Category Archives: East Timor

by | February 18, 2015 · 6:07 PM

One Reason the World Hates Israel So Much

James Schipper writes:

Syria isn’t hostile to Israel because of the Palestinians but because of the Golan Heights. I think that the Syrians would have been much better off if they had just renounced their claim to the Golan Heights in return for financial compensation from Israel and a right to receive part of the water of that region.

That land was acquired during a war waged by Israel. A state may no longer wage war on other states and annext their land to expand their own state. Wars of territorial expansion are banned for now and evermore by the UN. And it dosen’t matter what sort of war it is. You cannot annex another state’s land, even if they attacked you and not the other way around. It is simply forbidden. This is one reason why the whole world is united against Israel and you see all those 150-3 votes in the UN. Israel is probably the only state that has waged war on another state and conqurered, annexed and settled that lands acquired in a war of territorial expansion.

Name one other state that has waged war on another nation and then conquered, annexed and settled lands confiscated by arms during the war since 1945. I cannot think of one single state that waged waged a successful war of territorial expansion since the end of World War 2. If my readers are aware of one, please let me know.

As you can see, Israel is one of the world’s prime international scofflaws. Indonesia and Morocco have almost as many votes against them as Israel does for similar reasons. Morocco conquered, annexed and settled the former Spanish colony of Spanish Sahara when Spain set them free. You are not allowed to do that. Indonesia waged a war of aggression against the former Portuguese colony of East Timor, and then conquered, annexed and settled it. They then waged a long civil war in which 1/3 of the population were killed. The US supported and armed Indonesia during this whole war.

As you can see, three of the world’s worst international scofflaws have all been massively sanctioned for the same crime, waging wars of territorial expansion on neighboring states, confiscating the neighbor’s lands by force during the conflict and then annexing and settling the lands.

Israel is thumbing her nose and giving the finger to the whole world, and the world gets madder and madder by the day. And why does Israel get to become an international criminal state and get away with it. Because they got killed in the Ho-lo-caust. They got genocided, so now they get to be as sociopathic and evil as they want to. Screw that.

5 Comments

Filed under Africa, Asia, East Timor, Indonesia, Israel, Israel-Palestine Conflict, Law, Middle East, Morocco, North Africa, Palestine, Regional, SE Asia, Syria, War

by | October 19, 2012 · 12:03 AM

“Why We Are Afraid, A 1400 Year Secret,” by Dr Bill Warner

This is a video by an Islamophobic (he calls himself a counter-jihadist) far rightwing activist in the US. As such, it rubs me the wrong way. I don’t like US reactionary Islamophobia. It’s retarded.

On the other hand, most of what this reactionary scholar says about Islam is true. The Muslims are in a similar situation with US Blacks. Just as the behavior of Blacks gives ammunition to their haters, the same is true with Muslims. If so many Blacks and Muslims didn’t act so bad in the first place, there would be little hatred and discrimination against them.

Hence it’s a sad fact about Islam that much of what Islamophobes accuse it of is actually true. This is especially true if we look at Islam historically as opposed in its moderated essence. The era of the Caliphates when all of Islam lived under Islamic Law shows us the true essence of Islam. The modern secular era and the reactionary Islamist backlash against it is but a distortion.

The scholar points out the obvious: The Golden Age of Islam in Spain and Baghdad was anything but. It was only tolerant and open-minded in comparison to the backwardness and reactionary stupidity that preceded and followed these eras.

To be fair, most religions have been pretty backwards in a historical sense. The Catholic Church committed many outrages against heretics and even the advancement of science.

Traditional Talmudic Judaism in Europe was a miasma of backwardness, superstition and stupidity under a “dictatorship of the rabbis” as Israel Shahak painfully points out. It is this prison of idiocy that the formation of Orthodox Judaism in the late 1800’s sought to return the Jews to, and it is this nightmare of totalitarian nonsense that the Reform and Conservative Jews want to swim away from.

Jews only began to climb out of this hole when Napoleon tore down the walls of the ghettos and welcomed the Jews into secular society. Through the 19th Century, most progressive thinkers regarded the Jews that emerged from centuries in the ghetto as damaged creatures in need of assimilation to society to heal them.

But back to the video.

Warner points out that Islam has always been an expansionist religion.

Those of my mother’s generation, wise and correct about so many things, often said, “Islam was spread by the sword. It was convert or die.” This is not completely true, but there is much fact behind this. Muslims did not always offer that stark choice to the conquered or the dhimmis, but they offered it often enough. In jihadi-stricken areas today, Muslims continue to occasionally make this demand of infidels. We have some recent reports out of Iraq of such demands.

Even after conquest, repression and dhimmitude slowly withered away non-Muslim majorities down to the tiniest of minorities. This constant repression was combined with occasional massacres and even horrific and sometimes genocidal wars.

Once again, let us look to our elders.

Those in my mother’s generation noted about the Armenian genocide and the genocide in East Timor: “Yes, but the Turks were killing the Armenians because they were Christians. And the Indonesians were killing the East Timorese because they were Christians.” I, being PC, protested this forbidden account, but my elders just shook their heads. “No, they killed them because they were Christians. That’s how Islam works.”

We who went through the revolutions of the 1960’s ridicule our elders as old fashioned and bigoted fogeys. We have carved out a new way, a way of liberation, Political Correctness. But it turns out in so many ways that our elders were right, and we revolutionaries were wrong. Among other things, my elders understood the nature of Islam.

Warner points out correctly that not only was Islam spread by sword, it made continuous raids on neighboring non-Muslim regions including Europe. The attempts were to conquer them for the Muslims. He also suggests that the Dark Ages were caused by Islam’s war on Christian Europe. That is certainly a provocative topic in our PC times, but he may be correct. He also points out that the wars of conquest never really ended until the fall of the Caliphate in 1918.

Where I feel he is wrong is in assigning all modern Islamist attacks to jihadi attempts to conquer the infidels. Instead, most such wars are occurring in Muslim lands or in majority Muslim lands in non-Muslim states. Examples are the jihads in Southern Thailand, Southern Philippines and northern Nigeria. In all of these wars, sickening slaughters of non-Muslim civilians have taken place for no other reason than “kill the infidels.”

The horrific bombings in India appear to be some sort of a “war on the infidels.” Most other jihadi attacks are attacks on non-Muslim minorities in Muslim lands (typical Muslim persecution of minorities that tends to go on as background under Muslim rule.)

I disagree with Warner that the attacks in Europe are jihadi attacks aimed at conquering Europe for the infidels. Instead, the attacks seem to be Muslim retaliatory attacks against Western wars in Muslim lands (say Iraq) and against non-Muslims who harshly criticize Islam (Theo Van Gogh killing.)

The 9-11 attacks were not attempt to violently convert us as so many misguided folks think (including my Mother’s generation). Instead, Al Qaeda attacked the US as an enemy state that was killing the Muslims in various parts of the world, propping up the Israeli enemy and occupying the Holy Land of Saudi Arabia.

It’s a sad state of affairs when the only people who are complaining about this backwards, violent and barbaric religion are backwards, violent, barbaric, and often-Christian reactionaries in the West. This ideological war is really a war of reactionaries against reactionaries, one fundamentalist group against another.

Amidst all of this, the secular Left, ostensibly opposed to obscurantist barbarism, has lined up with one set of reactionaries (the Islamists) against the other set (fundamentalist Christians). It makes no sense. A reactionary fundamentalist is a reactionary fundamentalist. The flavors matter little as it all digests the same in the end.

22 Comments

Filed under Africa, Armenia, Catholicism, Christianity, Conservatism, East Timor, Europe, European, History, India, Islam, Islamic, Judaism, Left, Near East, Nigeria, Philippines, Political Science, Radical Islam, Regional, Religion, SE Asia, South Asia, Terrorism, Thailand, West Africa

by | February 17, 2011 · 2:45 AM

Settler Criminals Not Innocent Civilians

Repost from the old site.

Via Joachim Martillo, we have this interesting piece, Settler Criminals Not Innocent Civilians, on the attack on the Yeshivat Merkaz haRav in Jerusalem that killed 8 young Israeli male yeshiva students. There are some errors in this piece.

Yohai Livshitz and Neria Cohen are from Jerusalem, but according to Martillo, they both live in land colonized by the Israelis in East Jerusalem after 1967. This never-ending theft of Palestinian land in East Jerusalem is an ongoing project that is rarely remarked on in the US press. Like most settler issues, it gets orders of magnitude more press in Israel than the US. In this sense, the US is much more of a “Jewish state” than Israel.

Although Martillo justifies this attack, I have a hard time doing so. The attacker definitely picked a pretty good target, but the problem is that half of the students are minors. If it can be proven that these young men were involved in violence against Palestinians in the Territories, perhaps that makes them a target, but I am not sure.

As it stands, four of the eight males killed were adults and one of those was a resident of Israel proper. That does leave Yonadav Haim Hirschfeld, Yohai Lifshitz, and Roee Roth as legitimate targets, but three out of eight is not so good.

Martillo also notes that when he visited the yeshiva, well over half of the student body was over 20 years old. This would imply that the attack could have been justified in the planning phase. You’re still attacking adults with a bunch of minors mixed in, and I’m not sure that is ok.

My position is simple. Targeting of adult settlers in the Territories is right and proper. They are living on stolen land the natives have a right to drive them off with force. I feel sorry for those that are too poor to move, but there may not be many like that. I do feel that minor settlers should not be targeted, for the simple reason that they have no choice about whether or not to occupy stolen land – that is their parents’ decision.

Theoretically, when they are 18, they can decide to move away from the Territories and back inside the Green Line. That may not be possible in many cases, but at least they have the potential option not be living on stolen land.

This would at least accord some civility to this settler-native conflict, in line with Native American practice in defending their lands. It is true that Native Americans did kill some minors, they often captured women and children and took them to live with the Indians. I am not sure whether Native Americans would have killed teenagers or not. Boys grew up awful fast on the frontier.

Sadly, the Palestinian resistance has deliberately targeted kids, even babies and infants, from Day One. One wonders how they justify as 2-year-old as a “settler”. Come on.

Unfortunately, most Palestinian groups are targeting Israeli civilians inside the Green Line. Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Resistance Committees, the PFLP and the Al Aqsa Martyr’s Brigades all do this.

Fatah always condemns such attacks (especially Abbas, as Arafat was not so sincere) but their armed wing, the Al Aqsa Martyr’s Brigades, continues to engage in these attacks. Truth is that the AAMB is probably a pretty autonomous organization these days.

For those who find all this queasy and still want to support the Palestinians, there is always the DFLP. This small group only targets Israelis in the Territories. I guess theoretically they target military targets inside the Green Line, but in practice they hardly do this.

This group does carry out armed attacks, usually in conjunction with other armed groups, often Hamas. The DFLP is a staunchly secular armed group that split from the PFLP in 1969 in part due to their queasiness over the PFLP’s Arab nationalism. The DFLP had the typical Leftist worries about ethnic nationalism in general as leading to fascism.

Their leader is Nayef Hawatmeh, a Jordanian Christian. Originally, they pushed Maoism, but I think they have junked that recently. There are regular calls for the merger of the PFLP and the DFLP, but these never go anywhere, mostly due to the PFLP’s reluctance. The DFLP has a presence, armed and otherwise, in Gaza.

Hawatmeh met with an Israeli leader on a stage in the 1990’s and shook the Israeli’s hand. The PFLP, ultimate hardliners, condemned this act. George Habash, asked about his opinion of this, said, “Absolute condemnation!”

On to this attack on the yeshiva. This is looking more and more like a Hezbollah hit. The group named was the Imad Mughniyeh Liberators of Galilee. It looks like this was a revenge attack for the killing of Imad Mughniyeh by Israeli in Damascus recently.

The only announcement of responsibility occurred on Hezbollah TV, and the name Imad Mughniyeh portends a Hezbollah link. Hezbollah has deep links to the Israeli Arabs of North Israel. Galilee is the part of northern Israel that has a large Israeli Arab population.

In recent years, there has been a sickening process of Judaization, in which Jewish towns are built to encircle and close off most Arab villages, towns and cities. It’s ethnic warfare by any definition, and is typical of extremely racist settlement policies practiced by states against separatist movements – i.e. Indonesia in East Timor and West Papua, China in Tibet, Morocco in Spanish Sahara and Syria in the Kurdish North.

It looks like Hezbollah used an Israeli Arab from Jerusalem who had an Israeli ID card in this attack. He was dressed up as a haredi when he carried it out. The attack was pretty bloody, but war is a nasty thing. We knew there were going to be paybacks for Mugniyeh’s killing, and that’s what this looks like. This may be the end or there may be more.

I do not buy the typical Arab line that it is ok to kill a bunch of Israeli civilians because Israel killed some Palestinian civilians, but it’s typical Arab thinking. Arabs are incapable, like most of the world’s people, of fighting by the rules of war laid down by the West.

Furthermore, guerrillas are seriously limited in their ability to fight fair in war. Guerrillas try to fight by the rules of war and they will probably just get massacred. The only way to even the fight is probably to go “asymmetrical”, as Iraq War speak described terrorism.

The rockets coming out of Gaza seem increasingly nihilistic, but I think there is a method to Hamas’ madness. I think that Hamas really wants a cease fire or truce out of this, but Israel won’t even sit down and talk to them. That Hamas even talks of a truce at all shows their maturation as an organization from a terrorist group into a more mature political entity.

Israel refuses to talk to them on the basis that Hamas agree to three conditions:

  • Renounce violence
  • Recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state
  • Agree to all past agreements between the Palestinians and Israel

Hamas will not agree to any of these things, not now, not ever. As Israel will not renounce violence, I do not see why Hamas should either. Hamas will never recognize Israel as a Jewish state, and will not agree to past agreements negotiated by Fatah.

But Israel ought to talk to them anyway. The stronger parties in guerrilla wars, typically states, tend to refuse to talk with guerrillas. It’s the language of strength talking.

In addition to a cease fire, Hamas also wants some sort of a role in regulating traffic flow back and forth from Egypt to Gaza. This may not be as bad as it sounds, but when Hamas bashed down the fence a while back, they also used that opportunity to smuggle in Iranian Grad rockets that they have been firing at the Israeli towns of Ashkelon and Ashdod.

Israel is reluctant to do anything that will make it easier for Hamas to smuggle high-powered weaponry into Gaza. They also claim that Hamas will just use a truce, which Hamas acknowledges can be lifted at any time (the concept of hudna in Islamic law) to rearm and then to attack Israel later with much more powerful weapons.

Tit for tat, it goes on and on in the Middle East. Cycle of violence is a cliche, but there is no better word.

This yeshiva was founded by the son of Rabbi Kook, the most famous Israeli religious Zionist. Originally, Zionism was a secular movement, but Kook the elder, a Lithuanian Jew who came to Palestine in the early 1920’s, introduced the concept of religious Zionism.

At this time and until after World War 2, most Jews, and surely most Orthodox Jews, opposed Zionism as some sort of religious heresy at best and a very bad idea at worst.

The religious Zionists have become some of the most fanatical of all. Many of them feel that the Israeli state is illegitimate in the same way that Islamists feel that secular Muslim states are illegitimate. The Jewish state must be religious and the Muslim state must be also. Some of them refuse to fly the Israeli flag and others try to get out of paying taxes.

Many religious Jews are supported by the state to just study all the time. The secular Israelis regard this as a complete waste of manpower and money. There is quite a bit of bad blood between religious and secular Jews in Israel and even in the Diaspora.

Settler Criminals Not Innocent Civilians

by Joachim Martillo

In the Occupied Territories Palestinians are squeezed between the mostly off-camera aggressive anti-Arab violence of the settlers and the official theoretically defensive violence of the IDF.

Jews in Occupied Poland circa 1940 had a similar situation, for they were subject to alternating and sometimes combined SS and Wehrmacht violence.

Yeshivat Merkaz haRav is the flagship educational institution of Gush Emunim nowadays called Faithful of the Land of Israel (נאמני ארץ ישראל, neemanei eretz yisrael). It is the ideological command center for the Settler Movement

The ideology of Yeshivat Merkaz haRav is generally called religious nationalist, but it really educates its students in the occult mystical intellectual current of Zionism.

This Yeshiva is essentially a college level seminary with a large graduate (kollel) program. The students eventually develop an almost mythographic mentality

  • that rewrites reality to support a nearly psychotic set of extremist fanatic beliefs and
  • that puts them beyond any rational persuasion.

The students are often in combined military-Talmudic study programs. Many carry weapons and are involved in brutalizing or in abusing the native population in the Occupied Territories.

Yeshivat Merkaz haRav under US law would be considered a combined terrorist training and indoctrination center if the same laws applied to Jews that apply to everyone else.

Traditionally in Eastern Europe the best students were already immersed in deep Talmud study by bar mitzvah (13), but combined “religious nationalist” military-Talmudic study programs usually run for about 5-6 years, generally start at around age 15-16, and involve about 16 months of official military service with some physical and military training before official induction.

Here is the list of the students killed:

  • Doron Meherete, 26 years old
  • Yonadav Haim Hirschfeld, settler, 19 years old
  • Yohai Lifshitz, settler, 18 years old
  • Roee Roth, settler, 18 years old
  • Yonatan Yitzhak Eldar, settler, 16 years old
  • Avraham David Moses, settler, 16 years old
  • Neria Cohen, settler, 15 years old, and
  • Segev Peniel Avihail, settler, 15 years old.

In his completely legitimate act of resistance against the Zionist state currently breaking all just war standards in Gaza, Alaa Abu Dhein unlike the IDF carefully chose targets among willing participants, activists, and trainees in the commission of atrocities. He is to be commended for choice of target and for tohar haneshek (Hebrew: purity of arms).

2 Comments

Filed under Africa, Amerindians, Arabs, Asia, China, Colonialism, East Timor, Education, Egypt, Higher Education, Indonesia, Israel, Israel-Palestine Conflict, Jewish Racism, Judaism, Kurds, Middle East, Morocco, Nationalism, Near Easterners, North Africa, Palestine, Palestinians, Political Science, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Religion, Reposts From The Old Site, SE Asia, Settler-Colonialism, Syria, Terrorism, The Jewish Question, Tibet, War, West Papua, Zionism

by | January 23, 2011 · 5:00 AM

“Joys of Muslim Women,” by Nonie Darwish

Some of this stuff is a bit over to the top, and I edited out about 15% of the text that I thought was complete crap. Nevertheless, most of what remains seems to be true.

Some of the stuff I removed: that Muslims are preparing a jihad against the West, apparently to convert us to Islam? I don’t agree with that. They think some of us are attacking Islam, so they are counterattacking. Another line said that in 20 years, there will be enough Muslims in North America to elect the President and Prime Minister of the US and Canada. No way is that true. It isn’t really true that non-Muslims are supposed to be killed or subjugated by Muslims, though there is a bit of truth to that.

Under Muslim rule, non-Muslims are clearly subordinate. But where Muslims are the minority, that is not the case. Muslims are supposed to try to convert and increase their numbers so they can be a majority.

Apparently conquest in the name of Islam – aggressive jihad – we have not seen that much in recent years. One exception is Southern Sudan. There have been some genocides of non-Muslims too – Greeks, Assyrians and Armenians in Anatolia, Catholics in East Timor.

In areas with a Muslim majority trying to secede from the state, it’s typically “kill the non-Muslims.” This is the case in the Southern Philippines, Thailand, the Moluccas, Chechnya and Kashmir. There have been localized massacres of non-Muslims in India, Iraq, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Bangladesh and Pakistan.

Muslim jihad is a complicated subject, and saying they want to kill us or convert us is a bit ridiculous, though that was more or less what was going on South Sudan, and there have been some cases of that in Iraq and Pakistan recently.

Joys of Muslim Women

by Nonie Darwish

In the Muslim faith a Muslim man can marry a child as young as 7 year old, consummating the marriage by 9. The dowry is given to the family in exchange for the woman (who becomes his slave) and for the purchase of the private parts of the woman, to use her as a toy.

To prove rape, the woman must have (4) male witnesses. Often after a woman has been raped, the family has the right to execute her (an honor killing) to restore the honor of the family. Husbands can beat their wives ‘at will, and the man does not have to say why he has beaten her.

The husband is permitted to have 4 wives and a temporary wife for an hour (prostitute) at his discretion.

The Shariah Muslim law controls the private as well as the public life of the woman.

In the Western World (America), Muslim men are starting to demand Shariah Law so the wife can not obtain a divorce and he can have full and complete control of her. It is amazing and alarming how many of our sisters and daughters attending US and Canadian Universities are now marrying Muslim men and submitting themselves and their children unsuspectingly to Shariah law.

Ripping the West in Two. Author and lecturer Nonie Darwish says the goal of radical Islamists is to impose Shariah law on the world, ripping Western law and liberty in two.

Ripping the West in Two

Nonie Darwish recently authored the book, Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law.

Darwish was born in Cairo and spent her childhood in Egypt and Gaza before immigrating to the US in 1978, when she was eight years old. Her father died while leading covert attacks on Israel. He was a high-ranking Egyptian military officer stationed with his family in Gaza.

When he died, he was considered a “shahid,” a martyr for jihad. His posthumous status earned Nonie and her family an elevated position in Muslim society.

But Darwish developed a skeptical eye at an early age. She questioned her own Muslim culture and upbringing. She converted to Christianity after hearing a Christian preacher on television.

In her latest book, Darwish warns about creeping sharia law – what it is, what it means, and how it is manifested in Islamic countries.

Westerners generally assume all religions encourage a respect for the dignity of each individual. Islamic law (Sharia) teaches that non-Muslims should be subjugated or killed in this world. Peace and prosperity for one’s children is not as important as assuring that Islamic law rules everywhere in the Middle East and eventually in the world.

While Westerners tend to think that all religions encourage some form of the golden rule, Sharia teaches two systems of ethics – one for Muslims and another for non-Muslims. Building on tribal practices of the seventh century, Sharia encourages the side of humanity that wants to take from and subjugate others.

While Westerners tend to think in terms of religious people developing a personal understanding of and relationship with God, Sharia advocates executing people who ask difficult questions that could be interpreted as criticism.

It’s hard to imagine, that in this day and age, Islamic scholars agree that those who criticize Islam or choose to stop being Muslim should be executed. Sadly, while talk of an Islamic reformation is common and even assumed by many in the West, such murmurings in the Middle East are silenced through intimidation.

While Westerners are accustomed to an increase in religious tolerance over time, Darwish explains how petro dollars are being used to grow an extremely intolerant form of political Islam in her native Egypt and elsewhere.

It is too bad that so many are disillusioned with life and Christianity to accept Muslims as peaceful…some may be but they have an army that is willing to shed blood in the name of Islam…the peaceful support the warriors with their finances and own kind of patriotism to their religion.

24 Comments

Filed under Africa, Algeria, Americas, Armenians, Asia, Assyrians, Bangladesh, Canada, Catholicism, Caucasus, Chechnya, Christianity, Culture, East Timor, Egypt, Europeans, Greeks, Guest Posts, India, Iraq, Islam, Kashmir, Law, Middle East, Morocco, Near East, Near Easterners, North Africa, North America, Pakistan, Philippines, Race/Ethnicity, Radical Islam, Regional, Religion, SE Asia, South Asia, Southern Sudan, Sudan, Thailand, Tunisia, USA, Women

by | December 29, 2009 · 5:25 AM

Are Only Euro-Whites Capable of Peaceful Successionism

In this modern era, one of the ultimate litmus tests for extreme liberalism or humanism is the completely selfless permission that a state grants when it allows a part of itself to secede without starting a bloodbath.

Since the Peace of Westphalia, Europe initiated the notion of the nation-state, a brand-new concept. Before, there had only been empires at most, if that in most places. The notion of the nation-state gradually grew until the present moment, when it is unfortunately the status quo. If empires disallowed succession, nevertheless it did occur quite a bit, since empires never had much legitimacy in the first place.

The problem with the nation-state is that it has built up a nonsensical and undeserved legitimacy, even among the most liberal folks. As soon as lines are drawn on a map, they are instantly there for all time, never to be redrawn.

Except that imperialist maggots like the US and the UK, while paying lip service to the inviolability of borders, nevertheless, scumbags that they are, cynically pursue seccessionism and border violability against any states that are deemed enemies.

Look at how quickly the world recognized the states that emerged out of the USSR. While the breakup itself was testament to the USSR’s ultimate morality, its internationalism, a moral spear that split the heavens while the capitalist world wallowed in nationalist mud, the new states were only recognized by the capitalist shits because they were so eager to disaggregate their old socialist foe.

At the moment, the US cynically promotes the breakup of Iran, Venezuela and Bolivia. In the past, the US supported seccessionism in China. Kurdish secessionism in Iraq was promoted by the US and then its suppression funded by the US, depending on the whims of the day. At the moment, the US funds Kurdish secessionism in Iran while funding its crushing by the Turkish state in Turkey.

The truth is that under capitalism, imperialist states like the US have no morals whatsoever, only interests. That 90% of the US public thinks that the US state always operates according to some moral compass is an example of the success of the sickening US capitalist media machine in creating a nation of high-IQ idiots.

Anyway, let us take this as a litmus test of the ultimate in civilized behavior in 2009: a state that will peacefully allow parts of itself to secede, if they so choose.

Most states, being governed by uncivilized animals, react to secessionism with violence, often extreme violence. The legion of the primitives is vast: Russia, France, Spain, Turkey, Russia, India, China, Indonesia, Burma, Georgia, New Guinea.

No non-White state will ever allow peaceful secession. They are simply too primitive and uncivilized to allow such a thing. By White I mean European Caucasians. Caucasians outside of Europe are incapable of peaceful secession either, because they are still relatively uncivilized compared to Europeans.

Asians, despite their high IQ’s, are still primitive in some ways, and even NE Asians are incapable of dealing with peaceful seccessionism. The response of 105 IQ China is instructive. Secessionist movements in Taiwan, Turkestan and Tibet have been dealt with via repression that can only be called fascist, while similar movements in Inner Mongolia are never allowed to see the light of day.

Indonesia’s response to secessionism in East Timor, Aceh and West Papua, areas it has a weak, if any, claim to, have been characterized by horrific violence.

India has behaved criminally, even genocidally, in Kashmir. India has little legitimate claim on the entire Northeast, yet they will never let an inch of it go.

Burma has no legitimate claim on any of its territory at the moment, as a criminal state loses the legitimacy of its governance. Nevertheless it continues to commit genocide against its secessionist movements, as it has since 1947.

For the moment, Pakistan and Iran can be excused their backwardness in violently assaulting secessionism, as imperialism, Indian and US, is conspiring to break up both states.

No Black African nation will ever allow secessionism, though they may as well. Most all of them can’t even govern their own territory responsibly, so they don’t have much right to the land in the borders. Failed states revoke the right to inviolability of borders. Sudan has reacted with typical extreme brutality to the legitimate demands of Darfur and Southern Sudan for secession. The response to secessionism, typical of Arabs, was genocide. Since independence, most Arab states have reacted to secessionist demands with genocides of varying degrees.

Somalia is the ultimate failed state. There is no government, and anarchy has held sway for 15 years. Obviously, in the case of the collapse of the state and the onset of anarchy, the inviolability of borders principle is revoked. After all, a state that no longer exists can hardly invoke inviolability of borders.

Two new states, Puntland, and Somaliland, have emerged, but no one will recognize them due to the inviolability of borders crap. This is sad because these new states seem to have their shit together more than Somalia (whatever that means) does.

The nation of Georgia had no legitimacy before its birth in 1991. The day it was born, its fake borders were deemed inviolable forevermore. South Ossetia and Abkhazia have already broken away, as was their right. Georgia will never allow this transgression. Abkhazia has been de facto independent since 1991, but almost no one on Earth will recognize it, all because Georgia is a pro-Western state.

In contrast, the moment Kosovo declared independence, the West showered it with recognition, since they were splitting from Serbia, whom the West hates.

As I said earlier, Western capitalist states have no morals.

Yugoslavia did allow itself to be broken up, but violence followed. Slovenia had little violence, and Macedonia and Montenegro had none.  The Turks are not really European Whites, and Turkey’s always been the sick man of Europe. Since Ataturk, it’s been a fascist state. That’s not changing anytime soon.

In Spain, there are secessionist movements, but the Spaniards have always been fascist and backwards, and they will never allow anyone to secede.

So who will? The UK and Canada. Those are the only two states that allow secession based on a simple vote. There are movements in Scotland and Quebec, but they don’t have majority support yet. Yet still it seems by this litmus test, the UK and Canada are the most civilized states on Earth.

Czechoslovakia broke itself up soon after the fall of Communism, a great moment in human progress. Yet this was only possible due to decades of Communist internationalism and anti-nationalist propaganda. Since, then, fascist-like nationalism has set in in both new states.

The USSR allowed itself to break up. In a number of cases, idiot nationalist violence followed the breakup, but most states left peacefully. Anyway, the state did allow itself to be broken up, something almost no other state will allow. This feat of ultimate civilization only occurred in the USSR due to 78 years of internationalism.

Some of the states that broke up were part-Caucasian, part Asian in stock (some of the Stans), so they seem to be an exception to our rule that only Euro Whites will allow a state to break up, but possibly USSR internationalism overrode the racial stock. The only Asiatic or part-Asiatic states that have allowed themselves to dissolve were socialist in character.

Historically, we can see that only Whites seem to be able to secede without massacring each other like wild animals.

For instance, 100 yrs ago, 99.9% of Norwegians voted to secede from Sweden. The Swedes magnanimously accepted that.

In 1920, a plebiscite was held in Schleswig in northern Germany. The area north of Flensburg, 80% voted to go to Denmark. South of Flensburg, 80% voted to stay in Germany even though Danes were 25% of the population of Flensburg. The Allies would have loved to have given all of Schleswig to Denmark just to punish Germany, but the Danes magnanimously accepted the vote of the people.

It’s an open question whether non-Europeans will ever be civilized enough to allow secessionism without committing genocidal massacres in the name of some lines on a map. I don’t think it will happen in my lifetime.

In case you haven’t guessed, this is one more reason I think we European Whites are better than other people. We’re simply more civilized, and this is a prime example.

19 Comments

Filed under Abkhazia, Aceh, Africa, Americas, Asia, Britain, Canada, China, Czechoslovakia, Darfur, Denmark, East Africa, East Timor, Europe, Georgia, Germany, Imperialism, India, Indonesia, Inner Mongolia, Iran, Kashmir, Kosovo, Kurdistan, Latin America, Macedonia, Middle East, Montenegro, Near East, North Africa, North America, Norway, Pakistan, Political Science, Puntland, Quebec, Regional, Scotland, SE Asia, Serbia, Slovenia, Somalia, Somaliland, South America, South Asia, South Ossetia, Southern Sudan, Spain, Sudan, Sweden, Taiwan, Tibet, Turkey, USSR, Venezuela, West Papua, West Turkestan