Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘history’ Category

hqdefaultJoseph Tainter wrote a book called Collapse of Complex Societies, which I recommend. In it he argues that ‘collapse’ is basically when a complex society becomes less complex. An example would be the Soviet Union. It’s gone and now we have Russia and some other states. It ‘collapsed’ in the sense that Ukraine, Belarus and other parts were jettisoned because maintaining the whole thing was too expensive. I’m not sure if there has ever been a case where a society completely fell into a black hole.

Tainter also says that a complex society must provide ’tangible benefits’ to it’s participants otherwise they will no longer have an incentive to support the system and will look for an alternative. One tangible benefit is physical security. Another is food. If America can provide these kinds of things than I guess that means the system really does ’work’. But the disappearance of these things, like deadlines, has a way of focusing the mind.

I will say this; importing millions of non-whites, endlessly printing money and an economy which is based on ENDLESS economic growth are all linked. I believe that it is impossible to address one of those problems without addressing all of them. The GOP will not point out the first problem because they want cheap labour, White Liberals will not because they are PC, and non-whites will never address it because they view it as the source of their growing political power and they rightly understand that an America that is 60% White is still dangerous.

Who is the net consumer of resources in America? Non-Whites. Who is the net producer? Whites. If resources become scarce, what could we propose to the residents of the Red States to alleviate the economic hardship? When California goes bankrupt a lot of people in the Red States will not want to bail them out. When Chicago goes bankrupt (it will) the people of Illinois will not want to bail them out. Everyone in Michigan knows why Detroit went bankrupt.

Due to economic hardship and austerity, it will become convenient to be Pro-White. People like us will support WN on principal, but Joe 6-pack will support it because it will make his life easier. He will have more government benefits because of WN. WN means (just as one possible example) the residents of Northern California joining Oregon and then telling the rest of California to go screw themselves. It means the Red States dumping the Blue States because they are too expensive (as well as hostile).

WN is the only viable solution to our economic and political problems. In times of economic depression we need to pull together and co-operate. This is IMPOSSIBLE in a racially diverse country but the White parts of America could do it. America needs to collapse to a lower level of complexity.

In addition, as resources become scarce, competition for those resources will increase and that competition will not be just White vs. Non-White. Blacks and Latinos hate each other and have every reason to fight with each other – their political alliance is temporary. Perhaps we could propose austerity measures where one of them is given preference over the other in some way. Any successful WN movement must turn blacks and Latinos against each other – it is the logical strategy.

Mind Weapon is right to advocate the things he does because it will create Whites who will reject this system. It will create people who will, when presented with the prospect of bailing out non-white cities and states, choose to cede them to the 3rd world and maintain the land we currently have as an explicitly White nation that will not allow ANY non-white immigration.

But before we can plan any torchlight parades we need to do the groundwork for explicitly Pro-White political action and that is the Mantra. Once average White kids are saying “Anti-Racist is a codeword for Anti-White” we will have already positioned the pieces for checkmate. The Internet has destroyed across-the-board compliance with Anti-White dogma. We are starting to argue. They are censoring the comments section because of US.

In 1938 no one knew that Molotov and Ribbentrop had made that pact. Every war is won before the first shot is fired. By the time a bunch of people get together in a room and decide to form a pro-White party, all the work is done. The rest is just politics.

Read Full Post »

The Pilgrims are said to have knowingly given Indians blankets that had tiny little microscopic smallpox ‘germs’ on them. When? Well … in ‘Pilgrim times’, so around 1600 or 1700, right?

One question : When was germ theory invented?

Read Full Post »

Cathedral in Prague

Some people argue that the traditional perception of the Middle Ages ought to be revised. The image we normally have of this period is one of a ‘Dark Age’ of injustice and intellectual lethargy, where oppressed serfs in dirty rags toil on the land for the benefit of a small arrogant elite of landowners, and a dogmatic theocracy impedes every attempt at progress.

Apparently, the Middle Ages were not as ‘dark’ as previously thought. Perhaps this historical misconception is a legacy of the French Revolution, with its mad dash to destroy all that came before in order to better establish liberty, equality and brotherhood. There are many examples of invention and flowering that took place between the fall of the Roman Empire and the Enlightenment. However, these examples only serve to promote the idea that the Middles Ages weren’t so bad, and that many good things were produced at that time.

But a more compelling argument can be made for this maligned period when one considers its most prominent buildings. When tourists go to Europe to see impressive monuments, they invariably go to churches, cathedrals and the like. Though American and Japanese gawkers snap pictures of these structures because they are beautiful, they were built not only to be pleasing to the eye but to serve a very important function: They were places of worship.

In the Middle Ages great resources and effort were put into manifesting the greatness of God. Architecture, as well as art, was always linked with the spiritual. Compare this to the great buildings of today.

The skyline of most major western cities is dominated by banks and corporate offices. The ‘monuments’ of today are devoted entirely to the accumulation of money and material things. Today we consider ourselves advanced because we have more money, higher living standards, and greater rights for all citizens. Our highest ideal is the advancement of equality and to one day provide adequate financial and medical resources for everyone. We conceive of the purpose of human life as almost entirely material. At best we can only hold up bland egalitarian principals as our highest ambition – but only because they provide maximum personal happiness. No further does our thinking extend.

People in the Middle Ages saw themselves as spiritual beings, linked with their community and with God. And they took seriously the moral edicts of the Church as children did with their parents. Today, we often smirk at any talk or morals, pursue our personal agenda with the worst sort of pride, and assign prestige to the most peculiar of people.  For all the criticism we can make of the former period, it seems far less vapid than the present. When re-evaluating the Middle Ages we should not only ask if they really were so backwards, but we ought to examine our own period and ask if we are so advanced today.

Read Full Post »