Russia Didn’t Blow up That Dam

Looks like the Ukrainians blew it up and then blamed Russia. I’ve been through all of the arguments so far and in general, it looks like Ukraine did it. The evidence for Ukraine doing it is quite large and the evidence for Russia doing it is sparse. There are complaints that civilians in the area will be badly effected by the blowing up of this dam. Most of the civilians on the south side of the Dnipro are pro-Russian. Why would Russia flood out their own civilian supporters?

In addition, Ukraine has tried to blow up this dam many times in the past. They attacked it with HIMAARS and other MLRS systems. This is well-documented and in fact, Ukrainian officials in the past have bragged about trying to blow up the dam. Also Russia doesn’t do stuff like that. Russia doesn’t commit nefarious acts of war and then blame the other side. The only people who do that in this war are the Nazis and their backers in the pro-Nazi West.

A third theory beyond either the Russians did it or the Ukrainians did it is the “natural” theory. In this theory, the dam break was simply a natural event. However the only way that this works is if we propose a “natural but unnatural theory.” What this means is that there is excellent evidence for some time now that Ukraine has been undermining the dam by releasing the floodgates on all of the upstream dams. This raised the water to a critical level and the dam simply broke at a weak spot as a result. Looking at all three theories, I like this one the best. It still means that Ukraine killed the dam but that they did it by more indirect means instead of just blowing up as people suspect. Keep in mind that that dam was built to withstand a nuclear bomb attack! How are the Ukrainians going to blow it up then? This article also takes the “natural but unnatural” position.

They’ve done this countless times in this war. Almost all of the war crimes supposedly committed by Russia in this war were done by the Nazis. The Nazis commit some outrageous war crime and then they say Russia did it! It’s their standard MO.

Ukraine castrated a captured Russian soldier. We can tell they are Ukrainians because they have Ukrainian medics’ gloves and they’re wearing Ukrainian sneakers. Also the Nazi Chief Medical Officer of the Ukrainian military gave an official order to castrate all Russian POW’s.

In addition, there are many suppressed reports of Donbass fighters and now Russian POW’s coming back from Ukrainian captivity castrated. Russia is trying to suppress all such reports as they think that if the Russian people get wind of their soldiers getting castrated, they will go crazy with rage and Russia don’t want to deal with it.

There was a soldier in that crime who had Asiatic features and a hat. Ukrainians linked to a photo of a Russian soldier in a Buryat militia because he had similar features and a similar hat.

However, if you look carefully, the hat is not the same. Also it figures that Ukraine would blame as Asiatic as one of the main reasons Ukrainians hate Russians is because they think that Russians are non-Whites who are contaminated with Asiatic blood. Ukrainian nationalism is Nazi-type Nordic supremacist racist nationalism.

The Ukrainians inherited their hatred of Russians for being “Asiatics” from the Germans, as this was one of their main complaints of Russian inferiority. The Ukrainians call Russians “Huns” and “Hunnics.” These were Asiatic bands related to the present day Hungarians who swept through Russian lands at one point and conquered a lot of territory.

Ukraine has been deliberately shelling the civilian areas of cities in the Donbass and in Russia. Russia rarely if all attacks civilians in this war. I would say that far more than 99% of Russian attacks in this war have been against military targets. In fact, many times, Russia has to hold off on attacks because Ukrainians have put their troops next to civilian targets.

Keep in mind also that the vast majority of  civilians in the areas where Russia is fighting are pro-Russian. Why attack your own civilian supporters? It’s bullshit! Every time Ukraine shells civilian areas of the Donbass it claims that Russia shelled its own territory! That’s insane. Further there’s no evidence that Russia ever shelled its own territory in Ukraine. That’s ridiculous.

Ukraine shelled that Enorgodar nuclear plant that Russia holds for a very long time. Apparently they were trying to create a nuclear accident there that they could blame on Russia. Ukraine kept insisting that Russia was shelling its own soldiers who were occupying the plant! That’s bullshit.

Also a high ranking Ukrainian Nazi went on the radio to call for blowing up the nuclear plant. You see why we call them Nazis and say they’re insane? It’s because of things like this. Ukrainian nationalists are fanatical monsters, a menace to all of mankind. They have to be completely taken out in one way or another.

Always remember that Ukraine shot down that M17 passenger jet over their territory and then blamed Russia, despite there being zero evidence that Russia did it and a lot of evidence that Ukraine did it. The fraud went all the way to the completely corrupted, courts in the Netherlands, a typical Western pro-Nazi country where the corrupted courts in that country convicted several innocent Russians of shooting down that jet.

Those men cannot now leave the Netherlands without taking their freedom into their own hands. There’s probably an Interpol warrant out for their arrests, and those warrants tend to be honored. Come to think of it, Interpol itself is an arm of pro-Nazi NATO is in its own way a corrupted pro-Nazi police agency.

During the 2014 War, the Nazis shot at Donbass civilians many times, killing civilians. Each of these was blown up into an outraegous war crime by the OECD crooks who were supervising the area. OECD are monitors from the pro-Nazi EU. Everything they said in that period and afterwards was a lie. Recently it was proven that the OECD monitors were actually spying for the Nazis the whole time. They were then summarily banned from the Donbass.

Remember the bombing of the Mariupol Theater where the Nazis had cynically spelled out “Children” before they blew it up with mines after mining the place? To this very day, Russia is being accused of committing this crime. However, probably 99% of the people in that building were pro-Russian.

Furthermore, everyone from the building who had an opinion on who did it stated that the Nazi Azov Battalion had mined the building and then blew it up as they retreated. The footage from the building after the bombing argues against this being an arial bombing as the condition of the building and the place of the blast makes it impossible for this to be a bomb. Further, Mariupol residents said there were no Russian planes over the city that day.

The Mariupol Children’s Hospital was supposedly bombed by Russia, killing a few civilians. However, all civilians interviewed said that there were no Russian planes flying over the city that day. All of the victims blamed Ukraine for the attack. The director of the hospital said the attack was from a Ukrainian tank which fired a shell at the building. Further, the nature of the blast as seen afterwards indicates argues strongly against an arial bombing.

The Bucha massacre. No one quite knows that happened there, but it appears that the entire event was staged by the Ukrainians and was then blamed on the Russians. However, residents of the town and journalists who were there stated that Russia had not harmed one civilian the whole time they were in charge.

We also have audio tape of Ukrainian Nazis moving through the town executing everyone wearing a white armband. The white band indicated to the Russians that the civilians were friendly. Hence this was a mass murder event against any civilian seen as “collaborating” with the Russians.

An Attempt at a Good Definition of Fascism

To me any sort of race-based, obsessive, dishonest, and “blood and soil” or “volkisch” politics, fascist or not, is “Nazi.” And any fascism that is race-based (keep in mind a lot of fascism isn’t necessarily about race), is Nazism. Nazism is simply racist fascism.

It includes the usual obsession with the racial enemies of the people, an idiotic and absurd supremacist view of the “glorious past” in a “volkisch” sense, an obsessive, one-track mind about the ultranationalism, a view of the present as degenerate and too democratic because racial enemies have “contaminated” the body politic.

An important aspect is a “palingetic” view of the future rising, Phoenix-like, from ashes of the degenerate, “racially contaminated” present and the need for a revolution get rid of the “contaminating” non-national elements to bring about the rebirth of the great society via the mirror of a fake glorious past.

See this article here  on Palingentic Ultranationalism, which is as good of a solid base for fascism as anything.

Roger Griffin is definitely onto something. Griffin claims that any movement without this “Phoenix-like” palingenesis is simply not fascism. He also says that this is the essential element in any fascist ideology – the base, necessary and sufficient element for any type of fascist politics.

In other words, palingetic political projects are probably fascist.

Without palingenesis, there is no fascism. There are a lot of authoritarian, Far Right movements (especially in Latin America) that seem to lack this element. Down there, the radical authoritarian Right is all about “screw the poor” and “death to the Commies,” the Commies being the Left, far too generously defined.

For instance, members of labor unions are automatically Communist. So are Catholic lay workers working with the poor. So is any redistributionism. So is any attempt at social betterment (for instance, many far Right coups in Latin America happened simply because the “Leftist” and “Communist” state tried to raise the minimum wage. Raising the minimum wage down there is literally Communism and doing so automatically makes one a Communist.

It’s horrific, murderous, even genocidal, radical Far Right authoritarian form of politics for sure.

I’m not sure if it’s actual fascism. Some really evil far rightwing forms of politics are not necessarily fascist, though they often have serious overtones like that.

Radical authoritarian Far Right movements and parties are not necessarily racist at all, though there can be overtones of that because these regimes wage wars on the poor, and many of the poor are racially Amerindian, Black, or mulatto.

For instance, the murderous and genocidal counterinsugencies recently in Guatemala against the URNG and in Peru against the Shining Path were in large part based on a “slaughter the Indians” mindset, not because there was anything racially wrong with them but because the Indians were “Communists” who were supporting the armed Left.

Some Interesting Bits about Sendero Luminoso (the Shining Path)

Although there were many Indian Sendero Luminoso cadres in the movement, your average Senderista cadre was a mestizo, a victim of racial discrimination blocking their desire to move up in the world.

On the other hand, the revolution itself started in the high Andes with Sendero blowing up a polling booth in a small Indian town.

Very early in the war, attacks were being waged by a column led by Edith Lagos, a 19 year old Quechua Indian. She was a heroine in the heavily-Indian city of Ayachuco. She was killed in a firefight with the army, and her funeral was held at midnight in a Catholic Church (even though Sendero was officially atheist) in the city.

The city had a population of 30,000 and it was said that 30,000 people attended her funeral, which was presided over by actual Catholic priests. Supposedly the entire city came out for her midnight funeral. Unbelievably long lines of people waiting to get in stretched and wound far through the city. It was quite an event! Quite a few Indians visit her grave, which has been turned into a shrine, to this very day.

The leadership of Sendero was all mestizo or even Whites, led by a White university professor!

There were a number of people from the wealthy class in Lima in the top ranks of Sendero. Quite a few of them were in the arts. One was one of the most famous ballerinas in the country.

The most famous anthropologist in Peru was said to be the “intellectual father” of Sendero, although he was not a member of the organization.

Sybila Arredondo, the ex-wife of Peru’s most famous novelist, José María Arguedas, was a high-ranking Senderista. She was actually on Sendero’s Central committee at one time around 1986!

Low Black IQ’s in Africa Is a Five-Alarm Fire with No One to Put It out

Polar Bear: Not an IQ guy but the highest IQ in Africa is higher.

Not in Sub-Saharan Black Africa it’s not! Or even anything south of North Africa. I believe some of the IQ’s in North Africa are a bit higher but not by much. And their children tend to get a 5-point IQ rise if they move to Europe via a Flynn Affect. The children of Moroccan immigrants to Europe have IQ’s of 89. Their parents’ IQ’s were 84. That’s very close to the ideal IQ to have a functioning modern society, which I figure is ~90 IQ.

Sadly, Africans have the lowest IQ’s on the planet. I don’t hate them for it because I don’t blame people for picking the wrong parents or things that are outside of their control. Their IQ is so low that it seriously messes up their societies to the extent that I very much for some IQ-raising method even it came down to gene splicing or whatnot. That damned low IQ over there is like a five-alarm fire going off with no one putting it out. More than any other emotion, the way I feel about Africans’ intellectual poverty is sadness, pity, and frustration, with a topping of fear for the future to boot.

How Projection Works and Why People Project

Rambo: Isn’t that sort of what Scientologists do? “Whatever label you attach to me is simply a reflection of what you are.” I’ve seen that here and there over the years.

LOL! It’s called Projection. I didn’t really get hip to this psychological defense until about twenty years ago. In that time I have been stunned by the extent to which humans use projection.

And the shittier and more aggressive and Cluster B you are, the more you project. One tell if someone is projecting is to see if they ever blame themselves or apologize for anything. Pretty much guarantee that heavy projectors see themselves as flawless. They never admit that they were wrong or that they failed or screwed up at anything.

They’re just fine! And they flip out if you offer anything that could possibly be construed as aggressive. In fact, they typically take your harmless comments and twist them around label them with aggressive intent when you had no intention this way. While they are perfect and you don’t dare criticize them, they dole out criticism to you of typically heavy-duty and massive sort like carbon dioxide out of their mouths.

They’re hypocrites, like all shitty people!

These people are shitty. Bottom line is they’re haters. They’re full of hatred and contempt for many but not necessarily all people. They make you feel inferior with their constant attacks. But their lives are typically not bowls of cherries either. Their lives tend to be screwed up and in fact, I suppose you could describe them as failed in a lot of ways or even as “losers,” though I don’t use words like that myself.

With a lot of people, the more they fail in life, the more they construct this emotional walled castle around themselves, the motto of which is,

I’ve never done anything wrong! I’ve never failed at anything! I’ve always been right! Nothing bad that happened to me in my life is my fault! It’s all the fault of other people!

You have ever noticed that the angrier and meaner the person is, the more they never apologize even once about anything. The two things are related! If they’d go easier on themselves and admit they made a few mistakes here and there, after all,

Errare humane est.

they wouldn’t have to be so angry and project all the time like they do.

What’s really going on here is that deep down inside, the lie isn’t working because there’s a part of themselves that they hate that knows full well how they’ve screwed up their lives and created failed existences. They feel guilty about this. So all day long they project away those feelings of guilt as rage onto others.

I’m not at fault. You’re all fault!

They’re projecting away their faults as other people’s faults. By projecting them away they hope to get rid of the feelings of guilt and failure, but I don’t think it works. Because they project away guilt as rage all day long, then they go to sleep and wake up the next day and still feel like failures. So they have to spend that whole day projecting away these feelings of failure onto other people:

“I didn’t fail, you failed!”

See how that works?

If you criticize others all the time but they can’t criticize you, you’re a real POS of a person. Nevertheless, these people are everywhere, and they are especially common as adults. Kids’ egos tend to be rather weak and ill-defended. After all, they’re kids and they will fail at most adult tasks they try.

And it’s odd the way that this lousy personality is supported by other adults in society. It’s actually socially acceptable to be this way! That’s probably because all the other adults are doing this on some level themselves.

Anyway, don’t be a typical POS adult like this. If you do, you’re a bad person!

If You Can Never Admit You Are Wrong and You Never Apologize for Anything, You’re a Lousy Person

Admit that you are wrong and that you’ve been wrong in the past.

Admit that you made mistakes and even failed in the past, generally repeatedly. You’ve not supposed to make mistakes and fail all the time but to do so once in a while is the human essence, as that Latin phrase sums up.

It’s really ok to fail. I’m ok with most of my failures. I was trying my hardest at the time and I was failing anyway. I was limited by minor mental illness a lot of the time. The other times when I was more well, I simply did some stupid stuff I could kick myself for now. I wasn’t being very brave. I was being passive, shy, and cowardly.

But that’s ok too. I’ve learned from that and if I had to do it over again, I would do it differently.

I also had some panic attacks and some weird, minor freak out stuff because “It was all getting to be too much more me.” I do feel about those and I’ve resolved to try to never do that sort of thing again. And I’ve kept that promise to myself. And nothing is “too much for me to handle so I have to flip out and panic and act like a moron.” I can handle anything, or at the very least I won’t flip out and panic like I used to no matter what.

I definitely acted like a serious asshole quite a few times (though much less than the average person, who seems to dish this stuff out liberally) in the past, and in general I feel bad about that. I’ve resolved to not do it anymore, and I generally keep to the promise, though now and again, quite rarely actually, I act mean and insult someone just to be an asshole. It’s unfortunate that I act that way and it’s uncalled for. I guess there’s still work to do.

Think about this some time:

All you can do in life is try your hardest. You’re do anything more than that!

And for many people, even if they try their damned hardest at this or that all day long (typically social interactions), they will still fail. Everyone will hate them for failing, but the truth that they probably tried 5-10 times harder than the people who hate them who do these things as if they come naturally.

When you fail and screw up, ask yourself,

Did I try my hardest and fail anyway?

If the answer is yes, there’s no more room for discussion. If the answer is no, I myself believe you should try harder and give it your all. I’m not extremely impressed for people who don’t even try or half-ass things. But see here for more on that.

How Success Breeds Confidence and Failure Breeds Cowardice, Shyness, Timidity, and Solitary Behavior

If you try do something, say interact with others, over and over again, endlessly, trying your hardest, and nevertheless fail and get rejected the vast majority of the time, a lot of people are just going to hang it up and quit trying.

That’s true with anything. Anything in life, you can try and try and try, and at some point, if you still can’t do it, most folks just throw up their hands and say,

Screw it.

They don’t want to try it again because they figure they’ll just fail again like they did multiple times before. I really don’t blame people like for giving up hope and not trying anymore. They perceive that any attempt to do thing will end in failure, rejection, etc. and statistically, they’re probably correct.

Your average Normie says,

So what! Just keep trying anyway! You’ll get the hang of it after a while!!

Well they haven’t had to deal with the tsunami of failure and rejection that this other person had.

Speaking from experience, when social interactions tend to go well and other people give you a good response when you interact with them, you feel positive about social interaction and you are not afraid to walk up to people and start interacting with them. You’ve succeeded at this so many times in the past that you figure, by the odds game, you’re likely to succeed again. Sure, of course you will fail and get rejected even when you are like this, but you’re much less likely to.

This is a very simple explanation of how success and acceptance breeds confidence and failure and rejection breeds low confidence, shyness, timidity, solitary behavior, etc.

When You Are Literally Too Smart to Function in Society

Honest Guy: Like some high IQ types, Ron Unz shows definite signs of autism and being way out “on the spectrum”. Also fairly obvious mental illness and very few friends in “real life”.

Do you think this is true? Do you have any evidence for this? Do you evidence that he has a diagnosable mental disorder? If so, which one? Also do you have evidence that he has few friends. I heard he took an IQ test once and scored 190. That is also the score of Elon Musk and Thomas Pynchon, the notorious reclusive novelist.

I interacted with him in his comments section, and we exchanged one email. After that, he wasn’t answering my mails. He seemed to have the appropriate “adult” type social skills that I find very restrictive.

But I recently worked with a renowned scholar who had Assburgers. He also had excellent, “adult”-type social skills. He said he had had to learn them in life, as they did not come naturally. He did not wish to talk to me on the phone. He tried to get a PhD but dropped out of the program. He wanted to be a professor, but his advisor said he wouldn’t be able to do it. He said,

You don’t talk!

So he was extremely introverted. He was too weird to work in academia! I’ve worked with a few of these independent scholar types who are outside of academia. One used to be the editor of the Arts Section of the famous Le Monde newspaper out of Paris.

As far as the man in question, I interacted with him a lot via email, and he seemed to have very appropriate “adult” and not only that but “professional” social skills. I have worked with lots of academics, and you must have these sort of “professional” skills, most of which boil down to controlling your emotions and in general a lot of discretion and an extreme emphasis on “appropriate” as in “adult” behavior.

There may be a particular “academic” professional style, but I’m not sure. I know that any expressions of anger are very much discouraged. Even if you are outraged at some work or theory, you are supposed to use toned-down language in attacking it.

I’ve decided that this “professional” style is mostly about “toning down” your interactions with other humans and being in extreme control. Even anger is portrayed in very toned-down ways. Casual language and conversation is discouraged, but you have it if you get to know the person well enough. The academics that I dealt with overseas such as Turks (I worked with a lot of Turkish academics) were a lot more open and even “human,” if I could use such a word.

I’m not sure if high IQ types are more likely to be on the autistic spectrum or not. It’s a popular view but I’d like to see some good evidence.

I know that the famous Charles Sidis, one of the highest IQ people in recent history, was definitely an Aspie. That’s beyond dispute. I’m not sure how he supported himself after that. He had a professorship at a famous university but he dropped out of it at age 21 or so. He had started lecturing hardcore courses at this university at age 9!

The famous extremely high IQ Theodore Kaczynski, the Unibomber, was similar. I believe that he was said to be on the autistic spectrum. Same deal. I think he got a professorship in mathematics at age 21 or so, but he dropped out of it for no good reason after a year or two. He was an excellent math scholar and his dissertation is excellent.

It is true that as IQ rises, people tend to get weirder and weirder, but they’re not necessarily on the autistic spectrum. They’re just weird! As a good friend of mine at university said as we were walking to the parking lot one time,

All those genius guys are totally out to lunch.

He was looking at me as he said it and it seemed like he was talking about me.

I don’t think I was particularly weird at university, but there was this really hot chick who lived next door who thought I was weird as Hell and spared no opportunity to let me know that. One day I was reading a William Burroughs novel called The Ticket That Exploded while she was reading The Shining. We were both sunbathing in the parking lot with a couple of her chick friends. I left to go to the bathroom and she picked up the book and started reading it. Next time I saw her she looked at me like I was from outer space and she said,

Are you still reading that bizarre Ticket book?

To her, me reading a Burroughs novel was further evidence that I was weird as Hell.

Her beef about me was that I was too introverted and that I never left the apartment and seemed to keep weird hours. Like I would stay up all night reading books alone.  Compared to how I am now, I think I was mentally pretty healthy, much more than I am now, sadly.

University professors max out at 145 IQ. Above that, they start getting weird, and they can’t advance anymore. I read an article called “The Outsiders” about men with IQ’s over 160!

I don’t think they had Assburgers, but they were strange.

Many of them were working at very menial jobs, and most were low income or even living in poverty. They lived alone and almost never dated. Most were celibate at the time they were interviewed. They were all extremely introverted to the point of being painfully shy. All of them were misanthropes and their main complaint against humans in general was that they were stupid! As in “so stupid that there’s no point even having much to do with them.”

This is very interesting and it smashes the idea that income and accomplishment are equated to success. At some point, like with these men, your IQ is so high that you are literally too smart for society and too smart to function. They’re literally too smart! Almost too smart to live.

You got the impression that they were like aliens who landed here and got disenchanted with the place. Why they didn’t date, I’m not sure, but many very IQ men don’t date much. Perhaps they are “too weird to date,” if such a thing is even possible. I suppose women might see them as too weird to get involved with. I’m not sure if they had low or high sex drives.

I have read that in other cultures, it’s the same. An extremely high IQ man in Italy was working as a janitor! He loved it because he said it gave him time to think. He literally wanted a menial job where he could just think all day!

I think a lot of these guys are the same. For them, thinking, reading, that sort of thing, is almost a sensual (as in involving the body) pleasure. As others take pleasure in chess or swimming or vacations to exotic places, these guys get the same pleasure simply by thinking.

They can play chess games in their heads. They can swim anywhere and any way by doing breaststrokes in their brains. They can go on as many exotic vacations they want anywhere on Earth simply by traveling in their minds! I think they are very happy when they are thinking, reading, and daydreaming.

It’s sort of like the Literature professor at a famous university who taught courses on James Joyce. He was one of the most famous Joyce scholars around. One day another professor asked him what literature he had been reading lately and he confessed that in the last 20 years, the only novel he had read was Joyce’s notorious Finnegans Wake! The other man was taken back and said,

Think of all the other books you could have read in 20 years. Why just read one book?

The Joyce scholar responded and I love this quote:

But you don’t understand! They’re all in the Wake!

That is, all of the novels he could have read in 20 years are already “in Finnegans Wake,” as the book is so all-encompassing that in a sense it includes not only all past literature and all present literature too!

This reminded me of how these high IQ guys could go anywhere and do anything in their heads. No need to go on an African safari. They can go on the wildest safari vacation right in their minds!

They probably love challenging intellectual activities and see them as fun puzzles that seem impossible to solve but can be solved if you work hard enough. They probably see Herculean intellectual tasks as fun challenges, as in “doing the impossible.”

Israel, 911 and the Aftermath, and the Israel Lobby

Honest Guy: Like the readers of his site, Ron Unz is a genocidal Nazi maniac who has no legitimate place physically on this earth.

Yes, I’ve corresponded with him a bit. He doesn’t always write back but sometimes he does. I don’t get him. Does he think that this Nazi-style antisemitism he promotes and harbors is not going to blow back on him at some point?

He intercepted one of my comments on his site and said I seemed very smart but ignorant. He pointed me to a few of his articles about Jewish (probably really Zionist) conspiracies. One said the Jews (or Zionists) killed JFK. Another said the Jews (or Zionists) did 911.

As both were presumably motivated by support for Israel, I suppose it would be correct in saying Zionist Jews were the supposed perpetrators, but I get tired of this endless shorthand of using Zionists for Jews and then ascribing all manner of antisemitic evil to “Zionists,” while leaving the “Jews” themselves out of it. Except 89% of Jews (minimum) are Zionists or support Israel. If you don’t like Jews, fine, come right out and say it. You certainly have a lot of company. But coding Jews as ok and “Zionists” as the nadir of evil is intellectually dishonest to me.

There’s no way Israel killed JFK. Not buying it. I haven’t looked into it much, nor do I wish to. I’m sure they were not very happy about him, but they’re not happy about lots of people and they don’t resort to killing them.

Israel did not do 911. However, it looks like Mossad was following some of these guys around and surveilling them when they were in the US. There’s a reasonable suggestion that Israel had an idea of what was up but didn’t tell us. I think they said they warned us three weeks before, but we blew them off. A warning came in to the Odigo instant messenger system a couple of hours before the attack. Odigo is based in Israel.

There’s way too much suspicious stuff with the five Mossad spies (the famous “five dancing Shlomos” the antisemites like to talk about) taking photos and cheering on a rooftop in NY, the very weird “art student” Mossad network that unraveled in the days afterwards, and other very suspicious things. There were something like 70 Israelis (probably all spies of some sort) who were arrested soon after 911 on suspicion of involvement. A number of them made angry statements along the lines of “Now you know what we deal with…The Palestinians are not our problem – they are your problem too.”

Obviously 911 was great for Israel, and Netanyahu even said as much. Now Israel’s war was our war too. Condoleeza Rice also said there was a big upside to the attacks. The Project for a New American Century did talk about the need for a “Pearl Harbor” type attack to put their Israel-centric project in motion, but that’s not evidence that they were in on it. It’s a bit suspicious though.

The PNAC crowd were not all Jews. There were some Cold Warrior Deep State Gentiles in there, like James Woolsey, former CIA head. They also managed to roll a bunch of high-ranking US military officers, serving and retired, into their network. This has been an Israeli project forever – to try to marry the two militaries, a project that’s already de facto reality. I’m really sick and tired of this project, by the way.

We’ve pretty much handed the keys to the castle over to Israel in a lot of ways as far as aspects of our government and some of our foreign policy. We gave them the keys and said,

Here, do with it what you will. Don’t mind us. We’ll go sleep in the yard while you have the run of the mill of the place.

I assume it’s all about the Benjamins, but it makes me sick. Why we have to butt in on one of the two lousy sides in that conflict is beyond me. And yes, I’m not happy with Palestinians either, though I despise Israel. I wonder how many people like me have had it up to here with both of them?

The PNAC crowd sponsors Israel tours for US military officers, and as I noted, they’ve rolled a lot of them up into the Israeli Lobby in the US. All of those US military officers are now de facto part of the Israel Lobby. See how that works? The Israeli Lobby isn’t just a bunch of Jews. Is John Bolton Jewish? He’s as fire-breathing a Zionist as Netanyahu.

911 enabled the Israeli Lobby in the US to jump start their war against Iraq (which was mostly planned by Israelis, and I don’t care about all of the fake Israeli denials), and the list of seven countries the US was going to attack (many of which were coincidentally enemies of Israel). That list must have come from Israel. It gave Israel a chance to get the US military into the Middle East to fight some of Israel’s enemies for them, which we’ve been doing to a greater or lesser extent ever since.

The US Has No Vital Interests in Our Conflicts in the Middle East

We simply have no valid national interest in war with Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya, or Iran. All of our fighting over there is due to our alliance with Israel, but in the case of Iran, we also gathered up a lot of Shia-hating Sunni bigots in North Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Jordan, Egypt, Bahrain, Kuwait, and the UAE.

A lot of the US elite wanted to get Saddam because he was their bete noire, and we had unfinished business with him from 1991. Before that, he was our best pal, and we used him as a battering ram against Iran.

Same with Iran – the elite has a blood debt with it dating back to the Embassy takeover.

I suppose you could say the war on Libya was revenge, but it’s common knowledge by now that Libya didn’t shoot down that Lockerbie plane, but one wonders how many of these elite neocons believes that that because their minds are so distorted by lies about so many things. Instead it was blown up by the PFLP-GC Palestinian group contracted by Iran for $10 million.

The motive was revenge for that passenger jet of Iran’s that the USS Vincennes shot down, completely by accident and human error IMHO. The captain got his mind set on the idea that that was an enemy plane and no amount of contrary evidence would change his mind.

What on Earth our motive for war with Syria is happens to be beyond me other than being an ally of Iran and supporting Hezbollah.

We have a blood debt with Hezbollah too over the 1982 Marine barracks truck bombing. But Hezbollah didn’t do that. There was no Hezbollah back then. Hezbollah wasn’t formed until 1985. The group that did it was a tiny group called Islamic Jihad that was the child of Iran, hence the author of the attack was Iran. Yes, some of the guys involved in that groupuscle later joined Hezbollah including Imad Mugnieyeh, the author of the attack.

Hezbollah did kill a US pilot on a jet they hijacked. Mugnieyeh even pulled the trigger.

And in 1987, a CIA agent in Lebanon was was captured by Hezbollah two years before was executed, with his hanging body displayed on tape.

We may have blood debts with Hezbollah over over the Navy pilot and the CIA officer, the latter of whom got what he deserved in my opinion.

With All the Talk of Possible Nuclear War on the Horizon…

The problem here is that the US is insane!

We have already used nuclear weapons (tactical nukes) twice in the last 35 years. Once near Basra in 1991 and a second time at Tora Bora in 2001.

The second scummiest people on Earth after the Americans, the Jews (Israelis) are of course the only other people evil enough to do this. The Jews have used tactical nukes on Lebanon twice now, once in the Lebanon War and again to blow up the Beirut Port. They also used one in Hama in Syria a few years ago. Note that both of these groups are wildly supremacist, exceptionalist, and hyper-moral, and manically self-righteous. Ever notice that with these groups, they’re always right and pure good and their enemies are always wrong and pure evil?

The US has a first use option on nuclear weapons. I’m not aware any other country has that. Most other countries say they will use nuclear weapons if they existence of the country itself is at stake. The US keeps expanding their conditions for use of nuclear weapons.

Now we will use them if “lots of our soldiers get killed.” What kind of BS reason is that to use nuclear weapons!? IOW, if China or Russia sinks an aircraft carrier, and we lose 20,000 sailors, we get to nuke the country that did it! This ever-growing expansion of the conditions for using our nukes has been creeping upwards for a long time now without the slightest peep from any Republican or Democrat, no matter how left or right. It happened under Obama and Trump, and I think it’s happening now under Biden.

The insanity of the US government is truly a bipartisan disorder. Not even the Squad will let loose the slightest peep about our nuclear weapons policy. Just like the Squad always votes for military budgets, no matter how insanely bloated they are. When Trump sent his insane military budgets to Congress, every year, the Democratic Congress voted to increase the budget even beyond what madman Trump had requested.

The military budget insanity and the military-industrial complex are bipartisan forms of psychosis. Like I said, even the Squad is 100% down with this stuff.

Why “World Imperialism” Is a Fairly New Thing

The US only became a “world imperialist” country after World War 2 with the Cold War. We were “imperialist” before but it was generally just a “local imperialism” only in the Western Hemisphere, similar to that of Israel in the Middle East, India on the subcontinent, or even the Japanese in Asia.

“World imperialism as a thing is a rather new phenomenon that mostly took place after WW2, though the British did try their best for a while, with “the sun never sets” and all that. Nevertheless, if WW2 did anything, it knocked the British off their world controlling perch, where they were promptly replaced by the US, this change because of the devastation the war had wreaked on the UK.

Before, the Spaniards had made their world controlling attempt that was smashed with the defeat of the Armada. Rome tried for control of at least the known world anyway, a fairly benign tax-farming sort of colonialism that faded away rather than being smashed.

We didn’t care much about the rest of the world prior to World War 2, though we got involved in the Russian Civil War.

In general, “Bolshevism” was a problem for Europeans and not the US, and we were not really involved with the European continent until after WW2. In fact, many Americans, especially Republicans, had become isolationists at this time. The general attitude was that Europe’s problems were their own and not ours, and we needed to butt out of the external affairs of others and mind our own business and let them settle their problems or fight it out among themselves, just leave us out of it, thank you.

This of course had a long history in the US dating all the way back to the Revolution and George Washington’s warnings about avoiding foreign treaties and entanglements. On the other hand, it was an alliance or entanglement with French that allowed the revolutionaries to win in the first place so one wonders to what extent he really believed this or if this was more of an ideal that an actually existing or even preferred thing.

On the other hand, Communism, socialism, and the slightest bit of liberalism was a problem over here in which the Monroe Doctrine was invoked on a false basis in Haiti, Cuba, Mexico, the Dominican Republic, Panama, and  Nicaragua. It was not seen as Bolshevism or Soviet-inspired until after the Cold War, beginning with Guatemala in 1954.

There was an actual Communist uprising in El Salvador in 1932, and the Mexican Revolution was definitely a Left revolution, not to mention Sandinism in Nicaragua (though this was also very nationalist and anti-Yankee), but the US did not see these as “Bolshevist”-inspired, and indeed, the Mexican Revolution took place before Bolshevism was a thing.

The term Bolshevism, by the way, at the time and to this day still obscenely used by anti-Communist kooks, always had strong anti-Semitic overtones, and indeed, it was the invocation this beast that was in large part a rationale for the mass murder of Jews known as the Holocaust. So I’d avoid using that word if I were you unless you want to harken back to one of the worst things we humans have ever done in terms of degree anyway.

What Are the Definitions of Neoliberalism, Neoconservatism, and National Socialism?

Neoliberalism: Neoliberalism is simply, as my brother’s economics professor referred to it, “neoclassical” economics, with “classical economics” being that of Adam Smith, Richard Ricardo, etc., though both are quite misunderstood, especially Smith, who was a strong supporter in state intervention in the economy to prevent or smooth over the inevitable excesses and abuses of pure or free market capitalism. Neoliberalism is simply “laissez faire” capitalism. And yes, there is indeed a branch of economics called neoliberal economics.

The Recent Obfuscation of the Term “Neoliberal” by the Neoliberals Themselves

Lately there has been an effort on the part of neoliberal economic types themselves to disavow themselves of the word neoliberalism, simply because it has developed a very well-earned bad name!

From the Web:

The elusiveness of neoliberalism, however, ultimately stems from denials that neoliberals themselves have made about their efforts…

In other words, the capitalist fanboys are all lying! How shocking! A capitalist of all people, lying? Why, I’ve never heard of it!

All prominent neoliberals are all lying about neoliberalism precisely because their favorite witches’ stew of voodoo economics has been exposed for the fraud it is, and now the word neoliberalism is a dirty word because everyone found out how lousy it really is.

How do the fanboys respond? They yell,

We’re not neoliberals! There’s no such thing as neoliberalism!

as they feverishly work to promote – get this – neoliberalism! In other words, they’re lying sacks!

Capitalists are great at making widgets and quite a few services and little else, but good God are they liars! Capitalist fanboys are lying for money. And if there’s anything humans will lie like madmen about, it’s money! Sinclair Lewis had some famous words along those lines. Check him out!

Whether they admit it or not, the “neoliberal” project as described by its opponents is absolutely the economic project pushed by our modern elites here in the West, whether they say it is or not. Capitalists are like women.

Don’t pay attention to what women say. Pay attention to what women do. That’s the only thing that’s important. Also because what women say and what they do are often very different things.

What women say is mostly virtue signalling on their part and “trying to be a good person,” which is not a bad quality. Unfortunately, women are base humans at core, just lower mammals like any of us, and it’s hard to be a “good person” when your mammalian brain tells you to act like a cavewoman, screw the meanest man in town, reject decent men as pussies and fags, and rut in the mud like a pig.

Men are the same of course if not 10 times worse, with the exception that most men don’t even bother to virtue signal about being “good people” because most of us know that deep down inside we are just dogs and pigs more than humans and we quite like it that way, thank you very much. But women, well, they like to think the are better. And good for them for having such noble goals! But they are doomed by their base and lowly brains the same as any of us.

By the same token, pay attention to what capitalists do, not what they say. Don’t pay attention to what a capitalist says because they lie almost as much as they breathe. What comes out of the capitalist’s mouth is whatever statements and views are going to make him the most money. The capitalist has an odd view of truth versus falsehood. Quite simply, if it makes him money, it’s true. If it loses him money, then it’s false. Keep this in mind the next time one of these economic charlatans tries to school you on anything at all.

Neoconservatism: Neoconservatism is a type of foreign policy alignment. Its left corollary is “liberal interventionism,” which is, at its base, the foreign policy of the US Democratic Party since the Cold War and probably even before in Latin America.

Most if not all Democrats (Including members of the Squad!) are indeed neoconservative in philosophy, which by the way, has nothing to do with conservatism. And quite a few are also neoliberals on economics, which has nothing to do with American liberalism. Almost all conservatives are neoliberals, for instance, just as almost all liberals are neoconservatives. Neither neoconservatism nor neoliberalism have much to do with either conservatism or (American-style) liberalism per se.

There is indeed now a woke neoconservatism. The entire US Democratic Party follows the foreign policy of neoconservatism. They’re all neocons.

National socialism: National socialism is indeed a far right ideology, and nobody but conservative ideologues (i.e. morons of the worst sort) thinks it is any sort of Left or liberal anything, and in fact in practice, National Socialism was viciously opposed to all forms of liberalism, socialism (including any sort of labor activism or militancy), and of course Communism.

I suppose there are leftwing or even communist forms of National Socialism like Third Positionism and Strasserism, but those are not popular.

“National socialism” is simply racist fascism, keeping in mind that all fascism is not necessarily racist. Mussolinism, for instance, was not particularly racist, and yet it was fascism of the purest sort, fresh as a newly minted coin from the vault.

Tolerance, Sure. Pride, Why? What’s There to Be Proud of?

Aren’t tolerance and pride different things?

Granted, they get wired up that way and they can’t help it, so we can’t hate people for something they can’t help. I get that. But why jump up and down and cheer for it? Is homosexuality really the greatest thing since sliced bread?

You’re aware that being gay cuts 20 whole years off your lifespan, right?

I wish them all the happiness and health I wish for myself and not one bit less, but I don’t really want them around me. I want a divorce. Me over here, them over there.

If homosexuals are anywhere seriously close to your life, they’re probably causing problems.

Lesbians hate men, and I’m a man, so they hate me.

Gay men and straight men cannot be friends. They never stop trying to have sex with us.

Sure, we wish them all the best if they can’t help it, but why on Earth should I jump up and down and cheer for this stuff? A tolerance flag I like, a pride flag, not so much.

Why Antisemitism and All Hardcore “Political Ideologies” Are So Popular

Why Antisemitism and All Hardcore “Political Ideologies” Are So Popular

The thing is that that type of antisemitism is so popular because like so many ideologies, it attempts to explain everything that is wrong with the world as being the cause of only one thing.

Racists say all the world’s problems are due to that race over there. Feminists say it’s all due to the patriarchy. CRT people say it’s all down to White Supremacy. Self-esteem fetishists say it’s all down to low self-esteem. The Far Left say it’s all down to rightwingers. Antifa says it’s all down to fascism, defined with a very broad brush. The Right says it’s all down to liberals, defined promiscuously.

Nationalists say it’s all down to the nation’s enemies, country-sellers, traitors, and “anti-nationals” as the Hindutvas have it. Woketards say it’s all down to bigots of this or that subspecies. Socialists say it’s all down to capitalism. Capitalists say it’s all down to socialism, defined broadly, in all of its microforms.

A particular form of antisemitism say it’s all down to “Zionism,” defined very broadly to put it mildly. Bitter women say it’s down to lousy men, which is most all of them. Bitter men say it’s all down to women and their nuttiness and even wickedness, and it’s best to go your own way.

Christians say it’s all down to unbelievers and sinners. Catholics say it’s all down to sinners, bad Catholics, and Jews. Islamists say it’s down to infidels, apostates, and Jews, I mean Zionists, excuse me! Orthodox Jews say it’s down to the secular Jews. White nationalists say it’s all down to Blacks, illegal immigrants, and the anti-Whites.

The problems of our world if not our very own lives (Which are complex enough as it is!) are unbelievably complex. They’re too complex for most of us to figure out. Hell, we can’t even figure out our damned lives! How are we supposed to understand those of the insanely complex world? We can’t! At least not really.

Sure, we can investigate it and find causes here and there, but they’re myriad, hard as mercury to pin down, and sadly almost impossible to eradicate. On top of that, most people are not that smart. Even worse, most are not particularly wise, as they succumb so easily to emotionalism and emotional logic. Emotion is the enemy of logic and therefore of science. But science is contaminated with science-killing emotion because we are emotional humans. The problem goes on forever.

Most people are ignorant as Hell, and most don’t even follow the news or know a thing about what’s going on in their nation, much less world. I’m someone who is extremely intelligent (for what it’s worth, which is about zero), profoundly educated (in part by the state, mostly by myself), and not particularly emotional (though human nevertheless at the end of the day, so the problem’s not fixed, never will be, and arguably should not be anyway).

And even I struggle to make sense of the complex world and all of the lying psychopaths, politicians, media outlets, talking head ideologues, states, on and on. I spend a Hell of a lot of time trying to cut through the Alaskan mosquito swarm of lies we are bombarded with every day, without the help of much repellent, I might add.

Since I spend so much time on this, I’ve sort of figured things out a bit, but who has the brains, knowledge, emotional stability (Or emotional poverty!), and most of all time, to stick it through? Almost no one. If it’s hard for me to cut through the crap, how hard must it be for the average mis-educated fool on the street?

What I’m getting at it is people want a shortcut. Obsessive and conspiratorial antisemitism gives you just that workaround. Most of the problems of the world are obviously down to one thing – Jews! Or Zionists or whatever your fake name for them is.

They’re .3% of the world and 2% of the US, but they’ve got the whole world, 98% of Americans and 99.7% of the world, by the short hairs. It’s a simple tool for explaining everything that’s wrong with the world. You don’t need to be excessively or even particularly smart, though most antisemites like this are not stupid by any means, which is part of the problem – they’re intelligent and persuasive.

It’s your go-to explanation for everything wrong with the world. Got a problem, national or world? It’s the Jews. Simple go-to, just like that.

This is really what’s going on with these people, and I’ve come to this conclusion after studying Jews and antisemitism deeply for a good 25 years.

Now you’ve identified the problem, which is always the Jews and only the Jews, right? Now what is to be done? Well, I think you know the answer to that question. You have a tumor in your body or a virtual one in your body politic, there’s one solution. Cut it out. Remove the tumor. In the case of the virtual one, you need to get rid of them. You can throw them out, as has been done many times in the past and continues to be done with Orthodox Jews to this day.

Yes, Orthodox Jews are literally being thrown out of communities from Iowa to Guatemala due to their insufferable behavior, which perhaps gives you a light into a past obscured by time and emotion, defenses and ideology.

Or, there’s another solution. A final solution, as a well-known antisemite famously put it. You can kill ’em. Curiously, you can’t just kill a few of them, which might actually make sense in a brutal yet efficient way. The curious thing about obsessive and conspiratorial antisemitism is not its murderousness. It is its rather peculiar, as racist philosophies, exterminationism.

The Odd Exterminationism of Extreme Obsessive and Conspiratorial Antisemitism

The Odd Exterminationism of Extreme Obsessive and Conspiratorial Antisemitism

Hardcore racism descends into homicidal intent in short order. But the curious thing about extreme antisemitism is not its muderousness but its genocidal intent. It’s never about knocking off a few of the more obnoxious ones here and there, which even I might sign onto when the mike’s turned off. No, they always have to kill them all, to exterminate them, every last one of them.

I’ve studied lots of types of racism and bigotry and other than extreme Islamism, you usually don’t see exterminationist intent anymore, at least not these days.

You see it in Ukrainian nationalists, but that’s because they’re Nazis, and Nazis are exterminationist. You see it in Burma with the Yoghinga, in Sri Lanka with the Tamils, in Pakistan with Hindus, in Palestine with Jews, in Turkey with Kurds, Armenians, and any other “unpatriotic minorities,” in Sudan with Africans, in Africa with the Pygmies, with the Hutu towards the Tutsis, in Salafism with the Shia, in Iraq with Yezidis. You formerly saw it in the Americas with the Amerindians.

But even in the worst days of the South and slavery, you never saw it with Blacks. You never saw it anywhere in the Americas with Blacks. Nor in South Africa.

A lot of people hate Blacks, Muslims, Hindus, Hispanics, Asians, and even Whites, but how many want to exterminate them? Almost none. See?

Yet, with the Jews, it’s always not just kill em, but it’s always kill em all, with an emphasis on the all. Which has also been tried many times in the past to gruesome, and horrendous, voraciously cruel, and morally appalling effect.

There’s something curious about that.

Jews always claim that the next Jewish extinction event is right around the corner. It’s part of the neurosis of Jewish Identity Politics or being unassimilated. The antisemites have their go-to answer to all problems – the Jews – and the Jewish IP types have their go-to anxiety-inducing catastrophism about future events, a sort of Jewish Anxiety Disorder, and that is, that the next mass Jew culling is always right around the corner, ready to start tomorrow, or better yet, yesterday.

On the other hand though, this behavior is insensible and paranoid. If you look hard at the real world, especially the West, we just don’t have the stomach for any mass Jew-killing at the moment anyway. That last one was a doozy and quite enough for a long time, if not centuries, if not forever.

Most Westerners feel terrible about that last go-round, which is another thing Jewish IP types can’t figure out. But then a perverse pleasure in being a Chicken Little who’s never wrong and always just has their dates mixed up is part of Jewish IP and its basic neurosis, Jewish Anxiety Disorder.

How I Became an Antisemite (Anatomy of a Mental Disorder)

How I Became an Antisemite (Anatomy of a Mental Disorder)

The aggression was the one thing where the light finally turned on about them. I hadn’t figured that out about them until I was in my 50’s. Then, even worse, I succumbed to it and became a bit of an antisemite myself, a period I look back on with a bit of shame. But I can tell you what it’s all about now that I’m a recovered antisemite (And of course they recover, Jews! For God’s sake!).

Antisemitism in its conspiratorial and obsessive phase should honestly be seen as a mental disorder, but then, all obsessive racism maybe should be seen as a disorder. Similarly, all Identity Politics looks like mental disorder too. IP people are not mentally healthy. It’s not adaptive. IP make the IP believer himself crazy. When I finally pulled myself out of it, I realized I’d been insane for a years there, and I felt a lot better when I “got clear” and could see properly again.

Jews Acting Like Regular White People Is a Good Thing

Polar Bear: While on the other hand the Jews I’ve met behave as model Aryans unless they’re from NY.

That’s really nice that Jews act like regular White people! That means one thing – that they’re assimilated! And acting like a regular White person, or Aryan as the poster mistakenly puts it, is not a bad thing at all because white picket fence and even cookie-cutter mirror image suburbs work very well.

If there are any problems, it’s homogeneity to the point of assembly-line sameness in just about everything, suffocating conformism, partriotardism, excessive morality to the point of paranoia at the different, way too many rules, manners, and social peccadilloes for way too many things, and just a general lack of easygoingness.

But none of those things are a big deal, and having spent my life in these places, let me tell you that humans act quite good in these places. Other races like Hispanics and Asians quickly assimilate to Whiteness in these population centers.

As do Jews. Your average Jew in a place like this is quite assimilated. Now Jews can kvetch and bitch about assimilation and how it means the end of the Jews (and perhaps it does), but at the end of the day, it cannot be denied that the assimilated Jew acts vastly better than his unassimilated counterpart. Look at how Israel and Israelis act. That’s how Jews act when they don’t assimilate. Pretty lousy, huh?

And yes, most people are not totally ecstatic about Jews and we tend to give them the side-eye a bit and don’t totally trust them, and all of these are good things! They are an antidote to excessive Jewish power and the antisemitism that follows it like day follows night.

The Jews don’t control the world.

But due to our dubious attitude about them, we wouldn’t let them even if they tried! That’s good for the world and it’s even good for the Jews at the end of the day, though few realize it. As the author notes, we know something’s amiss so we keep our distance a bit and are rather suspicious of them, vowing not to let them get away with murder or even the lowest misdemeanors.

I always thought Jews acted like typical Whites too. I thought this way for the first 40-45 years of my life. Jews in the US don’t behave obviously bad, and it’s very easy to get fooled into thinking they’re like everyone else. They’re not, but they’re so assimilated here that any bad or even excessive behavior is rather masked and subtle, often tending towards the annoying rather than the pernicious.

It was not until I thought very deeply about Jews for a very long time starting at age 45, and sadly, until I started reading a lot of antisemites (who are sometimes tragically correct if misguided, hyperbolic and obsessive in their focus) that I started seeing them in a new light.

Then I started looking at all the Jews I’d known through this new lens, and, yeah, they started adding up in new ways. But still they weren’t bad people, just a bit aggressive is all. And I finally saw the clannishness, which just seemed more weird and incomprehensible if fascinating in an odd way.

I Started Out with an Open Mind about Indians, but the More Time I Spent around Them, the More Appalled I Got

Rambo: Wow.

This is Greg’s comment after reading my post, A Brief Primer on Hinduism.

Amazing, isn’t it?

It took me so long to figure these people out. At first I thought they were just wonderful because I knew nothing about them. I started meeting some of them on the Net. And these were the good ones! Every single high-caste Indian I have ever met has defended their lousy casteism.

They do so with an utter lack of apology as if it’s right and correct and wonderful. Sometimes I think they know it’s evil but they just don’t care! That’s what I meant when I said that sometimes I think Indian Hindus seem like they worship evil. They know they’re acting evil but they don’t care and in fact, they even like it, rather gleefully I might add.

Anyway, I met some of the decent ones, but even they got on my nerves after a while. They were always so grasping. You know the stereotype of the grasping Jew, right? Well, most Jews I’ve known had nothing on these Hindus! The Hindu makes the grasping Jew seem like Mother Theresa! They were always trying to get money, cooking up this scheme or that scheme to get the money, which is all they care about. The class system is terrible in that place and they suffer from a severe keeping up with the Joneses issue.

The one friend I had was making $18/year as as a journalist, which is great for an Indian, but all these high caste types he was hanging out with were telling him what a loser he was because he wasn’t making more money. I don’t mind if people have some money-making scheme, but this guy had one every time you turned around, and they all fell through! He was a great guy but he was this endlessly scheming and desperate grasper at the same time.

At one point he tried to get me involved in a company he and his Indian friends had set up in Chicago.

Get this! They immigrated here and then set up a company that hired zero non-Indians! All of the people who worked there were Indians as they refused to hire anyone else.

Yeah, Indians discriminate wildly. And this lousy company had only maybe three employees (albeit all Indians) in the US and they were even scheming and scamming as far as that goes  because were farming out as much of their labor straight back to India to save money. I thought,

These are exactly the sort of immigrants we do not need in our country!

There are horrible problems in IT now because the Indians take over the shops and slowly fire all the Whites and pretty soon it’s a near-all Indian shop. The few remaining Whites are made to feel like they need to leave. It’s worse than that. They not only hire only their own people, but even worse, they only hire their own particular group or caste and blatantly discriminate against everybody else.

The sleazy IT industry has been hand-waving all of this away and denying it, as they’re making bank off of all these Indian scabs, which is basically what they are. Every year the sleazy IT robber barons who run these companies go to Congress and plead for increases in the  H-1B (Hindu 1-B) visas. We already get 200,000 of these scabs a year, but they want more. There are plenty of Americans available to do this work but they won’t work for the low wages that these IT execs pay these Indians.

Supposedly they can only import them if they work for the same amount as an American, but they always get around the law and pay them about half as much. And though discrimination is illegal, there are sleazy American lawyer types who run seminars showing how you can blatantly discriminate against all US applicants in order to hire only foreign scab labor.

The Indians running these Hindu 1-B shops are terrible people and they grotesquely abuse their own employees in a boiler room atmosphere. It’s pretty much a sweatshop for IT workers. Of course the Indian owners don’t care because this is the sleazy way things work in India.

Look, I started out with a very open mind about these people, but the more I dealt with them, the more appalled I got. It resembles a society that’s devoid of all morality aside from doing whatever it takes, right, wrong, or indifferent, to get the money! Even Jews are nowhere near this bad.

Of course I have met the grasping, pushy, aggressive, rude, and bullying Jew (in fact I met a good part of a family of them once), and they were very unpleasant. I honestly wanted to punch the guy in the face because he was being such an ass. He had his three little Jewish sons with them, and they were all just as wicked and demanding as their nerd Daddy was.

But to tell the truth, the number of people I have met like this who were identifiable Jews is extremely small and most Jews I’ve met, including some I hung out with a lot and the Jewish woman I nearly married, were really not like this at all.The woman was always into this thing called “paying it forwards” which is essentially a very Christian form of charity with a bit of, if I dare say so, mercy.

The guy could be a bit aggressive, but he was basically an ok person. He was goodhearted and not particularly hostile towards me except when I deserved it. He felt sorry for me when I was in bad shape. I don’t know if he was a good person (though I don’t think he was particularly bad), but he was very much a good friend.

Most Jews have figured out that you aren’t supposed be a grasping, money-grabbing bastard all the time.

To the extent that they may be like this, they keep it under strict cover and at least their public face is often quite civilized, especially in assimilated Reform types.

I did know an Orthodox Jew for a while there and he was a sleazeball, but he was also a good friend to me too, and in a way, he also had a very good heart and was even kind and gentle. He openly stated that the type of businesses he was trying to set up were “scams,” as he put it, and there was usually something seriously sleazy or borderline illegal about whatever his latest moneymaking scam was.

There are indeed good people in India. Some of the Muslims are ok. Most of the Dalits are all right. And the Christians in Goa, who utterly despise Indian nationalism, are ok too. And there are some Indian guys who have seen the system for the pile of fertilizer that it is and have decided instead to become these “hippie dropout” types, and they can act quite good.

And of course a lot of the decent ones realized what a shithole they were in and immigrated here to the US to get away with all the lying, cheating, and thieving. They have even told me that if they had stayed in India, they would have had no choice but to get in on the scamming and debased behavior because if you want to succeed, there’s really no way to get around it.

Where I’ve Been

Maybe you are wondering where I’ve been. I’ve been working on a classification of all of the Indian languages of the Americas, which is at least 900 languages. Actually it’s a lot more than that! It is an expansion of the Amerindian classification I did in this article here, in which I, unbelievably, tried to classify most of the language families in the world! I still can’t believe I actually completed such a Herculean feat, but apparently I did!

Now that I am redoing this, I am finding out just how difficult it really is. There were serious problems with my classification of Latin American, particularly South American languages in the article. The problem is that the classification of South American languages is sort of like a group of blind men leading each other through a cave and not much being accomplished along the way. It looks like,  more than anything else, “linguistic chaos.”

I don’t mean to get racist about this, but it’s clear that our understanding and classification of North American Indian languages is vastly superior to that of South American languages. Mostly Whites (Hey, let’s face it) got an early start on North American Indian classification with the work of Edward Sapir and Arthur Kroeber at the turn of the century which revolutionized the field. Their work inspired many followers and students of theirs to engage in similar work on the last remaining speakers of many of these languages.

The genocide of the North American Indians came later and was not as extensive as in South America, and there were still many competent first language speakers of North American languages in the first few decades of the 20th Century. In fact, many of these last remaining speakers lived on after the 1930’s, and some of them are dying right now.

Hence, most of these languages were described quite well with exceptions on the East Coast, in Texas, and to a lesser extent in the Southeast where Indian-colonist interactions began very early, as soon as the 17th and 18th Century. The Texas Indians were genocided and missionized by the Spaniards very early on, as in in the 1600’s and 1700’s.

By the time the very late 1800’s rolled around and actual linguists like John Swanton went out to study them, there were hardly any of these Indians left. Many tribes had been nearly exterminated or civilized into extinction, with the remnants of many others joining larger surviving tribes to stay alive and hence losing their original languages.

The languages of the Interior Northeast and the Middle West are a lot better documented, as those areas were not colonized until later on, and the Indians held on there, as in upstate New York, a long time.

The areas west of the Mississippi were not even colonized until after 1850, and many of these tribes were not genocided and instead were herded onto reservations, where at least their languages survived for quite some time under the rubric of self-rule. There are very few large Indian reservations east of the Mississippi, but many Midwestern and Southeastern Indians ended up on reservations in Oklahoma.

The Western Indians also fought vicious wars with the colonists, and these wars lasted for quite some time. Quite a few tribes were not pacified until the 1870-1890, by which time they still had many surviving members on reservations.

Missionization happened early on in California too, as early as 1800, but not as early as it did in the Texas and the Southeast. California was not truly colonized until after 1850, and the genocide was not complete, as many Indians survived. Indeed, when J. P. Harrington was doing his incredible salvage linguistics on the West Coast, especially in California, from 1910-1930, he was still able to find many first language speakers of even the rarest California Indian tribes. They were still around because as I said, the colonization happened later here.

As a result, North American language classification has been undergoing a smoothing-out and intense editing and criticism project for over 100 years now with the involvement of many scholars. Most Americanists in North America have worked on North American languages. Only a few have worked to the south, and even there, there seemed to be a preference for working in Mexico and Central America as opposed to South America.

In recent years, more are working in South America, but not much is happening in the way of classification, as this work is being done under the present regime of extreme conservatism in historical linguistics. And in many cases, there is barely even salvage linguistics going on, as so many tribes are vanished altogether.

There were few linguists, either North Americans, Europeans, or even South Americans, working on South American languages before 1950. An incredible number of South American languages had gone extinct even at that early date.

To this day, there have only been a few excellent linguists from South America. Those who exist are very good, but as I said, there are not many of them. Their numbers are dwarfed by the number of linguists who have worked or are working on North American languages.

Furthermore, attitudes towards Indians were much more cruel and backwards for a long time in South America and continued even after North America started to clean up its act. South Americans were engaging in actual, literal genocidal projects worse than North American had ever done in the late 1800’s until the 1910’s. Many Indians were enslaved or kept on various forms of bondage, including debt bondage, and were only liberated from these conditions as late as 1912.

By this time attitudes in North America had already softened quite a bit towards Indians. Indians in North America were not much hated in the 20th Century. I was born around the mid-century, and all I remember was a veneration and near-worship of the North American Indian from fellow Whites, including an intense feeling of guilt for how we treated them and took their land.

We did give some of their land back as reservations on which Indians were largely under self-rule. North American Whites’ feelings of contrition towards the behavior of their ancestors towards Indians have resulted in various schemes to advantage Indians such as allowing them to form gambling casinos.

Also, the idea of the nobility of the Indian and the near-veneration of Indian culture by North American Whites has led to a renaissance of cultural and linguistic rebirth in Indian lands in North America, whereas in South America, extreme racism, including mass murder as in Brazil, continued far into the 20th Century and in fact, is still  prevalent today.

The ruling class of Peru is very racist towards Indians. In Brazil, Indians are to this day simply massacred with little more of a shrug from the state in Brazil.

I have spoken with Chileans, including ostensible leftwing ones, and I was stunned at their completely unashamed contempt for and ridicule of the local Indians. These highly civilized Chileans (considered among the most cultured people in South America) make brutal fun of Peruvians for the fact that they have a lot of Indian blood, whereas Chileans reassure themselves that they are either pure or mostly White, both of which are perhaps more dubious than you might think.

Indians were simply exterminated in Argentina and Uruguay and to some extent in Chile in the far South quite early on. Vicious wars of extermination were fought, particularly in Argentina. Hence little is known of Argentine and Uruguayan Indians.

The rape of the Amazon by colonists who are foresters, jewel-hunters, and land-clearers to create lands for grazing economies continues to ravage Brazil to the present day, and many Indians are still being murdered every year in significant numbers. Even in their reserves, they are killed and their lands are stolen. Everywhere their lands are set aflame to create pasture for ranching. The weak Brazilian state, which is controlled by a brutal, primitive, and racist ruling class, barely lifts a finger to stop the murders of Indians by colonists.

In addition, disease epidemics ravaged many Amazonian Indians around the turn of the century. These exterminating epidemics continued far into the 20th Century past the time when epidemics were a faded memory in North America. For a vast number of these tribes, few if any are left, and of those who remain, only a few or perhaps none speak their ancestral language.

In much of the continent, being Indian continues to cause a sense of shame, and acculturation to Spanish or Portuguese-speaking culture is seen as a way to move up in the world and in many cases to rid one of the shame of being “Indio.

Nevertheless, many of the less, barely, or even non-contacted tribes in Brazil and many more heavily-interaced tribes in Mexico, Guatemala, Panama, Nicaragua, Colombia, Venezuela, and Chile yet retain a strong sense of pride which is apparently a new feature. I am personally stunned at the pride local Mexican Indians in my city have in their Indian cultures and languages.

Consequently, South American Indian classification is a massive mess with over 100 language families and isolates with purportedly no relationship to each other. This silliness is being cemented in by the reigning fad, and it is a fad after all, of bullheaded and nihilistic conservatism that now reigns supreme in our field.

Thus, this project of mine is a gigantic clusterfuck. It’s chaos X 100. There are as many as 10-15 different names for some languages, and of course I need to write them all down, alphabetize them and try to figure out if they are correct or are names for other languages that somehow snuck in. What might seem like four different languages might actually be one language spelled four different ways because the documentation of these languages has been so scattershot and poor.

There have been a few brave forays into classification of these languages, but these are still in their initial phases, and the ruling conservatives are of course shooting them all down. I’ve had to change my classification over and over, and the names and the whole gigantic mess makes me want to tear my hair out. My head often feels like it is spinning.

Nevertheless, I love work like this. You start working on a project like this, and you laugh and think, “There’s no way that any human could possibly figure this mess out.” A computer, maybe, but even that might be hard. I’m always finding out that I classified something incorrectly or under the wrong name, and I’m having to go back and redo a lot of my work as I get a better and more “holistic” feel for it.

Still, I love jobs like this! The very idea of an “impossible job” which I can nevertheless probably manage to “do the impossible” and complete somehow anyway is an incredible rush. If I thought it was hopeless, I would throw in the towel. But I love the challenge of an insanely difficult task which I nevertheless can probably figure out if I stick at it long enough.

Furthermore, the fact that I am always solving little puzzles here and there and coming up with better solutions to things I thought I figured out earlier means that in the midst of the insane frustration (which I actually like), there are victories sprouting up all the time. The feeling of accomplishment every time you put another piece of the impossible puzzle together can hardly be exceeded in words.

Hopefully this piece may be published at some point in an academic journal, as one of the editors at a journal I recently published in encouraged me to go ahead and write this article when I suggested it to him. Without probable publication, I probably wouldn’t be driving myself nuts like this.

Maybe I’ll put up a working copy on my website if any of you want to look at it.

Francis Miville on Hinduism

I will add one detail to the criticism of India and Hinduism that tells it all: Orwell’s 1984 is now banned in most states and cities of India. Why? The rulers have seen in it a not-even-so-deformed caricature of Indian society and even more so of Indian best-known philosophy known on the idea export market as Advaita Vedanta.

Unfortunately they happen to be right: George Orwell grew fed up with Indian culture for life, as he was a civil servant in India and feared that the anti-human culture of that vast human mass might seduce the bourgeoisie of the whole Anglosphere on a day that was far nearer than one could imagine and with a particularly Western adaptation.

And lo, just ten years after he made that remark, Indian philosophy together with yoga came to be pressure-sold to the whole West, especially through the channel of the Anglo-Saxon Fake Left.

Make no mistake about it: all Indian philosophies are about one thing: nipping in the bud any mental impetus to correct social injustices as the hallmark of an inferior being. Doublethink as described by Orwell is practical Advaita Vedanta. That means that requiring your opponent to be coherent and consistent in his argumentation is considered to be a blasphemy against the highest heavens. As a consequence 1984 is now banned as a “racist book against India.”

My opinion is that Hindu propaganda of any kind should be banned from any humanistic conversation space together with its author, because the first thing these assholes do is attack your mental sanity together with your elementary sense of common decency. Talking with them is like entering into a Black Hole’s gravitational pull.

Indian philosophy is namely a war against Faith, Hope and Love wherever any of them might arise in the universe. It is a vivid proof that multiculturalism doesn’t work, or better said, works in Indian philosophy’s direction only. You cannot survive as a species by the mere exercise of your virtue of toleration. People of Indian origin should be profiled until they show clear guarantees that they will behave otherwise as wanted by their society of origin.

One of the main reasons the French Empire lost in India to the British during the Seven Years’ War was that the French quite clearly manifested their intention to eradicate Hinduism like the Black Death if their administration were to take over: they would tolerate Islam as in principle it talked about the same deity, while they saw in Hinduism a system of adoration of the forces of evil in the universe that teach people how to cheat.

India is just the first big modern country that fell prey to some kind of New Age thought in history, and the net result is the horror you see. The result in the West is California as you can contemplate it nowadays. Actually Hinduism as it is now known not something very ancient in India.

It appeared in a recognizable form around the 15th century, no sooner (contrary to the big lie that it dates back from some Golden Stone Age) that is to say, well after the Muslim invasions, in a strange parallel with the Rhineland and Flemish mystics of the same time period.

There was a Hindu-like form of thought previous to Hinduism (the Sivaite current), but it has now disappeared for all practical purposes from the Hindu scene, and even so, Early Medieval Hinduism was absolutely inauthentic and claimed to originate from a tradition that never existed.

Even the Sanskrit language is in its greater part a mostly medieval linguistic creation like Esperanto except that its purpose is just opposite, namely destroying humanism through divide and rule, and practically all sacred Sanskrit texts can be shown to be fakes. In all but a few passages, it can be shown that they were composed during Muslim rule and not before.

A Brief Primer on Hinduism

Rambo: What are some of the beliefs of Hinduism? The partition of India that created Pakistan (a country that Christopher Hitchens used to say was not a country at all but an hypocrisy) is seen by most as basically a Hindu vs. Islamic schism. Just what is Hinduism at it’s core?

Of course it was a Hindu versus Muslim split that yet reverberates to our own present day.

Let’s just say that Hinduism is a very primitive religion and primitive religions were largely amoral. Look at how many of them require human and animal sacrifices. Which brings us to the essential feature of a primitive religion: that an insecure and unstable Man is at the mercy of a capricious, sometimes warmly nurturing and other times brutally cruel Gods that no one can see, hear, or understand.

So insecure and unstable man must make prayers and give offerings to get good things from the Gods and to keep the Gods from getting angry and sending bad things our way.

These prayers are often to the Gods of Elements, who held the sword of life or death swinging over the heads of primitive man. The Elements were not understood, and few things are as capricious as the weather and other elements of Nature.

In a primitive religion, sacrifices or offerings are made to either appease God or to, frankly, get stuff. Get things, as in material things. You make an offering to the heathen God, and you are rewarded with riches at some point in the future, morality be damned! It’s all about getting the stuff and it doesn’t matter how you go about getting it.

These religions have little to nothing to say about human morality at all except to sometimes mandate unspeakably cruel and immoral behaviors! Like the Book of Manu for instance, one of the most important books in the Hindu religion. And an utterly, brutally, diabolically, cruel and immoral book, too. But that doesn’t matter, you see. Primitive religions are morals-free or even perversely mandate immoral behavior as the just and the good.

Strict morals-based religions are a pretty new thing. Even the primitive Jewish religion, a step forward for being monotheistic (Let’s give the Jews credit where it is due) relied on an insane level of animal sacrifice at its ridiculous temple. On sacrifice days, the line of Jews with the animals they were going to sacrifice to the Gods (or to their one God?) stretched far away from the temple.

The air was a cacophony of bleating and other animal noises along with the brutal screams of animals having their throats slit. The blood ran out of the temple and down the dirt path where the twisting line of sacrificial worshipers stretched into the distance. I’m not sure what was done with the meat of the dead animal. Was it eaten? No idea.

But this clearly was animal sacrifice run amok, and more than anything else, it was idiotic. Idiotically cruel, yes, but more stupid and ridiculous than anything else.

Well, there you have a primitive religion. Primitive religions are stupid because primitive man was uncultured and uncouth, more of a lower mammal than a human.

Morality in those days was taken care of presumably by tribal codes which, along the lines of Judaism, after all a primitive tribal religion, mandated that one should obey strict moral rules with the tribe or in-group, whereas all morality was thrown to the dogs when dealing with the out-group.

Why religion changed into a strictly morals-based belief system designed to force man into a decent and well-behaved life which he is constitutionally disinclined to follow is uncertain, but we on the Left see History as forward motion in all areas and that includes forward motion in morals and behavior.

Presumably as man became agricultural and more settled, increased civilized behavior become more important or even essential, so strict rules had to be put on people.

Tribes in the Amazon follow few rules with regard to other tribes, and they are in the habit of massacring or even genociding each other. It doesn’t matter much as the group that gets genocided numbers maybe 50-100 people, so there’s no great effect on the general scheme of things. But we can’t have groups of humans in our modern societies who decide to go genocide 50-100 people of some opposing group. It’s not going to work. Increased civilization demands more strict morality.

What I am saying here is that Hinduism is an “offering-based religion.”

Hinduism has something like 700 million Gods including a God for everything under the sun. Some of these Gods are Gods of pure evil, which makes sense theologically because this exists in humans, not that these entities should be worshiped!

But in Hinduism one can choose as a perfectly matter of fact and justifiable Hindu choice to follow one of the Gods of destruction. Thuggee culture in 1800’s India was based on theologically-sanctioned vicious criminals who roamed around preying on other humans. In Hinduism this is just a choice some people can make, as valid as any other. It’s probably not best for everyone to follow the thugee Gods, but the behavior of the thugees was definitely theologically sanctioned.

In Hinduism, one makes a morals-free offering to crooked priests who run shakedown enterprises called Hindu temples. You shower the temple with money or valuables or whatever, and then the Hindu priest, like some fortune telling charlatan bent over a crystal ball, tells that you that some Hindu God will send you great riches in the future. I suppose you can pray for anything you want though, not just money. But I’m not so clear on this.

Probably no religion treats women worse than Hinduism, and this is once again in line with its being a primitive religion, as such religions typically didn’t afford women much in the way of rights.

Hinduism also features caste, and caste sadly seems to be a hallmark of primitive human religion. Perhaps the earliest modern religion yet extant, Yezidism, has a strict caste system with serious rules about intermingling. I believe  the related Zoroastrianism also has caste.

It stands to reason that in Hinduism, being a very primitive religion like these two, caste also figures as a prominent feature. We can argue about this, about why caste was so prominent in early religions, about whether this indicates a basic caste-like value system of more primitive societies and perhaps a built-in natural tendency of primitive man towards cruel caste-based societies that man outgrows as his civilization and hence his morals become more developed, as each appears to need to the other to fully flower.

A Comparison of Christians, Hindus, and Jews

Amy Stark: It is their lying, scheming, scamming, and stealing of other people’s land that make the fucking Indians so despicable.

They don’t just steal land. The Indian Hindu spends his whole life lying, cheating, scheming, scamming, thieving, and backstabbing. He has no sense of honor whatsoever. And their nepotism is out of this world. It’s the worst. What worse about all of these things is that they don’t seem to feel bad about any of them. They think this is just the normal, typical, proper, and even moral way to behave.

I’ve known a lot of Jews. I liked most of them, but these were assimilated Jews who are fairly easy to like, and you have to concentrate, think real hard, do a lot of reading, and put a lot of weird pieces together to come to dislike them. I knew them for many years, and I never hated them at all. There were things about them that I found a bit odd and puzzling, but I just chalked that up to a weird culture. They were also rather aggressive, but they weren’t hostile towards me, so that didn’t matter either.

With almost all of the Jews I’ve known, I really got the impression that deep down inside, they have some deep moral core that’s really not that different from that of us Christians. I know Jews will hate the comparison, but there are a lot of good things about Christian culture. If there’s anything wrong with it, it’s that it demands you to be too good! People don’t want to be as good as Christianity demands you to be, so people drop out of the religion.

As the Jews are chosen to bear the burden of following the Jewish laws (the true, pure meaning of them being “chosen”), the Christians are also chosen or perhaps even doomed to be good, too good, maybe too good for their own good, certainly too good for an amoral society like ours. But I’ve always had a soft spot for saints. Jews and Christians are more alike than they think. We are both “chosen” to carry some rather heavy moral burdens and chores.

Hindus are far worse than Jews. Jews have a down side, but I also think there are a lot of great things about them, so they’re a mixed bag. Hindus are what happens when a group has all the worst qualities of Jews dialed up to the max and nary a trace of the good ones, which are considerable.

Sometimes I think Hinduism is almost demonic. Judaism is weird, it’s a lot of things good and bad, and in its Orthodox form it blows as much as any fundamentalist retardation, but the core religion, especially as practiced today by Reform assimilated Jews, is not demonic! Hinduism almost seems like literal Devil worship.

Why Are Americans So Ignorant, Stupid, and Lacking in Wisdom?

I don’t understand Americans, how they can hold grudges for half a century and they always assume that stuff that never works anywhere ever is the solution to this or that problem.

I talk to people in other countries all the time and almost to a person, they are far smarter (or more wise) than Americans and they know far more about politics and the world than most Americans do. Americans don’t know shit about anything! They’re some of the dumbest people on the planet.

They’re also shockingly lacking is wisdom. They have no normal curiosity about the world outside their shores, I assume because they hold all foreign countries in contempt. The problem isn’t White supremacy. It’s American supremacy and the whole country is guilty of it. Patriotards are everywhere. Most liberal Democrats are even worse patriotards than MAGA Republican nowadays. I’ve met a stunning number of Leftists who told that America was the greatest country in the world. Leftists!

A Bit about Cuba

It’s just that I don’t remember one quote from Cuba about the Russia-Ukraine situation. Does anyone else?

I’m not aware that they are talking about it very much.

This is an awesome website about Cuba. Really it’s an “online newspaper.” It’s run by a revolution-sympathetic guy in Cuba. He used to live there. Most if not all of the commenters are Cubans themselves! So you can see what they really think. Most if not all of them are strong supporters of the revolution and they are way more hardline than the government.

I keep up on Cuban news fairly regularly. That site is awesome because it shows you how the average Cuban feels about politics and their country. It also shows you how the place really works as opposed to “nothing but lies and distortions” BS you get from the US media. The US media only shows the bad side of Cuba and then they blame Cubans for things that are not their fault.

Remember when there were foreigner-sponsored demonstrations all over Cuba a while back and the government arrested a few people? Almost all of the Cuban commenters were mad that the government was going so easy on these people and they wanted the state to throw the book at these people! Not all dictatorships are tyrannies. In a lot of cases, the majority or vast majority support crackdowns on dissidents and the opposition.

There’s a lot of bitching and moaning on the site though, all from Cubans. They complain but they don’t want to get rid of the system. Almost all of the problems are due to the blockade we put on them. The blockade has secondary sanctions built in that force other countries to comply with our sanctions! Like US law sort of applies to the whole world! If a ship ports in Cuba, it cannot port in the US for the next six months, I know that. There are probably quite a few other ones. The blockade costs them $3-5 billion/year and that was 30 years ago.

It’s insane. We put it in in 1961 to make lives so miserable for Cubans that they will get rid of the government. Then we strengthened it over and over. Well, guess what? It didn’t work! It’s been failing for 62 years now. How long must a total failure go on before you hang it up and say screw it?

Why the West Is So Russophobic?

Polar Bear: “Jews love Russia, Russians, and filthy Russian culture.” KAK.

I don’t really understand anti-Russians. I get anti-Americanism, anti-Semitism, etc. but don’t fully understand why many hate Russia. Is Russian culture Jewy and filthy? The West looks more filthy and Jewy.

What’s Russian hate down to? Mongol and Commie hatred? Lack of niceties until some Westernization? Westernization in Russia did create its own culture in the arts, fusing two worlds (East and West). Some consider that middle ground to be the Russian ideal.

The Jews who haven’t left yet are hardcore patriots, most of them. Interesting people. There’s no anti-Semitism at all against these folks. Russians don’t dislike Jews per se. They just dislike a certain type of Jew, a nation-seller, traitor, and nation-hater who always worked for the enemies of Russia and tried to screw Russia over due probably to resentment over how Russians had treated his people.

Russian culture isn’t really filthy. It’s not like that at all. It’s hypermasculine, traditional, boozing, corrupt, and violent, but the average person you meet is really cool. Besides, all that stuff is the downside of Russian culture, and Ukrainian culture suffers from all of those things in an even worse way.

I guess it is West versus East. I know the British have hated Russia forever, all the way back to the 1800’s. France, Georgia, Germany, Poland, Sweden, and Finland all got their asses handed to them by Russia, and believe it or not, a lot of them are still out for blood and paybacks.

Mostly it’s all about the USSR and the Cold War. Your average Westerner thinks Russia is still Communist and still the USSR. It’s hard to change people’s thinking habits. It all shows the power of propaganda. Westerners are easily propagandized when the state has complete control over the media as is the case now in the West.

The entire West lives under a NATO dictatorship, and NATO despises Russia and wants to see it destroyed. A lot of Westerners also see Russia as a potential competitor and a threat. When you have 100% of the media screaming in your ear night and day about the evils of Russia, it’s easy to get brainwashed.

Westerners are not independent thinkers at all. They are profoundly conformist patriotards. They’re incapable of independent and critical thinking, and they have hive minds. With gullible brains like that, they are very easy to brainwash.

However, state, elite, and NATO control over the media is starting to develop cracks now that everyone can publish their own newsletter on the Internet. There have been many attempts to re-consolidate and get this back under control. That’s what the social media companies, the censorship, the canceling, and the character assassination is all about. They’re terrified that they don’t have total media control anymore, and they are lashing out in all directions.

The West is also becoming more authoritarian too. The only reason we had freedom of speech here is that everyone went along with the Foreign Policy Establishment and the NATO dictatorship. Now that some don’t drink the Koolaid anymore, there are wild attempts at censorship and authoritarian shutting down of speech. In the “free” West now, people are being arrested and are going to jail just for supporting Russia.

As soon as people started rebelling and going against the Deep States of the West, the West got authoritarian real quick, started censoring and canceling people, and putting critics in jail. Democracy is just a fine veneer over fascism in any Western country, and your typical Westerner goes from normie to fascist in the wink of an eye.

About That Soviet-German Pact

A college professor that was giving lectures about Russia was really into that Soviet-German pact. I suspect he had a chip against Russia given his ancestry.

Yes, the Russophobes are going crazy about that lousy pact on Twitter, saying that the USSR and Nazi Germany were allies during WW2. So the Holocaust is the fault of the Soviet Union! The Soviets were Nazis! Never mind Ilya Ehrenberg and the 500,000 Soviet Jews who bravely served in the Red Army.

They won’t shut up about this.

What’s next? How about the old theory:

The USSR started WW2 and Hitler only invaded to stop an immanent Soviet invasion of Europe with the intention of conquering all of Europe and installing Communist governments in each country.

Is that coming next? Why not?

Putin is fighting an antifascist and anti-Nazi war and the entire West is falling all over themselves to support the Nazis, who are pegged as freedom-loving Democrats, and bash the antifascists as being the real Nazis! We’re already rooting for Nazis, why not go full bore while we’re at it?

That’s straight up Nazi apologetics straight from the source!

I read neo-Nazis and their ilk all the time (Unz is full of them), and I can’t tell you how many times I have heard this line. There is even some fake Soviet defector who claims that this was the actual plan. But a lot of those defectors are flat out lying.

Of course the other part of it is

The Jews started the war by attacking Germany, and Hitler was only fighting back.

This is because World Jewry did indeed institute a boycott of Nazi Germany very early on, as early as 1933, due to the wildly antisemitic government they had. Obviously, it didn’t go very far, and Germany got quite wealthy and built up an economic and manufacturing powerhouse just the same.

The Jews didn’t have very much power back then. In the 1930’s, even in the US, Gentiles didn’t like Jews a whole lot. They were not Nazis of course, but most Gentiles were not real keen on Jews. So if the Jews announced a boycott of Germany, what effect would it have? Your average Gentile would have laughed and said they were not going to honor some Jewish boycott.

The Jewish Position in the US in the 1930’s

Back then, the Jews did not even have very much money. They had some of course, but not like they do now. Yes, they grabbed the media and Hollywood. Both were documented conspiracies motivated not by power lust but by the desire to keep the media and the movies out of the hands of racist Whites, who always go after the Jews sooner or later anyway.

The production of Birth of a Nation in 1916 had seriously alarmed the Jews. The movie venerated the KKK which mostly hated Blacks, but they didn’t like Jews either. Hell, they didn’t even like Catholics!

The Jews got alarmed and 4-5 Jews, all from within a 50-100 mile radius in Galicia (now Western Ukraine, formerly the Pale of Settlement) indeed bought up all of Hollywood, and they kept it for a long time. I think the Jewish hold on Hollywood seems to be lapsing though. For instance, Italians have become a major force in Hollywood in recent years. It’s not just a bunch of Jews anymore.

The Soviet-German Pact

I told my Mom about it and I said that Stalin hated Hitler and Stalin had realized all the way back in 1933 that Hitler was going to invade the USSR, hence he started preparing all the way back then. That’s how they industrialized so fast and moved all their industry east of the Urals so quickly.

She told me how when she was a little girls of 7-8 years old, her father had shown her a cartoon of Stalin and Hitler signing the pact and each one of them had a knife behind his back as he was doing it. Her father told here that they were not allies at all, and in fact, Stalin hated Hitler. Hitler had no intention of honoring the pact, as shown from his invasion three years later, an invasion which had been planned for a very long time, like almost a decade.

Stalin was just buying time and he grabbed part of Poland to have a buffer zone against Hitler. Same reason for the invasion and takeover of the Baltics (part of the Russian Empire since the 1700’s!) and the invasion of Finland.

And he grabbed all of Eastern Europe after the war because he didn’t trust the Germans, and he wanted a real buffer zone against Germany and the West itself and NATO (which he apparently foresaw) in case they tried any more crap. Don’t fall for it! All of the allies made peace treaties with Hitler, some of them multiple times.

If a maniac is breathing down your neck and he hands you a piece of paper to sign so he will quit trying to kill you, are you going to sign it? Of course you are!

On Some Motivations for Jewish Behavior

Polar Bear: Some Jews act like total victims for being ghettoized and badged. It’s interesting that many Jews want to be distinguished and isolated.

Jewish humor is said to come from little Jew towns, shtetls, in Poland.

Jews often take both sides. Many Jews backed Napoleon but at the same time many Jews backed Russia. Seems like a theme, Jews always take both sides.

The big Russian bear seems to spew Jews out after awhile. I know at least one Tsar wanted them sent back to Poland and later on Stalin wasn’t a fan either.

Bit by bit.

Some Jews act like total victims for being ghettoized and badged.

I dunno. How would you like to be forced to wear a yellow star badge? I don’t think I would like that very much.

It is interesting that they built some of those ghettos themselves! Apparently to keep Jewish women from having sex with Gentile men. They didn’t care too much about Jewish men having sex with Gentile women. Any offspring would be simply lost to the Jews, as the kid would have a Gentile mother and he couldn’t be Jewish. The man would keep on living with the Jews.

Jewish humor is said to come from little Jew towns, shtetls, in Poland.

This is actually correct. And do you know how poor those Jews were? They were very poor and their villages were basically overpopulated. Supposedly people hate Jews for being rich, but these Jews were as poor as dogs. And they got murdered just the same as all the others! You wonder what motivated murderous antisemites.

They killed the rich Jews. They killed the poor Jews.

They killed the degenerate Jews. They killed the deeply religious Jews.

They killed the nation-sellers and dual loyalists Jews. They killed the deeply patriotic Jews.

Basically if you were a Jew, you were screwed. Screwed from birth all because you chose the wrong parents.

Jews often take both sides. Many Jews backed Napoleon but at the same time many Jews backed Russia. Seems like a theme, Jews always take both sides.

You know, in their defense, I will say that a persecuted minority might do well to hedge their bets in any conflict. That way whoever wins, you can always say you supported the winners. A group like that doesn’t want to be seen as backing the losing side because there is often retribution against losing sides in wars.

A lot of people are fence-sitters in wars. In the Salvadoran Civil War, 1/3 supported the government, 1/3 supported the rebels, and 1/3 were sitting on the fence with their finger to the wind. My Mom said that the Revolutionary War was the same. 1/3 were with the Americans, 1/3 were with the British, and 1/3 were hedging their bets by being neutral.

I’m told you need a minimum of 1/3 support for any revolution to be successful. And you will need to turn the army. In successful revolutions, the state soldiers drop their guns and go join the rebels. When that starts happening, it’s all over!

Morals and values aside, in a war, a civilian mostly just wants to survive. And that might just mean siding with whichever side wins, whether they are good guys or bad guys or your guys or their guys, none of it matters. A lot of people reasonably just want to support whoever wins.

I saw a photograph taken when ISIS was attacking Ramadi in Iraq. There was a large group of young men who were still in the city who apparently had not been drafted. Most countries don’t draft all their young men, you know. They were posing in a wild, ragged group, and some of them had automatic weapons. They said they were ready to support whichever side was winning, either ISIS or the state. I was shocked that they were so honest about it.

Soldiers are like that too. Once one side starts getting its butt kicked and losing badly, often a lot of the soldiers and even officers will go over to the other side. Soldiers switch sides in wars a lot, especially when one side is losing badly.

The big Russian bear seems to spew Jews out after awhile. I know at least one Tsar wanted them sent back to Poland.

I think one of the Czars in the ~1880’s was like that. He was very bad for the Jews. I think he tried to throw a lot of them out of country, even the ones who were living in his own Pale. This is where the phrase “beyond the pale” comes from. I think he organized a lot of pogroms against Jews too. He was big-time bad news for Russian Jews.

I recently read an account of a British journalist who went to cover the Russian Civil War on the side of the Whites or the Royalists. He was stunned at their obsessive and conspiratorial antisemitism. He thought their antisemitism was so extreme that they were crazies. If you want to know why Russian Jews went over to the Bolsheviks, there you go. And if you want to know why Jews outside of Russia were opposed to the Whites in the Civil War, there you are. The Royalists were antisemites!

It’s also a lie to say that Russian Jews were Bolsheviks. Sure, a lot of the Bolsheviks were Jews but not as many as people say, and there were just as many Latvians as Jews in the high ranks. Yeah. Latvians! So go start a pogrom against Latvians then.

In 1917 in the last election before the October Revolution, 70% of Jews voted for the Zionist political party, not even for socialists, much less Communists. The Rightists say that rich Jewish bankers outside Russia backed Bolshevism, but that’s got to be BS. No rich anyone anywhere backs Communists! Why would they?

I do believe that the rich Jews outside Russia supported the more socialist or social democratic formations in play at the time though. Those parties were quite popular. One was called the Mensheviks.

A lot of those Czars had been antisemites or at the very least, antisemitism flourished under the Jews.

I’ve heard the Czars used antisemitism as a scapegoat so whenever popular resentment against the state developed, the Czars, instead of addressing the issues in one way or another, simply tried to distract people towards the Jews. It’s like peasants are mobbing some landlord demanding his head and he stops them and points in the distance, pointing out some Jews, and says, “Look, Jews! Your enemies! Go get them!” As in, go get them instead of me. Politicians use this sleazy distraction method all the time.

The Tranny Revolution

Ukraine is called the basket-case of Europe. Found some pro-Ukraine nudes, two nude girls with Ukraine colors, and clicked #Ukraine and a lot of trannies came up. That full Western corruption mixed with the worst form of Nazism. Some very odd thoughts are about in Ukraine.

That’s Ukraine, trannies and Nazis. Even worse, trannies and Jewish Nazis! WTH. What the Hell is a Jewish Nazi, anyway? How does that even exist?

I read porn blogs sometimes just for kicks now and again. You can search around for the porn blog sites and check them yourself. Tumblr had them for a long time, but then they banned porn blogs and everyone left. I used to read on there all the time. I think you have to set up a blog to read there, so just set up a blog and leave it empty. That’s what I do.

What’s interesting is that there are many, many porn blogs run by women! You would think something that perverted would be all guys but the ratio of females is far higher than I would have ever thought. Women are more perverted than you think!

Anyway, on this site I read nowadays at times, it’s absolutely flooded with trannies! They all call themselves “sissies” and a lot of them come across as gays. I guess they want to be seen as women, dress up as women, and get fucked by Alpha men as if they were women.

There are also a lot of the “see yourself as a woman” porn memes on there, which of course is what autogynephilia and almost all male trannies are about. They often seem like women’s blogs until you read for a while and you start seeing these creatures (Apparently human but who knows?) that look like really hot chicks except you look down the body and they have a cock! You’d almost want to fuck one of them, but I don’t fuck humans who have these things called penises attached to them. That’s pretty much a no-go for me, sorry, boys.

Women and even men put that stupid tranny porn on their pages. I’m really getting sick and tired of trannies in straight porn!

There are also quite a few FtM trannies on there with their porn blogs. I’ve talked to a few of them. One admitted to me that she made a big mistake, but she said it was too late to change now. I recently met a couple of them who had chopped their tits off! Yuck! I didn’t ask to see pics. I’ve seen pics of those anyway. They all have these small scars where their tits were.

A shocking number of these FtM women were still virgins into their early 20’s. And all these FtM women want to have sex with men, so I guess they are gay men! These were straight women who convinced themselves that they were really men.

A lot of them have a fetish that they want to be abused and insulted about being trannies, told that they’re not really men and they’re just faking it, told that they were stupid for being trannies, etc. They want you to misgender them. They specifically request to be misgendered.

About “Putin’s Palace”

Here is the lie, straight off the Internet:

I don’t think anyone actually believes he is a Communist when he built a 1.3 billion dollar mansion with a strip club and a casino.

That link is to The Guardian, a despicable British shitlib publication, nominally supportive of the shitlib party known as Labour. The story came out in a movie by the liar Navalsky, the Russian oppositionist. See? Now whatever you may think of Putin, I assure you that the Russian opposition is no good. They’re dirty, no-good, lying sonsofbitches and almost all of them are white collar criminals. Many have embezzled millions of dollars.

The media went crazy here in the US a while back when a story from the Russian opposition broke about how Putin owned a gigantic illustrious mansion in Crimea. They called it Putin’s Palace. I didn’t know what to think until later when someone said it was just some unfinished hotel down there and Putin had nothing to do with it. I just learned some new information that sheds light on the matter.

Turns out that Putin’s then son-in-law was one of a group of people involved in an hotel development in the town of Gelendzhik on the Black Sea. As a sales gimmick, the son-in-law offered Putin a free apartment in the complex for life. Putin refused, the complex was never completed, and to this day remains an empty shell. It was recently sold on at considerable loss by the original investors. The new owners hope to complete it sometime in the coming years.

The complex was never a palace, least of all “Putin’s Palace”. But this was the bullshit peddled in the Western MSM.

You see how they lie to you? This is going on all across the West now and the stories all have a familiar ring about them. A paper in the US, Spain, and the Czech Republic will all print the same bullshit story using the same sources and nearly the same wording. And in every Western country, every media outlet will go along without a single media voice in opposition. Some freedom of speech we have!


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)