Theme: Governance

  • CRITICISM OF P 1. Lack of Vital Components: This is the correct criticism. My pl

    CRITICISM OF P

    1. Lack of Vital Components: This is the correct criticism. My plan has been consistent: A moral license, a set of demands, a plan of transition and a means of insurrection. So far you can only see through the set of demands (constitution). It does not pay to release more information. The window has to move further.

    2. Lack of Reach: We have a plan. It is not useful to release it. The window has to move further.

    The window keeps moving. Unfortunately it’s started moving faster than I can…

    3. I’ll give you a warning: your conservatism (“show me, i need to understand”) is effective in resisting change only if you are in control. And it’s been a failure in resisting when you are not in control. And we lost control when women and underclasses entered the franchise. And you (we) let them into the franchise out of christian optimism during a period of windfall profits at civilizational scale – one that will never repeat again given the seizure of low hanging scientific fruits. So, I”m going to be blunt and say ‘if you need to understand to act, then you are the reason you fail.” The left just seizes a series of opportunities for incremental advancement. Your need for ‘understanding’ and ‘certainty’ is why you (conservatives) have failed. And the hand-wringing (cowards) on the right are the majority. I have studied many things not the least of which is the history of revolutions and evolutions in governance both inside the anglo european and outside it. The last time we had a political solution available to us was 1992. We have not had that solution available to us yet. it is only under extreme duress, and the inability to deny being ‘conservative and politically lazy’ that the overton window moves to the blatantly obvious. So the problem is the man in your mirror that even asks these questions rather than running to every rally, every demonstration,m every opportunity, and yes, every fight, to defend what you depend upon but really want others to solve for you so you can continue being lazy ‘conservatives’. There is no condition under which we can gain control after this next election and that is simply it. The only solution is to eliminate the optimism of the ‘white middle’ civic nationalists by evidence that they cannot contradict: the exposure of differences in groups under duress.

    4. My strategy has been to create a discussion on a proposition that serves the interest of our people regardless of disposition at the expense of the elites. It is not a ‘conservative’ strategy so much as it is a strategy neither side can envision because of their ignorance of the law, economics, and the sciences that describe the world beyond what is emotionally available to our intuitions. So, my strategy is to make a solution available and the promise of civil war so certain that it is unnecessary. But that if necessary there is the least possible resistance. This is not something new, it is the same strategy I have expressed for over a decade. And as far as I know there is no solution for engineering the operation of a government under which we can separate (and continue to speciate) yet hold this continental territory and its unique advantage in food production from competitors.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-22 11:51:00 UTC

  • ISLAMISM AND SOVIETS (NOW PERSIA AND ISLAMISM) by Radu M Oleniuc The KGB had mor

    ISLAMISM AND SOVIETS (NOW PERSIA AND ISLAMISM)

    by Radu M Oleniuc

    The KGB had more than 500 high profile agents in Islamic countries back in the 70s. They realized the potential of religious war against the US. This is the moment where long time Marxists imposed burka and grow themselves beards (remember how Egypt and Iran was back in the 70s – no fundamentalism, and how it is today). They used religion as a tactic, nothing more. In some respect, this is the same method used by some Jews who don’t know Torah, are not religious at all, sometimes they don’t even believe in God (they don’t care much about the Israel state either), but at the same time they identify as (religious) Jews to silence everyone as antisemite or even a fascist, whey someone is criticizing them.

    The dogma was intertwined with politics, and this was used as a weapon against the western world.

    The Islamists we face today learned their style of warfare from the Soviets, who established the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as “the fulcrum of the Soviet Union’s strategic approach” to world revolution, especially control of the Middle East. At the time, President Reagan was battling the Soviet empire, including its support for international terrorist groups. Lofton reminded his readers of many facts about the Soviet-supported international terrorist networks. These facts are extremely relevant today.



    Lofton wrote about and has to conclude that the modern-day Islamic terrorists we face today grew out of these communist networks that the Soviets sponsored.



    What we have learned since that time is that PLO chairman Yasser Arafat was actually a trained KGB operative. The case of Carlos the Jackal, the KGB-trained Marxist terrorist, is perhaps more significant. He converted to Islam.



    Jeff Jeffrey R. Nyquist asks, “When we learn that a leading commander in ISIL was born in the Soviet Union and trained in Russia, we ought to wonder what is really going on?” Omar al-Shishani, the Russian commander in ISIL (also known as ISIS or the Islamic State), has been reported to be the group’s overall military chief. We have heard repeatedly about Americans and Europeans fighting for ISIL, but little attention is being devoted to the Russian-speaking foreign fighters that make up the group. Their numbers are estimated at 500 or more. Omar al-Shishani is usually described as a prominent Islamic State fighter who is Chechen. In fact, he was born in the former Soviet republic of Georgia and was trained there.



    Before we jump to conclusions that Russia is on our side in fighting ISIS, it might be wise to examine the history of international terrorism, its Soviet roots, and Russia’s ties to these networks today. President Obama told “60 Minutes” on Sunday that the U.S. intelligence community had “underestimated what had been taking place in Syria.” So what do we know about this mysterious entity called ISIS? Could Russia be playing both sides in this conflict as part of a geopolitical game to safeguard its Iranian client state?



    Our media think that because the Soviet Union died and a modern Russia supposedly emerged in its place, these issues are irrelevant. But the head of this new Russia is a former KGB spy who wants to reconstitute the former Soviet Union. He invaded Ukraine. Is it really too much to believe that the Kremlin has had a hand in the rise of ISIS?

    https://www.facebook.com/oleniuc/posts/10152796343961565Updated Jan 22, 2020, 10:40 AM


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-22 10:40:00 UTC

  • PARALLELS: ISLAM AND SOVIET SOCIALISM – AND CONSEQUENCES by Radu M Oleniuc (must

    PARALLELS: ISLAM AND SOVIET SOCIALISM – AND CONSEQUENCES

    by Radu M Oleniuc (must read)

    Islam, like soviet socialism, is founded on a dual basis : on the one hand the ideological foundation, and on the other the imposition of that ideology through armed force. The combination of the two is characteristic. The earliest person to speak of this was Sima Qian, one of the greatest intellectuals in China, a historian, who was also prime minister. As an intellectual and as prime minister, he was perfectly acquainted with a system based both on ideology and on violence. In his letter to Jen An, which dates back to 91 B.C., he explains that, in such a system, there can be only two solutions :

    – physical death : you oppose the system and in that case you are killed

    – spiritual death : you pretend to believe in the ideology, and in that case you wear a mask.

    (but “the mask sticks to your face”, as Sima Qian said later in his books. The mask becomes you, and you become what you did not ever wanted to be. The whole process can last for years, or several generations, but JUST AS IT HAPPENED IN COMMUNISM, the phenomenon always ends with exactly the same results – and btw, this explains also the high approval rate of Putin, or the 99% who voted for Saddam. It’s not only fear driving these men, it’s much much more).

    Thus, according to Sima Qian, in a system founded both on force and on ideology, one can choose only between physical death and spiritual death.

    That is precisely the structure of Islam, founded both on ideology and on the use of armed force. Then there’s the interior violence that is exerted on the ‘dhimmis’, or peoples conquered by the Muslim armies, who lose all their political rights and the greater part of their civil rights, and who become foreigners in their own country. They are driven to extinction by a combination of methods.

    Throughout antiquity, and right up until the second half of the 19th century, there were fluctuations in population due either to famines, or to epidemics, or to wars. After each decline, the population would increase again until it reached its equilibrium, that is, the maximum number of people who could live on the land considering the agricultural techniques available. The Muslims built new towns, Oran, Cordoba, Cairo, etc. while slaughtering or deporting the local populations, and peopling the towns with Arabs either from the Hedjaz region or from Syria.

    It is a general phenomenon. Thus the Turkish population, initially 100% Christian, had fallen to 30% Christian by 1900, and is 0.2% Christian today. [We have the similar example of Pakistan today, or Egypt, Syria etc]

    Secular constitutions in Europe evolved and are separated from religion only where Christianity was properly applied. Because this concept exist only in this part of the world, for thousands of years. In Islam is not like that. In Islam the religion IS the state. 90% of Islam deals with civil problems, administration, regulations and so on.

    For Muslim scholars, Islam is “Dîn, Dunya, Daoula” (i.e. religion, society, state). And even a single comma is “sacred” in their book, thus cannot be changed – not like here, where we had dozens of versions (some conflicting among themselves) of the Bible. Hundreds of light years away from Virginia Convention or from “Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and to God what belongs to God”. Hundreds of years away from the “wall of separation” of Roger Williams (a priest) or later, Jefferson. This is why they will NEVER reform their states. Not to mention the fact it is enforced with the sword at every step.

    In Christianity there is the concept of sword as well (Matthew 10:34 “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace, but a sword.”). But it is not used as a violent means to something (only for defensive purposes – at his trial “bring only two swords”), and only to separate “mother from the daughter, son from father” etc. As any sin is an individual sin, not a collective one (a revolutionary concept again, at the time). And here comes individual responsibility in jurisprudence and coutumes. Yakuza and Japanese culture doesn’t understand this at all. They can pass “sins” (in the Old Greek the word for sin is debt) among others, and usually a low tier subaltern pays / takes the punishment for the boss, a habit that is so typical for any collectivist society (and this with ‘honor’ – crazy).

    This is a very long talk. At the end, I guess we must understand why Marcel Gauchet said “Christianity is the religion to end all other religions”, as it is the exit from dogma, cheap mysticism, forced morals (good by force), collectivism and so on. As all of the concepts we take from granted evolved very hard, but to conclude, we must understand why they happened ONLY in this part of the world.

    https://www.facebook.com/oleniuc/posts/10153609756561565


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-22 10:35:00 UTC

  • Sort of lost my patience with the Manginas last week. So we’re going to simply d

    Sort of lost my patience with the Manginas last week. So we’re going to simply delete Mangina Cowardice, Nihilism, Counter-Signaling into Guilt, and GSRRM, as dead weight on our people and our movement. Not worth our efforts. Intellectually honest solution seeking, questioning, and criticism only. We have to cut out the dead weight and sunk costs on losers.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-22 10:28:00 UTC

  • As far as I can tell the only value we can demonstrate by voting is to approve o

    As far as I can tell the only value we can demonstrate by voting is to approve or reject proposals by a professional government. Otherwise democracy serves only locality and homogeneity.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-21 20:25:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1219717630816399360

    Reply addressees: @gardeniabee @JohnMarkSays

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1219700489983492102


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1219700489983492102

  • This allows classes to construct trades rather than race to the bottom by majori

    This allows classes to construct trades rather than race to the bottom by majority.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-21 20:23:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1219717130465222656

    Reply addressees: @gardeniabee @JohnMarkSays

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1219716857277698048


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @gardeniabee @JohnMarkSays No. I suggest that voting is a bad thing – but that if you want it, and there are reasons you should – then we must return to houses of the classes and one of those houses being women. I also suggest houses that require responsibility so that participation is earned and valued.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1219716857277698048


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @gardeniabee @JohnMarkSays No. I suggest that voting is a bad thing – but that if you want it, and there are reasons you should – then we must return to houses of the classes and one of those houses being women. I also suggest houses that require responsibility so that participation is earned and valued.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1219716857277698048

  • No. I suggest that voting is a bad thing – but that if you want it, and there ar

    No. I suggest that voting is a bad thing – but that if you want it, and there are reasons you should – then we must return to houses of the classes and one of those houses being women. I also suggest houses that require responsibility so that participation is earned and valued.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-21 20:22:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1219716857277698048

    Reply addressees: @gardeniabee @JohnMarkSays

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1219700489983492102


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1219700489983492102

  • Sets the strategy to pursue specific rights based claims rather than vague ident

    … Sets the strategy to pursue specific rights based claims rather than vague identitarianism. 5) time to compose set of rights that include self determination 6) then to escalate to demand for separation. From there we gather momentum.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-21 17:02:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1219666525709312000

    Reply addressees: @NewRightAmerica

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1219666082098794496


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @NewRightAmerica Hey: It was useful. 1) Lots of guys lots of guns, well organized, peaceful – because no antifa. Evidence we can use that it’s them, not us. 2) Did a Reset on C’ville/Portland. Up to others to explain why we’re not violent. 3) Demonstrates show of number even on workdays. 4) …

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1219666082098794496


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @NewRightAmerica Hey: It was useful. 1) Lots of guys lots of guns, well organized, peaceful – because no antifa. Evidence we can use that it’s them, not us. 2) Did a Reset on C’ville/Portland. Up to others to explain why we’re not violent. 3) Demonstrates show of number even on workdays. 4) …

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1219666082098794496

  • Hey: It was useful. 1) Lots of guys lots of guns, well organized, peaceful – bec

    Hey: It was useful. 1) Lots of guys lots of guns, well organized, peaceful – because no antifa. Evidence we can use that it’s them, not us. 2) Did a Reset on C’ville/Portland. Up to others to explain why we’re not violent. 3) Demonstrates show of number even on workdays. 4) …


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-21 17:00:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1219666082098794496

    Reply addressees: @NewRightAmerica

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1219664851368390661


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1219664851368390661

  • SOME THOUGHTS ON THE RICHMOND RALLY by Julian le Roux 1. We couldn’t have hoped

    SOME THOUGHTS ON THE RICHMOND RALLY

    by Julian le Roux

    1. We couldn’t have hoped for a better outcome.

    2. I was expecting much smaller attendance and at least some serious conflict.

    3. Amazing demonstration of the level of self-control, civilization (and conviviality to boot) amongst the Right.

    4. Further to (3), I imagine the Left / media will have a very hard time manipulating or memory-holing such a unambiguous message.

    5. Overwhelming safety-in-numbers should provide a huge boost to morale and willingness to participate.

    6. The show of force has ensured that no-one can claim that they weren’t *respectfully* warned about the Rights’ commitment and seriousness. The fact that a clear message has been sent, supports the Right moral justification should future events require stronger action.

    7. The ball has moved forward substantially for Peaceful Separation, and the rally has opened up new avenues to normalize that narrative.

    8. It’s become easier to assert that the Right Desires Peace.

    9. Again, being able to claim the mantle of Peace helps to draw in more normies and shift them towards our position.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-01-21 16:20:00 UTC