Note: All those speaking, Avakov, Saakashvilli and Poroshenko ( who calls the meeting closed to prevent escalation of violence), speak in Russian, the only common language they have.
Why do those idiots in the Ukraine want arms? Crimea has gone in accordance with the will of the great majority (more than 80%) of the people (and that's according to a Pew Research poll, not Russian propaganda). Donbass demands autonomy within the Ukraine in accordance with the will of the people. And what's hard to understand about that? Remember, Julia Tymoshenko, American Lacky, ex-convict, former two-time Ukrainian Prime Minister, leader of Ukraine's Fatherland Party, calling for a gun to go kill damn Russians (that is, ethnic Russians of the Ukraine's Donbass region).
I've sometimes wondered if feminists, the female variety, that is, are not in most cases just women resentful at not being, for whatever reason, the target of at least occasional male sexual harassment.
If that were the case, the mass influx of strong, young, sex-starved, single, Islamic males intent on rape and pillage across Europe would naturally appeal to at least a certain segment of the feminist establishment. And so it appears to be the case. Or at least so it has been reported from Sweden where feminists have launched a campaign against men that want to protect them from being rapedby "Syrian" "refugees."
This, in turn, seems to confirm the genocidal intention of the US-orchestrated mass influx of young, strong, single, sex-starved Muslim males from Syria (aka, draft dodgers and economic opportunists) and elsewhere into Europe. As we noted before:
Germany has less than five million female citizens between the ages of 20 and 30, so by opening the door to one million young, Islamic males, with millions more to come, the Merkel government has cuckolded (a large part of) the male youth of Germany.
German demographics
Presumably the intention is to follow this with ever more energetic promotion of homosexuality as an outlet for the cucked, while welcoming Islam, a faith that sanctions the brutal execution of homosexuals, as a religion of peace and love eminently compatible with European civilization.
To better understand the psychology underlying this project for the ethnic destruction of Europe, consider what would be the reaction of European males to mass influx of young, healthy unaccompanied, sex-starved females from Asia and the Middle-East.
I have no sympathy for the imperialist enthusiasm of Oxford cum Harvard and Stanford Professor, Niall Ferguson. I am prompted, however, to come to his defense in the face of a viciously false allegation of white supremacism by a Pankaj Mishra, a cousin-in-law to the pseudo-Conservative and imperialist war criminal British Prime Minister, David Cameron.
Mishra's contemptible smear was published by the London Review of Books under the guise of a review of Ferguson's book, Civilization: The West and the Rest.
Mishra is a skilled exponent of defamation by insinuation.
Politico reports that in future the Huffington Post will append the following editor’s note to every post mentioning Republican presidential contender, Donald Trump:
Note to our readers: Donald Trump is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, birther and bully who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims -- 1.6 billion members of an entire religion -- from entering the U.S.
What they mean by this is that their readers should be for Hillary Clinton, a serial liar, and a rampant advocate of uncontrolled Third World immigration to the US in contravention of law, and the Islamification of America through an influx of Muslims with a radical ideology and a settler mentality.
And here's a fine illustration of exactly what it is that the HuffPo wants for the United States and by implication for all of Europe:
To most young liberal-minded persons, the sight of a Scandinavian city filled with Africans and Middle-Easterners, many of them riot- and violence-prone, probably seems quite normal. To me, however, having as a child in the 1950's visited the city of Gothenburg (or "Yottabuoy" to give an approximation to the correct Swedish pronunciation) to which the above-linked Daily Mail article refers, the destruction of the unique identity of the Swedish people through mass immigration and enforced multiculturalism seems an unmitigated catastrophe. That the Huffington Post, in league with the rest of the corporate media in the United States, demands an immigration policy that will culminate in the transformation of America from a unified and civilized society to a multi-culti patchwork of competing ethnic groups, linguistic communities, and warring religions, as is now occurring throughout Europe makes clear how widely treason doth prosper under the Bush-Clinton-Obama New World Order.
As the Toronto Star reports, this picture, displayed in Toronto's York University Student Centre, shows:
a person looking at a bulldozer close to a building while holding rocks. The person is shown wearing what looks like a Palestinian flag with a map of Israel without its borders. At the bottom of the mural, the words “justice” and “peace” can be seen along with other text.
Paul Bronfman, a A Toronto film industry executive, has announced that his company is pulling its support for York University’s Cinema and Media Arts program because of the display of this picture, which, Mr. Bronfman said, "is anti-Israel."
He then continued:
It made me sick to my stomach and very angry. “We live in an amazing city, an amazing country, and to have this happening under our noses is disgusting. It’s subtly anti-Semitic and anti-Israel. It’s anti-Canadian.
But what is disgusting about being anti-Israel when the Israeli state enables the theft of Palestinian land for the construction of illegal settlements in the occupied territories?
And what has opposing Israeli state policy got to do with anti-Semitism? To say that the one necessarily implies the other is like saying that to condemn George W. Bush's Iraq war amounts to hatred of Americans.
As for equating anti-Semitism with anti-Canadianism, it amounts to saying that Canada should be subservient to the interests of Israel, just as the Canadian Ukrainian Congress seeks to make Canada subservient to the interests of Russophobic Ukrainian nationalists. Both are manifestations of ethnic politics that are potentially of great harm to Canada.
What the picture depicts is the violent (i.e., rock throwing) resentment of Palestinian youth at the theft of their land by Israeli settlers. So which is worst, stealing land or throwing rocks? Apparently, in Mr. Bronfman's mind, Israeli crimes against the Palestinians are to be ignored, while the World condemns the violent though largely ineffectual Palestinian reaction as a terrible crime.
Moreover, according to Mr. Bronfman, anyone who takes a different view is an anti-Semite. OK, then, on that definition an anti-Semite is an opponent of Israeli crimes against the indigenous people of occupied Palestine, which is not such a bad thing, is it? Related:
... the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company [Uranium One] with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West.
Which deal, the Times reports
... gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.
And "At the heart of the tale" reports the Times:
... are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family.
And, reports the Times:
Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.
And the Times continues:
As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.
And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.
But the US establishment, i.e., the plutocracy who only like politicians they can buy, still prefer Hillary to one of their own, Donald Trump, with a reform agenda.
A recent example of the BBC's large-type Web journalism entitled Donald Trump and the politics of paranoia, written by a member of the Chosen, one Michael Goldfarb, asserts:
One startling feature of the latest race to become the next president of the US - which begins in earnest with next week's Iowa caucuses - is the runaway success in the opinion polls of the outspoken billionaire, Donald Trump.
What's "startling" to the BBC about Donald Trump's popularity is that he's not just another presidential puppet of the New World Order project for the destruction of the democratic nation state, including not only Britain, but also the United States of America.
Yeah, that is startling. The project for a global empire, ruled by a plutocratic elite, and served by a mongrel population brainwashed in the religion of Political Correctness that appeared to be going so well, seems now to be going edge ways. The Brits, and the Frogs have accepted their own demise as distinct racial and cultural entities. The Germans are being brought to the bidding of Angela, Treason, Merkel as they are compelled to commit national suicide by accepting an influx of millions of strong, young Asian and Middle-Eastern males described euphemistically as "refugees," but for some reason Americans are kicking up a real fuss about open borders, Third Worldization and the eclipse of the Euro-American majority. Why?
The reason, as Mr. Goldfarb of the BBC explains, is that egomaniac Trump, telling people that a real country has borders. Well damn that: America is not a real country and it's time for those "bitter" white people who "cling to guns or religion," as America's Euro-American majority have been described by their African-American President with an Islamic-Indonesian upbringing, to give up on the stupid idea of refusing to go "gentle into the good night."
Yep, it's time for Americans to bite the bullet, accept destruction of the Euro-American majority that built the greatest nation on Earth, and open the floodgates to the Third-World. That is what the globalized corporate giants demand: cheap immigrant labor, unrestricted import of goods from the sweatshops of the World, and the Hell with this silly idea of democracy, individual liberty, and free speech — in future the BBC and the other temples of political correctness will tell Americans what to think.
And if Americans don't like that then, as the BBC clearly believes, they are stinking nativists: or in Guardian-speak, they are far-right wing, extremist, Nazified, racist xenophobes with the contemptible desire to be succeeded in their own country by their own posterity, not by people from elsewhere. What's more the BBC screams in large type, they are PARANOID.
Which goes to show what good sense most Americans have, for as Andy Groves, former head of Intel Corporation remarked: "Only the paranoid survive." Let's hope the Germans and the Brits and the French and all the other European nations oppressed by a genocidal conspiracy to erase their identities from the face of the Earth get real paranoid real soon. The Brits could make a start by giving the bums rush to David Cameron, that war-criminal shill for the New World Order, to be replaced by someone who will shutter the BBC, an propaganda agency with an undue tolerance for rapists and paederasts.
This article, by Mike Whitney in the Unz Review, explains how US (and by extension European) monetary and fiscal policies* saved criminally reckless Western financial institutions from bankruptcy. The method was to provide the bankers with virtually limitless amounts of cash at negative real interest rates, which enabled them to blow a huge stock market bubble that financed their return to solvency. At the same time, Whitney argues, governments were careful to limit the magnitude of monetary stimulus so as to insure no substantial growth in aggregate demand or, therefore, in employment or wages.
On the latter point, Whitney offers the correct Keynesian analysis. But Keynes addressed the problems of a different age, when the US economy was largely self-contained, with external trade amounting to less than 5% of GDP.
Globalization with input factor mobility, i.e., free movement of labor from the Third World to the First World, free movement of capital and technology from the First World to the Third World, and free movement of the products of sweatshop labor from the Third World to the First World means lower wages and higher unemployment in the First World, which in turn shrink aggregate demand resulting in even lower wages and higher unemployment.
The Keynesian solution to shrinking demand and rising unemployment was deficit spending to raise aggregate demand and hence employment and wages. But today, in an era of globalization to the max, the effect of deficit spending is primarily to suck in more cheap Chinese shoes and shirts, computers and car parts, all of which Americans and others in the First World used to make for one another. Add in the effects of computerization, automation, robotization and insane student debt and the outlook for employment and wages for ordinary folks becomes, as is now apparent, bleak indeed.
There are two measures to improve the welfare of the proletariat. One is massive infrastructure spending, since this generates work that cannot be off-shored and is still largely beyond the scope of automation and robotization. The other is a return to free trade without input factor mobility, which as David Ricardo explained in his 1817 classic, “On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation” yields the benefit of “Comparative Cost”, or “Comparative Advantage” as it is now known, i.e., the benefit of increased total output and lower costs than if each nation tried to produce in isolation.
These, as I explained here, in a post that was rejected for publication in the Unz Review, are the economic policies espoused by Donald Trump, i.e., restoration of the border to limit influx of labor from the Third World, and the imposition of tariffs to restrict influx of products of foreign sweatshops financed with First World capital and technology, thereby achieving the benefits of comparative advantage through international trade, and last but not least a massive infrastructure renewal project.
———
* Said policies are administered by governments largely owned by said criminally reckless financial institutions, for example, the great American banking firm of J.P. Morgan, which took former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair on as an "adviser" for a fee of two million pounds per year. This is in accordance with the Western tradition of political bribery, which as explained by Thomas Macaulay (The History of England (1848)), involves payments made after the bribed individual leaves office, an arrangement that is entirely legal, and one that no politician would ever think of changing.
Question: What do you call a black woman who has had at least three abortions?
Answer: A crimefighter.
So what is the moral of the joke? That is revealed by another joke:
Question: What do you call a white woman who has had at least three abortions? Answer: An anti-racism activist.
If you found the second joke funny, you are either an immigrant to Europe with a settler mentality or a European driven by media lies, advertising manipulation, Hollywood brainwashing, and twelve years of mandatory state propaganda in the guise of education to believe that opposing the racial and cultural destruction of your own people is racism.
If, however, you found the first joke funny, then you are among the minority of the European people with at least some small chance of success in the Darwinian struggle to perpetuate your own genes* among future generations of those residing in the land of your birth.
In Europe, around 30 per cent of pregnancies end in abortion.
In Western Europe there were 12 abortions per 1,000 women in 2008, while in Eastern Europe at the same time there were 43.
However, Northern Europe (which includes the UK and Scandinavia) fared worse than the western region with 17 abortions per 1,000 women, which is on par with North America.
Thus it is abortion that makes the difference between a self-perpetuating society and a society engaged in self-genocide. The fertility of European women is currently 1.55 and falling, whereas the replacement rate is 2.1. If the 30% of pregnancies terminated by non-therapeutic abortion went to term, the European fertility rate would be 2.2, which would achieve near perfect population stability. As it is, the European population is growing rapidly due to mass immigration from Asia, the Middle East and Africa, most of the immigrants being either of reproductive age or children and hence soon to be of reproductive age. These immigrants will thus contribute disproportionately to the next generation in Europe even if their fertility was no greater than that of Europeans. However, all immigrant groups have a higher fertility that indigenous European women, and in some cases their fertility is several times higher. For example, in Britain, women from Libya, a country deliberately turned into a failed state and thus a source of immigrants to Europe by NATO bombing, have a fertility rate more than three times the European rate. These numbers make it clear, Europe is engaged in self-genocide driven by puppets of the globalist money power, such as Blair and Cameron, Sarkozy and Hollande, and above all, Frau Merkel. The objective is a mongrel Europe of easily manipulated deracinated serfs among whom will be found the subservient technicians to run the global machinery of commerce, and solve the servant problem, as George H. W. Bush said many years ago with reference to illegal Mexican immigrants to the US.
———
* The Darwinian struggle, as is now understood, is about the propagation of genes, and thus cannot be directly measured by they number of an individual's own descendants. That means the struggle for the survival of the European people's is a matter for everyone, including the childless.
As President, Jimmy Carter always seemed a terrific bore. But now, at a great age, he speaks with a force and authority that far exceeds that of any of the contestants currently seeking the Presidency. And, remember, Carter served only one term, so he is eligible to run now. Once Hillary's been taken into custody, he should be drafted on the understanding that he will speak not only for the Palestinians, but for the American people living under occupation and exploitation by stooges of the New World Order.
They intend to create one integrated planet under a top-down, locked-down political and economic management system, backed up by coercion. In order to achieve this goal ... the notion of separate nations must be eradicated. The primary goal of the provoked chaos in the Middle East and parts of Africa is: redraw that whole territory and push waves of immigrants into the West, primarily Europe. [thereby drowning] traditional cultures and ethnic identities [to create] a nationless Europe, broken from its past.
Donald Trump's campaign for the US Presidency threatens the more than one-hundred-year career of the Treason Party's drive for "global governance," which is to say, a Money Power regime, fronted by pseudodemocratic puppets such as David Cameron, Angela Merkel and Barack Obama, and backed by the corporate-owned media, purveyors of pornography, and Hollywood fake history and the global corporations that export Western jobs along with the capital and technology accumulated by the sweat of generations, to the lowest wage, lowest tax, Third-World jurisdictions with minimal workplace health and safety standards, and environmental protection.
Mr. Trump wants to restore America's borders and make America a real country again, with immigration only in accordance with the interest of the United States and subject to law. Moreover, he advocates a national economic policy designed to promote the welfare of Americans, not the profits of global corporations. In this Mr. Trump is almost certainly sincere, since his own business consists very largely in selling real estate and resort services to Americans and thus depends for its success on the prosperity of Americans, not the shareholders of global corporations.
Hence the outpouring of hate speech directed at Mr. Trump by members of the British Parliament during yesterday's debate to consider a petition demanding that Mr. Trump be banned from entry to the UK.
This question, for example, from Dr. Rupa Huq (New Labor, at right) to Paul Flynn (New Labor):
Does my hon. Friend not agree that the fact that it is Martin Luther King day today makes it even more bizarre that this hate figure is preaching these ridiculous things that we should reject?
Note, no evidence of hate speech by Mr. Trump is offered by the Hon. member, perhaps because she does not know of any. Or perhaps when she describes Mr. Trump as a hate figure she means that he is a figure who all politically correct members of the Treason Party must hate.
Paul Flynn (New Labor)
But Paul Flynn (left) was prompt to supply evidence of Mr. Trump's hate speech, albeit based on lies and a preposterous assertion:
He [Trump] described the people of Mexico as rapists and drug abusers.
I don’t see how there is any room for misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the statement I made on June 16th during my Presidential announcement speech. What can be simpler or more accurately stated?The Mexican Government is forcing their most unwanted people into the United States. They are, in many cases, criminals, drug dealers, rapists, etc. Many fabulous people come in from Mexico and our country is better for it. But these people are here legally, and are severely hurt by those coming in illegally. I am proud to say that I know many hard working Mexicans—many of them are working for and with me…and, just like our country, my organization is better for it.
Flynn also stated:
More recently he [Trump] suggested that Muslims not be allowed into his country, which is an extraordinary and extremely dangerous thing to say.
Which is untrue. Trump did not "suggest," he asserted that there should be a total "shut down" in Muslim immigration to the United States pending determination of the cause of the intense anti-Western hatred among some Muslims, i.e., radical Islamic extremists, such as those who perpetrated the recent Paris massacre of 130 innocent civilians, the Muslim couple, one newly immigrating, who last month murdered 14 American workmates in San Bernadino, California, and the hundreds or thousands of Muslim "refugees" responsible for a wave of sex crimes against European women in Germany and Sweden and elsewhere.
But is would be fascinating to know why Mr. Flynn says advocating a cessation, albeit temporary, to the flow of Muslim immigrants to the US would be "extremely dangerous." Is he suggesting it would lead to more radical Islamic terrorism against the West? Or is his concern that it would end the current wave of racial and cultural destruction being wrought by mass Islamic immigration to the West? It is regrettable, though not surprising, that the Hon. Mr. Flynn did say.
Tulip Siddiqi, MP for Kilburn and Hamstead (majority foreign born): A pretty face, and a contempt for Britain's tradition of free speech.
And here is Tulip Siddiqi (right):
I draw the line on freedom of speech when it leads to violent ideology being imported, which is what I feel is happening.
As clear an indication as one needs of the settler mentality of Britain's immigrant community, which is characterized by a contempt for Britain's tradition of free speech, and which justifies that contempt by what they "feel" is happening. No facts required folks. If we, the settler immigrants, "feel" hurt, then everyone whoever we say had better shut the fuck up and stay the fuck outta the country.
And so the debate went on, with much hate speech directed at Mr. Trump, particularly by New Labor party members and members of the immigrant and Muslim community, although there were some occasionally sensible comments also. What the debate confirms is that the Treason Party, the party that privileges immigrants and would-be immigrants over the interests of the native population of the European nations, is dominant in Britain, as in Germany, France and currently the United States, and that these people will resort to unending lies in there determination to destroy the European nation states, including the predominantly European United States of America.
Related:
Stefan Molyneux a Review of the Reaction to Donald Trump's Presidential Candidacy:
Excellent research.
(During a Presidential election year in America, this piece, first published: 4/14/2011, seems worth re-airing)
The United States, according to Chris Hedges, is destroying its system of education. A nation that destroys its systems of education, he writes, degrades its public information, guts its public libraries and turns its airwaves into vehicles for cheap, mindless amusement becomes deaf, dumb and blind. ..."
Hedges is surely right. But it seems equally certain that the process of destroying the American system of education is being undertaken without malice, intent or even awareness. System failure, whether in education, public transportation, healthcare or any other complex social arrangement is the inevitable result of evolutionary societal change.
In the beginning, education is rare and hard to come by. Those who get it are mostly people of exceptional talent and capacity for hard work. They are selected for their peculiar aptitude and schooled by a tiny group of committed scholars. They achieve brilliantly in a world of near universal ignorance.
Then every ambitious person wants their child to get an education. Taxes are raised, schools are built, thousands of teachers are hired. Some of the teachers are mediocre at best. Many of the students are not bright, some have no interest in learning. So this generation is mainly fit only for jobs in the public sector. Public demand (demand for public sector jobs, that is, not public sector services) results in a huge expansion of the bureaucracy, including the educational establishment.
Then comes the era of mass education. Everyone must have a university degree and a white collar job. Most school teachers are now incompetent. Most of them never teach: they become part of the management team. Someone invents the "bubble test", which can be marked by machine without the intervention of human intelligence at any point. Many university professors are ignorant and lazy. The students are mostly at uni only to socialize. The brightest are disgusted by their experience of "education" and shun an academic career.
Eventually everyone has a university degree and no one knows anything at all. Even the President of the United States.
In time, the economy collapses under the weight of an ever expanding burden of useless bureaucratic activity. Educational institutions decay for lack of funding. Furniture is removed for fuel wood, books for toilet paper. Buildings fall into decay and gradually disappear. Learning is despised and eventually forgotten. A new dark age ensues.
After a thousand years or so, some clever monk or hermit stumbles on a copy of Newton's "Principia," or a book of Napierian logs. They figure it out and tell other people. Some of the brightest students of this ancient wisdom form colleges where they train a few especially clever pupils. One of the newly educated elite unifies quantum theory and relativity. Practical men apply the new knowledge, making possible, among many wonders, faster than light travel, the generation of electricity from thunderstorms, and the renutrification of shit.
Then every ambitious person wants their child to get an education. Taxes are raised, schools are built, thousands of teachers are hired. Some of the teachers are mediocre ...
I suspect that the reason for the unfolding disaster is more wishy-washy leftish PC and innumerate thinking even amongst Conservatives than anything as rational and deliberate as you suppose.
Much as one would like to think that this is correct, since it would mean the possibility of a change of heart among the elite that would permit the survival of the English nation, the view is entirely mistaken. The British, as with the other European nations, are as surely and deliberately targeted for destruction as were the Jews under the rule of the Nazis.
The British elite disdain the common people not only because, as discussed in my earlier post, they see them as only remotely related to themselves, but also because they consider them to be more or less genetically botched. The attitude is of longstanding.* Dr. Marie Stopes, Britain's pioneer advocate of birth control, held that only those able to "add individuals of value to the race" should be permitted to reproduce. This view was shared by leaders of both the left and the right. In Parliament, during the 1930's, Conservatives attempted to pass compulsory sterilization legislation to eliminate future generations of the genetically inferior. The attempt failed because Labour Party opponents saw the measure as an effort to rob them of their constituents. Nevertheless, intellectuals on the left shared the Conservative view of the degeneracy of a large part of the population. the Fabian socialist, H.G. Wells, for example, who was a welcome guest at both the Kremlin in the time of Joe Stalin, and the White House in the time of F.D. Rooseveldt, advocated a program of eugenics that would, without mercy, exterminate the unfit. Another Fabian socialist, the hugely popular Anglo-Irish playright, George Bernard Shaw, spoke fervently in favor of "lethal chambers" for the disposal of society's unproductive members.
These were not isolated extremists but representatives of mainstream British thought in the early decades of the Twentieth Century. Hitler gave the use of "lethal chambers" a bad name, but the underlying contempt of the elite for the lower classes remained. Moreover, beside widespread belief in the necessity of eugenics, there was an entirely different idea within political circles that drove, and still drives, genocidal thinking; namely, the ambition for global empire, the chief obstacle to which is the ethnic nation state. This globalist project, now spearheaded by the United States, had is origins in the work of the Rothschild-Rhodes-Milner group in Britain, whose activities were directly responsible for the creation of the Council on Foreign Relations, America's leading foreign policy think tank. About this movement, much can be learned from the works of Bill Clinton's Georgetown University history professor, Carrol Quigley, including not only "Tragedy and Hope," but the "Anglo-American Establishment" an unofficial history of the Rothschild-Rhodes-Milner group and its pro-globalist activities during the first half of the 20th Century.
Bill Clinton, incidentally, was a beneficiary of the empire-promoting Rhodes Trust that funds Scholarships to the University of Oxford. But in an effort to bite the dead hand that fed him, Clinton recently repaid the Scholarship that he received from the Trust, a gesture apparently in support of those students at Oxford intent on the destruction of a statue of Cecil Rhodes. Oddly, many of the students so demanding, are it seems, Asian or African, the very people to be advantaged by the Rothschild-Rhodes-Milner plan for global empire and the genocide of the British people by mass immigration.
The Saker has an article over at the Unz Review in which he argues that the ongoing racial and cultural genocide of the European peoples by mass immigration and multiculturalism is unstoppable, first, because of the decadence of the European people, and second, because of the malign manipulation of the Anglo-Zionist money power.
This is a plausible but entirely mistaken analysis of what is happening to the European people both in Europe and in North America.
The elite are destroying their own people because the have no respect for them, or sense of kinship with them, and because it pays. This goes back to the beginning of the industrial revolution, when an urban proletariat, with no family connection to the landowning and capitalist class that dominated Parliament,* rapidly expanded and became a perpetual threat to the security of the state. Hence Disraeli’s recognition of the existence of “Two Nations” between whom, as a character in his novel "Sybil" (1945) remarked:
there is no intercourse and no sympathy; who are as ignorant of each other's habits, thoughts, and feelings, as if they were dwellers in different zones, or inhabitants of different planets. The rich and the poor.
The Great Chartist Meeting on Kennington Common, London in 1848 by William Edward Kilburn. Chartism was a movement for workers rights and political representation.
In Disraeli’s time, free trade with input factor mobility, i.e., the import of cheap labor, or the export of capital and technology to cheap-labor areas whence products could be imported to the home market, was rarely if ever an option for the owners of capital, which meant that the industrial proletariat, though considered by the elite to be both dangerous and disgusting, had to be tolerated.
But input factor mobility is not only possible today, but the underlying reason for globalization. Thus there is a massive flow of cheap Third-World labor to the high-wage West, a flow of products of sweat-shop labor in the same direction, and a flow of capital and technology in the opposite direction, all of which negatively impacts wages in the West. Multiculturalism is the inevitable, and from the elite point of view, desirable consequence of the Third-World migrant flow. Desirable, that is, because a culturally divided proletariat is much less of a threat to the elite than a united nation.
But the Saker is right about two things. First that mass migration means the complete cultural and racial extinction of the European peoples. Second, that mass immigration will continue inexorable for the foreseeable future, the reason being that, for every worker in, say, England (pop. 53 million), there will certainly be many better qualified people (higher IQ, more energy, more ambition, little if any commitment to workers’ rights, etc.) in the Third World (pop. 5 billion plus), who are paid a fraction of what an English worker is paid. And among these potential migrants, rickshaw drivers earning a dollar or two a day, for example, there will always be some ready, if they are permitted, to migrate to London to earn twenty or thirty dollars an hour driving a bus? And naturally, the elite welcomes such people. If the newcomers hassle the local girls, squeeze the natives out of decent housing, build mosques, etc., so what? What can the natives do about it? Nothing, as it now is clear. And if it means ever rising taxes to pay for new maternity hospitals, roads, schools, etc., that's very satisfactory: it keeps the construction industry prosperous and it allows a growing bureaucracy to soak up the educated middle class who might otherwise begin to think seriously about what is going on. And if the net result is that the native working class becomes an underclass — i.e., white trash despised by all and sundry, again, so what? There’s not a damn thing they can do about it: the supposedly left-wing workers parties being funded by the same plutocratic donors as the so-called conservative parties.
As for the Saker's assertion that the genocide of the Western nations is an Anglo-Zionist Money Power plot, that is just thoughtless conspiracy theory. One might as absurdly impute the Rothschild's or the Illuminati. Many members of the elite are Jews, for sure, but many are Anglos, and many more are Asians, Middle-Easterners or Africans. The issue is that genocide by immigration and multiculturalism pays. The ethnicity of the genocidal elite is irrelevant.
———
* An understanding of the change in relationship between the landowning classes in Britain, i.e., the elite, and the common folk that occurred with the industrial revolution was provided by Adam Smith in his treatise on economics. There he explained that, before the industrial revolution, there was close kinship between the upper and lower classes due to differential mortality between the rich and the poor. Overall, the population remained relatively constant, but because of high child mortality, the poor failed to fully reproduce themselves and the resulting population deficit was made up by the excess fertility of the rich. Thus, the rich were permanently downward mobile with two results. First, most of the rich had poor relatives for whom they had a personal sympathy, second the poor, many not so long descended from the rich, tended to adhere to the conservative values of their better off relatives. These factors made for a united nation. This unity fractured with the rise of the urban working class, which though living in seeming squalor and bestial ignorance, achieved well above replacement reproductive rates and which, as it swelled in number, adopted socialistic ideas. Thus, in purely hereditary terms, the industrial proletariat became much more distant from the elites than had been the rural poor of the pre-industrial era. In addition the political ambitions of the proletariat came to threaten the security of the elite, as they do to this day.
This is how independence-minded Poles view the EU. The management of an "independent" Scottish triviality would, presumably, not be handled by Der Fuhrer personally as in the case of Poland, but delegated to some minor, Eichmann-like functionary, to dispose of the nationalist rabble by the most modern means — fertility suppression through sex "education," ad-lib Murdoch-media and Internet porn, plus mass immigration.
Germans opposed to cultural genocide by mass immigration
Germany has less than five million female citizens between the ages of 20 and 30, so by opening the door to one million young, middle-eastern, Islamic males, with millions more to come, the Merkel government has cuckolded the male youth of Germany.
German demographics
Presumably the intention is to follow this with ever more energetic promotion of homosexuality as an outlet for the cucked, while welcoming Islam, a faith that sanctions the brutal execution of homosexuals, as a religion of peace and love eminently compatible with European civilization.
This is a policy of suicidal madness, driven by what appears to be the genocidal self-hatred of Frau Merkel, a leader whose family name might be Treason. At the height of the Cold War, her father, Horst Kasner, emigrated from West Germany to Communist East Germany, where he established a "sympathetic" relationship with the Communist regime, which rewarded him with various privileges including two cars. Meantime, the young Angela joined the Communist Youth. Later, at the East German Academy of Sciences, the future Chancellor of Germany became a member of the Free German Youth district board and secretary for "Agitprop" (Agitation and Propaganda). But then East Germany was re-united with West Germany wherupon Angela Merkel morphed easily into a democrat: the rest, as they say, being history.
And history brings us to yesterday's riots in Leipzig, the home of Angela Merkel's East German Communist youth, where hundreds rampaged through the town smashing ethnic restaurants. This, the Daily Mail, and no doubt the rest of the Presstitute media, attributes to "far right-wing elements." There's a problem with this part of the MSM narrative, however, as the New York Times revealed when quoting the "Influential Hamburg broadcaster NDR," which is that such crimes (the sexual assaults committed on News Year's Eve by Muslim "refugees" in Cologne and other German cities):
threaten to push xenophobia toward the "middle of the population" — which could lead to a backlash against refugees.
Meaning that the furious reaction of Germans to state engineered invasion is not a manifestation of far right wingism, but is driven by the the natural and inevitable anger of the vast majority of German people and thus defeats the heretofor successful boiling frogs method of genocide by importing a new people. When virtually the entire population is aroused to anger, calling them far-right-wing extremists exposes the media hacks not only as liars but as stupid fools.
What's more, the New York Times, normally a leader of the cucks, seems to be losing its nerve about the promotion of European genocide by mass migration, for on January 9 an Op-Ed columnist wrote:
In the German case the important number here isn’t the country’s total population, currently 82 million. It’s the twentysomething population, which was less than 10 million in 2013 (and of course already included many immigrants). In that cohort and every cohort afterward, the current influx could have a transformative effect.
"Could have a transformative effect." LOL
How transformative depends on whether these men eventually find a way to bring brides and families to Europe as well.
Which they won't. Much better, obviously, to marry a German girl or two, or three or four, who speaks the local lingo and can protect the cuckolds from the backlash of the native population.
But it could also double or treble this migration’s demographic impact, pushing Germany toward a possible future in which half the under-40 population would consist of Middle Eastern and North African immigrants and their children.
Which is clearly the objective. Which is to say, the objective is European genocide.
But even the writer realizes that the worst outcome is inevitable, for he continues:
If you believe that an aging, secularized, heretofore-mostly-homogeneous society is likely to peacefully absorb a migration of that size and scale of cultural difference, then you have a bright future as a spokesman for the current German government.
You’re also a fool.
And continues:
Such a transformation promises increasing polarization among natives and new arrivals alike. It threatens not just a spike in terrorism but a rebirth of 1930s-style political violence.
What to do? Our panicky NY Timeser urges:
closing Germany’s borders to new arrivals for the time being. It means beginning an orderly deportation process for able-bodied young men.
And he writes:
It means giving up the fond illusion that Germany’s past sins can be absolved with a reckless humanitarianism in the present.
The last sentence giving the game away: the object of the game is the destruction of the people and culture of the Germans and the rest of the Europeans all in the name of avenging the Holocaust.
_YB15.png){kind=link}