[Majorityrights News] Trump will ‘arm Ukraine to the teeth’ if Putin won’t negotiate ceasefire Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 12 November 2024 16:20.
[Majorityrights News] Alex Navalny, born 4th June, 1976; died at Yamalo-Nenets penitentiary 16th February, 2024 Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, 16 February 2024 23:43.
[Majorityrights Central] A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity’s origin Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 25 July 2023 22:19.
[Majorityrights News] Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine? Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, 18 May 2023 18:55.
Posted by DanielS on Thursday, 13 August 2020 05:04.
Related - TheLocal.de: Teenage girl stabbed to death in broad daylight in west German park. The scene of the murder in Viersen. Photo: DPA
Women in Germany feel largely unable to move about large cities without risk of verbal or physical harassment, a new study suggests. Every fourth woman reports experiencing sexual harassment in her city.
Almost no women feel safe when traveling about the large German cities of Hamburg, Berlin, Cologne and Munich, according to a study by the German branch of Plan International, a children’s rights organization.
For the study, dubbed “Safe in the City,” almost 1,000 women aged 16-71 were requested to place markers on an interactive map in city locations that they have experienced as safe or unsafe. Eighty percent of altogether 1,267 marked locations were classified as unsafe, for reasons including verbal harassment when jogging in the park, badly lit streets, stalking or unwanted touching of a sexual nature.
“Our survey shows that girls and women do not really feel safe or able to move freely in their city. On average, each of the respondents marked one unsafe location in her surrounding area,” said Maike Röttger, the director of Plan International in Germany.
“Every fourth woman has experienced sexual harassment and every fifth woman has been followed, insulted or threatened,” Röttger said, adding that the study findings were concerning.
Nighttime fears
The most frequent reasons given for feeling threatened were encounters with people under the influence of alcohol or other drugs, badly lit paths and parks and lonely areas where no help would be available in the case of an emergency.
Röttger called for action, saying that every girl and woman had a right to move about in her city freely and without fear. She said they should be included in planning and structuring their urban surroundings to make them safer.
But Röttger also called for a change in thinking about gender roles, saying many boys and men still thought it was all right to harass women. “Underlying stereotypes and discrimination are the reason why girls and women cannot feel safe,” she said.
According to the study, women felt most in danger after dark, with 806 of the 1,014 negative markers indicating evenings or nights and only 208 applying to the daytime.
A 2018 study carried out by Plan International in New Delhi, Sydney, Lima and Madrid made similar findings, with most girls and women saying they feel unsafe in those cities.
The former interior minister faces a possible trial for refusing to let a ship carrying 150 migrants dock in Italy last year
MILAN—The Italian Senate voted to lift the immunity of Matteo Salvini, paving the way for the country’s former interior minister and the leader of the opposition to face a possible trial for refusing to let a ship carrying 150 migrants dock in Italy last year, and bringing the issue of migration to Europe back to the fore as the continent tries to stem the spread of the coronavirus.
Today is the 76 anniversary of the outbreak of the #WarsawUprising
The Germans murdered 200,000+ Poles during the 63-day-long uprising. Many of them children
Just in my district (Wola),they executed 50,000 civilians in 4 days
Our football fans have excellent historical memory!
I must disagree with the sentiment here. It’s far better to take the weight off of the Germans per se, especially subsequent generations, and place the burden on the Nazi regime and those who went along with it (who were thus, Nazis).
Tarring all Germans and leaving them no route of distinction from the Nazi regime is no way to move forward and foster good neighborly relations among nations.
The Poles would not appreciate it, and quite rightly not, if the entire nation of their people were blamed for the misdeeds of some rogue regime of theirs from history.
.....
This is why I maintain the term “Nazi.” In order to distinguish a rogue regime from German people per se - those who never really thought it was the right course of action and those who went along with it but might not have with the guidance of a better regime; recognizing their human agency as it might pursue neighborly coordination as opposed to the natural fallacy of deterministic conflict and war that was epistemic of Nazi ideology.
Further, “Nazi” is used so as to avoid the ennobling, misrepresenting and misleading title, “National Socialist.” Hitler’s regime was imperialist, not nationalist, supremacist not socialist - not “social” in most of the positive connotations of “social” - particularly, not in the non-economic, social sense of humaneness and social accountability; not only to qualitative niches of its own, but also in recognition and respect for the niche qualities of other groups; and in the need to get along with these human ecologies - as the world view of praxis, with its apprehension of reflexive effects, would do.
I’m going to keep hammering-home the importance of centralizing our world view through praxis - that is to say our people groups, their biological nature (requiring optimal, not maximal need satisfaction), mammalian nature (caring for relationships) and their distinctly human capacities - for example to learn to get along, to coordinate interests, by means of social accountability to correct runaway trajectories of natural fallacy and ideals beyond human nature; which otherwise rupture human and pervasive ecological systems.
If humans are to evolve, devolve as it were, in a dehumanizing eusocial manner, it is far more likely to occur through the kind of natural fallacy that the Nazis operated on.
Whereas the Post Modern project - properly understood, which I call the White Post modern project in order to distinguish it - by taking the post modern turn to centralize our world view through praxis, provides for the coherence, social accountability, correctivity and agency to stave-off such pernicious devolution.
....
* “White Post Modern Project” - as distinguished from the da da, ironic, hyper relative, hyper critical deconstructionist misrepresentations of the post modern project.
Statues toppled, buildings renamed, curricula “decolonized,” staff fired. The protests following George Floyd’s killing have emboldened cultural revolutionaries in America and Europe. The iconoclasts are changing minds, and could be in a position to enact a root-and-branch reconstruction of America into something completely unrecognizable to its present-day inhabitants. Imagine a country whose collective memory has been upended, with a new constitution, anthem, and flag, its name changed from the sinful “America” to something less tainted. Far-fetched? Not according to data I have collected on what liberal white Americans actually believe. Only a renewed American cultural nationalism can resist it.
According to multiple surveys, the effect of the riots which occurred at around the same time as the BLM protests is quite different from what occurred with previous waves of rioting. First, many of the participants in the major riots were white. Second, there has been no clear call for Nixonian law and order following the riots, but rather greater public acceptance of the BLM movement’s unsupported claims that contemporary structural racism explains why police shoot unarmed black men or violent crime plagues inner-city neighbourhoods. While 57 percent of Americans disagree with the protestors’ radical slogan, “defund the police,” an astounding 29 percent support it. This is so despite the deaths of a number of black people during the riots and the fact the riots have coincided with a steep rise in the number of black homicide deaths in inner-city neighbourhoods due to a “Ferguson Effect” of police reducing their presence in these areas.
Meanwhile Trump is polling well down after the riots, having dropped 2.5 points to Biden since Floyd’s death on May 25th. Trump’s repeated mistruths, unstatesmanlike behaviour and nepotistic employment of family members may have eroded the truth-based environment to such an extent that evidence-free shifts in issue position become increasingly easy. His sinking popularity tarnishes issue positions associated with his presidency, even when they are backed by the weight of evidence—as with the idea that indiscriminate police brutality rather than racism accounts for violence against unarmed blacks. The power of corporate and celebrity endorsement, magnified by “trendy” social media herding, has resulted in unusually high approval among whites for the activities of the rioters. This is an important departure from what occurred during, for example, the late 60s race riots, 1992 Rodney King riots, or even the 2014 Ferguson riots.
Statues, memory, and the social construction of harm
Progressive scholars are fond of emphasizing the socially-constructed nature of perceived reality. This is overstated, of course. Human minds are not blank slates. Gender can’t be readily reconstructed to make males dominate the caring professions and females the majority of ditch-diggers. Similarly, Americans can’t easily be convinced they are actually Russians.
But you don’t need to follow social construction to its postmodernist extreme to acknowledge that social construction does play a role in how we perceive the world. To a partial extent, there really is a “social construction of reality,” as Berger and Luckmann put it. Psychological research, for example, shows that flagging certain issues repeatedly, or framing them in particular ways, affects attitudes and feelings.
Let me interject here to make a correction in Kaufmann’s assessment of the abuse of social constructionism. The agentive aspect of social constructionism can be overstated [and I am sure that “progressive scholars” like to do that], but this would be an abuse of social constructionism indeed. As I like to emphasize, there are three important aspects to proper deployment of social constructionism: 1) The more literal, for example, as in people constructing a building together. 2) The metaphoric, for example, “a couple and a village socially constructing a child together”...or the social (re)construction of the narrative of a people’s history and 3) Post Hoc attribution as to how more brute facts come to count - e.g., fact, ‘my cousin was hit by lightning and killed’ but now there is a negotiation (social construction) as to whether the lightning strike was an act of god or triggered by events of physics; whether he has gone to heaven or is now just worm food, up for beatification or a good riddance, etc. ...is there something to be done to prevent lightning strikes or not?
...and poignantly, the fact of immigration, to be treated like a force of nature, a flow (as our enemies might like us to passively accept it), something that just happens? or rather an egregious social policy instantiated by hostile and irresponsible elites?
For Kaufmann to say that “social constructionism is overstated” is not accurate then. He might say with accuracy, that the agentive aspect of social constructionism can be overstated where it might attempt to say that it can make just whatever it likes of brute facts. But then that is neither particularly social nor anti-Cartesian indeed, but rather solipsistic, violating the corrective raison d’être of social constructionism and its means to harness social accountability.
Besides a red caping for the sake of Jewish interests, to dissuade Whites from this vital instrument (viz. for Whites to organize as a group), I believe much of the abuse of social constructionism has to do with the university being in the big business of selling talk and undergraduates being the paying customers that can be lured into liberal tenured professors’ language games by appealing to them with an “empowering” sense of overstated agency and liberal activism.
That correction at hand, back to Kauffmann
What society chooses to focus on and care about, the emotions it feels, the objects it sacralizes, the boundaries between groups, vary a lot across time and place. For instance, choosing not to shake someone’s hand is offensive in Western culture, but not in Japan, where a bow is the common greeting. Leaving food on one’s plate is treated as an insult in Japan, but not in the West. Bradley Campbell and Jason Manning show that in Western elite culture in 1800, as in violent inner-city neighborhoods today, insults were treated as violence, which can only be avenged by physical violence. But for most of us, who haven’t been inculcated into a touchy honor culture, verbal slights don’t carry the same emotional punch. We either ignore them or respond with a counter-insult. As the sociology of emotions tells us, the way societies and individuals emotionally respond to words is, to an important degree, socially constructed.
The same sensitizing dynamic works for history, literature, film, statues, and even words. Like Red Guards with a hair-trigger sensitivity for sniffing out the bourgeois, today’s [*internationalist left ergo liberal-modernist] offense archaeologists outdo each other in trying to reframe the world as racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, ableist, and so on. Turning the principle of charity on its head, they insist on the most suspicious interpretation of a person’s motives when the subject matter is associated with their canonical totems of race, gender, sexuality. A Hispanic man flicking his fingers outside his truck window gets fired because this was photographed, tweeted, and spun as the “OK” white power sign. The result is an atmosphere where inter-personal trust is as low as humanly possible while discursive power flows to the accuser. The new cultural revolutionaries have constructed our emotional and conceptual reality.
Once “harm”, “racism” and other concepts become unmoored from reality, more of the world is remade. Statues which were long ignored become offensive. Complex historical figures like Jefferson or Churchill, who embodied the prejudices of their time, or elites like Columbus or Ulysses Grant, whose achievements had both positive and negative effects, are viewed through a totalizing Maoist lens which collapses shades of grey into black and white. If a historic personage transgressed [liberal internationalist] left-modernist sacred values, their positives instantly evaporate and activists myopically focus on their transgressions.
Suddenly, an entire Orwellian world opens up: place names, history books, statues, buildings. When you’re equipped with the anti-racist hammer, everything begins to look like a nail. In this brave new world, it doesn’t matter whether a symbol like the Rhodes Scholarship has acquired a completely different meaning, or whether a statue has become a symbol of something completely different. All must be levelled to bring forth utopia.
What has occurred across the West, especially in the English-speaking world, is a steady [liberal internationalist] left-modernist march through the institutions. Beginning in the 1960s, former radicals entered universities and the media, capturing the meaning-producing machines of society. Once boomers became the establishment in the 1990s, the ethos of institutions started to shift. For good and ill, equality and diversity rose up the priority list. As these ideas filtered through Schools of Education and into the K-12 curriculum, older ideas of patriotism faded and the new critical theory perspective began to replace it. Sixty three percent of millennials (aged 22–37) now agree that “America is a racist country,” nearly half say it is “more racist than other countries” and 60 percent that it is a sexist country. Older generations are less radical, but 40–50 percent of boomers and Gen Xers agree with these statements, reflecting the long march of the [Internationalist Marxist] Left through American culture.
The deculturation of America
In order to find out how willing liberal Americans are to jettison the country’s cultural identity, I decided, on May 7th, to ask what I thought were outlandish questions—almost to the point of inflicting a Sokal Squared-style hoax on survey respondents. The answers I received amazed me. I then repeated the exercise on June 15th, after the George Floyd killing and subsequent protests to see whether things had gotten even crazier. It turns out they have.
After the preface, “To what extent do you think that the following should be done to address structural barriers to race and gender equality in America,” I presented 16 statements that an amalgamated sample of 870 American respondents could agree or disagree with. The sample is not representative of the American population—I used the Amazon Mechanical Turk and Prolific Academic survey platforms that thousands of academics use. Respondents on these platforms lean young, liberal, and white. But as this is precisely the group I wished to study, this is not a major limitation. Indeed, I have removed conservatives and centrists to focus only on liberals. Liberals are defined as those who rate themselves as a one “very liberal” or two “liberal” on a five-point scale from “very liberal” to “very conservative.” The liberal sample, consisting of 414 people, was 86 percent white and 53 percent male. Forty percent of liberals identified as “very liberal” and the other 60 percent as just “liberal.”
Responses ranged on a seven-point scale from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” I’ve simplified the seven categories into a binary agree-versus-disagree score. Those who scored a four—“neither agree nor disagree”—were dropped from the analysis, permitting me to gauge where the balance of committed opinion lies.
Here is what I asked people to agree or disagree with:
1. Rebalance the history taught in schools until its voices and subjects reflect the demographics of the population and heritage of Native people and citizens of color.
2. Move, after public consultation, to a new American anthem that better reflects our diversity as a people
3. Rename our cities and towns until they match the demographics of the population
4. Rebalance the art shown in museums across the country until an analysis of content shows that it reflects the demography of the population and perspective of Native people and citizens of color
5. Move, after an open public process, to a new name for our country that better reflects the contributions of Native Americans and our diversity as a people
6. Rename our states until they better reflect the heritage of Native people and citizens of color
7. Gradually replace many older public buildings with new structures that don’t perpetuate a Eurocentric order, until a more representative public space is achieved
8. Respectfully remove the monument to four white male presidents at Mount Rushmore, as they presided over the conquest of Native people and repression of women and minorities
9. Allow our public parks to return to their natural state, before a European sense of order was imposed upon them
10. Move, after public consultation, to a new American flag that better reflects our diversity as a people
11. Consider adopting a new national language, that will be forged from the immigrant and Native linguistic diversity of this country’s past
12. Remove existing statues of white men from public spaces until the stock of statues matches the demographics of the population
13. Gently remodel the statue of liberty to make it better reflect the diversity of America
14. Rename our streets and neighbourhoods until they match the demographics of the population
15. Move, after public consultation, to a new American constitution that better reflects our diversity as a people
16. Begin changing the layout of our cities, towns, and highways, moving away from the grid system to follow the more natural trails originally used by Native people
Nativist Concern: One of the more talented of the somewhat recent arrivals to the J.Q.
Not highly original but pretty solid in his understanding of the J.Q. His third positionism does, unfortunately, provide backdoors for right wing elements to be used against nativist, ethnonational concerns.* It would be good to talk to him.
* For a classic example of his formulaic (and latently disastrous) worldview (106:34):
He exercises 2020 hindsight to suggest that World War II shouldn’t have been fought, but fails to consider that perhaps it was Hitler who should not have been attacking other nations. There are a host of right wing reactions vulnerable to misdirection with his presumption.
The editorial staff at Voice of Europe’s regrets to inform you, our readers, that we will be ceasing our news publishing operations indefinitely. Our decision, of course, comes with the heaviest of hearts and follows months of increased censorship from Google, Facebook, and Twitter. Furthermore, our ability to monetize our content, which had already been greatly diminished as a result of the virus’s economic effects, was recently taken away completely when our ad platforms banned us outright. Unfortunately, we do not receive nearly enough financial support from you, the readers, to cover the costs of our operation. For all of these reasons, we’ve decided end Voice of Europe.
Like you, we at Voice of Europe are also deeply concerned about the dark place that our society seems to be headed. We have clearly entered a time where sharing facts which aren’t in line with the mainstream narrative is no longer tolerated.
We are grateful for the support that you’ve shown us over the years.
At the moment, when search Google News for “Raspail”, you get French death notices, and New York Times story, illustrated with a picture of presidential aide Stephen Miller, titled A Racist Book’s Malign and Lingering Influence, by Elian Peltier and Nicholas Kulish, NYT, November 22, 2019.
Miller and GOP Congressman Steve King are alleged to have read Raspail’s book, and to have pointed out—correctly—that it was prophetic, and that’s a bad thing, according to the NYT, which is in the business of deciding what’s not fit to print, and suppressing it. (Their story is in the “news”, rather than Opinion section of the paper.)
We have been covering Raspail and his prophesies since we began here at VDARE.com.
See Truth Follows Fiction: Camp Of The Saints begins in France, by Paul Craig Roberts, February 20, 2001.
Email .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) if you want to buy one—they may be the last physical copies on the North American Continent.
To quote another controversial Frenchman:
“When I am dead, I hope it may be said: His sins were scarlet, but his books were read.”
Related - TheLocal.de: Teenage girl stabbed to death in broad daylight in west German park. The scene of the murder in Viersen. Photo: DPA
Prosecutors in Sicily are seeking to charge Mr. Salvini with illegally detaining the migrants…
