsk Komsomolsk-on-Amur Khabarovsk Krai 263,906 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komsomolsk-on-Amur Blagoveshchensk, Amur Oblast 214,390 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blagoveshchensk Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, Sakhalin Oblast 181,728 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, Kamchatka Krai, 179,780 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky Nakhodka, Primorsky Krai 159,719 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakhodka Ussuriysk, Primorsky Krai, 158,004 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ussuriysk Artyom, Primorsky Krai 102,603 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artyom,_Russia Magadan, Magadan Oblast 95,982 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magadan Birobidzhan, Jewish Autonomous Oblast 75,413 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birobidzhan Belogorsk, Amur Oblast 68,249 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belogorsk,_Amur_Oblast Neryungri, Sakha Republic 61,747 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neryungri Svobodny, Amur Oblast 58,778 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svobodny,_Amur_Oblast Arsenyev, Primorsky Krai 56,750 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenyev Krasnokamensk, Zabaykalsky Krai 55,666 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krasnokamensk,_Zabaykalsky_Krai 69
Posted by Strategic location Birobidzhan on Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:40 | # Strategic location Birobidzhan, Jewish autonomous Oblask.
70
Posted by Putin welcomes Jews to Russia on Thu, 21 Jan 2016 14:26 | # Putin Welcomes Jews to Russia. Geo-strategic aims evident.
71
Posted by Eastern Europe defending Western civilizaiton on Wed, 17 Feb 2016 07:34 | # 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
72
Posted by problem of manning Russia on Thu, 17 Mar 2016 03:27 | # 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: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shjM2QFH9XQ
73
Posted by Armenian / Azerbaijani conflict on Mon, 04 Apr 2016 19:28 | # Armenian / Azerbaijan border conflict
Armenia is apparently a Russian Federation proxy in this war. 74
Posted by Map of Armenia / Azerbaijan conflict on Sun, 10 Apr 2016 17:54 | #
75
Posted by Frozen Conflict: Armenians / Azerbaijanis on Mon, 11 Apr 2016 22:35 | #
76
Posted by European/Asian Alliance: It's happening on Mon, 11 Apr 2016 22:44 | #
77
Posted by Jewish take-over through Soviet Union on Wed, 27 Apr 2016 05:28 | # Rafael Johnson: The Jewish take-over of Russia - a deception of terms. Putin is not on as good terms with China as Johnson thinks. 78
Posted by Russian Federation offering land in its far east on Sat, 07 May 2016 21:36 | # 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.
79
Posted by Russian free land offer to foreigners not true on Wed, 18 May 2016 09:32 | #
80
Posted by Brzezinski on Russia / China on Wed, 25 May 2016 13:12 | # 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:
81
Posted by If you can't get away from it in Omsk.. on Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:26 | #
How could anyone kiss that thing? Utterly disgusting!
82
Posted by Tweet from Zbigniew Brzezinski on Wed, 15 Jun 2016 18:49 | #
84
Posted by Russian colonization of central Asia on Sat, 09 Jul 2016 04:10 | #
85
Posted by Putin: Russia’s Borders Don’t End Anywhere on Sat, 26 Nov 2016 22:04 | #
86
Posted by dsc on Fri, 23 Dec 2016 03:09 | # There’s a new movement started by Stark’s co-host called “Asian Aryanism” 87
Posted by DanielS on Fri, 23 Dec 2016 04:02 | # It is not new movement. Anything that comes from Stark’s cohorts is Jewish bullshit… misdirection. 88
Posted by dsc on Fri, 23 Dec 2016 05:50 | # 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. 89
Posted by DanielS on Fri, 23 Dec 2016 09:30 | # 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. 90
Posted by dsc on Tue, 03 Jan 2017 00:27 | # Greg Johnson talks Alt-Left and Asian-Aryanism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHbgMLHgJ44&t=197s JQ talked about on the Stark Truth. 8 minutes in. Blonde Jewish Girls and Asian Jewish identity. 91
Posted by (((Alt Left))) is a Jewish ruse on Tue, 03 Jan 2017 05:00 | # I don’t know who this DSC guy is, but…
Aha, no, chances are DSC is Robert Stark (i.p. address Santa Barbara) 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.
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.
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. 92
Posted by Iran certifies 29nations bid on oil/gas projects on Tue, 03 Jan 2017 12:52 | # Iran certifies 29 international companies to bid for oil, gas projects 93
Posted by dsc on Wed, 04 Jan 2017 19:38 | # 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. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYAHKsi4pmw Millennial Woes talks to Pilleater. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ew0q3tU5GIU
94
Posted by DanielS on Wed, 04 Jan 2017 20:28 | # 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. 95
Posted by Bill on Thu, 05 Jan 2017 11:02 | # 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. 96
Posted by DanielS on Thu, 05 Jan 2017 14:19 | # 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. 97
Posted by Japan dispatches largest naval vessel since WWII on Mon, 01 May 2017 11:59 | #
Post by DanielS 98
Posted by Thousands of abandoned Russian villages on Mon, 12 Jun 2017 07:43 | #
100
Posted by Chinese buying land on Lake Baikal on Thu, 04 Jan 2018 14:12 | #
101
Posted by Native Siberians and Americans on Sun, 11 Feb 2018 09:51 | # The Connection Between Whites and Asians? Genetics of the Sami, Ainu and Siberian Peopels Who are the REAL Native Americans Indians? Exploring the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas: 102
Posted by Japanese wine-makers threatened with deportation on Sat, 07 Jul 2018 13:26 | # Japanese wine-makers in France, first up to be threatened with deportation. 103
Posted by Adapt not Adopt on Thu, 13 Sep 2018 07:53 | #
“Western countries need to study these Chinese techniques and adopt them.” Not adopt them. Whites need to adapt ruthless ferocity to the ethnonationalist cause. In the two examples, one would be correct, and one would not. Where Islamic incursions are quelled, that is correct. Going to an African country, enslaving them, beating them and so on - when it is not sheer self defense - is not. But of course, such bad advice (e.g., that we should be brutal slave masters over Africans) is typical of right wing reactionaries - to look for a foundation in natural fallacy, in sheer might makes right supremacism beyond the complexity of social praxis. ...and of course, when praxis is ignored, then broader patterns of nemesis correction are in store for the hubris. 104
Posted by Spheres of Influence on Wed, 21 Nov 2018 20:35 | # Stephen Kotkin: Sphere of Influence III - The Chip on the Shoulder 105
Posted by right and wrong way to Everest Summit on Fri, 04 Jan 2019 17:24 | # Although Kumiko has a great story on her back burner about how Nepalese women have organized into an effective ethnonational guerrilla force, there are no relevant Nepalese posts yet under which to place this - so I’ll put it here - a video journal of American travelers to Everest. It is a video noteworthy for capturing the natural beauty of the setting and showing respect for the locals (summiting is dangerous for the Sherpa too).
Given the death rate (the odds of dying are high) and the expense ($11,000 for a summit permit), it seems aspiring to Everest summit is pretty stupid (the Sherpa think so too). It’s not like its never been done and now there are literally queues to hike to the summit. These people did it the right way. Take a plane up there after getting to base camp.
106
Posted by The moment Europeans / Asians split on Sat, 13 Apr 2019 19:20 | # Towards a New History and Geography of Human Genes informed by Ancient DNA Interesting lecture which includes discussion of the moment when Europeans split from Asian populations. 108
Posted by Protests in Russian Far East: KHABAROVSK on Sun, 26 Jul 2020 05:11 | #
Post a comment:
Next entry: Counter-cultural ruminations – Part 2, the culture war
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) CommentsThorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 19 Dec 2024 01:13. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 19 Dec 2024 01:11. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 21:35. (View) Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 20:51. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 19:49. (View) Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 18:47. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 23:29. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 22:01. (View) Manc commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 19:52. (View) Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 18:17. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Thu, 28 Nov 2024 00:02. (View) Manc commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Wed, 27 Nov 2024 17:12. (View) Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Mon, 25 Nov 2024 02:05. (View) Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sun, 24 Nov 2024 19:32. (View) |
Posted by Putin names US threat to Russian security on Sun, 03 Jan 2016 22:36 | #