—“….take heed how you impawn our person,
How you awake our sleeping sword of war.
We charge you in the name of God, take heed,
For never …. kingdoms did contend
Without much fall of blood, whose guiltless drops
Are every one a woe, a sore complaint
‘Gainst him whose wrong gives edge unto the swords
That make such waste in brief mortality.”—
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-28 04:29:00 UTC
—“It was precisely this domestication of men and women into family units that propelled Europeans forward. That the Germans were more monogamously disciplined than the Celts is why they went on to be the source of Northern European success, more so than the Irish. The eugenic footprint can be seen even to this day.”— Josh Jeppson
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-28 00:38:00 UTC
“Leftist, Facebook virtue-signaling, bed-wetting, mom’s basement dwellers”
“Scotland’s main exports are mediocre whiskey and heroine addicts.”
“Who knew that calling people racist repeatedly would’t work?”
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-26 05:44:00 UTC
—“This article argues that revolutionary leaders are more willing to commit mass killing than nonrevolutionary leaders. Revolutionary leaders are more ideologically committed to transforming society, more risk tolerant, and more likely to view the use of violence as appropriate and effective. Furthermore, such leaders tend to command highly disciplined and loyal organizations, built in the course of revolutionary struggles, that can perpetrate mass killing. This study uses time series cross-sectional data from 1955 to 2004 to demonstrate that revolutionary leaders are more likely to initiate genocide or politicide than nonrevolutionary leaders. The violent behaviors of revolutionary leaders are not limited to the immediate postrevolutionary years but also occur later in their tenure. This demonstrates that the association of revolutionary leaders and mass killing is not simply indicative of postrevolutionary instability. This article also provides evidence for the importance of exclusionary ideologies in motivating revolutionary leaders to inflict massive violence.”—
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-24 19:31:00 UTC
“EUROPE’S BRUTAL HANGOVER IS INEVITABLE”
“The individual can make all the difference.” One man, open-minded and curious, did very well for himself. By what he learned from his (independent) studies in economics, he was enabled to predict the approximate arrival time of the 2008 housing boom. By then, he had become a successful finance professional. Afterwards, in 2010, Michael Burry courageously took out an ad in the NYT and publicly asked the Federal Reserve and Congress what their excuse was for not predicting the collapse, for their negligence. Soon his company was harassed by government agents in various ways, which cost him millions of dollars in legal fees. LISTEN TO THE BALANCE OF HIS SPEECH, ESPECIALLY THE CONCLUSION.
And I really like zerohedge’ lead in: Infamous for his prediction of the great recession, Europe’s demise, and the collapse of the US financial system (as well as profiting extremely handsomely from said predictions), so well captured in Michael Lewis’ book “The Big Short”, UCLA’s Dr. Michael Burry undertakes UCLA’s Economics Department’s commencement speech with much aplomb. In this “age of infinite distraction”, the astounding truthiness of this 15 minute speech is stunning from single-sentence summation of Europe’s convulsions that “when the entitled elect themselves, the party accelerates, and the brutal hangover is inevitable” he reminds us that Californians, and indeed all Americans, should take note. A quarter-of-an-hour well spent from a self-described ‘chicken-little’ who was “just trying to figure it all out”.
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-24 12:14:00 UTC
—-“You. on the other hand, have that horse-face thing going on that says your female progenitors had to pick males impulsively – if they weren’t scullery maids who took seed involuntarily.”—
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-22 16:57:00 UTC
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-2-pro-nazi-nobelists-attacked-einstein-s-jewish-science-excerpt1/LETS CORRECT HISTORY A BIT
(I will get hate mail over this rather grand deflowering)
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-2-pro-nazi-nobelists-attacked-einstein-s-jewish-science-excerpt1/
Some of us have to clean up history a bit:
(1) There is nothing strange about a popular political movement generating crackpots, and the state not shutting down the crackpots. I mean, world academia is full of them. We don’t even have to get to bloggers, and newsletters and their progenitors.
(2) Naziism was an aesthetic movement in the same way that socialism was a pseudoscientific movement, or the movements of religiosity of prior eras. All movements create nonsense mythos. Nazis were not unique.
(3) Hitler’s mistake was purely military. And had nothing to do with his attempt to ‘cleanse’ the population of cosmopolitan, bolshvik, and socialist activism. Germany’s enlightenment, thanks ot the failures of Kant and his followers, was incomplete and just reaching maturity under Wagner, Nietzsche and their contemporaries. The Ashkenazi enlightenment (Jewish enlightenment) arrived just as the German was peaking, but beause it was commercial where the german was cultural and aesthetic, was able to take advantage of new technologies and far lower cost of distribution of propaganda. The cosmopolitan (socialist) vision was not compatible with the german (hierarchical duty), and to some degree, this “Clash of Civilizations” turned out to be a war over the soul (Germany) of Europe. The two battling cultures (german heartland agrarian, and borderland diasporic Jewish) fought with their historical methods: germans with war and jews with propaganda. The bolshevik-cum-Stalinist Russians took advantage of this weakness, in hopes of not only seizing the borderlands, as they had the land east of the Urals, but possibly the german heartland as well. Had not the Americans intervened and de facto conquered and colonized Europe, that clash between agrarian hierarchy and cosmopolitan socialism would have been settled with that war. Hitler’s war was a civil war between the Jewish/Slavic borderlands previously held by Russia/Poland/Lithuania and their borderland enlightenment, and the ancient germanic martial civilization, and their heartland enlightenment and the bolshevik-stalinist fantasies of russia to escape third tier status among the great powers. The rest of us were just players until Hitler moved west – easily baited by the Russians into entrapping himself with Poland. His error was that he did not understand the stakes, any more than the Americans did. And in both world wars, Americans most likely fought ont he wrong side. It was germany that was trying to protect the west, as she had for millennia against invasion from the east.
(4) Had Hitler attacked Bolshevism, and had he not exhausted his resources so that the ‘ex-patriation’ camps did not become slave-labor and finally death camps, he would have accomplished the same ends by militarily, politically, and morally defensible means that we today would still find substantive. The British invented the idea of using camps as processing centers, the Nazi’s adopted it, and the Russians industrialized it. And the Chinese merely circumvented it by direct, outright killing opponents wherever they could find them – setting china back into destitution from which western influence by example, finally extracted them.
(5) The postwar propaganda campaign was probably appropriate, if not necessary, for the era in which so much cost was born by citizens, but has been overplayed since the early sixties – so much so that we are at risk at present (I monitor the scholarship) of reversing the historical narrative.
History will look at these events very differently in a century than we do now and the above narrative is more likely to be the one that survives and endures.
It’s my job to tell people unpleasant truths about their moral fantasies. I don’t particularly like the fact that my people have largely been wrong about everything they have done since the grand accident of the Louisianna Purchase.
But truth is merciless to all of us.
There is just as much pseudoscience if not more among Jewish intellectuals than there was ever imagined by the Nazis. And the difference is that no one took nazi propaganda seriously other than the semi literate, but the entire western intellectual and political system embraced jewish pseudoscience enthisiastically simply becuase it was better written ‘crackpot’ pseudoscience.
Boazian antropology = anti-Darwinian pseuoscience.
Freudian psychology = anti-Nietzschean pseudoscience.
Marxism / Socialism = anti-Economic pseudoscience.
Leninism = Justification of totalitarianism and murder.
Trotskyism = Justification of totalitarianism and murder
The Frankfurt School = anti-Spencerian sociological pseudoscience
Postmodernism = resorting to lying and repetition by propaganda having failed with pseudoscience.
Neo-Conservatism = Leo Strauss and his followers, attempting to use the german kantian technique of pseudo-rationalism to load, frame, and overload, and thereby decieve.
Let us assess the damage done by:
The Anglo struggle for its enlightenment: worldwide expansion. (an empirical one)
The French struggle for its enlightenment (the massacres of the French revolution, and the tyranny of napoleon), ( a romantic one) and its replacement of the existing nobility with a new bureaucratic one.
The Russian struggle for its enlightenment (a literary one)and its truncation by Bolsheviks.
The German struggle for its enlightenment (a philosophical one) and failure to transition to the empirical.
The second german struggle for its enlightenment (an aesthetic one)
The Jewish struggle for its enlightenment (a pseudoscientific one)
How many of these enlightenments were stopped dead by the Jewish pseudoscientific enlightenment?
How many more murders and how much more suffering was caused by the success of the Jewish pseudoscientific enlightenment, it’s conquest of Russia, it’s failed conquest of Germany, it’s failed conquest of China, it’s existing hinderance of Indian political development, and the saturation of the formerly great academies of the west with pseudoscience?
So let us not revel in self-compliment and congratulate ourselves on our moral standing when we are greater fools than those few who found purchase in such nonsense. You cannot compare the ineffectual propaganda of the Nazi fringe in support of anti-bolshevism and anti-cosmopolitanism in a fight over control of the borderlands with the extremely effective propaganda of the Jewish pseudosciences, and the 100m dead, and billiions idoctrinated into falsehoods because of them.
Look at the crisis the resistance to the enlightenment is causing in the Islamic world. They’ve been fighting it since they started suppressing knowledge and expanding Islam to the masses in the thirteenth century.
Civil wars, and border wars, and clashes of civilizations are bloody things. The fact that some of us fight more with armies(germans), some of us fight more with economics (anglos), some of us fight more with fabricated religions and pseudoscience (jews), some of us fight with reproduction and raiding (Islam), some of us fight with parasitism (gypsies), is just a matter of the resources and populations at our disposal.
Nothing more. We are all in competition. Cooperation is merely useful or it is not. Thankfully it is usually more useful than not.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine.
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-22 16:25:00 UTC
—“There are in nature neither rewards nor punishments — there are consequences.” —-Ingersoll H/T William Butchman
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-21 09:17:00 UTC