For peace to continue, everyone has to play by the rules established in the last round of wars. Even if the rule is that the hegemon gets his way, he got to be hegemon by doing dreadful things, which tend to be forgotten or denied as time passes.
So there is always a temptation to bend the rules, which tend to get bent further and further, until one party responds to that bending with escalated violence, to which the other party responds with even more escalated violence. And people forget that this tends to get out of hand. They assume that if they escalate, the other party will have no alternative but to yield. And the other party, since so long has passed since the last all out general war, thinks the same.
People forget that the rules are maintained by the threat of general war, and become too clever by half at adjusting the rules in their own favor.
Europe’s peace is based on rule by America. They are all muppet states and have been since World War II. America’s peace is based on the fact that people still think the government is complying with the constitution, as radically re-interpreted after the civil war. But as speech gets suppressed ever more forcefully that illusion grows thinner. And so, in Ferguson, we see the state restraining whites so that blacks can attack them without being killed.
The president, who commands both the pentagon and the state department, keeps pentagon and state department from going to war with each other. For this to work, the pentagon must see the president as more than just a puppet of the state department.
If a government is cohesive, revolution is impossible, but war between governments all too likely. If a government is incohesive, war between elements of the government is likely, and, because of governmental weakness, war between the government and its citizens is likely.
We are moving towards all three forms of war at roughly comparable speed. Hard to say which one will come first. Likely one will trigger the others. The proximate cause of the fall of the Soviet Union was that Reagan drew them into more wars than they could afford, but upon losing one external war, it suddenly became apparent that no one believed in communism any more, and a wave of collapse spread from Afghanistan to Moscow.
The Pax Americana draws to an end, the American government becomes weaker internally and externally, at the same time as it acts more aggressively than ever, internally and externally. This does not mean war tomorrow, perhaps it might mean war in a decade. But it does mean war eventually. Perhaps external war and external defeat will result in economic collapse which will result in internal war. Perhaps internal war will result in external war and external defeat. The general trend in the US empire is that the restraints against all forms of war, external war, intrastate war between elements of the state apparatus, and revolutionary war with subjects of the state, are diminishing, and the provocations are increasing.
There is a great deal of ruin in a nation. This trend has been going on for a very long time without anything remarkable happening, and it could go on for a very long time further without any very remarkable results. But in the end …
In November 2005 I thought the financial crisis would blow up immediately, or within a few months. Instead, the superficial appearance of financial normality was maintained for two years, as underneath things became more and more abnormal. But in the end, the appearance of normality collapsed.
There will be war.
If you travelled back in time and told the average Spaniard in 1916 that his country would be torn apart in a civil war in twenty years, he would take you for a lunatic. Yet all the elements that triggered the war were already present by then: an unstable monarchy undergoing a crisis of legitimacy, a leftwards-moving intelligentsia agitating for radical anticlerical violence, an insecure rural middle class, a restless and disenfranchised army.
This last element is usually neglected by most casual readers of Spanish history, who simply assume that the army had always been that way. In fact the army had been the greatest defender of liberal values during the 19th century, frequently intervening to change the course of the country’s politics when a government turned too conservative. Over 200 coups took place in the 19th century alone, most of them with the intent of steering the country further to the left.
The army only turned nationalistic and antiliberal after enduring constant slights on the part of civilian governments, and it only became full-blown reactionary when the betrayal and dissapointment by incompetent and corrupt civilians became unbearable.
The wars in Cuba, the Philippines and Morocco all followed the same general pattern: civil authorities commanded the military to engage an enemy they could or could not possibly defeat, without any clear objectives or exit strategy; then they withheld, for political reasons, resources that were essential in order to win battles; then they blamed the military when they predictably fucked up.
Sounds familiar?
Of couse, the Spanish political and journalistic establishment was shocked -shocked- to find that members of the armed forces were increasingly embracing fascism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6e2Qz_07qw8
That video’s producers accept at face value everything said by a person from the NAACP about another organization founded to advance a particular sort of people. The KKK should rename itself the NAAWP or La Raza Blanca just to soak up the irony of being the only skin color it’s OK to hate.
Nothing to disagree with except this: Civil War 2 may well have begun December 21st in Brooklyn with the political killings of 2 uniformed NYPD officers, and it may well be because the police and their families, friends have had enough. I’m both and we have [family/friend, not police].
I might add we face 3 major conflicts: Civil War, a Hemispheric Challenge to the Continental United States from the South, and the worldwide conflicts that will erupt with the collapse of the American Hegemony.
Texas and part of the sun belt might go off on their own if the country falls apart, just as Somaliland managed to keep a working state amidst the chaos of the Somalian civil war. But the security situation in Mexico is bad enough on its own, there’s no way they’ll go for an opportunistic land grab.
And yet it moves.
2014 was different immigration, it was 84% teen males. Those are cholos, and in war soldiers. Any teen male in a conflict zone is a soldier whether he likes it or not, and on balance they like it very much.
This isn’t hypothesis, it’s already happened and is happening.
But no they – Mexico/Meso America–wouldn’t, not without powerful allies. Who will not be lacking. We have made many enemies in our rise and that is a very large land border, currently undefended. They already have allies in Washington and our elites to aid them – in their struggle against us – indeed the President himself. They’ll not lack for many powerful other nations as well.
Anytime cops want you could pack up leave protestor who block roads alone. The public would respond with deadly force the moment it was clear they wouldn’t be arrested for doing so and there would be no more protesters blocking the street.
I almost posted about this the other day, but demurred. The only thing that would keep me from this exact course of action, is the fact that I’ve taken a vow not to take human life except in a desperate situation (and even then, to prefer not to if mine is the only life involved). But if I had not made such a promise, when I see these people protesting in favour of thugs and criminals, holding up traffic, preventing emergency responders from getting where they need to be, preventing parents from getting home to their families… I know that the only thing keeping *decent* people from running them down in the street, is the fact that elite whites and the police enforcers would punish them for it. If I had not taken the vows I’ve taken, I would simply drive my car straight through and over a crowd of vibrants chimping-out in defense of the criminal element of our society.
Cops: you don’t need to personally go to war against violent, vibrant thugs. Just make it clear to the rest of America that you will not be participating in rounding up and arresting decent people, who are more than happy to fight for our civilization on their own time. The civilian population would gladly have removed roadblocks and halted looting with deadly force… if only you made it clear that you would permit them to do this, which is surely the bare minimum that could be granted to decent people in defense of their homes, property and communities. Why feel like you are abandoned on the front lines against vibrants? Just promise us that you will not use force against us (unless we truly do something deserving of it, which is unlikely), and you have us as your allies. So many even of the Conservatives distrust you, because the cops now seem to have this attitude that they are not “civilians,” not part of the citizenry like us. We want to be on your side, and vice-versa. But if you continue to threaten the use of force against everyone – the decent people seeking to preserve their way of life just as much as the criminal underclass – then you are really little better than the criminal element you theoretically oppose. Work with us, again; cease viewing good citizens as a separate class from yourselves; stand aside when our buildings are being looted, if you cannot bring yourself to shoot the perpetrators with us. But for God’s sake, don’t threaten to enforce “justice” against us. That makes you unjust, and to what purpose is an unjust officer?
http://i.imgur.com/Upxcztw.gif
In Brazil, at a protest against rising public transit costs
I must be an horrible person, but that warms the cockles o’ me heart.
lovely
I’ve read that US funded protests in Russia used to block traffic. Russians started shooting them and the police refused to investigate. Protests in Russia no longer block the streets.
What a jerk – didn’t back up to make sure they were dead.
Make that the *third* American civil war. The Revolution was a civil war that the rebels won.
This latest outrage will surely awaken the sheeple and start gas the kikes race war now…
There is a lot of ruin in a nation.
And who was inciting the blacks? It was de Blasio and Obama. I don’t see any very prominent Jews in this operation. It is more that the blacks, knowing they will be indulged, proceed to incite each other.
Absent forceful repression of black misbehavior, you get black misbehavior with no need for Jews to tell them to misbehave.
I was trying to respond sarcastically to vxxc but clicked in the wrong place. This latest outrage is just another outrage and nothing will change until our subversion reaches every responsible White man, using the Internet to route around the 14th amendment.
Anyway, I disagree about Obama and the mayor of hymietown not being majority owned by The Jews. The new mayor was a response to the excessively assimilated previous mayor’s pro-White policies that threatened to cause White immigration. Jews are supposed to be the only New Yorkers with any kind of physical security.
And the fact that Emmanuel‘s son just got robbed in front of his house and a cop waited until a negro had stabbed a Jew before putting it down just underscores the fact that the pushback against gentrification is to withdraw police protection, perhaps depending in the future on Jewish gangsters alone to defend Jews.
The Pentagon genuinely doesn’t want war. They know it would devastate America, and they’re still loyal to the nation, myth though it may be.
The Pentagon is full of true believing demotists, and civil war would be unpopular.
As Trotsky almost said: You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.
Yes exactly.
Alrenous, if we ask you to point to your country on a map, does it exist?
Or do you exist there, protected by people you despise?
We’re no more a myth than any nation, in fact usually a great deal less these days.
We really need to make “The Man without a Country” mandatory reading again.
Hell I’d convene schools I’d otherwise burn to the ground just for that one afternoon reading and discussion.
Why do you think I despise my country?
Great post Jim.
Jim has faced the Truth ahead of most, Bravo.
Not to detract from Jim’s post, which I enjoyed, but: hasn’t it been obvious to everyone – even Leftists – that there would be war, for at least six-eight years, now? In a certain sense, hasn’t it been obvious that things would end badly, since the Income Tax was introduced, or, at the very least, since Woodstock and the era of University protests began? If people didn’t know that there were an whole lot of people who would simply have to be shot after that epoch of cultural self-revelation, then it is only proof that the nation deserves what is coming to it. Nobody seriously believes that the current situation is sustainable.
Most leftists assume they’ll win. When they bother to read history it’s mostly to wax abhorrently at the endless acts of racism and sexism, but on occasion when their eyes drift over a battle or two they exclaim the righteousness of Martin Luther King Jr’s quote “The arc of the moral universe is long but it bends towards justice.” They assume they are an ever victorious army prepped for their next conquest.
And the other half looks at the leftists and sees a group of whining, effeminate failures who would break at the first whiff of grapeshot and believes that this group can never win a war.
Both parties doubt the other’s vigor and believe victory will easily won.
Maybe the war started with Mumia Abu-Jamal shot Daniel Faulkner? Maybe the war started with Eldridge Cleaver’s rape spree and attempted murder of police? Maybe the war started when the Jews realized that they would have to start tricking people about race if they wanted to stay in the country?
This is why Dante placed community organizers, whom he referred to as “sowers of discord”, near the bottom of the eighth circle of Hell, to be repeatedly hacked to pieces as punishment for dividing the societies they once lived in.
This is 4GW. The state does not hold the monopoly on war that it once had. The defeat of the USG by cavemen in Afghanistan and Iraq is the start of America entering 4GW which is a war of all versus all. The muslims, the blacks, the jews, the white liberals, the white conservatives, the latinos, the police, the Christians, etc. will all fight. This is not a war the USG can ever win.
The 4GW stuff is mostly illusionary. There was no 4GW war when Nato Invaded Kosovo because they used the Muslims to ethically cleans the now disarmed Serbs. 4GW only works when the normal way of dealing with an insurgency (reprisals, mass killings, and ethic cleansing) are declare off limit by the priests. The ban on such tactics regularly goes out the window when the Cathedral is having trouble winning, but it’s never reported by the media.
The most spectacular example of this was vaginally impaling Tutsi women in the Congo with very large objects, which even the Romans would have thought excessive. Our press, however, to the extent that it mentioned it at all, blamed it on Tutsi intransigence.
4GW is a lie.
If it isn’t then explain why the KKK doesn’t rule the former Confederacy.
Explain why Boers don’t rule South Africa or why whites don’t rule Rhodesia.
4GW is successful when the people using it are allied with the State Department and the NY Times because then any effective measures used to fight it are made illegal.
4GW is unsuccessful if it’s used against the NY Times or the State Department. The most it accomplishes is the NY Times backing off a bit like when a federal building in Oklahoma gets blown up.
The KKK didn’t revive the Confederacy but it did make the South into one-party states with the ruling party ran by former Confederates and their heirs albeit supervised by the federal government of the Union (which accepted this state of affairs under the Civil Rights Movement). Still I can see your point about PC being the decisive factor.
The KKK was an anti black crime program. The ending of reconstreconstruction and the rule of the white middle class was either New England giving up on changing the south into New England puritans or the next step in setting up a New England like power structure(middle class instead of aristocracy) depending on which history you read. The KKK wasn’t involved in politics during this period as far as I know.
An anti-black crime program that sought to ensure that everyone voted Democrat. Sounds reasonable.
Hidden all you know about the KKK is cathedral propaganda. They use terror to make sure that blacks knew for every rape, robbery, and murder they committed they’d suffer massively. Within 5 years blacks got the message reduced their crime levels and the KKK faded away. The second KKK was formed after the movie birth of a nation and that KKK was explicitly political in nature.
So how’d the set of elected officials go from black Republicans to white Democrats everywhere in the South, considering that some states had a black majority and that white males (voters) had already suffered considerably more casualties than black males (newly enfranchised voters)?
Having the majority of the population doesn’t mean shit when you don’t have the brains to build political organizations, your voting population is too lazy to show up to vote, and they can’t read well enough mark a ballot. When whites were re-enfranchised they quickly won power by voting in greater percentages and then stopped stupid people(whites and blacks alike) from voting through things like literacy tests, poll taxes, and social pressure. Violence wasn’t needed. Later during the new deal poor whites were re-franchised in order to elect progressive politicians.
In other words, Southern blacks didn’t mind being dominated by Southern whites. The whole line from Jim about how inferior people enjoy being dominated by superior people. Yet when the people you guys deem inferior have a chance they side with the progressives. I wonder why…
Sure they do.
And here is the woman who will tell you exactly why:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio
>Yet when the people you guys deem inferior have a chance they side with the progressives. I wonder why…
In a democracy the underclass always sides with the group giving them the biggest bribes.
And it quite natural for lesser groups to follow and emulate the better people. That doesn’t mean that the better people are not batshit insane with their ideas. See the south under the reconstruction for a perfect example where the smarter, more dominate, and richer group of New Englanders failed in directly ruling the south because their ideas which worked well for New England didn’t work at all for the south due to genetic differences in the 2 peoples.
Most reasonable rulers would then allow the locals to govern themselves while extracting resources from them. And for a while it worked very well in the south. Southern white men were the back bone of the US military and without the south there’s little Chance the US would be the world spanning empire that it is. But Puritans make shitty rulers because they can’t stop trying to force people to be something other than they are and they ultimately screw up such beneficial relationships.
“Most reasonable rulers would then allow the locals to govern themselves while extracting resources from them. And for a while it worked very well in the south. Southern white men were the back bone of the US military and without the south there’s little Chance the US would be the world spanning empire that it is. But Puritans make shitty rulers because they can’t stop trying to force people to be something other than they are and they ultimately screw up such beneficial relationships.”
Amen.
“4GW is unsuccessful if it’s used against the NY Times or the State Department. The most it accomplishes is the NY Times backing off a bit like when a federal building in Oklahoma gets blown up.”
Indeed. 4GW alone doesn’t cut it. It would take titanic amounts of energy to defeat the NY Times/MSM and the U.S. State Department.
It’s not that 4GW won’t cut it “alone” – it doesn’t cut it at all.
4GW is a tool for using superior force to force those capable of stopping barbarism to not defend themselves.
It’s the cops disarming the Ferguson shopkeepers and letting the mob run loose. That’s 4GW.
It’s not something that can be used at all versus the Cathedral.
Thus the need for titanic amounts of energy to destroy or deter the Cathedral, if one would wish to do so.
In some sense, hasn’t the war been fought already, and the current arrangement is a fulfillment of the surrender terms?
There was a battle for marriage. The sustainable side lost.
There was a battle for the right of association. The losing side is being bussed/crimed/sectioned eight’ed out of their communities.
There was a demographic battle. The losing side is being replaced.
I don’t see any stomach to re-fight those battles. What we have in the West is grousing in an internment camp.
Yes. But …
The winning side will not accept surrender. They want the impossible, and will increase the punishments until they get it.
If they did a Stalin, and announced Utopia had arrived, the proletariat is victorious, and there will be no further movement leftwards, then that would be stable for a very long time, and then we would just be grousing in the internment camp.
“The winning side will not accept surrender. They want the impossible, and will increase the punishments until they get it.”
Indeed, but they are surrounding the near-corpse of Western Man; kicking him while shouting RAPE and other bromides.
Meanwhile, the grid goes down and the food shipments become more erratic.
Gun control? The vanquished are still heavily armed, leaving the victors understandably anxious.
4GW is highly relevant. Not because the coming war will resemble the wars of the past, but because 4GW theory encourages you to think about war in realistic terms:
It’s like the wikipedia article is trying to warn us:
“a complex or long term conflict” where a “A non-national or transnational” force conducts “a direct attack on the enemy’s culture” potentially “including genocidal acts against civilians” through “Highly sophisticated psychological warfare, especially through media manipulation and lawfare” using “all available pressures … political, economic, social and military”.
That is what happened to us. Which means that the war began long ago. And we’re already at the Battle of Berlin stage. This is our last stand.
We still exist, physically, but we’ve been defeated in every other area of the conflict. Not just defeated, but our society has been turned against us and used to fuel our own destruction. We’ve been cucked.
Our institutions now exist primarily to fuel the growth of the non-white biomass that will, sooner or later, one way or another, put an end to our physical existence. Our economy exists to siphon wealth from us to parasites (at both top and bottom) that hate us. Our religious institutions exist to extract wealth to fuel the growth of non-white biomass and to keep us anesthetized to the severity of our plight. Our politics… well you get the idea.
We’re doomed if current trends continue. A Russian nuclear strike or a North Korean super EMP would be deus ex machina at this point. Unfortunately both are unlikely.
Our most realistic hope is that our enemies get sloppy, kick off a left / anti-white singularity too early and turn this 4GW into a 2GW. They are getting rash and overconfident lately and even dopey white Christian conservative patriotards are starting to notice that this is more than just good faith difference of opinion.
But the system is set up in a way that it protects them from themselves. Likely we’ll get a Romney type in 2016 to anesthetize the patient, calm things down, let the new normal sink in and allow current trends to continue. We’re only a few more Romneys away from an unrecoverable position.
That’s how current trends keep on continuing. I can’t see any viable strategy but getting serious about accelerationism, to bring on the 2GW while we still have the demographics for it.
How would we go about getting serious about accelerationism? What would that entail?
Suppose there were several Breivik-style incidents occuring per month: a white man who’d had enough goes on a well-planned spree, killing a bunch of white leftists, particularly young white leftist elites-in-training.
Does that accelerate things? Or does it simply harden the Cathedral’s resolve and destroy the moral justification for revolt?
How do you think the preening, prattling leftards would react to that? Would their courage fail, as it has in the face of Islamic violence punishing those who mock their prophet with cartoons, or in the face of North Korean/whoever threats against distribution of a movie they don’t like? The left doesn’t seem to have a lot of physical courage against real threats to their safety. Would they find their courage against a wave of new Breiviks, or are they basically a bunch of women and womanish men who would cave if faced with real danger?
Caving to the muslims isn’t remotely comparable. They LIKE doing that; it’s what they want to do anyway. It sticks their real enemies (us) in the eye, and it gives them a masochistic thrill.
I remember taking a history of science course at a big State U years just after 9/11. The middle-aged, white, presumably-atheist, female prof didn’t just give us the party line about the Islamic Golden Age and how great it was for Science!, freedom, diversity, women’s rights, and all that. No, she took it all a step further and went into an ecstasy of submission every time the subject of Islam came up, and it came up often. It was always, “The Prophet Mohammed,” and “The Holy Koran.” You could hear the capitalization in her voice. I learned that the “Archangel Gabriel” dictated the “Holy Koran” to the “Prophet Mohammed,” who was illiterate, yet still transcribed this most beautiful, perfect, and poetic work of literature in human history. It was never, “Muslims believe…”, she just told the class this as if it were historical fact. This was a class called “History of Science.” Nobody, not one student out of 100-200, including me, spoke up or complained about how ridiculous this was.
Accelerationism refers to the idea of accelerating the pace of leftward movement. I’m not sure what would be the best strategy to pull this off, but obvious strategies include entryism and getting rid of the Republican party.
Rightist entryism against the left has been examined and most agree that it not realistic to turn leftist organizations rightward. But I’m not talking about right entryism, I’m talking about left entryism into the left. Agree with all the orthodox leftist positions, but encourage them to get a little bit exuberant and overzealous, and to focus on stuff like Trayvon Martin or Michael Brown that they want to do anyway, but that has a high probability of backfiring against them.
Getting rid of the Republican party also seems like a realistic possibility. They depend on higher levels of turn out among certain demographics to maintain their position. They refuse to do anything useful for many of those demographics and they appear to be mostly on board with the left’s program for the country, but unwilling to say so openly, because they would lose votes. This is a precarious position for them.
If the GOP could be de-legitimized among a critical mass of voters, it could be reduced to a very minor party. This would clear a path for the heedless advance of leftism. It would also create a political vacuum. There would be a large amount of voters sitting out there with no party to harvest their votes. This would create an incentive for some party to compete for those votes. That would be a gradual process though, so there’d be plenty of time for rapid leftward movement.
In both cases the hope is that rapid, heedless leftward movement would radicalize whites and make the left overconfident and over-aggressive, leading an earlier outbreak of 2GW, while the demographic situation is more favorable. It’s risky but I don’t see a better solution.
I’m not really qualified to analyze the effects of right wing terrorism. I’m generally skeptical. It seemed to work out ok for Breivik but he might be an exception. White Nationalists have been into that kind of thing for a long time and it hasn’t been very effective for them at all.
Breivik went after the elites and their children directly, Tim McVeigh killed regular people. Guess who was more successful in their overall goals… (You already know the answer)
Now that is clear thinking on 4GW.
It’s a form of war that an imperial state can use against its subjects.
Not the other way around.
A few months without EBT eliminates most of the non-white biomass. White people are the way they are because the harsh but predictable winters of the northern latitudes select for those who can think abstractly, control their impulses, and plan ahead.
They’ll come take our food, you say? In a recent gang shootout in New Orleans, fifty rounds were fired and one person was injured. We’re not up against Sergeant York here.
They’ll send the police to take our food? Sure, de Blasio will give the order as soon as he gets back from the “More dead cops now!” rally.
4GW is a real thing in the sense that today’s economy, physical infrastructure and demographics create vulnerabilities that can be attacked for massive disruptive return on investment. A few hundred dollars spent can cause losses of billions of dollars to the enemy. Counterguerilla tools have evolved as well, but not as fast. The measures necessary to squash a well-done disruptive campaign would themselves be very disruptive and cause massive economic losses.
To the main point, it’s obvious very bad things are coming down the pipe. America’s leadership is ever-more divorced from reality, functioning in an echo chamber. It continuously acts in a more aggressive way for more stupider ideological reasons, supporting worse and worse people (see: the Arab Spring, which led to the rise of ISIS,) importing more and more shitheads from terrible places while undercutting its military and law enforcement effectiveness (SWAT teams operating surplus military kit are no consolation to the cops in Ferguson and NYC.) And of course you have the increasing economic disruption of the middle class (might be swinging the other way with reshoring manufacturing and domestic energy production,) and several hundred thousand Americans who came back from observing the kind of damage that can be done even by monkeys hamhandedly employing 4GW tactics, with very good training and unclear economic prospects. All signs point to cliff.
Yes, the opponents of the Cathedral can shut down the North American power grid cheaply and easily – two guys with rifles and some know-how would do it.
Yes, it would be cheaper to do that than it would be to repair it.
I’m pretty sure shutting down the power grid won’t be in the long term interests of 100+ IQ races.
There is a lot left to be lost before shutting down the power grid looks like a good idea and most will never reach that point.
Stormfront readers: THEY R GENOCIDING US!!!
B: Why don’t you do something about it?
Stormfront readers: Without electricity, we can’t read Stormfront.
Ok, good luck.
the problem is, Whites do not like seeing physical capital destroyed. Whites will preserve old physical capital as museums and try to do anything with it other than destroy it. Convincing snow niggers to destroy their physical capital is harder than convincing them to give their daughters to other tribes, because in their 1260cc brains, if you damage your physical capital, your entire village freezes to death without enough fermented herring to eat next time the sun doesn’t come up.
Stormfront readers: Also, we are too morally good to destroy things!
Sure. That’s why euro wars have historically been so sparing of physical capital. Anyone who’s been in a German city can tell you. Other outstanding examples of European preservation of physical capital include the burning of the Summer Palace, Sherman’s campaigns and Napoleon’s Russian campaign.
— A few hundred dollars spent can cause losses of billions of dollars to the enemy.
then, why aren’t Palestinians doing this? They surely have hundreds of dollars and Israel’s GDP is 300 billion dollars.
See how much fun the Israelis living in Sderot have. That’s what cheap weaponry can do.
How many Israeli women and children have been raped and murdered by Palestinians this year?
And how many White women and children have been raped and murdered by Blacks or other imported diversities?
Are the Pallies too stupid to implement 4GW, or does 4GW only happen where the civilian population facing genocide is strictly monitored for signs of resistance (such as jailing Garron Helm for calling Luciana Berger a filthy Jew bitch)?
They are, hamhandedly. During the last war they attacked the power lines going to settlements in Shomron and they are constantly setting forests on fire, causing lots of damage. But they are not very good at what they do, heavily surveilled and infiltrated and very heavily dependent on the Israeli govt for free electricity/water/fuel. And Israel is a very hard, resilient society, much more so than any in the West, having been dealing with this shit for 70 years.
As for the question of how many Jewish civilians they kill/rape-are you daft? Look up Netanel Arami, Shelly Dadon, the Fogel family, etc. During the last intifada, Israel had over 1000 civilians killed. Out of a population of several million. Apply that ratio to the U.S. and tell me if you see 40k US civilians murdered by blacks.
In the last 6 years? 40k would be low. US has around 15k murders every year and that doesn’t include the numbers from Detroit because they’ve stopped collecting the bodies. Generally 50% of the killers are black.
Red: we’re talking about Whites murdered by diversities, so a quarter of that
B: you say 1000, jewishvirtuallibrary says somewhere over 1000 since 2000, pro-Palestinian propaganda says a tenth of that, presumably because they remove the war from their numbers.
So what we’re left with is, if Americans faced intermittent race wars as well as “random” murders, perhaps our police would provide better protection.
In Israel, an Israeli policeman would not have waited until a Jew was stabbed before shooting the crazy negro waving a knife around.
Are Arabs really that incompetent at 4GW, or does 4GW not actually work very well against a determined enemy?
Let us imagine what our murder levels would be if we destroyed the homes of black murderers and threw their families off welfare.
I recommend you read Rabbi Meir Kahane’s Revolution or Referendum, available for free online, for the answers to these questions.
I only wish we destroyed terrorists’ homes and threw their families off welfare.
Throwing their families of welfare would be difficult when welfare is distributed by the Black Panthers with bonus payments for families of suicide bombers. AFAIK Israel can only destroy homes randomly when they can pretend there was a dangerous attack from around there; precision munitions are meaningless when you can only carpet bomb to pretend the damage was unavoidable.
Our Black problem isn’t exactly the same as Israel’s Arab problem, though. Blacks can be offered a subsidized house and an opportunity for a life meaningfully similar to ours with harsh and predictable punishments is they fall out of line. Arabs are basically mutts. What Israel needs to do is what Mubarak did with his Arabs: rape the men to show them who’s top dog.
Note: I would not advocate for Whites to do this, because it is disgusting, but as their religion correctly points out, Jews do not have souls.
It all depends on the pattern you see. Most people look at black-on-white crime and see a pattern of criminal individuals and gangs. Racists look at black-on-white crime and see a pattern of race war. But in Israel, the pattern is indisputable: militias of hundreds of thousands of armed men with financing by outside states are killing Jews, making it obvious that the deaths are war rather than a crime wave. Thus Israel fights the murderers as if they are at war.
Huffing paint is bad for you, peppermint.
> Most people look at black-on-white crime and see a pattern of criminal individuals and gangs.
Which is why that nice progressive white people move away as soon as the first black moves into their area.
>Racists look at black-on-white crime and see a pattern of race war.
Racism must be the medical condition where one is honest about reality.
Hey, Red, why are the blacks fighting a race war? I thought you said they liked submitting to white authority figures.
Their white authority figures are telling them to fight a race war.
Yes, B, white authorities are ordering blacks to shiv them. Ironically these authorities still exist!
Their intent is that the blacks will shiv the white working class, and the occasional cop.
At least they think that is their intent, because they think they can stop any time at any point, but they don’t like each other very much either.
it might surprise you, HA, that Whites aren’t all the same person. Some of the White authorities B refers to are actually Jews, but many of them are actually White. The Daley family never had any problems with the negroes they used to vote for them and get rid of the White middle class who wouldn’t vote for them. Chicago got so bad that it elected Rahm Emmanuel, and his son just got assaulted in front of the mayor’s house.
The Negroes haven’t turned on Bill DeBlazio ( http://i.imgur.com/uRBcjhL.jpg ) (real name Warren Wilhelm, honeymooned in Cuba, supported the Sandinistas), but the golem only turns on its handler after it’s destroyed everything else.
B refers to Sherman destroying parts of Georgia, leaving the women to vanish into the West, as Whites destroying their physical capital. Whites love destroying other Whites. In fact, during the time of the Great Game, Jews would give White kings money to play in exchange for subverting the judicial process regarding Jewish ritual murder.
The communists are right that the White nationalists are using the “niggers and jews, bad news” line to try to build a coalition that will collapse as soon as the threat passes, when they’re not pretending that race doesn’t exist or that there is only one White with one White agenda. Figuring out how to be a nationalist in the northeastern United States will be difficult.
I know not all whites are one person; that’s people’s biggest objection to racism: that it treats all members of a race as one person. Your talk about Jews having no souls and committing ritual murder is based off the say-so of demagogues that sought to incite mobs to destroy the Jews as if they were all one (evil) person. Likewise this race-war rhetoric is based on the premise that some black criminals prove the malice of all blacks because their race places them on the same side. It’s funny that when people count you guys out on your demagoguery, hate and stereotyping not out of malice but rather out of love of fair play and truth, you guys insist malice is the reason and then throw back at us accusations of demagoguery, hate and stereotyping (characteristics of *your* personalities) to “prove” your point.
When I said “count you out”, I meant to say “call you out”.
Either the blacks seek to exterminate all whites or they don’t. If they really do, then presumably they want to kill any white handlers too. That’s what’s crazy about the accusation that Jews want to use crazed niggers to destroy the white race–blacks consider Jews to be whites too. In fact, even the Nazis needed to mandate Star of David armbands to distinguish Jews from officially-acknowledged white people.
Blacks don’t particularly want to exterminate all whites. Those using blacks as a tool want to exterminate all whites, including each other.
Indeed, especially each other, observe the Old Jewish Bolsheviks on old Jewish Bolsheviks, and the Khmer Rouge on foreign educated intellectuals.
Rather, their white handlers want to kill each other. The essence of leftism is alliance with far to destroy near. They think they intend only to destroy certain whites, those hateful rednecks, but they are fooling themselves and lying to each other.
>Either the blacks seek to exterminate all whites or they don’t.
Blacks did exactly that Haiti and Zanzibar and they’re working on it in South Africa and Zimbabwe. Bantu blacks are not a very civilized people and as such when given power they tend to destroy the people unlike them, and then the people who look like them but are smarter than they are until they’re back in grass huts and dumber than rocks. This is the true and final destination of equality. Again the key here is this is what happens when you give blacks power over other groups.
If you give blacks legal power over one group of whites but maintain power over them yourself then it’s a win win for you. You get destroy the group you didn’t like by using uncivilized blacks and you get to keep your hands clean.
HA, you apparently can not imagine that people would believe politically sensitive things based on anything but the say-so of a demagogue. That’s what you’re doing here: making sure James Donald Thought is sophisticated enough and has enough of a base to be worth defecting to.
I’m tired of telling you that there is more than one faction of Whites. In James Donald Thought, we consider factions with incentives, not classes with destinies. For more on the factions, check out Menachem Moldberg‘s article Why I Am Not a White Nationalist, which tells us that we shouldn’t be seen at White Nationalist parties, and Theory of the Ruling Underclass, which describes how White factions beat the obsolete farm equipment into swords against each other, and Noam Chomsky killed Aaron Schwartz, about how being this bluepilled will get you in trouble.
“then, why aren’t Palestinians doing this?”
I would guess that they would like to go home, cook a meal, and flip on the TV after a hard day of launching rockets and arranging atrocities.
I thought you thought America’s situation was bad in general and in particular with regards to cars. Now you say that Americans will enjoy more fuel for their cars as part of a boom in prosperity.
The economy has different sectors. Some are speeding up, others slowing down. Overall the situation is bad, but fuel is getting cheaper.
And within two decades, the transition to electric cars will have begun: If fuel prices are low, oil is not profitable; if fuel prices are high, demand increases for electric cars. And Tesla is building a Gigafactory to mass produce batteries for electric cars.
Yeah, I doubt it. Look at the energy density of batteries and the transmission losses and cost of storage of electricity.
Tesla is building a gigafactory to collect massive government subsidies. Any actual useful product is unnecessary, and therefore unlikely to be produced.
B: Obviously old tech can’t do the trick; have you kept tabs on what the new tech is like?
Jim: You mean like the early railroad and computer companies that built things for subsidies and likewise ended up not producting anything useful?
well, batteries are a better idea that hydrogen, or putting ethyl alcohol in a gasoline engine…
re: Tesla (Musk)
Snake oil for the 21st Century. Study thermodynamics. Internal combustion is much more efficient than electric motors to power vehicles IF one looks at the entire energy production cycle.
Dan Kurt
…provided you can pick a decent fuel.
Electric cars do have electric motors, which are a lot easier to maintain than the mechanical stuff. Of course, with a good fuel, you can put it in a fuel cell and get electricity out for the motors.
What fuels do people talk about? Hydrogen, because everyone knows it’s a pipe dream so it won’t threaten any existing businesses but it sounds wonderful to run a car and just produce water. And ethyl alcohol, which corrodes the few materials that can handle gasoline, but corn growers want to sell it, and sure, it might have been a better idea than giving corn to Mexico to buy more Mexican peasants and drive them off their land to jump the border 20 years ago, but there’s no sense in closing the barn door after the donkey has left.
Ammonia would be great. Fischer-Tropsch would work if we couldn’t dig up oil. Batteries are a better idea than hydrogen or ethanol, and make for low-maintenance vehicles, which could be a bigger concern than fuel price for some end lusers.
>>IF one looks at the entire energy production cycle.
Musk’s companies are also upgrading solar panels, updating the technology. Keep in mind that all energy on Earth outside of radioactive material deep under the crust comes from the Sun. So the apex of efficiency would be to tap into *that* source.
No, that would be reinventing the wheel. Should we then claim the ultimate in nutrition is photosynthesis and aim for that? By whatever method the oil got into the ground, it’s very concentrated energy. Rather than wasting time trying to gather sunlight directly by various esoteric methods, we should focus our resources on better oil exploration tech.
Just don’t cry because Achmed the Crazed Terrorist Homo is armed by the oil sheiks to the point where he can take you aprize as his wife! 😀
“I’m pretty sure shutting down the power grid won’t be in the long term interests of 100+ IQ races.”
It would strip the low IQ groups of protection from above.
Example: New Orleans after being hit by Katrina. The Neo-Puritans were bitching about how the white neighborhoods formed militias that successfully destroyed black gangs who attacked the neighborhoods. The progtards were really butthurt that they couldn’t protect the black gang bangers in those neigborhoods where the infrastructure and power grid went down.
[…] War is easy, peace is hard. […]
[…] War is easy, peace is hard. […]
[…] In this the Season of Peace on Earth, Jim has up a thoughtful and thought-provoking piece reminding us Peace is hard, war is easy. […]
[…] In this the Season of Peace on Earth, Jim has up a thoughtful and thought-provoking piece reminding us Peace is hard, war is easy. […]
I just realized something: Lincoln didn’t win the Civil War any more than Nixon won the Vietnam War and Bush 43 won the Iraq War. After all three hard-fought victories, it was necessary to garrison the other country with US troops to make sure the war stayed won, and later presidents decided this wasn’t worth the cost.
This is partly because we’re not a monarchy, so we elect a new president who lacks any personal stake in the achievements of his predecessor, and partly because we think the Puritan puppet regime we installed ensures a future of peace, justice, security, and prosperity after our troops leave.