Category Archives: Conservatism

The History of and Rationale Behind Republican Fanatical Government Hatred

When Ronald Reagan came into office in 1980, he launched a campaign of demonization of the federal government the likes of which this nation had never seen before. Even Goldwaterites, John Birchers and Southern Democrats had never shown this level of contempt and hatred for the federal government before. Keep in mind that a Republican lie is that they only hate the federal government. Like most things Republicans say, it’s a lie. Republicans hate all forms of government. They mostly hate the federal government, but they do not like the state governments much either. Nor do they even like county or even city governments.

When Republicans spit their contempt for “government workers,” we need to know a few things. First of all, they do not only despise federal government workers. They despise all government employees who work for any branch of the government, even City Hall. And there is something else. “Government workers” is shorthand for two things.

  1. Union thugs. First of all, it means “union members.” Government unions are last unions in this insane state that have not yet been destroyed by the capitalists. All capitalists hate all unions. All conservatives hate all unions. If you love unions, you can’t be a conservative. It’s ruled out. Hatred of labor unions and state education are two of the principal pillars of US conservatism. All Republicans, even the RINO “liberal Republicans” of the East Coast, were united in their hatred for state education and labor unions. Those are two things you need to check off to get your conservative card.
  2. Shiftless, sponging nigs. Second of all, “government workers” means niggers. Excuse me, I mean Black people. Lazy Blacks, shiftless Blacks, incompetent Blacks, Blacks ripping off hard-earned White taxpayer money – “government workers” implies all of these things. And there is something else. There is the assumption that government workers are the least competent workers in America. The idea is that they work for the government because they are so incompetent that no one in the private sector will hire them. Government workers are the ultimate American failures.

9 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Government, Labor, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Republicans, US Politics

Next NATO/CIA Target: Vojvodina?

Here.

The usual jerkoffs who brought you the Ukraine mess are up to no good again, this time in Serbia. Serbia is being punished because even though it is more or less permanently occupied by EU/NATO sops, Serbia and its people consider these leaders to be traitors and the people are trying to get out from underneath NATO’s boot heel.

All of the ingredients in the wonderful Ukraine Mystery Casserole are in place:

Zionist Jew neocon George Soros and his “Open Society” Institute. I used to think this guy was ok, but now I think I agree with the Tea Partiers that he is Satan. The only Left he promotes is the Cultural Left freakshow, but he only promotes this for the Gentiles, not for his own kind.

When Cultural Left feminazi Femen tried to expand to Israel, Soros cut them off. Decadence and degeneration are only for the Gentiles, and his own people must be kept pure of such things. This guy seems like he walked right out of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. If you ever wonder why so many people hate Jews, it’s because too many of them are just like this clown. George Soros is poison, a US imperialist agent.

Neoconservative Jew Victoria Nuland. “We paid $5 billion to conquer Ukraine,” and “Fuck the EU.” Wherever this psycho shows up, turbulence and chaos seem to follow.

…the Soros and Central Intelligence Agency-financed NGO operatives in the province who work closely with U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, the person who helped shepherd [Croatian Nazi President] Grabar-Kitarovic to victory in Croatia and who stands ready to launch a Vojvodina war for independence among recently-arrived professional provocateurs from Romania, Hungary, Albania, and Roma camps in the Balkans.

Looks like Ms. Nuland is palling around with her Nazi buddies again. I guess her motto is, “We like Nazis, as long as they are pro-US Nazis.”

NATO. North American Terrorist Organization. Lost its raison d etre in 1991, made some new fake enemies so it could have an excuse to keep threatening, invading and warmongering. Killers gotta kill.

EU. More like PEE-UW. Stinks to high heaven. Rapidly becoming the most disliked organization in Europe for good reason.

Your friendly neighborhood Nazis. What would NATO mischief be without Nazis or Al Qaeda type jihadis? The Nazis this time are the Croat Nazis, and those are some real Nazis, at least as bad as the Ukie kind. Actually probably worse, sorry. The Croat Nazis were so bad that the Germans themselves were appalled at their brutality.

Oil and gas. All wars are oil wars? Well not quite, but you get the picture. Otherwise known as Black Money.

If Ukraine is any example, what Nuland and her neocons have in store for Vojvodina will cleanse the province of its Serbs and provide a friendly country for Western oil and natural gas companies to exploit known reserves of the hydrocarbons in eastern Vojvodina, an area known as Banat.

No war for oil! Where have we seen this movie before?

Jihadis or Baby Al Qaedas: Apparently the Kosovars are meant to serve this role.

Zionazis: From the article:

And in yet another example of the close ties between neo-Nazism and Zionism, Grabar-Kitarovic’s presidential political adviser and the head of her transition team is documentary film maker Jadranka Juresko Kero, yet another American implant in Eastern European governance structures and an individual who avidly supports Israel and the Zionist cause.

These Zionists and pro-Israeli types are really nuts. Making alliance with out and out neo-Nazis. How insane can a Jew get? Another reason so many people don’t like Jews. Apparently a lot of Jews are so sleazy that they will even make alliance with and use real bonafide Nazis if they share the same enemies. I would say that the ultimate in sleaze for a Jewish person would be to make a cynical, money or Realpolitik based alliance with out and out Nazis. I mean talk about no values.

I always said that National Socialism can unfold in any society, and by that token, Israel is a Jewish National Socialist (Nazi) state. I

 

 

in Israel, the “Germans” are the Jews and the “Jews” are the Arabs. It’s an +e++++++++++++++ down world. But really National Socialism is just racist fascism. Some fascism is not racist, say Mussolini or Franco. But then there is the racist kind – Nazis and many others. So in that sense as a racist fascist state, Israel could be seen as a Jewish Nazi country.

National Endowment for Democracy: Laughably named US CIA front for engineered regime change in states hostile to US imperialism. Where Trouble is, NED is.

Monsatano (Monsanto): Where Evil is, Monsatano is. Monsatano is busy at work in the Ukraine too. In fact one of the main reasons so many people are dying over there is so Ukraine can be secured for Monsatano colonization.

Just as Kosovo was carved from Serbia to facilitate a trans-Balkan pipeline and provide the United State a permanent Balkans military base at Camp Bondsteel, an independent Vojvodina is designed to provide NATO with a ready supply of oil and natural gas from Banat and a fertile Danube valley for the production of genetically-modified foods. Like Ukraine, Vojvodina is being targeted by the Western military-commercial complex for hydrocarbon fracking and Monsanto agri-exploitation.

However, I do not think this is going to work. There are too many Serbs here (66%) and they are scattered all over, so there is no way that Vojvodina could secede as long as it has a strong Serb minority.

1 Comment

Filed under Conservatism, Europe, Fascism, Government, Imperialism, Israel, Jewish Racism, Middle East, National Socialism, Nazism, Neoconservatism, Political Science, Racism, Radical Islam, Regional, Religion, Serbia, The Jewish Question, Ukraine, Zionism

Propaganda Works Great

Here.

Well at least it does in the West, where no one believes they are being subjected to 24-7 full spectrum dominance propaganda by 100% of the mainstream media! Oh no, we don’t have propaganda here. Of course not. The only people who have propaganda are the enemies of America. Yeah.

I am absolutely stunned at the number of Americans who believe every single word the US government, its allies and the mainstream media says about US foreign policy. I would say that Democratic Party liberals are probably the worst of all, as a lot conservatives now are libertarians and paleocons who are cynical about both the US state and Western media. This type of conservative believes full well that the US state does all sorts of nasty, wicked stuff and both the state and the media are liable to lie on a continuous basis.

But honestly I am shocked at how gullible Americans are. Americans just seem to go along with the propaganda du jour. Very few Americans dissent, and trust me, being a dissenter on US foreign policy is not very pleasant, even in liberal circles. You are called a traitor, a nut and a conspiracy theorist and an agent of the enemy states. I am starting to think that Americans may be some of the most brainwashed people on Earth. Most of the problem is they don’t think they are being brainwashed. The most brainwashable people of all are those who do not think they are being lied to.

 

19 Comments

Filed under American, Asia, Conservatism, Culture, Democrats, Eurasia, Government, Journalism, Liberalism, NE Asia, North Korea, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Russia, Sociology, US Politics, USA

There Is No Right-Left Divide in Europe

The real divide is between nationalists (anti-EU, anti-NATO, anti-austerity, anti-corporate, anti-rich, and opposition to being colonized by the US and the banksters) and internationalists (EU, NATO, neoliberalism, austerity, pro-corporate, pro-rich, continuation of being colonies of the US and the banksters).

Most of the standard European rightwing and centrist parties are internationalists, as are almost of all the traditional European left and social democratic parties. There is not a Hell of a lot of difference between the Tories, Labour, Spain’s Conservative Party, Hollande’s Socialist Party, and Merkel’s Christian Democrats. There is no real European Left anymore as the Old Left is dead.

So you can see that the traditional European Left, Centrist and Right parties have all converged around EU-NATO pro-corporate, pro-oligarch, pro-austerity neoliberalism. For the life of me, I have a hard to time telling the difference France’s “Socialists” and Spain’s “Conservatives.” To me they’re all the same. Can someone clue me on the differences between the traditional European Right, Left and Center parties. They all seem to be saying the same thing.

I am absolutely with the nationalists here. Putin,  Marie LePen’s National Front in France,  Orban’s Conservative Party in Hungary, UKIP, the Greek Independent Party, and the government of Cyprus. All of these are considered to be rightwing nationalist movements, leaders or governments. I am down with all of them.

I also support the Russian and Ukrainian Communist Parties and Syriza in Greece. All of these are on the Left.

Eurasianism and BRICS are excellent antidotes for NATO-EU poison.

Even though I am supposedly a Leftist, I would support a lot of European rightwing parties. I suppose I am more of a nationalist and an anti-internationalist than anything else. I will make alliance with most rightwing nationalist movements against the EU-NATO crowd, whether they are right, left or center.

3 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Economics, Eurasia, Europe, Internationalism, Left, Liberalism, Nationalism, Neoliberalism, Political Science, Politics, Regional

Family Research Council’s Anti-Gay Charges

The Family Research Council is a rightwing anti-gay, pro-family Christian organization. The SPLC has designated them a hate group, which they may well be. The SPLC then lists a number of charges that the FRC has made about homosexuals and says that all of these charges are proven false. Let us go through the charges and see which are true and which are false.

True after a charge means the SPLC is wrong, and the anti-gays are right, Mixed after a charge means that SPLC and the anti-gays are right on some thing and wrong on others, and False after a charge means the SPLC is right, and the anti-gays are wrong.

A tallying of the data shows that 6 of the anti-gay charges are false (the anti-gays are lying), 8 of the anti-gay charges are mixed (some lies, some truth), and 7 of the charges are true (anti-gays charges are true). So of 21 anti-gay charges, only 6 are complete lies, and the other 15 are either true or have some truth to them.

False (Anti-gays Are Lying)

“Welcoming open homosexuality in the military would clearly damage the readiness and effectiveness of the force – in part because it would increase the already serious problem of homosexual assault in the military.”

— Peter Sprigg, Homosexual Assault in the Military. 2010

I do not agree that gays in the military has a bad effect on the readiness and effectiveness of the force. At any rate, the anti-gays have never proved it. There is indeed a serious male on male sexual assault problem in the military, believe it or not. Whether allowing open gays in the military will increase this problem remains to be seen.

“Gaining access to children has been a long-term goal of the homosexual movement.”

— Robert Knight, FRC Director of Cultural Studies, and Frank York. 1999

This is the old chestnut “the fags have come for our kids!” line. I have never believed it, and there doesn’t seem to be any evidence for it. At any rate, most gay men have no interest in young boys.

Sprigg claimed that ex-gay therapy works, that sexual orientation can change…The FRC also strongly promotes the “ex-gay” movement as a way to combat LGBT civil rights measures…

It is true that you cannot make gay men straight by any therapy. This has been proven in the lab. This has been proven endlessly. Consequently, straight man apparently cannot be turned gay by any therapy. Whether or not lesbians can change their orientation remains to be seen, and the data here is not adequate as the question has not been properly explored.

…that gay people are mentally ill simply because homosexuality makes them that way…

Homosexuality is not a mental illness, but in a lot of cases, it sort of acts like one, oddly enough. The hard fact is that there are quite a few gay men who are as mentally healthy as any straight man or as healthy as a man can be. The fact that there are homosexuals who are this healthy means that homosexuality cannot possibly be a mental illness.

Nevertheless, gay men do have higher rates of depression and anxiety and no one seems to know why. New studies out of Sweden and Denmark have recently affirmed this. These two countries are probably the most pro-gay nations on Earth. The traditional argument has been that so many gay men are nutty because of how society treats them. But the new studies seem to suggest that even when gay men are treated as well as possible, they still have elevated rates of depression and anxiety. However, the reasons for the higher rates of depression and anxiety in gay men are not yet known.

“Sexual abuse of boys by adult men is many times more common than consensual sex between adult men, and most of those engaging in such molestation identify themselves as homosexual or bisexual.”

This is one of the craziest arguments I have ever heard. There is much more men having sex with boys than there is men having sex with other men? Are you kidding. I wonder if I am reading this right.

Mixed (Some anti-gay charges true, others lies)

“The reality is, homosexuals have entered the Scouts in the past for predatory purposes.”

– FRC Vice President Rob Schwarzwalder on radio’s The Janet Mefferd Show. Feb. 1, 2013.

It is no doubt true in the past, some gay men entered into scouring to get access to boys, but not all gay men in the past entered into scouting for this reason.

“The videos are titled It Gets Better. They are aimed at persuading kids that although they’ll face struggles and perhaps bullying for ‘coming out’ as homosexual or transgendered or some other perversion, life will get better…It’s disgusting. And it’s part of a concerted effort to persuade kids that homosexuality is okay and actually to recruit them into that lifestyle.”

— Tony Perkins, FRC fundraising letter. August 2011

The basic idea behind the videos is a good one. It is indeed part of an effort to persuade kids that homosexuality is ok. I have never believed the “gays recruit young kids” argument and I see little evidence that they do. Do they try to convert and recruit straight men, especially young straight men? Well of course.

“Those who understand the homosexual community – the activists – they’re very aggressive, they’re – everything they accuse us of they are in triplicate. They’re intolerant, they’re hateful, vile, they’re spiteful…To me, that is the height of hatred, to be silent when we know there are individuals that are engaged in activity, behavior, and an agenda that will destroy them and our nation.”

— Tony Perkins speaking to the Oak Initiative Summit. April 2011

You’re darn right that gay activists are aggressive, intolerant, hateful, vile and spiteful, just like most Identity Politics crazies. Political homosexuality has been a huge mistake, and much of what they peddle is PC lies. The Gay Lobby lies all the time, like all Identity Politics groups. However, it is dubious that homosexuality will destroy our country and lot all homosexuals are “destroyed” by their behavior, though quite a few certainly are.

“One of the primary goals of the homosexual rights movement is to abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize pedophiles as the ‘prophets’ of a new sexual order…homosexual rights movement has tried to distance itself from pedophilia, but only for public relations purposes.”

— 1999 FRC publication, Homosexual Behavior and Pedophilia, Robert Knight and Frank York

I really doubt if the gay movement wishes to abolish all age of consent laws, although the Gay Lobby had a far too cozy relationship with the boylovers in NAMBLA and other groups for far too long. Furthermore, a number of prominent gays associated themselves with or supported NAMBLA.

Nevertheless, I refuse to believe that gay men wish to make it legal for adult men to have sex with very young boys. Most gay men are not even interested in little boys.

However, it is very much true that the Gay Lobby would love to lower the age of consent so that gay men could have access to those teenage boys so many of them love and crave so much. It has been known since Antiquity that gay men have a thing for teenage boys. This stuff didn’t start with Death in Venice you know. Gay men are much more likely to have had sex with teenage boys when the men were over age 23 (25%). Straight men are much less likely to have sex with teenage girls when the men are over age 23 (6%). So there is something to the old chicken hawk charge.

…homosexuals are promiscuous, and that lesbians exhibit “compulsive behavior.”

Gay men are absolutely promiscuous, and they probably always have been. I am not aware of any evidence that shows that lesbians exhibit any more compulsive behavior than other women.

In another paper titled Homosexual Parenting: Placing Children at Risk, Dailey quoted from a study that claimed, “A disproportionate percentage – 29 percent – of the adult children of homosexual parents had been specifically subjected to sexual molestation by that homosexual parent…Having a homosexual parents appears to increase the risk of incest with a parent by a factor of about 50.”

It is absolutely true that being raised by gay parents increases the risk that the child will be molested by someone during childhood. The figure I am not sure of is the 29% figure. Nevertheless, the likelihood that a child will be molested in a traditional family is also quite high, much higher than you might guess.

On Oct. 11, 2010, Perkins managed to get the Washington Post to run his op-ed, in which he reiterated his point that anti-bullying policies are not really intended by their supporters to protect students. “Homosexual activist groups like GLSEN [Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network] … are exploiting these tragedies to push their agenda of demanding not only tolerance of homosexual individuals, but active affirmation of homosexual conduct and their efforts to redefine the family.”

True and false. GLSEN, etc. do indeed want to stop anti-gay bullying in schools because it traumatizes many gay boys. Many gay men are still traumatized from the way straight males tortured them in school. However, certainly these groups also want to promote tolerance of homosexuals and affirmation of homosexual conduct. The gay movement absolutely seeks to redefine the family, among other things they wish to redefine, including gender itself.

“While activists like to claim that pedophilia is a completely distinct orientation from homosexuality, evidence shows a disproportionate overlap between the two…It is a homosexual problem.”

— FRC President Tony Perkins, FRC website. 2010

Well, there is a certain amount of overlap between male homosexuality and child molestation of boys and pedophilia as discussed below. Nevertheless, the average gay man is highly unlikely to be a child molester because pedophilia is such a rare condition.

True (Anti-gay Charges Against Homosexuals Are Correct)

“A little-reported fact is that homosexual and lesbian relationships are far more violent than are traditional married households.”

– Timothy Dailey, FRC publication, Homosexual Parenting: Placing Children at Risk. 2002

There is little doubt now that both gay and lesbian relationships are much more violent than straight relationships. The debate is over on this one.

“Homosexuality…embodies a deep-seated hatred against true religion.”

— Steven Schwalm, FRC senior writer and analyst, in Desecrating Corpus Christi. 1999

Considering that most religions condemn homosexuals and especially their behavior, it would not be surprising if many gays were hostile to religion. After all, if you hit someone enough times, they might just start hitting back.

Knight authored numerous anti-gay papers, and even used Cameron’s infamous “gay obituary” study in testimony he offered before Congress to oppose the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) in 1994. In his prepared statement on that topic, he said, “A study of more than 6,400 obituaries in homosexual publications reveals that homosexuals typically have far shorter life spans than the general population.”

Cameron is a prick and a nut, but his data is usually pretty good. His study has now been replicated numerous times, including new studies out of Sweden and Denmark, two of the most gay-tolerant countries on Earth. Being gay absolutely shaves at least 20 and maybe 30 years off the lifespan. Much of this is due to HIV, but even if you pull HIV out of the equation, even gay men who are HIV-negative live on average 22 years less than straight men.

Lesbians also lose about 20 years of life expectancy. Leaving aside the question of HIV, there is a lot of debate about why gays die so soon, and it is not yet resolved. Many lesbians are obese and are much more likely to drink and smoke too much than straight women. They also get a lot of breast cancer. These factors may explain the loss in life expectancy. Why HIV-negative men die so soon is not known.

“…homosexuals are less likely to enter into a committed relationship…”

True, at least for gay men. There is a lot of good research backing this up. Data for lesbians is unknown, but they often do enter into long-term committed relationships.

Gays are less likely to be sexually faithful to a partner.

100% true, at least for gay men. Even when gay men marry, they typically have open marriages and each partner has an average of 7 partners each year outside the marriage. Data for lesbians not known.

…links homosexuality to a variety of sexually transmitted diseases.

Gay men are absolutely linked to quite a few STD’s and in fact, some STD’s are present almost exclusively among gay men and little if at all among straights or lesbians. Lesbians do not appear to have an elevated risk of STD’s.

“Homosexual activists vehemently reject the evidence which suggests that homosexual men…are…relative to their numbers, more likely to engage in such actions childhood sexual abuse than are heterosexual men.”

– Peter Sprigg, Senior Fellow for Policy Studies at FRC, on why the Boy Scouts should not allow LGBT Scouts or leaders, FRC blog. February 1, 2013.

“We believe the evidence shows … that relative to the size of their population, homosexual men are more likely to engage in child sexual abuse than are heterosexual men.”

— Peter Sprigg, Debating Homosexuality: Understanding Two Views. 2011.

In some of his other papers like Homosexuality and Child Abuse, Dailey links homosexuality to pedophilia, and claims that “a tiny percentage of the population homosexual men commit one-third or more of the cases of child sexual molestation.”

…gay men commit a disproportionate number of child sex abuse cases…

This is unfortunately true. Indeed, 35% of all molestations are of boys. Almost all of the men doing this identify as gay or bisexual. Gay men are 3% of the males in the US and they commit 35% of the molestations, so gay men are much more likely to be pedophiles and child molesters than straight men. However, the numbers of gay men who molest boys must still be quite small, and your average gay man is highly unlikely to be a pedophile. This is because pedophilia is rare. If gay men were highly likely to be pedophiles, half of the gays in San Fransisco would be in prison.

The crazy argument that if one is pedophilic then one cannot possibly be gay is truly insane, but this is the argument that the American Psychological Association has adopted. The Gay Lobby is on a major jihad to fight this charge and it is understandable why they do not wish to see gay men linked to child molestation. Nevertheless there is some truth to the charge.

10 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Death, Depression, Health, Homosexuality, Illness, Law, Mental Illness, Pedophilia, Political Science, Politics, Psychology, Psychopathology, Religion, Sex, Sociology, US Politics

“News Reporting” in the United States of America

For all intents and purposes, there is no such thing as investigative reporting in the US anymore.

Nor will Hollywood even make dissident films. I listened to an interview with Oliver Stone today and he said that in this climate there is no way that he could make JFK or Nixon and it would be a hard time making Born on the Fourth of July either. Even the somewhat dissident film Bush could not get any money raised in the US because no one would fund it. Instead, Stone had to get his funding from Hong Kong.

So Hollywood, yes, liberal Hollywood, along with the “liberal media,” is now part and parcel of the Deep State and the US State Propaganda System.

So even the word liberal doesn’t mean much anymore. Apparently there is a “liberal” wing of the Deep State/US State Propaganda System and a “conservative” wing of the Deep State/US State Propaganda System. Big deal! This is important? This is a distinction without a difference.

Democratic Party liberals are as much a part of the problem these days as Republican Party conservatives. And on foreign policy, they are more or less advocating the same thing, though the Democrats want a kinder, gentler US imperialism while the Republicans want the usual rabid sociopathic US imperialism that the world knows so well. They both have the same goals – they just differ on how to go about them.

This is what “the news” means in 2015 America.

News in America is made up of two things:

1. Hollywood. And all that implies (sheer entertainment, titillation, gossip, nonsense).

2. Propaganda. And journalism in the US nowadays is yellower than at any time since the early 1960’s. We aren’t going forwards at all. We are going backwards to the Hearst era.

Some US news is pure Hollywood silliness, and some is pure undiluted propaganda.

But the best US news of all mixes the fireworks of Hollywood with the totalization of propaganda to produce a full, dazzling, mesmerizing, nearly all-encompassing Matrix-like alternate reality.

Like any good addicting drug, it takes you under its spell, hooks you til you can’t think straight, and won’t let you kick the habit without nasty withdrawals.

You have heard of full-spectrum warfare?

How about full-spectrum brainwash?

Too late. It’s already here, zapping around in your lulled, dulled and hypnotized brain.

Welcome to the show!

5 Comments

Filed under American, Cinema, Conservatism, Culture, Democrats, Government, Imperialism, Journalism, Liberalism, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Republicans, Sociology, US Politics, USA

Neoconservative Central

Center for Security Policy.

As you can see looking at the authors, the group is a mixture of Jews and non-Jews, but considering Jews are only 2% of the US, the CSP must be 50% Jewish. Nevertheless, there are many non-Jews in the group who share an agenda with the Jews.

CSP was originally a hardline Cold War group that grew out of the Reagan Era’s stepped up war on the USSR. Paul Nitze (gentile), Frank Gaffney (gentile), Richard Perle (Jewish), Paul Wolfowitz (Jewish), and Jeane Kirkpatrick (gentile) were some of the big Reagan era names that continued on in the 1990’s, graduating from Reagan era Cold Warriors to the new War On Terror nonsense of the 2000’s and 2010’s. Later members included Roger Noriega (gentile), Newt Gingrich (gentile), John Bolton (gentile) and Donald Feith (Jewish).

CSP’s current concerns are a fanatical obsession with Iran and extreme anti-Muslim fearmongering, along with a focus on combating extremist Islam which in itself is laudable. Looking at the front page, you can see that the connection with Netanyahu and the Israeli Right is still very strong. One article appears to be actually authored by the Israeli ambassador himself!

As you can see, the big names are a mix of Jews and non-Jews, but they all share a strong alliance with the Israeli Right represented in the flesh now by the very reactionary Netanyahu. I do not think most Americans realize how far right Netanyahu is. He is like an Israeli George W. Bush for lack of a better comparison.

It was from here and a few other organizations that the entire neocon project was launched during the 1990’s. It was from these groups that such seminal documents as Securing the Realm and the founding document of the Project for the New American Century.

Another huge group is called JINSA (Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs).

The entire neocon project of the 2000’s, including the Iraq War itself, was cooked up by just a few of these organizations. I imagine that we can pin down maybe 25 people in Washington and Tel Aviv who were primarily responsible for setting the stage for the Iraq War. And yes, many but not all of them were Jewish.

22 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Iraq War, Israel, Jews, Middle East, Neoconservatism, Political Science, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, The Jewish Question, US Politics, USA, War

Zionists, Nazis and a Bit of History

I agree with the general tone of this article by the Saker.

Zionists, Nazis and a Bit of History

The Zionists

Oh this is too good!!!  My two “favorite” Russia-hating Uber-Zionists join forces in the New York Times to call for the salvation of the Nazi Junta in Kiev by a massive injection of capital.

Priceless.

Here is what they wrote: (full text)

Save the New Ukraine

A NEW Ukraine was born a year ago in the pro-European protests that helped to drive President Viktor F. Yanukovych from power. And today, the spirit that inspired hundreds of thousands to gather in the Maidan, Kiev’s Independence Square, is stronger than ever, even as it is under direct military assault from Russian forces supporting separatists in eastern Ukraine.

The new Ukraine seeks to become the opposite of the old Ukraine, which was demoralized and riddled with corruption. The transformation has been a rare experiment in participatory democracy; a noble adventure of a people who have rallied to open their nation to modernity, democracy and Europe. And this is just the beginning.

This experiment is remarkable for finding expression not only in defending Ukraine’s territorial integrity from the separatists, but also in constructive work. Maidan’s supporters have moved from opposition to nation building.

Many of those in government and Parliament are volunteers who have given up well-paying jobs to serve their country. Natalie Jaresko, a former investment banker, now works for a few hundred dollars a month as the new finance minister. Volunteers are helping Ukraine’s one million internally displaced people as well as working as advisers to ministers and in local government.

The new Ukraine, however, faces a potent challenge from the old Ukraine. The old Ukraine is solidly entrenched in a state bureaucracy that has worked hand in hand with a business oligarchy. And the reformers are also up against the manifest hostility of Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, who wants at all costs to destabilize Ukraine.

One drawback is that the new Ukraine is a well-kept secret, not just from the rest of the world but also from the Ukrainian public. Radical reforms have been hatched but not yet implemented.

It is instructive to compare Ukraine today with Georgia in 2004. When he became president that year, Mikheil Saakashvili immediately replaced the hated traffic police and removed the roadblocks used to extort bribes from drivers. The public recognized straight away that things had changed for the better.

Unfortunately, Ukraine has not yet found a similar demonstration project. Kiev’s police force is to be restructured, but if you need a driver’s license, you must still pay the same bribe as before.

Mr. Saakashvili was a revolutionary leader who first stamped out corruption but eventually turned it into a state monopoly. By contrast, Ukraine is a participatory democracy that does not rely on a single leader but on checks and balances. Democracies move slowly, but that may prove an advantage in the long run.

The big question is, will there be a long run? Although Russia is in a deepening financial crisis, Mr. Putin appears to have decided that he can destroy the new Ukraine before it can fully establish itself and before an economic downturn destroys his own popularity.

The Russian president is stepping up the military and financial pressure on Ukraine. Over the weekend, the city of Mariupol came under attack from forces that NATO said were backed by Russian troops, undermining the pretense that the separatists are acting on their own.

Ukraine will defend itself militarily, but it urgently needs financial assistance. The immediate need is for $15 billion. But to ensure Ukraine’s survival and encourage private investment, Western powers need to make a political commitment to provide additional sums, depending on the extent of the Russian assault and the success of Ukraine’s reforms.

The reformers, who want to avoid the leakages that were characteristic of the old Ukraine, have expressed their wish to be held accountable for all expenditures. They are passing extensive legislation but also want the International Monetary Fund to go on exercising oversight.

Unfortunately, just as democracies are slow to move, an association of democracies like the European Union is even slower. Mr. Putin is exploiting this.

It is not only the future of Ukraine that’s at stake, but that of the European Union itself. The loss of Ukraine would be an enormous blow; it would empower a Russian alternative to the European Union based on the rule of force rather than the rule of law. But if Europe delivered the financial assistance that Ukraine needs, Mr. Putin would eventually be forced to abandon his aggression. At the moment, he can argue that Russia’s economic troubles are caused by Western hostility, and the Russian public finds his argument convincing.

If, however, Europe is generous with its financial assistance, a stable and prosperous Ukraine will provide an example that makes clear that the blame for Russia’s financial troubles lies with Mr. Putin. The Russian public might then force him to emulate the new Ukraine. Europe’s reward would be a new Russia that has turned from a potent strategic threat into a potential strategic partner. Those are the stakes.

The way the NYT presents these two bloodthirsty clowns is also typical. One, Soros, is a “philanthropist,” while the other, Levi, is a “philosopher”. They might as well have presented them as modern-day saints.

Clearly, the Neocons and their Zionist allies are in a full war mode, they fear that their Russophobic Nazi regime in Kiev is going to tank, and they are terrified at the consequences. As they should.

The Nazis

Well, just as predicted, the Rada in Kiev has declared Russia an “aggressor state“.

Now all that is needed to “prove” their point is a major false flag to show that hordes of Spetsnaz GRU throat-cutters are slaughtering babies in their cribs (Kuwait), blowing up peaceful shoppers (Markale market), committing genocide (Srebrenica), massacring villages (Racak) or using Viagra as a weapon of war (Libya). Then Putin needs to be upgraded from “new Stalin” to “new Hitler” (or both) and, voilà, the US and NATO will have to “shoulder their historical burden” of having to defend “civilization, human rights, freedom and progress” against the revanchist Russian aggressor.

I am sorry to have to say that, but I consider a large-scale false flag a virtual inevitability by now. God willing, the Junta is in too much disarray and chaos to make it happen, but I think that everybody in the Novorussian resistance needs to go to “red alert” for some crazy move by the Junta.

The Belly Is Still Fertile from Which the Foul Beast Sprang

Guys, I am constantly getting a flow of comments about “Jews this, Jews that”, “Nazis this, Nazis that”, and the “killer argument” of “Jews cannot be Nazis, and Nazis cannot be Jews”. Guys, think again. Look at all Zionists and Nazis have in common:

1) the belief in the existence of races/ethnicities
2) the belief in the superiority of their own race/ethnicity
3) the morbid obsession with blood and racial purity
4) a phenomenal propensity to use violence to achieve their goals
5) the belief that their opponents are not really human
6) a morbid interest for the occult (Ahnenerbe, Kabbalism)
7) a rabid hatred for Russia, Russians and Orthodoxy

Now, of course, they also happened to hate each other. So what? Trotskists hated Stalinists and vice versa, the SS hated the SA and vice versa and the Jesuits hated the Lutherans and vice versa. But in each case these movements spring from the same well (Bolshevism, National-Socialism and Frankish Papism).

Zionism and Nazism are born from the same fetid womb: 19th European secular nationalism and, as Brecht so well put it: the belly is still fertile from which the foul beast sprang. This is also the root of Ukrainian nationalism, Russian pan-Slavism, and many other ideologies. Most of them have lost traction and have been repudiated, but in Israel Zionism is still the main official state ideology, and the same is true for the part of the ex-Ukraine run by the Nazi junta in Kiev.

Now, since there are apparently quite a few of you who still hold on to racist/racialist ideas, I feel the need to repeat here what I wrote in my post AngloZionist: Short Primer for the Newcomers:

Now this might seem basic, but so many people miss it that I will have to explicitly state it: to say that most US elites are Anglos or Jews does not mean that most Anglos or Jews are part of the US elites. That is a straw man argument which deliberately ignores the non-commutative property of my thesis to turn it into a racist statement which accuses most/all Anglos or Jews of some evildoing. So to be very clear: When I speak of AngloZionist Empire, I am referring to the predominant ideology of the 1%ers elites which form this Empire’s “deep state”.

By the way, there are non-Jewish Zionists, (Biden, in his own words) and there are (plenty of) anti-Zionist Jews. Likewise, there are non-Anglo imperialists, and there are (plenty of) anti-imperialist Anglos. To speak of “Nazi Germany” or “Soviet Russia” does in no way imply that all Germans were Nazis or all Russians Communists. All this means it that the predominant ideology of these nations at that specific moment in time was National Socialism and Marxism, that’s all.

This is why the listing of Jews in power in Kiev because what is missing from the picture is either a list of all Jews who are not in power in Kiev or the list of all non-Jews who are in power in Kiev, or both.

Zionism is to Jews what National Socialism is to Germans and what Communism is to Russians: a pathology triggered by a slight but crucial modification of these nation’s “spiritual DNA”. This is like comparing healthy tissue to a malignant tumor: very similar but different enough to be fatal.

The real enemy:

The real enemy is not the Jew, the German or the Russian, of course. The real enemy is evil, satanic ideologies. As Saint Paul so eloquently put it: For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms (Eph. 6:12). He did not say the “1%ers” of course, but if you ask me, this is close enough.

I recently got an email from a friend who asked me to stop using the word “Ukie,” and I decided to follow his advice because even if some or even most Ukrainians nowadays might support the regime of freaks in Kiev, some, even maybe most, do not.

Yes, Soros and BHL are Jews. Really evil, bloodthirstily and ugly buffoons who I despise from the very bottom of my heart. And yes, their ideology is the kind of Neoconservative Zionism which has become so popular in the USA and in the past decades in Israel (the original Zionists were dramatically different, socialists, secularists, and actually, I think – honest if mistaken idealists). Oh, not that I believe for one second that either one of them sincerely cares about his fellow Jews or about Israel. Not at all. Contrary to the popular belief, one does not need to care for Israel at all to be a Zionist. Are you shocked by that statement? Okay, hear me out. Here is what I wrote in my “primer”:

Let’s take the (hyper politically correct) Wikipedia definition of what the word Zionism means: it is “a nationalist movement of Jews and Jewish culture that supports the creation of a Jewish homeland in the territory defined as the Land of Israel”. Apparently, no link to the US, the Ukraine or Timbuktu, right? But think again.

Why would Jews – whether defined as a religion or an ethnicity – need a homeland anyway? Why can’t they just live wherever they are born, just like Buddhist (a religion) or the African Bushmen (ethnicity) who live in many different countries?

The canonical answer is that Jews have been persecuted everywhere and that therefore they need their own homeland to serve as a safe haven in case of persecutions. Without going into the issue of why Jews were persecuted everywhere and apparently in all times, this rationale clearly implies if not the inevitability of more persecutions  at the very least, a high risk thereof.

Let’s accept that for demonstration sake and see what this, in turn, implies.

First, that implies that Jews are inherently threatened by non-Jews who are all at least potential anti-Semites. The threat is so severe that a separate Gentile-free homeland must be created as the only, best and last way to protect Jews worldwide.

This, in turn, implies that the continued existence of this homeland should become an vital and irreplaceable priority of all Jews worldwide lest a persecution suddenly breaks out and they have nowhere to go.

Furthermore, until all Jews finally “move up” to Israel, they better be very, very careful as all the goyim around them could literally come down with a sudden case of genocidal anti-Semitism at any moment. Hence all the anti-anti-Semitic organizations a la ADL or UEJF, the Betar clubs, the network of sayanim, etc.

In other words, far from being a local “dealing with Israel only” phenomenon, Zionism is a worldwide movement whose aim is to protect Jews from the apparently incurable anti-Semitism of the rest of the planet. As Israel Shahak correctly identified it, Zionism postulates that Jews should “think locally and act globally” and when given a choice of policies, always ask THE crucial question: “But is it good for Jews?“.

So far from being only focused on Israel, Zionism is really a global ideology which unequivocally splits up all of mankind into two groups (Jews and Gentiles), which assumes that the latter are all potential genocidal maniacs (which is racist) and believes that saving Jewish lives is qualitatively different and more important than saving Gentile lives (which is racist again). Anyone doubting the ferocity of this determination should either ask a Palestinian or study the holiday of Purim, or both. Even better, read Gilad Atzmon and look up his definition of what is brilliantly called “pre-traumatic stress disorder”.

So we need to be very careful here.

First, we cannot fight an Empire whose nature and essence we do not understand.

Second, we cannot fight an enemy who we cannot even name. I therefore submit that speaking of the AngloZionist Empire is not only correct but even crucial: “Anglo” refers to historical roots and geopolitical reality, “Zionist” refers to its ideological world view. HOWEVER, as soon as we start “counting Jews” or saying that Nazis and Jews cannot be in the same junta, we are immediately falling back into a completely discredited 19th century West European ideology which has triggered many millions of deaths in all the major wars of the past couple of centuries.

This is bull. Acting like a bull. In a corrida.

Personally, I don’t even believe in the word race. Here again, I will quote my “primer:”

First, I don’t believe that Jews are a race or an ethnicity. I always doubted that, but reading Shlomo Sand really convinced me. Jews are not defined by religion either (most/many are secular). Truly, Jews are a tribe. A group one can chose to join (Elizabeth Taylor) or leave (Gilad Atzmon). In other words, I see “Jewishness” as a culture, or ideology, or education, or any other number of things, but not something rooted in biology. I fully agree with Atzmon when he says that Jews are racist but not a race.

Second, I don’t even believe that the concept of “race” has been properly defined and, hence, that it has any objective meaning. I therefore don’t differentiate between human beings on the basis of an undefined criterion.

But I am aware that there are people out there who consider themselves as Jews or Jewish (never understood the difference between these two terms, but never mind). I say – let them. But let’s not paint them as the enemy when the enemy is a tribal ideology which is shared by millions of people who do not consider themselves as Jews (US Evangelicals, for starters, millions of them).

If we miss the real target and get distracted by the fake one put in front of us by the real enemy, we will act just like a bull in a Spanish corrida: we will always miss the real enemy who will exhaust us and then kill us.

Let us please be smarter and stop constantly chasing the wrong enemy. Let’s hit the real enemy where he really is, where he hides, where it will really hurt him. Let’s accurately name him. His name is “Legion” because he has many ideologies and manifestations, and he shows up in any and all human groups.

Please read the above post carefully, please re-read my “AngloZionists: a short primer” for a fuller discussion.

Kind regards to all, cheers,

The Saker

5 Comments

Filed under Anti-Semitism, Conservatism, Economics, Ethnic Nationalism, Eurasia, Europe, Fascism, Geopolitics, Georgia, Israel, Jewish Racism, Jews, Journalism, Middle East, National Socialism, Nationalism, Nazism, Near East, Neoconservatism, Political Science, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Russia, The Jewish Question, Ukraine, USA, War, Zionism

Is There Such a Thing as a Rightwing Socialist or a Racist Socialist?

Jason Y writes:

White Nationalism is pretty much a “straight up” right wing thing. No tolerance for the left, as they seen as the “devil” At least that’s the way it is on Stormfront, and in the USA.

As for Republicans, they seem to be some kind of “gateway drug” into white nationalism.

Not really.

There are a lot of racist socialists over at Stormfront. There is a whole large section of them over there. I am not sure what they are, if they are National Socialists or what, but a lot of them like socialism and hate capitalism. They want some sort of “white socialism.” I always found them interesting and even though they are scumbags, I would rather ally with some harmless Nazi socialist loudmouth than a boutique upper middle class Cultural Left neoliberal from the Democratic National Committee. The latter is probably going to cause a lot more damage. The Nazi is annoying, but he probably won’t hurt anyone.

These racist socialists really do not exist at any other sites like American Renaissance.

I am not sure what other movements like that are out there, but the National Bolsheviks and Third Positionists are sometimes said to be racist socialists, nationalist socialists or rightwing socialists. I know the Baath Party Arab socialists were very much racist socialists or nationalist socialists. A lot of people say that Marie Le Pen’s party is a rightwing party, and they call her a racist and a fascist. However, her economic program is very populist and extremely socialist. The Khmer Rogue were racist Communists.

I know a socialist who is more or less of a White Nationalist. He is allied with Putin’s Eurasianist project and the National Bolsheviks. I know a Communist who is very much an anti-Semite. He has since converted to Islam. Israel Shamir is a Russian-Israeli Jewish Communist who is often called an anti-Semite (correctly so).

Often these leftwing racist types start moving to the right the deeper they get into their racism. There is some dynamic about racism that seems to naturally make the racist person rightwing or drive them further to the right if they are already on the right. This makes me think that racism is sort of inherently rightwing project that simply does not fit in well with the Left.

As former liberals and Lefties get deeper into racism (as some people do become racist or more racist later in life) they seem to automatically move towards the Right. They also start speaking favorably about the racist Right, especially the fascist Right, who after all hate the same groups that the racist Lefties do, and they start advocating tactical alliances with the fascist Right. They use phrases like “getting rid of Left and Right.” I get a nervous feeling every time I hear that phrase because it is associated with these racist Leftie types.

Leftwing anti-Semites often convert to Islam because, let’s face it, Islam is an anti-Semitic religion.

We do not really have a word for most of these type of “rightwing socialist” or “racist socialist” groups. The idea is that all socialists are non-racists, but that is not necessarily true. I will tell you being into Left politics in any way, you will get a lot of pressure to tone or shut down any racism or even “PC-racism” (which isn’t even racism) that you might have.

As racist Lefties get bashed more and more by their Left colleagues telling them to tone it down, most of them tend to play down the racist stuff more and more over time. The Left is extremely intolerant or racism to the point where it has invented an entire fake category of racism (PC-racism) which is really hallucinated racism that doesn’t even exist and persecuting people for telling the truth.

The socialist project is frankly an economic project. A lot of working class people are socially conservative. They don’t like gay marriage, want to keep their guns, do not like abortion and may not be too wild about Black folks. The Left has blown these people off and now they are voting Republican for no good reason. A lot of them have become Obama haters. A union member was on the radio yesterday telling about how the Obama people had passed out Obama stickers at their last union meeting, and a lot of the rank and file workers tore them up or threw them away.

If the socialist project is about economics – socialism or some sort as an alternative to laissez faire capitalism – then really all of the rest of the dross has nothing to do with it. What does feminism, antiracism, abortion, gun control, gay rights, animal rights, open borders and the Cultural Left freakshow have to do with socialism as an economic project? Nothing, and in some cases such as open borders, you have a wildly anti-socialist project being pushed by Lefties.

At the end of the day, Leftwingers are human beings like all the rest of us.

Quite a few are sexist. Back in the 60’s, they asked Eldridge Cleaver what the position of women in the Movement was and he said, “On their backs.” That is the way a lot of men in the Movement felt and that gave impetus to the Women’s Movement.

A number of leftwingers are homophobic, racist or anti-Semitic. I was on a forum once with Arab Communists, hardcore Communists all right, and they were raving anti-Semites all the way down to Holocaust Denial. George Orwell was said to be an anti-Semite.

Really leftwingers are just human beings who have an interest in a particular economic project. Human beings are often homophobic, sexist, racist, anti-Semitic, etc. That’s just the way they are. Since Lefties are human, they are of course susceptible to all of these quite human foibles also.

 

9 Comments

Filed under Anti-Semitism, Conservatism, Democrats, Economics, Left, Liberalism, Marxism, Obama, Political Science, Politics, Racism, Republicans, Socialism, US Politics, Useless Western Left, White Nationalism, White Racism

Support Housing for the Political Homeless

Mark Graybill writes:

Hey Robert, are you really politically more left than right? I ask because reading your blog the last few days, you sound more conservative than I do. I know you’re economically left-wing, but given your conservative social attitudes, maybe really what you are is anti-libertarian, rather than liberal. Have you ever taken a political inventory?

Yes I have. I came out standard super-liberal on social and economic stuff. My chart is below.

I am not sure how to interpret this chart, but it looks like I am a standard hardcore libtard.

I am not sure how to interpret this chart, but it looks like I am a standard hardcore libtard.

I am very leftwing on economics, but I am also rather conservative on social issues. Most liberals and Leftists really hate my guts. The Leftists all say I am a conservative, a reactionary, a fascist, a Nazi, a KKK member, a racist, a sexist, a homophobe and an anti-Semite. A number of Left sites have active bans on linking to me and others have been me from their site as a “reactionary.”

For a while there, I was thinking, “Ok these idiots all say I am a conservative, so let’s go to some conservative sites and see if I am one.” I went to some, but as soon as I started commenting, they started tearing into me like rabid wolves. Most of these sites banned me too under monikers like “liberal” and “anti-American.” Also I am absolutely horrified by conservative websites. I agree with them on almost nothing, and the politicians, the commenters and the authors all seem like monsters. I have nothing in common with them at all, and frankly I hate them and their whole ideology.

I also went to Libertarian sites. Some like Reason Magazine I can actually resonate with on a lot of things. They are very anti-authoritarian. They hate cops, hate the military, hate belligerent imperial foreign policy. But their economics is horrifying.

Everyone keeps telling me I am a racist, so I used to go hang out on White Nationalist sites. They do not like me one bit, and they all call me “liberal, anti-White, nigger-lover, anti-racist, antifa,” etc. Also those racist sites are just horrifying. They are so full of hate. I am on the mailing list of a number of more or less antiracist groups such as Color of Change and I do participate in their campaigns sometimes.

People keep telling me that I am sexist, so I go to misogynistic Manosphere sites a lot. While there is a quite a bit of truth to be read there sadly, I always find the level of misogyny there to be terrifying. I almost want to smash the screen when I read that stuff. Also I am a former member of NOW and I participate in a lot of feminist campaigns as I am on their mailing lists. I mostly participate in campaigns around abortion as the rest of the feminist project seems wacky.

I am politically homeless. There is no place in US politics for people like me. It is a lonely place to be. I have a feeling there are a lot of people like me though.

6 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Economics, Feminism, Gender Studies, Liberalism, Libertarianism, Political Science, Politics, Racism, US Politics, White Nationalism