Soviet Anti-Semitism

Exhibit A: Zionology.

Exhibit B: Anti-Zionist Committee of the Soviet Public.

A touchy subject, but it’s clear that Stalin became anti-Semitic at the end of his life. He outright murdered leading Yiddish writers for no legitimate reason that I can think of. There’s controversy about whether or not he was going to purge the Jews to Siberia (population transfer) around the time of his death. There’s also controversy about whether or not there was something to the Robert LindsayPosted on Categories Anti-Racism, Anti-Semitism, Europe, Europeans, Jewish Racism, Jews, Left, Marxism, Poland, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, USSR, Zionism31 Comments on Soviet Anti-Semitism

Some Interesting Zionist Propaganda

I cut out some of the more egregious and nonsensical Zionist propaganda here. You have to admit there is a lot of truth is this bit of Zionist propaganda. I don’t like Zionism one bit. It’s a ridiculous settler-colonial project that the civilized world has given up on 100 years ago. The main problem is that the Arabs and Muslims, while obviously the victims of this settler-colonial aggression, often act like such shits that it’s hard to side with them over the Zionists. You really ought to seize the moral high ground in a war.

The mass movement of Muslims into Europe has been a catastrophe all around. Europe needs to start limiting the number of Muslims moving there, imposing some restrictions on them, demanding that they assimilate before being given citizenship, etc. There are all sorts of things that could be done. Main thing is to quit making it worse. If you’re in a hole, quit digging. Many Muslims in Europe seem to be refusing to assimilate to modern Western Europe. This is unacceptable. Immigrants must assimilate.

Furthermore, in general, Europe’s Muslims appear reactionary in the sense that they reject modernism in Europe and wish to turn back the clock. This is unacceptable. Europe is part of the modern, Judeo-Christian secular Western project. Islam seems to reject this project in its entirety. That’s not a problem if they want to sit over in their sandboxes and reject modernism, but if they need to Europe, they need to embrace modernism, grin and bear it and shut up about it, or take off back to their sandboxes.

A lot Left Anti-Zionists are actually anti-Semites. They support Islam in Europe and elsewhere because it’s the front line in the war against the Jews, oh, I’m sorry, I mean the Zionists. This is ridiculous. Talk to the Arabs and Muslim Left about how progressive Islamists are.

A lot of White nationalists are behind the Islamists too for the same reason. They’re the leading edge of the anti-Jewish, I mean anti-Zionist (!) resistance battalions. Nonsense. How would these White nationalists like it if huge numbers of these wonderful Muslims moved in next door to them. Mass Muslim immigration has not proven beneficial to Western White states.

The Nobel Prizes list is most interesting. I so want to be a Jew! Otto Weinberger must have been wrong. It’s not true at all that Jews lack the capacity for genius. That’s ridiculous. I don’t know what was wrong with Weinberger, maybe he was just another self-hating Jew. He wouldn’t have been the first.

All European Life Died at Auschwitz

By Sebastian Vilar Rodrigez

I walked down the street in Barcelona, and suddenly discovered a terrible truth – Europe died in Auschwitz….We killed six million Jews and replaced them with 20 million Muslims. In Auschwitz we burned a culture, thought, creativity, talent. We destroyed the chosen people, truly chosen, because they produced great and wonderful people who changed the world.

The contribution of this people is felt in all areas of life: science, art, international trade, and above all, as the conscience of the world. These are the people we burned.

And under the pretense of tolerance, and because we wanted to prove to ourselves that we were cured of the disease of racism, we opened our gates to 20 million Muslims, who brought us stupidity and ignorance, religious extremism and lack of tolerance and lastly, crime and poverty, due to an unwillingness to work and support their families with pride.

They have blown up our trains and turned our beautiful Spanish cities into the Third World, drowning in filth and crime.

Shut up in the apartments they receive free from the government, they plan the murder and destruction of their naive hosts.

And thus, in our misery, we have exchanged culture for fanatical hatred, creative skill for destructive skill, intelligence for backwardness and superstition.

We have exchanged the pursuit of peace of the Jews of Europe and their talent for a better future for their children, their determined clinging to life because life is holy, for those who pursue death, a people consumed by the desire for death for themselves and others, for our children and theirs.

What a terrible mistake was made by miserable Europe.

Nobel Prizes, Jewish and Muslim

The Global Islamic population is approximately 1.2 billion or 2

Literature: 1988 – Najib Mahfouz

Peace: 1978 – Mohamed Anwar El-Sadat 1990 – Elias James Corey 1994 – Yaser Arafat 1999 – Ahmed Zewai

Economics: (zero)

Physics: (zero)

Medicine: 1960 – Peter Brian Medawar 1998 – Ferid Mourad

TOTAL: 7

The Global Jewish population is approximately 14,000,000; that is 14 million or about 0.

Literature: 1910 – Paul Heyse 1927 – Henri Bergson 1958 – Boris Pasternak 1966 – Shmuel Yosef Agnon 1966 – Nelly Sachs 1976 – Saul Bellow 1978 – Isaac Bashevis Singer 1981 – Elias Canetti 1987 – Joseph Brodsky 1991 – Nadine Gordimer World

Peace: 1911 – Alfred Fried 1911 – Tobias Michael Carel Asser 1968 – Rene Cassin 1973 – Henry Kissinger 1978 – Menachem Begin 1986 – Elie Wiesel 1994 – Shimon Peres 1994 – Yitzhak Rabin

Physics: 1905 – Adolph Von Baeyer 1906 – Henri Moissan 1907 – Albert Abraham Michelson 1908 – Gabriel Lippmann 1910 – Otto Wallach 1915 – Richard Willstaetter 1918 – Fritz Haber 1921 – Albert Einstein 1922 – Niels Bohr 1925 – James Franck 1925 – Gustav Hertz 1943 – Gustav Stern 1943 – George Charles de Hevesy 1944 – Isidor Issac Rabi 1952 – Felix Bloch 1954 – Max Born 1958 – Igor Tamm 1959 – Emilio Segre 1960 – Donald A. Glaser 1961 – Robert Hofstadter 1961 – Melvin Calvin 1962 – Lev Davidovich Landau 1962 – Max Ferdinand Perutz 1965 – Richard Phillips Feynman 1965 – Julian Schwinger 1969 – Murray Gellmann 1971 – Dennis Gabor 1972 – William Howard Stein 1973 – Brian David Josephson 1975 – Benjamin Mottleson 1976 – Burton Richter 1977 – Ilya Prigogine 1978 – Arno Allan Penzias 1978 – Peter L Kapitza 1979 – Stephen Weinberg 1979 – Sheldon Glashow 1979 – Herbert Charles Brown 1980 – Paul Berg 1980 – Walter Gilbert 1981 – Roald Hoffmann 1982 – Aaron Klug 1985 – Albert A. Hauptman 1985 – Jerome Karle 1986 – Dudley R. Herschbach 1988 – Robert Huber 1988 – Leon Lederman 1988 – Melvin Schwartz 1988 – Jack Steinberger 1989 – Sidney Altman 1990 – Jerome Friedman 1992 – Rudolph Marc us 1995 – Martin Perl 2000 – Alan J. Heeger

Economics: 1970 – Paul Anthony Samuelson 1971 – Simon Kuznets 1972 – Kenneth Joseph Arrow 1975 – Leonid Kantorovich 1976 – Milton Friedman 1978 – Herbert A. Simon 1980 – Lawrence Robert Klein 1985 – Franco Modigliani 1987 – Robert M. Solow 1990 – Harry Markowitz 1990 – Merton Miller 1992 – Gary Becker 1993 – Robert Fogel

Medicine: 1908 – Elie Metchnikoff 1908 – Paul Erlich 1914 – Robert Barany 1922 – Otto Meyerhof 1930 – Karl Landsteiner 1931 – Otto Warburg 1936 – Otto Loewi 1944 – Joseph Erlanger 1944 – Herbert Spencer Gasser 1945 – Ernst Boris Chain 1946 – Hermann Joseph Muller 1950 – Tadeus Reichstein 1952 – Selman Abraham Waksman 1953 – Hans Krebs 1953 – Fritz Albert Lipmann 1958 – Joshua Lederberg 1959 – Arthur Kornberg 1964 – Konrad Bloch 1965 – Francois Jacob 1965 – Andre Lwoff 1967 – George Wald 1968 – Marshall W. Nirenberg 1969 – Salvador Luria 1970 – Julius Axelrod 1970 – Sir Bernard Katz 1972 – Gerald Maurice Edelman 1975 – Howard Martin Temin 1976 – Baruch S. Blumberg 1977 – Roselyn Sussman Yalow 1978 – Daniel Nathans 1980 – Baruj Ben Acerraf 1984 – Cesar Milstein 1985 – Michael Stuart Brown 1985 – Joseph L. Goldstein 1986 – Stanley Cohen [& Rita Levi-Montalcini] 1988 – Gertrude Elion 1989 – Harold Varmus 1991 – Erwin Neher 1991 – Bert Sakmann 1993 – Richard J. Roberts 1993 – Phillip Sharp 1994 – Alfred Gilman 1995 – Edward B. Lewis 1996 – Lu Rose Iacovino

TOTAL: 129!

Jews Versus Muslims

The Jews are not brainwashing children in military training camps, teaching them how to blow themselves up and cause maximum deaths of Jews and other non Muslims. The Jews don’t hijack planes, nor kill athletes at the Olympics, or blow themselves up in German restaurants. There is not one single Jew who has destroyed a church. There is not a single Jew who protests by killing people.

The Jews don’t traffic slaves, nor do they have leaders calling for Jihad and death to all the Infidels. Perhaps the world’s Muslims should consider investing more in standard education and less in blaming the Jews for all their problems. Muslims must ask what can they do for humankind before they demand that humankind respect them.

General Eisenhower Warned Us

It is a matter of history that when the Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, General Dwight Eisenhower, found the victims of the death camps, he ordered all possible photographs to be taken, and for the German people from surrounding villages to be ushered through the camps and even made to bury the dead.

He did this because he said in words to this effect:

Get it all on record now – get the films – get the witnesses -because somewhere down the road of history some bastard will get up and say that this never happened.

Recently, the UK debated whether to remove the Holocaust from its school curriculum because it ‘offends’ the Muslim population which claims it never occurred. It is not removed as yet. However, this is a frightening portent of the fear that is gripping the world and how easily each country is giving into it.

It is now more than 60 years after the Second World War in Europe ended. This e-mail is being sent as a memorial chain, in memory of the 6 million Jews, 27 million Russians, 10 million Christians, and 1,900 Catholic priests who were murdered, raped, burned, starved, beaten, experimented on and humiliated while the German people looked the other way.

Now, more than ever, with Iran, among others, claiming the Holocaust to be a myth, it is imperative to make sure the world never forgets.

How many years will it be before the attack on the World Trade Center never happened because it offends some Muslim in the United States?

The Breakup of the USSR as a Major Progressive Milestone

A commenter questions how I can say that the breakup of the USSR was a progressive moment in history. But it was…

Rob, you once wrote that the breakup of the USSR was a progressive moment in 20th century history? How can you call yourself a leftist after such a statement? You do realize what happened in Russia and around the world after 1990, don’t you? Gorbachev was a traitorous, cowardly, slimebag on the CIA payroll.

I don’t think so. The breakup was not a progressive event due to the abandonment of socialism, though many seem to think that the project was not working out very well, so maybe the abandonment of socialism was proper after all.

The real way that it was progressive was in terms of the liberation of the official nationalities of the republics of the USSR. After all, nations want liberation. This is a longstanding Left position and demand from the anti-colonial movement on.

From the very start, the USSR gave the nationalities the right to secession. That was way back around 1920 or so. How many other states allowed such a thing back then? None.

So when those Republics seceded, that was allowed under the Soviet Constitution. How many states will allow their minority regions the right to self-determination in that way? Almost none. Almost all states ban the self-determination of the nations amidst their borders. If these nations decide to secede and exercise that right, the states react with fascist aggression. So almost all states on Earth are fascist in that sense.

Only the USSR and a few other states are or were truly non-fascist or anti-fascist on this most important question.

Other antifa states: Great Britain, Canada, the former Czechoslovakia. That’s about it, right? Can you think of even one more?

It’s unfortunate that the new republics went in a capitalist direction, but that was their choice. Russia also went in a capitalist direction, apparently a choice of the people. This was right and proper, true people’s rule and popular decision-making.

Women, Men and Racial Loyalty

tulio asks:

Here’s another question. Is the stigma just as strong amongst White females? It’d be best to hear an answer from one of them, but I don’t think too many White females post in here. Do they ostracize one of their own the same way White men do? Like would a White woman who is married to a White man refuse to make friends with a White woman who is married to a Black man? I’m sure some do, but how widespread is it, I wonder? Is there a White sisterhood that also expels White women who like the brothas?

I think a lot of this stuff comes from the men. White men consider themselves superior to Black men across the board. It’s always been that way and still is. So the ultimate slap in the face to him is to see one of his own women prefer not only a guy he considers inferior, but from the race he considers MOST inferior. It’s totally a male ego thing I believe, and if it’s true that this sentiment is much less pronounced amongst White females, then that makes the case even more plausible.

I don’t think women do this stuff to their sisters, but I could be wrong. With women, it’s all about who you love. If her friend falls in love with a Black guy, well, hey, it’s wonderful, and you support her. If it didn’t work out, well, it’s sad, but he was bad, and she was just following her heart.

Women simply don’t have racial loyalty like men do. Men don’t really either, but they often at least won’t breed with the other races. They will just have fun with them. I actually know some insanely racist WN Nazis who are sex maniacs, and they have actually told me that they would bed a non-White hottie, just never marry or have kids with one. But women will actually marry out of our race and stir up the nice clean White gene pool. That’s why we need to police them and keep them in line.

Even White women who would never touch a Black will support her friend’s decision to go with a Black guy. It’s all about the sisterhood. It’s about finding a guy and breeding with him during her reproductive years. If your BFF found and bred with a Black guy who then left her, well, that’s sad, but it’s her decision, and she was following her heart and her biological clock. With women, it’s all about whoever you fall in love with (chance – could be different race or even either gender).

Ordinarily, it’s about finding a man, mating, and breeding in that short time span. A woman doesn’t have much time, and her options are limited. If she found a Black guy, hey, it was meant to be.

Men are much more into this racial loyalty/ethnic nationalism stuff than women. They’ve always punished women for sleeping outside the race while letting the men do it if they wanted to.

In Medieval Spain, if a Jewish woman had sex with a Gentile man and was caught, the rabbinical courts (who had jurisdiction over this matter) would sentence her to having her nose cut off. In this way, Jewish women were kept in line. Jewish men would have sex with Gentile women. Any children were lost to the Jews anyway.

But the Jewish women had to breed pure and true with Jewish men. That’s why the line was judged matrilineally. You always know who your mother is, but you might not know who your father is. If your mother was a Jew, you’re a Jew.

East Germans Getting Nostalgic For Socialism

Repost from the old site.

Although there were reportedly some serious problems with East German socialism (the Trabant, the ubiquitous vehicle, was a piece of junk), with the recent chaos in world capitalism, many East Germans are now saying that they would rather have socialism than capitalism. A recent survey found that 5

Sales of Marx’s Das Kapital have tripled since last year and increased 100X since 1990, although sales as a whole remain low. The publisher expressed amazement and said that he never thought the book would sell well again. He said that even bankers and managers are reading it to try to figure out what’s going in with the turmoil in capitalist economics.

The switch from socialism to capitalism has not worked out very well in the East. Unemployment and poverty are very high. The outskirts of Berlin, Leipzig and the Baltic shore and doing well, but the rest of the region is doing poorly. It’s actually suffering depopulation.

One of the problems with East Germany was that the factories were really not competitive by Western standards. After reunification, they were bought by Western competitors and shut down. That seems devious. The Left Party, a genuine Leftist party, now has 3

One serious problem with Communism has been that, although in general it got rid of poverty, it was unable to provide more than a low standard of living. Nowadays, for better or worse, people want stuff. They don’t want empty stores, lines, shortages and crappy products. Social capital only goes so far with people. This is going to be a real challenge for modern socialists.

In addition, there was often great economic growth for decades, but then it all bogged down into bureaucracy. Another vexing problem to be dealt with.

Who Says Latin Is Extinct?

Carpe diem, for momento mori.

Timeless, no? What more do you need to know, at least while you’re young?

Anyway, the last native speaker (Yes, native speaker) was born in Hungary in the 1860’s. Died around 1940 or so. He was a Classics prof at a top US university. It was his first language, and he was more comfortable in Latin than in any other language. Many folks don’t realize this, but Latin had been nearly a native language in parts of the Austro-Hungarian Empire (with a certain section of the upper class) for a very long time.

I think I’d rather speak Latin than Hungarian. You think Latin sucks? Try learning Hungarian as a second language. You’d rather be in Hell, or actually you would be.

When is a language dead anyway? When it has no L1 speakers? What about L2 speakers? Latin’s had those for a long time now. Recall that in in Paris cafe society 1910-1920 (You were there, remember? Sitting at tables with James Joyce, Ezra Pound and all those women with funny orientations. Just jogging your memories.) there were so many people from so many different European countries that they actually spoke Latin so they could understand each other. Now English is the new Latin, but it’s so much worse, isn’t it?

Lenin on the Socialism of Fools

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDwigueNWjw&feature=related]

Lenin himself on the socialism of fools. Are you listening, fools? C’mon, listen closely, it’s The Man himself speaking.

Anti-Semites say he was Jewish himself. He was 1/4 Jewish on his father’s side. That’s not enough to be a Jew in either the Orthodox nor the more modern Reform tradition. He had a bit of Jewish ancestry. So what? A lot of us have ancestry of this or that, and it means nothing. At the time, Orthodox Judaism was the only real Judaism in Russia. So, Lenin was not seen as a Jew by anyone, neither Jews nor Russians. Lenin himself did not see himself as a Jew. Why should he, as Judaism at the time in Russia was defined religiously, not racially?

Karl Marx’s On the Jewish Question is brought up by many anti-Semites as evidence that Marx was an anti-Semite. Marx was fully Jewish and cared nothing for anti-Semitism. He renounced Judaism and condemned it as he condemned all religion.

In OTJQ, Marx attacks the Jews for demanding liberation for themselves only, when no one is Germany is free except for the rich. He saw this as self-centered. He also felt that Germany was still a feudal state, and was not going to give liberation to anyone anyway, Jews or not. That’s all the essay is all about, though admittedly it is very hard to understand. He also attacks Judaism as a religion, and says that anymore, the religion of Jews is simply capitalism itself, and that any real religion as since fallen by the wayside. This is an attack on Judaism as a religion.

The “JewSSR” folks need to explain why synagogues were closed all over the USSR the same way that churches were. The Jews were granted a state in Siberia to shut them up. Hebrew was forbidden there as the language of the Jewish religion, and Yiddish was promoted as the proper language of the Jewish people. It was an attempt to deal with the incessant demands of Jewish nationalists by giving them a state of their own. Still, I feel that giving them a piece of Siberia was a bit shitty.

The Judeo-Bolshevik crowd has some ‘splainin to do. The ethnic Latvians were just as prominent as Jews, in fact, more, from 1917 all the way through World War 2. Sure, many Latvians hated the USSR,  for some reason, lots of Latvians also joined the Red Army, NKVD, etc. No one quite knows why this is. I urge you to come up with a theory about Latvio-Bolshevism as quickly as possible.

King Tut Was a European

Map of R1b distribution in Europe. R1b were the Old Europeans pushed to the far west by invading Indo-Europeans.

DNA tests show that King Tut’s Y-DNA matches that of modern day Western Europeans. The lineup is with R1b. The match with modern West Europeans is rather deceptive.

In truth, I believe that R1b is ancient European, or “Old Europe” DNA. It’s found mostly in the Basques these days. It’s probable that the R1b group came from the Caucasus at some unknown time. They probably spoke languages related to the Basques and the languages of the Caucasus. They were overrun by the Indo-European invasion of Europe about 6,000 years ago. The only holdout was the Basques in the high Pyrenees of Spain and France.

So, rather than showing the King Tut was a West European, it shows that he was racially, a member of the “Old Europe” group. No one knows quite what these people looked like, however reports of the “Old Europe” group in the UK say that they had dark hair, dark eyes and were rather swarthy.

Based on drawings, Egyptians seem to have been an olive skinned race similar to the Meds of today. They were surely not either traditional White-Whites and they were definitely not Blacks. The Egyptians made it clear that the Black Nubians were not the same people as Egyptians. The drawings show Nubians are Black Africans and Egyptians as olive-skinned Med types. The Nordicists love to claim the Egyptians. They’re full of shit as usual. The Egyptians were a bunch of swarthy wop non-Whites, you Nordicist turds. Choke on that.

A common White Supremacist lie holds that Egypt was originally “White” (supposedly Nordic too). With time, Egyptians gained more and more Black genes until they hit the 1

This is a lie. According the Journal of Physical Anthropology, the ancient Egyptians were the same as modern Egyptians racially. The ancient Egyptians test at ~9

The website is a disgusting White Supremacist site out of Europe, and the comments are full of WS nutcases, and even worse, Afrocentrists polluting up the threads with “Egypt was Black” crap.

White Nationalism – What Is the Nature of the Project?

I’ve gotten some complaints for talking about these guys so much, but the truth is that in some ways this is the anti-White Nationalist blog. I am fascinated with them as Carol Swain is, and come from a similar POV (Carol Swain is an anti-racist Black woman who is fascinated by White Nationalism and has written books on it).

In a previous post we went over the prospects for the White Nationalist (WN) movement in the US. The prospects are dim to nil and fading fast. Their only chance is that the rest of us might get so sick of them that we give them a little slice of land just to be rid of them and get them out of our hair. Even that seems quite dubious.

But what exactly is it that they want?

The project is quite diffuse, and so are its goals. The White Separatist project aims to slice off a section of the US as a Whites-only state, and then partition the rest of the US in various ways – a Black state in the South, an Hispanic state in the Southwest, and maybe a mixed state in between. There are also advocates of making almost the entire US a White state, with only small states for the rest.

Many WN’s continue to advocate throwing many or all non-Whites out of the US. Their leaders lie and say that no one ever says this, but that is not true. I am on their sites, and they say this all the time.

The expulsion project is quite difficult in the US where we are down to 6

Sounding like Zionists, they talk about the large “population transfers” of the 20th Century. That these wildly racist ethnic cleansings were accompanied by horrible violence and mass killings is usually not mentioned. As the population transfers of the past were bloody and involved huge violence and mass killings, it seems that any major ethnic cleansings or expulsions in the US would have to be also.

It’s going to be a bloody, violent affair. A war if you will. Think the Balkans in the 1990’s. In fact, disgustingly, the Balkans cleansings are held up by WN’s to exemplify the viability of their project. There are lesser versions of the project, such as throwing out all of the post-1965 immigrants (And their descendants?), throwing out all of the anchor baby citizens of illegal immigrants, etc.

There are also versions of the project that do not involve throwing out the non-Whites in the White state. Instead, they would disenfranchise them along apartheid lines similar to apartheid in South Africa and Zionism in Palestine. The objective would be, as in Palestine, to make conditions so unpleasant for them that they take off.

Other proposals call for the non-Whites to be stripped of their rights to vote – a sort of Jim Crow version.  That way, Whites could stay in the White state, but they would have no say in political matters, so they would be irrelevant. Interracial breeding and probably dating would be banned in the White state. It seems clear that the White state would have to be an authoritarian and highly anti-liberal project. It would look a lot like a fascist state.

For Europe, the WN’s clearly talk about throwing out all of the non-Whites, not partition, since Whites are over 9

Lesser goals for the project include the ending of all non-White immigration to the US. Even this is going to be almost impossible to put in place.

We can’t even get rid of the illegal immigrants here in the US, forget the legal ones. The state refuses to throw the illegals out in large numbers. Many cities have been declared nearly off-limits to federal immigration agents. There is almost zero crackdown on employers of illegal aliens, and after raids, many illegals are simply released to the community with no followup.

All state and local efforts to deal with the matter are thrown out in court as unconstitutional. They are ruled unconstitutional, as immigration is solely a federal matter. Yet the Feds refuse to do anything about it. And there are repeated efforts, with increasing urgency over time, to legalize the 12-20 million illegals in the country.

The trend over time seems to be to legalize the illegals. Given that we can’t even get a handle on the illegals question, how can we possibly eliminate non-White legal immigration?

Before one eliminates non-White legal immigration, one might want to start with at least reducing legal immigration of all types, White and non-White. But even this does not seem possible. For some insane reason, both political parties are dead set on over 1 million immigrants to the US a year. There is almost zero resistance to this in the US government, and there are even efforts to increase the numbers. Well-known opponents of illegal immigrants like Lou Dobbs cheer on legal immigration, even calling for upping it to 2 million a year.

Perhaps you recall the furor when Rand Paul, candidate for Congress,  said he wanted to get rid of one of the articles in the Civil Rights Act forbidding private employers from discriminating on the basis of race in terms of employees or customers. This is actually a hallmark of Libertarian theory, and Paul has Libertarian roots. The fact that Libertarians want to get rid of all anti-discrimination legislation is why so many WN’s and other racists have gone Libertarian.

The WN movement cheered wildly when Paul opposed this part of the Civil Rights Act, and the issue was even discussed in the media at all. This was seen by them as a breach in the wall. Later, John Stossel of Fox News agreed with Rand Paul. Nevertheless, the Civil Rights Act appears pretty secure for the forseeable future.

I do agree with the WN’s that their project should be discussed in the national media. They claim there has been a media blackout of them, this blackout being led by those nasty Media Jews. I think that the people in power in general, Jews and Gentiles, simply do not wish to see the various issues the WN’s bring up discussed in public. Why?

I think they are afraid that if the project is openly discussed, its support will increase, that is, more Whites will come on board. The WN’s probably will gain some support by having their views discussed, but not enough to matter. On the other hand, putting their views out in the fresh air for everyone to see will also probably dramatically increase the opposition to their project.

The BNP is a British nationalist project in the UK that has support from many WN in the US. They abandoned White nationalism a while back in favor of British nationalism instead. They are a major political party and are in the news all the time. In the last election, they didn’t even win a single seat. Their support is around

Still, there is something undemocratic about “let’s keep these folks out of the media lights since others might start agreeing with them.” And we liberals are after all democrats.

Porn Kills

Porn Kills Recipe

Ingredients:

1 porn movie 1 dildo

Instructions:

Remove your pants and underwear and sit on the bed. Turn on the porn movie. While watching the porn movie, casually pump your pussy with the dildo. With the other hand, slowly rub your clit. Continue slowly for 10-15 minutes, or until orgasm.

Result:

Death. Best served cold.

A Recent Comment on Human Genetics and Races

Here is a recent comment on the Peopling of India post by an Indian commenter. I will answer his questions later on in the post:

Please try to answer all of this long winded set of questions, thanks. Firstly, you seem interested in this topic and well educated on it say as much as me (love your theories they make sense based on my previous online research and discussion with other people of Indian and indo-Iranian+Near Eastern origin), in fact even more, but how are you valid, are you an anthropologist, scientist of some sort, or do you at least have sources (no offence)?

Can you pleases check out these genetic findings on this website: does this data not contradict yours? Is it valid?

Also Pakistanis are not genetically distinct, correct, and I heard Iranians, Indians, and All Aryan(Indo-Iranian) are closely related genetically as are all Aryans, including Europeans, is this true?

Dravidians are essentially just darker Mediterranean (a phenotype not really from the Mediterranean) Caucasians with a distinct language and culture?

Tribals seem like non-Caucasians that have adapted some local languages but kept their own.

So essentially you are saying Europe, the Middle East and Caucasus were likely inhabited by Australoids from East Africa who became Caucasians in India and outside of India?

So the Australoids would have been the first race to diverge off of Negroids, and if I am right, according to recent research, they would have mixed with Neanderthals who mixed with everyone who was not Negroid?

One more are, Veddoids, Tamils/Elamites, and Kalash intermediates or something else, and aren’t Nagas Mongoloid?

What are Andamans and Negritos racially?

Firstly, you seem interested in this topic and well educated on it say as much as me (love your theories they make sense based on my previous online research and discussion with other people of Indian and indo-Iranian+Near Eastern origin), in fact even more, but how are you valid, are you an anthropologist, scientist of some sort, or do you at least have sources (no offence)?

I am just a journalist who has researched the subject for a few years now. I have no formal credentials whatsoever.

Can you pleases check out these genetic findings on this website: does this data not contradict yours? Is it valid?

That data is very interesting. I think it claims that the Indians are very old and consist of two stocks, North Indian and South Indian. North going back 40,000 YBP and South going back 70,000 YBP. Problem is that if you go back that far, all Indians looked something like Aborigines. Indeed the Aborigines were partly created by an infusion of proto-South Indian stock (Carpenterians) 12,000 YBP went by boats to Australia.

Also Pakistanis are not genetically distinct, correct, and I heard Iranians, Indians, and All Aryan(Indo-Iranian) are closely related genetically as are all Aryans, including Europeans, is this true?

Pakistanis are pretty hard to tell apart from the rest of Indians, yes. But it does appear to be a separate small race amid the Indids.

All of the Indo-Aryans are indeed pretty closely related nowadays, even archaic types like Tamil types. The archaic types are so close to the rest probably through mass interbreeding. All people on the subcontinent are close genetically. The Iranians are fairly close to the Indians, but they are somewhat more distant. The Iranians are the link between the Europeans and the Indians via the Italians. It works like this:

Italians -> Iranians -> Indians

Groups separated by only one arrow are fairly closely related. By two arrows, not so close.

So you see the Iranians are the link between the Caucasians of the East and West.

All Europeans are not that closely related. The groups in the Caucasus are very distant from the rest, as are Turks, Russians, Jews, Orkney Islanders, Sardinians, Basques and Sami at the very least. At lesser distance, but still far from the rest are Yugoslavians and Greeks.

Dravidians are essentially just darker Mediterranean (a phenotype not really from the Mediterranean) Caucasians with a distinct language and culture?

No one knows what the Dravidians are. At the least they seem to be the basic cross between the ancient Australoids of India with the more modern Aryan types from the steppes in the north. There is also evidence of an infusion of ancient Caucasoid stock moving into India 12-17,000 YBP from the area between Lebanon and the coast of Iran. These people may have been related to the ancient Elamites, and Dravidian languages may be related to Elamite. Genetically, this stock looked like Arabs. So the Dravidians may be in part ancient proto-Arabs or proto-Iranians.

Tribals seem like non-Caucasians that have adapted some local languages but kept their own.

Tribals at this time are genetic Caucasians but have skulls that are Australoid.

So essentially you are saying Europe, the Middle East and Caucasus were likely inhabited by Australoids from East Africa who became Caucasians in India and outside of India?

No, it is not correct that Europe, Caucasus, and the Middle East were initially inhabited by Australoids. The Caucasus and the Middle East were originally inhabited by Africans. Europe was originally inhabited by proto-Caucasians, but they did not look much like White people. They may have still looked like East Africans or Masai. Later on, they looked a lot like Amerindians from the US Northwest.

The original Australoids did come out of East Africa as Africans, but they turned into Australoids. And the Australoids were the first race out of Africa, correct. The survivors of this first group are people like the Andaman Islanders and the Mani.

However, the Caucasian race has a different provenance. They came out of East Africa as Africans too, but more recently, only 42,000 YBP. So Caucasians are a more recent split from Blacks. The proto-Caucasian stock may have resembled the Masai, but no one really knows. They moved into the Middle East and then to the Caucasus and South Russia. There, they met with migrating proto-Chinese types (maybe resembling Ainu). From a mixture 2/3 Ainuid and 1/3 Masai type, the Caucasians were born. The Asiatic eyefold was somehow lost.

In Asia, the Australoids progress into modern Asiatics by evolution. The progression occurs first in NE Asia and later in SE Asia. Ancient SE Asians look like Melanesians.

So the Australoids would have been the first race to diverge off of Negroids, and if I am right, according to recent research, they would have mixed with Neanderthals who mixed with everyone who was not Negroid?

Yes, everyone outside of Africa mixed with Neandertals, maybe in the Middle East first, then later in Europe.

One more are, Veddoids, Tamils/Elamites, and Kalash intermediates or something else, and aren’t Nagas Mongoloid?

Kalash are a completely separate race of Caucasians. Caucasians are split into two races – Kalash and Non-Kalash.

Veddoids, Tamils, tribals, etc, are Caucasians by genes and Australoids by skulls.

Nagas, etc. in the Northeast are Mongoloids.

What are Andamans and Negritos racially?

Based on genes, I think that they are some sort of Asiatics. I do not know about the Andamans. The Andaman genes are very distinct, but how distinct I am not sure.

The Mani in Thailand have genes that look Thai.

The Aeta in the Philippines have genes that look Filipino.

Etc, etc.

However, if you do race by skull type, all Negritos are members of the Australoid race, as are Tamil types and others that look like Tamils in India.

Genetically, the Australoid Race only has Aborigines and Papuans in it.

By skulls, it consists of Ainus, Melanesians, Aborigines, Papuans, Negritos, Tamils, Veddoids, tribals and similar South Indian types and Fuegian Amerindians.

Eric Hobsbawn on Capitalism and Socialism

Socialism Has Failed. Now Capitalism Is Bankrupt. So What Comes Next?

Great article by the venerable 93 year old Marxist historian. I agree with him that no sane person is looking to Soviet-type socialist systems, and he doesn’t even advocate them himself anymore. Yet he argues that the free market capitalism of the past 30 years has failed as badly as socialism, or even worse. The future, of course, must be some kind of a mixed economy. As Thatcher used to say, There Is No Alternative. Those who continue to drink the free market Koolaid against doctors’ orders will experience increasing pain, illness and debilitation.

Hobsbawn points out how badly the British Labour Party, in the form of New Labour, has failed in its attempts to mimic Thatcherism. That agenda is precisely why the global economic crisis is hitting the UK so much harder than much of the rest of Europe. The UK drank the free market Kool Aid a lot more and longer than some others like Germany and France did. For one thing, the UK gladly offshored all of its manufacturing in order to become a world center for global financial shenanigans and gimmickry. Great idea that was.

The Republican Party, unrepentant advocates of free market capitalism in this era when that is increasingly suicidal, has no role to play in the future of the US. To the extent that we keep electing them, we go down the tubes faster and faster. At this point, the Democrats are little more than a weak version of the Republicans. The mixed economy of the future is off the agenda for both parties, so both parties are scrolling our nation’s epitaph with every step they take.

The American people have not figured out the wisdom of Hobsbawn’s words, and possibly they never will. In that case, Americans deserve every future bad thing that will befall them.

Reading the idiotic comments at the end, many of them, appallingly, from British readers no less, who seem just as insane about free market capitalism as the average US teabagger, was very discouraging. I thought that the British were a bit more sane than we are. I guess not. Oh well, in that case, the Hell with the Brits then too. I have little sympathy suicidal idiots.

The future is not going to be good.

Why Neoliberal Austerity Measures Never, Won’t and Will Never Work

US unemployment is now 9.

There will be high unemployment because the US private sector is not creating jobs. It’s not in part because banks no longer lend much to the private sector. They cut back on that 20-30 years. There’s much more money to be made in financialization of the economy, in speculative investment, derivatives and other financial wizardry and in debt-driven real estate booms and bubbles.

Bottom line is that new US jobs will be created by the US government or not at all.

This reality is now hamstrung by the fiscal austerity madness that haunts Washington, and threatens to throw the US into its Third Depression. The first was in 1873. The second was in 1929. Both parties and the G-20 world economies are pushing Hooverism. Even Roosevelt showed up in 1932 pushing Hooverism. His campaign was to out-Hoover the Hooverites – he ran on a platform of balancing the budget. You don’t balance budgets in a Depression, or even try. That’s one lesson we thought we learned in the Depression.

The austerity measures shoved down the throats of both Greece and Latvia, poster children for neoliberal structural adjustment, haven’t worked. All of the tax increases on the middle and lower classes and the devastating government budget cuts have nuked the economies of Greece and Latvia, deepening their Depressions. The more they cut, paradoxically, the more it fucks the economy, hence the more the deficit grows. The more you cut the deficit, the more it grows. Think about that one a bit, neoliberals. The same thing is happening in Ireland.

What’s all this silliness based on? The Hooverian notion that tax increases on middle and lower classes and devastating budget cuts in a Depression will “restore confidence to the private sector and investors.” Problem is that this neoliberal crap didn’t work in 1929, and it won’t work now. It won’t work, ever, because it doesn’t.

One wonders why the plutocrats are pushing something that they must know, if they are sane at all, doesn’t work. In Latvia, they were up front and honest about it. The economy plunged by 2

What else?

In neoliberalism, if you bankrupt the state, the state has no money to spend in the economy. You need to rely on the private sector for everything. Less government spending in the economy means more cash for the private sector.

Another agenda is privatization. Canadian states are discussing selling off 1

No war but the class war.

It’s not only the only motto for the Left (fuck Cultural Marxism), but it’s always the only motto for the rich, the upper middle class and the capitalists. If the motto is good enough for them, why is it not good enough for you, oh workers?

Finland Says Broadband Internet Access Is a Human Right

This is an excellent decision, but of course, conservatives all over the world are furious about this, but they don’t agree that anyone has a human right to anything, as far as I can tell. Right to food? Nope. Right to housing? Nope. Right to basic health care? Nope. Right to dental care? Nope.

What they have done is mandate that everyone have access to it. What’s interesting is that a lot of cities in the US have decided that they are going to offer a wireless network to their citizens for free. Cities can set these things up very cheaply. Of course, the capitalist bastards are screaming bloody murder over this, and the US Congress has actually tried to pass laws banning cities from providing this service to their citizens. As our Congresspeople are all essentially whores for the rich and the corporations, these laws stand a good chance of going through.

I don’t believe they are mandating everyone have broadband. Just that you have access to it. I doubt if the state is going to buy you a computer. But if you have the computer or whatnot, you can hook into it.

Mandating it be available to everyone means that providers, state, private or whoever they are, have to make sure that everyone can have Internet access. This is good in rural areas because the capitalist bastards will never extend coverage to people in rural areas because they say it’s too expensive.

Up until the 1930’s, the capitalist scum refused to provide phone and electricity coverage to rural areas in the US on the same basis – they said it was too expensive and it would drive them out of business. But the US government forced them to provide this access. Last time I checked the phone and electric private monopolies were still in business. Unfortunately!

Another charming this the capitalists did back in the 1930’s and 1940’s was that there were different phone companies with competing networks, just as the neoliberal dipshits would love. My Mom lived through that era. She said it was totally insane. The competing phone companies refused to work with each other’s products (sort of like computer companies nowadays), so you could only call someone who had the same provider. What crap!

Finally the evil government stepped in and forced the poor, suffering phone companies to all work with each other. Now we can all call each other up, no problem, thanks to the evil government!

Wouldn’t it have been better if the evil government had just stepped back and let the moronic capitalists fight it out forever? That would be so cool. In 2010, we could still hardly even talk to each other on the phone! But who cares about that? At least the capitalists would be happy! Give the capitalists everything they want! They deserve it! For the rest of us, nothing. Or lumps of coal. Serves us right for being too lazy to set up our own businesses.

Tony Blair’s Government Killed David Kelley

I have been studying this case since as soon as it happened several years ago, and I always thought there was something fishy about it. Obviously, intelligence services “suicide” people on a regular basis. I don’t know how it’s done, but I don’t have to, as I’m not a professional killer.

The latest evidence makes things quite clear. Dr. David Kelley was murdered by Tony Blair’s government. There can be no other explanation for the facts surrounding the case. It’s amazing at how many people in the government got in on it too. I guess they were just following orders in most cases, and at the same time, most of them had no real evidence that he was killed. They were just given weird orders to do this or that strange thing, or orders to cover up the case with no explanation given.

Who did it? I assume the MI5. They are very, very, very good at killing people. A top-notch intelligence service, up there with the Mossad, CIA, ISI, RAW, GRU, the Syrians, Egyptians, Algerians, Saudis, Iranians and North Koreans.

How Dare You Talk to the Turkish Enemy, You Traitor!

National Socialist Minister Avigdor Lieberman takes to task his fellow Revisionist Zionist tribal member Benjamin Netanyahu for Benny’s treason in sending an envoy to speak to the wily Ottomans, I mean Mohammadens, I mean Amalekites, I mean Turks.

The day when the spiritual heir of Jabotinsky is a Leftist traitor.

Part Four of Growing Fascism in Israel.

The End of the Mahdi Rebellion

General Gordon Brown, Governor of Sudan, dies on the steps of his palace at the hands of the Mahdi Army.

The year is 1885. It is winter, January 25th. The Mahdi Rebellion against the Egyptians, and really, the British, is over. General Charles Gordon, governor of Sudan, had only arrived a year prior. He died on the steps of his palace, fighting off the Mahdi warriors alongside his assistant, both firing pistols at the encroaching jihadis. His assistant was knocked unconscious.

When he came to, Gordon was dead, and his head had been cut off. When the head was placed at the Mahdi’s feet, he ordered it placed on a tree branch, where people would mock it as they walked by, children would throw stones at it, and hawks would circle it above.

The Mahdi Rebellion was one of the major Muslim jihads of the modern era. The Mahdi was a Sudanese Muslim who declared that he was the “Mahdi” or messianic redeemer of Islam. The Mahdi Army in Iraq is a recent reincarnation.

It was really an anti-Western jihad and an anti-colonial rebellion, as the British were controlling Egypt. The Sudanese Muslims actually defeated the British here, though the assembled army was not the actual British army, but more a collection of laggards, incompetents and mercenaries – 7,000 Egyptian soldiers. “Perhaps the worst army that has ever marched to war,” Churchill called them.

Gordon has several million rounds of ammo, artillery, cannons, thousands of men, but it fared him little well against the surging Mahdi warriors besieging Khartoum. In the winter, the Blue Nile receded, leaving muddy flats exposing the palace. The city was besieged, and food was running out. The civilians and troops were waylaid by cholera and starvation. After nearly a year of siege, Khartoum fell, and Gordon lay dead.

The Mahdi then ruled Sudan for the next 11 years until the British took it back under the fake cover of an Egyptian claim to the Sudan. This time the real British army invaded the Sudan. The Mahdi fought hard, but they were cut down with machine guns. A fake colonial entity called the Anglo-Egyptian administration administered the frank colony of Anglo-Egyptian Sudan until 1956.

Sudan got its independence in 1956, and the South immediately rejected joining the Sudan, a rejection which would culminate in decades of war. I figure that Sudan has so fucked up the business of running of a state that “Sudan” has no right to exist. Break it up into as many pieces as you wish, I say. Hardly anyone but the Arab Muslim ruling class around Khartoum wants to be part of the shithole called Sudan anyway.

There has to be some way away from this inviolability of borders crap, and it collides with the right to self-determination anyway. States are like parents, and the nations within them are like children. If you can’t manage your kids, they are taken away from you and given to someone who can. If you can’t manage the basic tasks of running a state, your right to run the state should be revoked, and the nations within should have the right to decide their destiny.

Good God, Are You Kidding?

In Germany, the “Freedom Democratic Party,” who call themselves “liberals” filed “anti-Semitism” and “support for a terrorist organization” charges against three members of Die Link, or The Left Party for sailing on the Turkish flotilla to Gaza.

Israel Shamir has written about this before.

Go to Israeli fora, and they shudder when discussing modern Germany, land of the Hitlers to the End of Time. German anti-Semitism is everywhere, they say. Even German rats scurrying down Berlin alleyways in the dead of night have it in for the Jews.

But Shamir points out that instead of being some horrorshow of unreconstructed Nazism, modern Germany is practically Tel Aviv on the Rhine. Endless Jewish browbeating of Germans, nonstop demands for money and especially gold (How does that play into the grasping Jew stereotype?) that resemble an eternal shakedown, continuous, nearly tic-like German genuflecting and apologies to Jews. Face it: modern Germany is just another Israeli Occupied Territory.

Institutes for the Study of Jewish Culture and Holocaust Studies have sprung up like mushrooms all over Germany. There are probably more professors engaging in this pro-Judaic scholarly masturbation than there are Jews in Germany.

Jews have come back to Germany, 100,000 of them. You would think they would keep their heads down, assimilate and try to make nice, but they’ve been stirring up trouble as usual.

The Anti-German Movement is a curious and problematic Leftist movement. A product of splits on the German Left, the Anti-Germans are part of the pro-Israel Zionist Left.

The Anti-Germans are mostly Gentiles, but there is also heavy involvement of German Jews. The theme of the movement is the terminal evil of Germanness. Since the founding of the state in the 1870’s, and really, long, long before, Germanness has been a font of evil. It started with the Kaisers and World War 1, where somehow the Germans were more at fault than the other crazy parties.

A seamless carpet rolls back centuries to early German culture, tainted back hundreds of years into the past with the roots of Hitlerism. To the Kaisers, to the First War, to Nazism and the Holocaust, it’s all one roll of Jew-hating, imperialistic, malevolent, tainted dough.

Even the Second War did not exterminate the German evil, since it is set in the German soul like a diamond in a ring. Germanness must be destroyed, excised, cut from the hearts of Germans like a bloody Aztec ceremony. Only after this exorcism can the world rest in peace. You can imagine how this goes over with your average German, still more or less a nationalist, despite it all. After what happened to them 65 years ago, it’s hard to believe that the German Jews returned to pull this shit. How do they expect Germans to react?

The charges filed against Die Link are part of this masochistic flagellation of the German soul, part and parcel to the game, along with the drooling suckup to the Jews.

At some point, the groveling apologies, the self-abdication, the blackmail of billions, it’s all got to end. At some point, you need to let bygones be bygones and move on.

But does the Jew ever bury a grudge?

Never forgive, never forget.

That’s a pretty hardass stance.

It’s also a recipe for interminable conflict.

Anti-White Hate Propaganda on a British Talk Show

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kkXogn8Oeo]

That video is really pissing me off. It’s a British talk show about White women who are with Black guys. They interview a bunch of White women who prefer Black guys to White men. The Black guys, as a rule, are the well-behaved types that my friends and I call “White Blacks” – i.e., they act like White people.

We learn so many fascinating facts from these silly dames.

Black men are better in bed than White men. White men are lousy in bed. WTH?

Black men treat women better than White men. I can tell you right off that in my experience, that is not true.

Also notice at the end of the video, the one White woman who says she would not date a Black man, in fact – if he was the last man on Earth even – notice the propaganda here. They interviewed five White women who prefer Black men to White men, and one White woman who felt the opposite way; if you’re a moron, which most people are, the logical conclusion is that 8

Also notice how the “White Black” guy argues with the White woman who refuses to date Blacks and implies that she is a racist for having this opinion. Utterly sickening.

But this is what Black men and boys always do. In schools where there are many Blacks and Whites, this is the line the hyper-sexually aggressive Black boys use with the White girls. If the girl says she won’t go out with them, they badger and badger her about it, endlessly accusing her of being racist. After all, the only reason she could resist his irresistible Black Big Cock Godliness is racism, right?

Sadly, many White women are weak and stupid, and Cultural Marxism worsens these problems, so this lame line – “You won’t date me because I’m racist!” – actually works, incredibly enough.

I’m shocked that Black males would stoop so low as to use this line. If a Black woman would not go out with me, I would hardly accuse her of being racist! How rude can you get? I was brought in a civilized, mannered, White middle class environment, and a lot of stuff is just beyond the pale rude. Especially calling someone racist because they won’t date your sorry ass. How pitiful can you get?

I have known many White women who had relationships with Black men. Some even preferred Black guys. In the case of every single woman where they had a kid, the Black man had taken off, nowhere to be seen.

This is the typical scene. Single White or Hispanic Mom, or she has a new guy. The Black guy made one or more kids with her, then he took off. If you ask the child, he’s either mad at or indifferent to his absent Black father. Ask the woman, and the father is nowhere to be seen. He’s vanished from the Earth, takes no interest in his offspring.

In addition, the Black men were far more likely than White men to abuse, verbally and physically, imprison, browbeat, keep at home, rape, rob, steal from, and of course cheat on the White woman. I can’t think of one single case where the guy did not do at least one of these things. What I have seen, Black men treat White women appallingly worse than White men do.

Are there cases that are not like this? I assume so, just never met any. If I knew a White woman who was involved with a Black guy and thinking of marrying or having kids with him, I would recommend that she not do that. As evidence, I would cite the experience of the women I know who had relationships with Black men.

Was the sex great? Who knows, maybe it was. Did they treat these women better than White guys? Are you kidding? For White women, Black men may well be a fun ride for a bit. As far as marrying them or having kids with them, the odds are not on your side.

Making Sense of Kosovo

Repost from the old site.

Updated March 25, 2008:

Via Joachim Martillo, we have Backgrounder on Kosovo/Kosova.

This is one of Martillo’s pieces that I am going to support in full.

Almost the entire Western Left, and part of the libertarian Right, seems to be opposed to independence for Kosovo. This is a most sorry state of affairs and has a rather shameless history. I am very happy that Martillo has come out in favor in independence for Kosovo, no matter how problematic it may be. I am afraid he did so only because he is a Muslim, but no matter.

A background in the Balkan Wars of the 1990’s is helpful, if not essential, in understanding the declaration of independence by Kosovo.

It is also important to understand where the Workers’ World Party, of which Sarah Flounders is a member, is coming from. I don’t know a lot about them, but this Wikipedia article is a good primer.

WWP is a Trotskyite split dating from 1958. They split from the Socialist Workers Party, a standard Trotskyite group.

Their reasons were: the candidacy of Henry Wallace for President in 1948, support for Mao’s revolution in China and defense of the Soviet invasion of Hungary in 1956.

The SWP opposed all of these.

Mao is opposed by all Trotskyites, mostly on human rights grounds but also on the usual ultra-Left basis of not being socialist enough. Wallace’s candidacy, a revolutionary candidacy in the US in that an explicitly socialist candidate actually ran for office and got lots of votes, was probably opposed on ultra-Left reasons that he was not a Communist.

The invasion of Hungary would have been opposed on the basis that the USSR was “Stalinist”.

Trotskyites have always had a reputation of not being very pragmatic. In some ways, they are the ultimate splitters.

The WWP retains some Trotskyite leanings in that they are highly critical of Stalin. However, after Stalin died, they supported the USSR. Many Communist parties chose sides after the Soviet-China split, but the WWP continued to call for a union of all socialist countries, no matter what their ideology. In this sense, they are somewhat unique.

They also started supporting all states that were seen as resisting US imperialism. This led to difficult stances such as supporting Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

It is in this context that they opposed the breakup of Milosevic’s Communist Yugoslavia in the early 1990’s and thereafter supported Milosevic on the basis that he was a Communist. In this they reflected the views of most Communists and Leftists the world over – they supported the fascist Milosevic just because he was a Communist.

WWP is also behind International ANSWER Coalition, which led many antiwar marches. Ramsey Clark has unfortunately been associated with this group. I do not think much of the WWP.

Fascism is a nasty virus, and like many viruses, it can grow in most any human being and certainly can unfold in any society. This is what makes it such a dangerous and deadly enemy. In many ways, Russia is now a fascist state. Even Communist Vietnam has fascist tendencies of various types. It can even be argued that break away from Iran and take most of Iran’s oil wealth with them. Iran should not be expected to put up with that. A similar situation exists in Angola with Ahwaz, the Basque Country, Catalonia, Corsica, Brittany, Wales, Scotland, the here and here), Burma (separatists here , here, here, West Papua nor to its rule over Aceh, and its criminal performance in suppressing these rebellions cements those negations.

India never had any right to rule Kashmir and certainly does not now. Palestine at least ought to declare Kosovo-style independence. This blog has always supported the struggle of the Sahrawis in Spanish Sahara. The island of Bougainville deserves support for its separatism from Papua New Guinea.

In Russia, the republics of the Caucasus deserve support in their drive for independence. This includes the Chechens, the Ingush, the Dagestanis, Karachevo-Cherkessia and Kabardino-Balkaria. The Tuvans seem to deserve the right to secede also.

The situation of the Mari, Chuvash , Bashkirs , Udmurts and Tatarstan are much more difficult because none of these republics exist on Russia’s borders. States should not be forced to carve out enclaves inside their own borders. All secessionists need to cleave off lands on the borders of existing states or even split existing states. The notion of independent islands wholly surrounded by a single state is preposterous.

In India, the nations of the northeast were never part of India and their secessionist movements should be supported. Nor can India ever be said to have existed at all until 1949, as under the British it was merely a collection of 5,000 separate princely states with ever-shifting borders.

In China, the cause of Taiwan and Tibet is clearly moral and East Turkestan also seems to have a valid cause. Abkhazia and South Ossetia should be allowed to cleave off from Georgia, and they already have anyway, de facto, though Russia is supporting these movements for only the most cynical reasons. The Tamils of Sri Lanka deserve support, despite their terrible tactics.

I have much more of a problem in supporting Islamist separatists in the Philippines and in Thailand. First, their tactics are horrible. In both cases, Islamists, as they always do in wars, are simply massacring non-Muslim civilians in countless numbers.

The Koran provides justification for mass murder of non-Muslims in wartime, so this is typical behavior of most Muslims when they go to war with non-Muslims. The historical antecedents are too painful and numerous to count. Furthermore, the war against the non-Muslims often takes near-genocidal proportions.

There are examples in this century from Indonesia (Muslims massacred animists in West Papua and Christians in slaughtering Christians in the 1840’s-1860’s) and Iraq (more mass murders of Assyrians in Iraq in the mid-1800’s) and the worst of all in India around 500 years ago, when Muslim invaders murdered up to and possibly more than 50 million Hindus in the worst genocide that the world has ever seen. Quoting Will Durant:

The Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex of order and freedom, culture and peace, can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within.

This continues a tradition set in the early days of Islam, when invading Muslims often committed massacres of non-Muslims in various places they conquered. Notable examples occurred in Palestine and in Iran. The only conclusion is that when Muslims fight wars with non-Muslims, they are frequently genocidal conflicts, and this genocidalism is sadly sanctioned by language in the Koran itself.

As such, it is difficult to support a bunch of Islamist murderers in the Pattani region of Thailand and in Mindanao in the Philippines. In Mindanao, Muslims are only 2

Hawaii deserves to go free, but the movement has no support except among Hawaiians, about 2

In most cases, like baby birds from the nest, these colonies need to be tossed out on their own. Most are welfare cases anyway that take in far more from the Western state they are umbilically attached to than they donate in services. In other words, to the colonizer, they are a gigantic money drain.

This begs the question then of why these colonies even exist, since the logic of colonialism, which is all about the loot, demands that money-losing colonies be cut adrift. In some cases, there are imperial reasons, in others, there is simply the logic of colonialism. Once a nation becomes a colonist, the power rush is as addicting as crack. It’s a tough habit to break.

Two essential rights are at stake here.

First is the right to self-determination. This has even been ratified by the UN.

The other is a totally phony “right of a state to be secure within its borders”, which was dreamed up by states after World War 2 in their paranoia over national secessionism. This principle has no standing, as state borders have been shifting forever, and many states have only the most dubious standing for drawing their borders wherever they did.

It’s clear that the only progressive stand worth taking is in favor of self-determination. However, we should make exceptions in certain cases as above, and only real nations should have the right to secede. The right to secede should not be granted on economic or purely political grounds (such as the rightwing state of Zulia in Venezuela the rightwing Sarah Flounders’ article below entitled Washington Gets a New Colony in the Balkans is fairly typical of the criticism of the Kosovo declaration of independence.

While the USA does a lot of evil in the world, the breakup of Yugoslavia may at least initially have been a project of the German government, which for historical reasons was much more interested in an independent Slovenia than the USA was.

Neocons like Joshua Muravchik fairly quickly saw a possible opportunity to cultivate a pro-Israel Muslim population (either Slavic or Albanian) in a divided Yugoslavia. Finding such a Muslim population has been a holy grail of Zionism since Herzl created the character of Reshid Bey in Old New Land (Altneuland).

Sorting out the various claims about Kosovo requires awareness of the changing boundaries of the region. Here are two maps of the Ottoman Vilayet of Kosovo:

The first map of the Ottoman vilayet (province) of Kosovo, from 1875-1878. Kosovo is now much reduced in size from this vilayet.

The second map of the vilayet of Kosovo, from 1881-1912, shows shifting boundaries once again. Kosovo today is much smaller than this vilayet.

Claiming that Kosovo is the historical center of Serb culture is somewhat tendentious. The Ottoman Vilayet of Kosovo was larger than present-day Kosovo, and its borders shifted during the 19th and early 20th century.

Territory that had been Ottoman Kosovo is today divided among Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia, Bulgaria and Greece. Kosovo regions that were in some sense the historically important Serb centers have for the most part been incorporated into Serbia, Montenegro or Macedonia. Here is a current map of Kosovo:

A current map of Kosovo, much shrunken from its former vilayet. When Serbs scream about Kosovo, you really need to ask which one they are talking about.

Ethnic Albanian Kosovars could probably legitimately argue that they rebelled from the Ottoman Empire during the Balkan Wars of 1912-1913 in order to achieve independence or union with Albania, whose independence European Great Powers endorsed in 1913, but the Serbian government opportunistically used to rebellion to expand Serbia at their expense.

The Serb obsession with controlling all of Kosovo results from the development of a nationalist mythology that focuses on the Battle of Kosovo (Косовски бој, Kosova Savasi, Bitka na Kosovu, Beteja e Kosovës, or Schlacht auf dem Amselfeld).

The mythology has little connection to the facts. Lazar’s army (the “Serb” side) included Croats, ethnic Albanians (who were mostly Orthodox at that time period) and probably Bosnians. Murad’s army (the “Turkish” side) included a large contingent of Serbs.

The population composition of Kosovo/Kosova in the 14th century and later is disputed. It was not unusual for a close relative of someone with a Serb name to bear an Albanian name. Later Serb literature refers to Albanized Serb populations, but the description is dubious. Bilingualism was simply common, and the ethnic boundaries that exist today really only came into existence in the 19th century.

The following paragraphs are propagandistic:

Yugoslavia was born with a heritage of antagonisms that had been endlessly exploited by the Ottoman Turks, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and interference by British and French imperialism, followed by Nazi German and Italian Fascist occupation in World War II.

The Jewish and Serbian peoples suffered the greatest losses in that war. A powerful communist-led resistance movement made up of all the nationalities, which had suffered in different ways, was forged against Nazi occupation and all outside intervention. After the liberation, all the nationalities cooperated and compromised in building the new socialist federation.

There simply is not much evidence of Ottoman exploitation of ethnic or religious antagonism either from Ottoman or non-Ottoman sources. The Ottoman rulers generally tried to discourage local Balkan hostilities because they were administratively costly and interfered with tax collection.

The omission of any mention of Czarist Russian imperial interference shows bias.

Terminology like Jewish and Serbian peoples is questionable. Yugoslavia contained Jewish populations of Ashkenazi ethnicity and of Ibero-Berber refugee ethnicity. The term “Jewish people” comes from Zionist propaganda. While there is a Serb ethnicity, there is no Serbian ethnicity because people of many different ethnicities live within the territory of Serbia.

The implicit attempt to connect Jewish and Serb losses during WW2 is misleading. Serb politics in the lead-up to WW2 had clear fascist and Nazi currents.

While many Serb political leaders wanted to work with Germany, the German government rebuffed them because too many Germans and Austrians blamed Serbs for WW1 and the subsequent dismantlement of the pre-WW1 German and Austrian Empires.

German and Austrian hostility toward Serbs increased during WW2 and probably influenced German policy toward Serbia during the 1990s.

The situation of Kosovo before NATO intervention was a mess. It has remained a mess, and there is no particular reason to believe that independence will lead to improvement.

Kosovo’s ‘independence’ Washington gets a new colony in the Balkans

By Sara Flounders Published Feb 21, 2008 8:13 PM

In evaluating the recent “declaration of independence” by Kosovo, a province of Serbia, and its immediate recognition as a state by the U.S., Germany, Britain and France, it is important to know three things.

First, Kosovo is not gaining independence or even minimal self-government. It will be run by an appointed High Representative and bodies appointed by the U.S., European Union and NATO. An old-style colonial viceroy and imperialist administrators will have control over foreign and domestic policy. U.S. imperialism has merely consolidated its direct control of a totally dependent colony in the heart of the Balkans.

Second, Washington’s immediate recognition of Kosovo confirms once again that U.S. imperialism will break any and every treaty or international agreement it has ever signed, including agreements it drafted and imposed by force and violence on others.

The recognition of Kosovo is in direct violation of such laws – specifically U.N. Security Council Resolution 1244, which the leaders of Yugoslavia were forced to sign to end the 78 days of NATO bombing of their country in 1999. Even this imposed agreement affirmed the “commitment of all Member States to the sovereignty and territorial integrity” of Serbia, a republic of Yugoslavia.

This week’s illegal recognition of Kosovo was condemned by Serbia, Russia, China and Spain.

Thirdly, U.S. imperialist domination does not benefit the occupied people. Kosovo after nine years of direct NATO military occupation has a staggering 60 percent unemployment rate. It has become a center of the international drug trade and of prostitution rings in Europe.

The once humming mines, mills, smelters, refining centers and railroads of this small resource-rich industrial area all sit silent. The resources of Kosovo under NATO occupation were forcibly privatized and sold to giant Western multinational corporations. Now almost the only employment is working for the U.S./NATO army of occupation or U.N. agencies.

The only major construction in Kosovo is of Camp Bondsteel, the largest U.S. base built in Europe in a generation.Halliburton, of course, got the contract. Camp Bondsteel guards the strategic oil and transportation lines of the entire region.

Over 250,000 Serbian, Romani and other nationalities have been driven out of this Serbian province since it came under U.S./NATO control. Almost a quarter of the Albanian population has been forced to leave in order to find work.

Establishing a colonial administration

Consider the plan under which Kosovo’s “independence” is to happen. Not only does it violate U.N. resolutions but it is also a total colonial structure. It is similar to the absolute power held by L. Paul Bremer in the first two years of the U.S. occupation of Iraq.

How did this colonial plan come about? It was proposed by the same forces responsible for the breakup of Yugoslavia and the NATO bombing and occupation of Kosovo.

In June of 2005, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan appointed former Finnish President Marti Ahtisaari as his special envoy to lead the negotiations on Kosovo’s final status. Ahtisaari is hardly a neutral arbitrator when it comes to U.S. intervention in Kosovo.

He is chairman emeritus of the International Crisis Group (ICG), an organization funded by multibillionaire George Soros that promotes NATO expansion and intervention along with open markets for U.S. and E.U. investment.

The board of the ICG includes two key U.S. officials responsible for the bombing of Kosovo: Gen. Wesley Clark and Zbigniew Brzezinski. In March 2007, Ahtisaari gave his Comprehensive Proposal for Kosovo Status Settlement to the new U.N. Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon.

The documents setting out the new government for Kosovo are available here. A summary is available on the U.S. State Department’s Web site. An International Civilian Representative (ICR) will be appointed by U.S. and E.U. officials to oversee Kosovo.

This appointed official can overrule any measures, annul any laws and remove anyone from office in Kosovo. The ICR will have full and final control over the departments of Customs, Taxation, Treasury and Banking.

The E.U. will establish a European Security and Defense Policy Mission (ESDP) and NATO will establish an International Military Presence. Both these appointed bodies will have control over foreign policy, security, police, judiciary, all courts and prisons. They are guaranteed immediate and complete access to any activity, proceeding or document in Kosovo.

These bodies and the ICR will have final say over what crimes can be prosecuted and against whom; they can reverse or annul any decision made. The largest prison in Kosovo is at the U.S. base, Camp Bondsteel, where prisoners are held without charges, judicial overview or representation.

The recognition of Kosovo’s “independence” is just the latest step in a U.S. war of reconquest that has been relentlessly pursued for decades.

Divide and rule

The Balkans has been a vibrant patchwork of many oppressed nationalities, cultures and religions. The Socialist Federation of Yugoslavia, formed after World War II, contained six republics, none of which had a majority.

Yugoslavia was born with a heritage of antagonisms that had been endlessly exploited by the Ottoman Turks, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and interference by British and French imperialism, followed by Nazi German and Italian Fascist occupation in World War II.

The Jewish and Serbian peoples suffered the greatest losses in that war. A powerful communist-led resistance movement made up of all the nationalities, which had suffered in different ways, was forged against Nazi occupation and all outside intervention. After the liberation, all the nationalities cooperated and compromised in building the new socialist federation.

In 45 years the Socialist Federation of Yugoslavia developed from an impoverished, underdeveloped, feuding region into a stable country with an industrial base, full literacy and health care for the whole population.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, the Pentagon immediately laid plans for the aggressive expansion of NATO into the East. Divide and rule became U.S. policy throughout the entire region. Everywhere right-wing, pro-capitalist forces were financed and encouraged.

As the Soviet Union was broken up into separate, weakened, unstable and feuding republics, the Socialist Federation of Yugoslavia tried to resist this reactionary wave.

In 1991, while world attention was focused on the devastating U.S. bombing of Iraq, Washington encouraged, financed and armed right-wing separatist movements in the Croatian, Slovenian and Bosnian republics of the Yugoslav Federation. In violation of international agreements Germany and the U.S. gave quick recognition to these secessionist movements and approved the creation of several capitalist mini-states.

At the same time U.S. finance capital imposed severe economic sanctions on Yugoslavia to bankrupt its economy. Washington then promoted NATO as the only force able to bring stability to the region.

The arming and financing of the right-wing UCK movement in the Serbian province of Kosovo began in this same period. Kosovo was not a distinct republic within the Yugoslav Federation but a province in the Serbian Republic. Historically, it had been a center of Serbian national identity, but with a growing Albanian population.

Washington initiated a wild propaganda campaign claiming that Serbia was carrying out a campaign of massive genocide against the Albanian majority in Kosovo. The Western media was full of stories of mass graves and brutal rapes. U.S. officials claimed that from 100,000 up to 500,000 Albanians had been massacred.

U.S./NATO officials under the Clinton administration issued an outrageous ultimatum that Serbia immediately accept military occupation and surrender all sovereignty or face NATO bombardment of its cities, towns and infrastructure. When, at a negotiation session in Rambouillet, France, the Serbian Parliament voted to refuse NATO’s demands, the bombing began.

In 78 days the Pentagon dropped 35,000 cluster bombs, used thousands of rounds of radioactive depleted-uranium rounds, along with bunker busters and cruise missiles.

The bombing destroyed more than 480 schools, 33 hospitals, numerous health clinics, 60 bridges, along with industrial, chemical and heating plants, and the electrical grid. Kosovo, the region that Washington was supposedly determined to liberate, received the greatest destruction.

Finally on June 3, 1999, Yugoslavia was forced to agree to a ceasefire and the occupation of Kosovo.

Expecting to find bodies everywhere, forensic teams from 17 NATO countries organized by the Hague Tribunal on War Crimes searched occupied Kosovo all summer of 1999 but found a total of only 2,108 bodies, of all nationalities.

Some had been killed by NATO bombing and some in the war between the UCK and the Serbian police and military. They found not one mass grave and could produce no evidence of massacres or of “genocide.”

This stunning rebuttal of the imperialist propaganda comes from a report released by the chief prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Carla Del Ponte. It was covered, but without fanfare, in the New York Times of Nov. 11, 1999.

The wild propaganda of genocide and tales of mass graves were as false as the later claims that Iraq had and was preparing to use “weapons of mass destruction.”

Through war, assassinations, coups and economic strangulation, Washington has succeeded for now in imposing neoliberal economic policies on all of the six former Yugoslav republics and breaking them into unstable and impoverished mini-states.

The very instability and wrenching poverty that imperialism has brought to the region will in the long run be the seeds of its undoing. The history of the achievements made when Yugoslavia enjoyed real independence and sovereignty through unity and socialist development will assert itself in the future.

Sara Flounders, co-director of the International Action Center, traveled to Yugoslavia during the 1999 U.S. bombing and reported on the extent of the U.S. attacks on civilian targets. She is a co-author and editor of the books: Hidden Agenda:U.S./NATO Takeover of Yugoslavia and NATO in the Balkans.

Articles copyright 1995-2007 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

References

Durant, Will. 1972. Story of Civilization, Vol.1, Our Oriental Heritage, p.459. New York.

The Pakistan-Peruvian Axis, Part 2

I was listening to some music on the road today. For a long time, I thought I was listening to music from India. Normally, I hate that stuff, but this particular Indian music I could listen to. I got closer to town and now it sounded like Arab music. When I got into town, I started listening to the lyrics and I thought I heard Spanish words over and over. But it didn’t make sense. Spanish words with Arab or Indian music? Then now and then they would all say, “Ole!” like they were at a bullfight. Huh? Then the announcer came on. I was intrigued.

It was Miguel Agujetas, and the music was Flamenco music from Spain. I’ve never heard this music before. It’s the music of the Andalucian Gypsies, with roots in Gypsy, Moorish (North African), Byzantine (Middle Eastern Greek) and Sephardic (Mediterranean Jews) music. As you can see, there is a general Mediterranean and Middle Eastern or Arab flavor to this music. But the roots of Gypsy music are in music from India, so Indian culture has flowed into the Mediterranean region too through the Gypsies.

This is what I meant by the Pakistan-Peruvian Axis of Arabized peoples. The Andalucian Spaniards are an Arabized people. To the extent that Flamenco music is popular in Latin America (they play it in Southern Brazil and Argentina), these parts of Latin America are also Arabized. Keep in mind that this is the White part of Latin America, but with a heavy White Med flavor full of Spaniards, Portuguese, Italians and even Arabs. The flamenco music is from the Iberian element.

Pedobear Flees Poland!

Pedobear says, “I’m out of here!” He just crossed the border into Germany the day before the law came into effect.

Most recent photo of Pedobear. After fleeing Poland, he spied on this young innocent German girl in her home! Parents watch out! Um, WordPress, this photo is ok, right?

Whew! That was close!

Earlier the same day, he chased a young girl down the train tracks on the Poland-Germany border! Kids be careful! Please I mean it!

More on the Pakistan-Peruvian Axis

More on what I call the Peru-Pakistan Axis. The Peru-Pakistan Axis is a region of Arabized peoples who have been culturally Arabized due to Arab influence. It includes non-Arab nations and regions like Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, the Caucasus, Turkey, the Christian Arabs, Cyprus, Greece, Albania, Southern Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Latin America, especially the parts not heavily Africanized. From The Study of Racialism site:

A long time ago, I dated a girl whose parents were from Reggio di Calabria – which is right at the tip of the toe of the boot in Italy. A few years later, when I was studying French, I read Née en France – Histoire D’une Jeune Beur by Aïcha Benaïssa. As I read that book, I realized I was imagining the author’s family as family of the girl I dated.

The cultural similarities were very strong, with the the domination of women by the family, the belief in the “evil eye” and spells, and the controlling father who in turn fears his own mother, the separation of the women and the men, the older women trying to play matchmaker, the elevation of female purity/virginity etc.

One can see how there is an underlying common culture which has existed probably since pre-Roman times that has simply had Islam/Christianity superimposed upon it.

Primitive Communism, Feudalism, the Fencing of the Commons and the Genesis of Capital

A far rightwing commenter disagrees that there existed primitive communism in the past, as theorized by Marx. Instead, he opines that primitive man lived, absurdly, in some condition called “the free market.”

You could say primitive man was communal but NOT communist. There is no such thing as voluntary Socialism/Capitalism. Such are contradiction in terms, Robert. If work within a group are completely voluntary, then it is by definition a free market. If they were forced to work together, then it was some sort of authoritarian-ruled collective. Either way your argument is bunk.

Needless to say this fellow’s definition of free market (capitalism as per Adam Smith) is quite unlike any other I’ve ever heard.

Read Marx.

Many primitive tribes lived under primitive communism. There was no free market among primitive tribes, there was no market period, there was no capitalism, there was no exploitation other than maybe of slaves, there were no wages, people lived in communes, hunted, collected, farmed, etc. for the common good. Food was divided amongst all members. No one hired anyone to do anything, paid them, marked up their labor, and sold it or products based on it for profit. Hence, no capitalism, no free market.

In the Middle Ages, there were many artisans, but they were more or less free agents akin to the self-employed. Shoemakers, tailors, chimney-sweeps, etc.

Much of the rest of society was under feudalism. Before the fencing of the Commons in England that was necessary for capitalism, most were primitive artisans or small landholders. Small parcels were farmed and some livestock was held. In the meantime, households made a few items here and there for sale.

There was no labor force for the plants that the capitalists wished to build. They were building the plants and no one was coming to work in them. Since people were happy to work their small parcels and do a little household industry on the side, no one wanted to give that up to become a wage slave in some Godawful capitalist firm.

In order to create a proletariat, the Commons was fenced off, and the small landholders were driven off the land into teeming towns where they crowded, starving and in rags, a new army of proletarian workers for the capitalists. There were long debates about this in the English Parliament about the necessity of throwing all of the small householders off their land and depriving them of their livelihoods in order to create a captive workforce who needed to sell their labor to capitalists or starve.

This process has actually been repeated over and over in the modern era and continues to this day in places like India, El Salvador, Paraguay, Brazil, Honduras, Mexico, Peru, Philippines and Colombia where the poor are continuously being thrown off their small parcels so their lands can be seized by large landowners, and the poor farmers are hence proletarianized and turned into landless peasants.

There are even suggestions that this occurred in the early days of the US. So many Americans were becoming small landowners in the West that this raised serious problems for the creation of a captive proletariat. Hence much of the land was grabbed by the state and turned over to the railroads in an attempt to deprive small landowners of land and force them to sell their labor or starve.

Read Marx, “The Genesis of Capital.”

Capitalism is a new thing, mostly since about 1400 or so.

References

Marx, Karl. 1978. Genesis of Capital. Moscow: Progress Publishers.

Can We Please Put an Anti-Communist Lie to Rest?

The capitalist West’s war against Communism has been pretty vicious. There are few lies that they have not bothered to toss about. Most here in the West simply uncritically swallowed all of this stuff no questions asked.

I would like to take to task at least bit one anti-Communist dogma: That Communism (and by analogy socialism) has failed, and one of the reasons for that failure was that people hate it.

We really need to ask, “Failed how, and in what way?” If you ask your average person how it is that it failed, you won’t get much of an answer.

One of the ways we can determine if a system failed or not is if the people themselves accepted it or enjoyed. Anti-Communist dogma long held that the people living under Communism were miserable. But this is now coming under question. An earlier post laid out well that after 20 years, large sectors of Eastern Europe, in some cases a majority, prefer Communism to the capitalism that replaced it. Keep in mind that these are folks who experienced both.

More evidence is forthcoming from a new poll from Tajikistan, indicating that 7

Another poll says that 6

Ok, so if it failed, it wasn’t because the people hated it, right? In many cases, large sectors of the population, even majorities, preferred it to capitalism. So we can’t say it was a failure based on lack of popular support.

How about another argument? This argument says that no one has ever immigrated from a capitalist country to a Communist country, with the exception of a few Western Communists. But this is not the case. After Germany split into West and East halves, many West German Communists left their half and immigrated to East Germany. I’m not sure how long they stayed. This info comes from a German friend of mine from Hessen. She told me that most of her Communist relatives in the West took off for the East.

In Cuba, we have yet another case. Eastern Cuba is now full of Blacks from Jamaica and Haiti who have fled capitalist Haiti and Jamaica (largely failed states) for Cuba. They reportedly like Cuba much better than Haiti and Jamaica.

A better way to look at it is that Communism and capitalism (as economic systems) are different systems, both of which can and often do have immense problems and also immense benefits. Some humans prefer to live under Communism while others prefer to live in a capitalist system. The type of person who prefers to live under one system or the other probably depends on personality and life experience.

A rightwing friend of mine told me that it’s true many people prefer Communism, but he said that they are the “lazy failures” of society. I’m ok with his objection. I just wish that the capitalist media of the West would agree that a lot of humans prefer Communism over capitalism. Then we can argue about who they are and why, whether or not they are “lazy failures,” etc.

As for the larger question of whether Communism failed or not, that goes beyond the preferences of those who lived under it and deserves another post.

“Kipling On the Front Lines,” by Alpha Unit

Mowgli, the little boy raised by wolves and befriended by Baloo the bear and Bagheera the panther, first came to life during a winter in Vermont in the imagination of Rudyard Kipling.

Kipling was in Vermont because that’s where his wife’s family lived; the couple had taken up residence there and started their own family. It was American hubris, however, that soured Kipling on living in the United States.

The focus of all the dissension was British Guiana, which was in a border dispute with Venezuela. Richard Olney, the American Secretary of State, declared that the United States had a right to mediate all disputes in the Western Hemisphere. Because of the Monroe Doctrine, you know.

In other words, the United States ruled the Western Hemisphere.

This didn’t sit well with the British, including Kipling. Anti-British sentiment in America, followed by family troubles, sent him back to England.

It was a period when both Britain and the United States were settling their weight upon all kinds of native peoples around the world. Someone observing the actions of both nations might have been amused by Kipling’s distaste for American interference in Britain’s interference in South America.

“If anybody’s going to be interfering in South America, it’s going to be us,” Secretary Olney would have told him.

Kipling, who actually memorialized the imperialist ambitions of both nations, remains a figure of contradictions.

He won the Nobel Prize for literature in 1907, though other writers have mocked his abilities, particularly as a poet. People still argue about whether he was pro- or anti-imperialist. Many know of his poem The White Man’s Burden, for which he has been denounced – and celebrated, as a satirist.

Does anyone concerned with world affairs today, particularly heads of state, really care what Kipling may or may not have advised his fellow Whites roughly a century ago?

I’m guessing that the answer to this question is “No.” The fact that people still debate Kipling’s views is a testament to two things: the power of art, in this case literature; and the power of the idea of race.

Kipling is long gone, but there are people who seem to have some kind of stake in whether or not his views on race and empire were justified. It reminds me of the debate we have had from time to time in America over whether kids should read some of the works of Mark Twain.

Kipling’s Kim has been compared to Huckleberry Finn, in fact. Both novels tell the coming-to-maturity tale of a “loose” boy with father issues, traveling with a beloved adult male. Both novels have come under scrutiny for alleged racism – which informs the question of their appropriateness for developing minds.

School children should be taught literature. Adults wrangle over which works are to be presented to them, and how they are to be presented, because adults supervise the indoctrination of children.

They wrangle for another reason, though. The issue of race is intimately wrapped up in another issue: self-esteem.

When I say self-esteem, I mean the popular concept of having a healthy, positive self-image. Who doesn’t want kids to have a healthy, positive self-image – especially “minority” kids, those long deemed to be most in need of it?

So for quite some time, at least here in the US, we’ve been giving historical figures – be they Presidents or novelists – the PC litmus test. If someone reads anything by Kipling other than The Jungle Book (both parts), will he be contaminated by White Supremacist ideology?

We’ve decided we must be very careful about that sort of thing going into the heads of young people.

And so educators and other interested parties have put long-dead authors such as Kipling onto the front lines of their ideology wars.

Save the White Race!

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1E3qSxQP9M&feature=player_embedded]

Now! I mean it! Because if we don’t, these chicks will all go extinct! Forever!

I mean, there’s always hair dye and bottle blonds, but that’s not quite the same now is it?

The Go Blonde Parade in Riga, Latvia, 2010.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q4xiyJiOps&feature=player_embedded#!]

This was last year’s parade, comes with a cool soundtrack even.

Israel Attacks Flotilla, 10 Killed, 34 Wounded

Here.

10 killed, 34 wounded on the boat

The Israelis were attacked with account from the Israeli POV here.

7 Israelis were wounded, 2 critically. 2 received gunshot wounds.

In Turkey, stone-throwing mobs yelling, “Damn Israel” tried to overrun the Israeli Embassy.

Dead Issues

Gang Bang Funeral

In some societies necrophilia was enacted owing to a belief that the soul of an unmarried woman would not find peace; among the Kachin of Myanmar, versions of a marriage ceremony were held to lay a dead virgin to rest, which would involve intercourse with the corpse. Similar practices existed in some pre-modern Central European societies when a woman who was engaged to be married died before the wedding.

Good God, how horrible!

Cool Sculptures

Acts of necrophilia are reportedly displayed on Moche artifacts of Peru.

Yuck.

Wisdom of the Ancients

Herodotus writes in The Histories that, to discourage intercourse with a corpse, ancient Egyptians left deceased beautiful women to decay for “three or four days” before giving them to the embalmers. This practice originated from the need to discourage the men performing the funerary customs from having sexual interest in their charges.

Indeed, the same famous work discusses one Pharaonic era undertaker whose particular kink was screaming for his “Mummy” while doing the deed.

Birds and the Bees, or Animals Do It Too

Necrophilia is known to occur in animals, with a number of confirmed observations.

Kees Moeliker allegedly made one of these observations while he was sitting in his office at the Natuurmuseum Rotterdam, when he heard the distinctive thud of a bird hitting the glass facade of the building. Upon inspection, he discovered a drake (male) mallard lying dead about two meters from the building. Next to the downed bird there was a second drake mallard standing close by.

As Moeliker observed the couple, the living drake picked at the corpse of the dead one for a few minutes and then mounted the corpse and began copulating with it. The act of necrophilia lasted for about 75 minutes, in which time, according to Moeliker, the living drake took two short breaks before resuming with copulating behavior.

Moeliker surmised that at the time of the collision with the window the two mallards were engaged in a common pattern in duck behavior which is called “rape flight.” “When one died the other one just went for it and didn’t get any negative feedback – well, didn’t get any feedback,” according to Moeliker. This is the first recorded case of necrophilia in the mallard duck- though not the only recorded case of homosexuality within the bird family.

The Cane Toads: an Unnatural History film shows a male toad copulating with a female toad who has been run over by a car. He goes on to do this for eight hours, although the entire eight-hour act is not depicted in the movie, thank God.

In the case of a praying mantis, necrophilia could be said to be part of their methods of reproduction. The larger female will sometimes decapitate or even eat her mate during copulation. However, this only happens in 5-3

Dang man, a queer necrophiliac birdbrain odd duck, a ugly toad fucking a toadly chick for a full eight hours without even getting bored, worrying about genital warts or stopping to eat a fly, and male praying mantises with their brains in their dicks. I’ve heard of guys thinking with their dicks before, but that’s ridiculous.

error

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)