RSS
Probably the single most important political fact about the modern world has been the steady rise of the United States of America. From a geopolitical point of view, the United States really is in a class of its own. While the Soviet Union might have rivaled the U.S. militarily, and while China and the European Union may be comparable economic giants, no other nation comes even close to having America’s combination of economic, diplomatic, military, cultural, and, increasingly important, surveillance power.
At least since the Second World War, there has been a veritable cottage industry of books predicting America’s supposedly inevitable decline, due either to the myth of American “exceptionalism” or to imperial hubris. In actual fact, one is struck at how steadily America has maintained its global share of power. Despite their economic recovery in the postwar years, the decline of Western Europe and Japan has in fact proved a more fundamental tendency. Russia has only partially recovered from the collapse from the Soviet Union. After decolonization – the collapse of the overseas European empires – in fact virtually none of Third World has been able to organize themselves as influential actors (“Brazil is the country of the future and always will be,” De Gaulle is supposed to have said.) Only capitalist China, it seems, will have the organization, intelligence, and sheer size to decisively overtake the United States economically.
America’s rise began from rather humble beginnings as a string of British colonies, peopled largely by English and other north-west European stock, along the eastern North-American seaboard. A striking fact for me: the U.S., born in 1776, is younger than my village church. At the time of independence, the country was inhabited by less than 3 million people.
America has risen thanks to a winning exponential formula right from the beginning. Already in a famous essay written in 1751 (Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind), Benjamin Franklin was computing that thanks to the economic ease in raising children in America “our people must at least be doubled every twenty years.” Franklin could also already foresee that the free, northern colonies of Anglo-America must overtake the less dynamic slaver colonies of the South:
The Whites who have slaves, not labouring, are enfeebled, and therefore not so generally prolific; the slaves being work d too hard, and ill fed, their constitutions are broken, and the deaths among them are more than the births; so that a continual supply is needed from Africa. The Northern Colonies having few slaves increase in Whites. Slaves also pejorate the Families that use them; the white children become proud, disgusted with labour, and being educated in idleness, are rendered unfit to get a Living by industry.
By simply doing the math, Franklin could also foresee that Anglo-America would demographically overtake England and become a great power within a century (although he did yet imagine that this great power would actually be outside the British Empire):
Thus there are supposed to be now upwards of One Million English Souls in North America, (tho tis thought scarce 80,000 have been brought over sea) . . . This million doubling, suppose but once in twenty-five years, will in another century be more than the people of England, and the greatest Number of Englishmen will be on this side the water. What an accession of Power to the British empire by the Sea as well as Land!
Franklin’s predictions were remarkable. The colonial and then U.S. population did in fact double roughly every 25 years between 1750 and 1870. The population then doubled at a slower place, between 1870 and 1905 (35 years), and 1905 and 1960 (1960). The population is projected to double again between 1960 and 2030 (70 years) to 360 million.
By way of comparison, the population of most European countries doubled or tripled throughout the course of the entire nineteenth century. That of France, by far the largest in Western Europe, actually stagnated despite the Industrial Revolution, somewhat mysteriously. Many blame the Napoleonic Code’s mandatory division of inheritances among children and the French’s bourgeois spirit, preferring to “play it safe” by having few children. In any event, we can never emphasize the reality and importance of France’s relative decline: from being the leading and even culturally hegemonic Western-European state from the late Middle Ages right up to nineteenth-century, to merely one great power among many, and by no means the most powerful one, perpetually vulnerable to German invaders and fickle Anglo-Saxon allies. Demographics certainly is a big chunk of destiny.
All this begs the question: why has America been so successful? I do not claim to have all the answers, but I want to suggest a few possibilities.
America is, or was, above all a nation of European race and Anglo-Saxon culture. Late-medieval European civilization had already been remarkably dynamic and expansive, evident in its technological inventions, its military conquests (the Holy Land, Iberia), its explorations (the Vikings being the first discoverers of North America), trading routes, and its general development and peopling of the European landmass, with the foundation of innumerable new towns and settlements.[1]On the general expansion, development, and dynamism of Europe in the Middle Ages, see Robert Bartlett, The Making of Europe: Conquest, Colonization, and Cultural Change, 950-1350 (Princeton University Press, 1993). The Middle Ages marked the gradual movement northwards of civilization and technologies into lands which, prior, had been considered too climactically harsh and cold to sustain anything other than barbarism.
The “European Miracle” or “Great Divergence” between the West and the Rest is also somewhat mysterious. Suffice it to say that Europe became remarkable significantly before the Renaissance. The Europeans, divided in innumerable principalities and city-states, were animated by a enterprising spirit of conquest, trade, exploration, and invention. Hence, it was Europeans with their ships and steel, who rediscovered and conquered America, and explored and conquered much of the rest of the world. One is still astonished to see such small nations – by global comparison – as Portugal, Spain, the Netherlands, England, and France circumventing entire continents and bringing vast empires to heel.
The United States was however not merely founded by Europeans, but in particular by the English, who have the distinction of having been one the most dynamic and economically successful of European nations. England, blessed with mostly harmlessly small Celtic neighbors and a crucial little expanse of water between itself and the Continent (a mere 33 kilometers between Dover and Calais!), could develop in relative security develop in a most unique direction. Whereas virtually all European principalities developed, by geopolitical necessity, into military monarchies, England was free to develop into a purely mercantile and naval power.
Whereas political survival on the mainland depended on the state’s coercive ability to raise the men and taxes necessary to a large army, in England this depended instead on the maintenance of a large navy, which itself required an advanced trading economy. The American Founding Fathers were acutely aware of the role of war in the development of Continental despotism and self-consciously made their republic into a counter-model.
English and Anglo-American society were then uniquely pacific (I speak of domestic affairs) and based on law and commerce, relative to Continental Europe. These societies were also uniquely individualist. This seems to have driven the dynamism of these societies: people were uniquely mobile, they could seek out profitable professions, professions which interested them and/or which they excelled at (both of these are great motivators), and business could develop with great confidence in the legal system. All this seems to have allowed for a uniquely Anglo-Saxon confidence in enterprise and experimentation, rather than, as in many traditional societies, individuals merely being invited to stay in their rut.
As Franklin suggests, economic prosperity and individual free choice appear to have driven America’s steady and exponential demographic growth. America was more economically dynamic than other European settler-societies, such as French-Catholic Québec (although there was massive demographic expansion here too), Brazil (a slaver society to an even greater degree than the American South), or Spanish America in general (from Mexico, with conquistadors ruling over miserable indigenous and Mestizo masses, to Spanish-Italian-Amerindian Argentina). America’s society of middle-brow pioneers proved more expansive.
The spirit of enterprise is even visible in the British model of imperialism, which was often driven by individual initiative and profit, rather than grand political initiatives. The most spectacular example of this is the British East India Company, with imperial rule following profitable trade routes, rather than the other way around. (This is in stark contrast, for instance, to Adolf Hitler’s abortive empire in Eastern Europe, which though theoretically modeled on the British precedent, in fact was based on political and ideological imperatives, rather than economic viability.)
Another uniquely American phenomenon: the free popular adherence to religion. Whereas in most of the world, religion was passively handed down by the previous generation and often imposed in a top-down way by a state-sanctioned monopoly, in the U.S. individuals were free to join or found innumerable sects. One is surprised and struck to find, in a such an advanced country, so many religious revivals. Yet, the religious – with their regular meetings and pious enforcement of social norms – often have many children and tend to outbreed their atheist counterparts. We recall: the Amish and Mormon populations double every few decades (the Mormon founder Brigham Young, admittedly polygamous, had 56 children). Free adherence to the Protestant sects has also motivated a tremendous amount of idealism in American history, particularly visible among the Puritans and Quakers in the North. Religion too has contributed to American dynamism.
If I were to summarize the roots of American power, I would say this is due to the planting of Anglo-European civilization in the vastness of North America, no longer being cramped by the divisions and smallness of Europe (e.g., the State of Utah alone is larger than the island of Great Britain). Thus could dynamic potential of English culture be actualized at a truly continental scale, with the potential to even dominate the European continent itself (as Tocqueville foresaw). And, as John Jay famously observed in Federalist no. 2, the United States, unlike Europe, would be united in one ethno-cultural group:
With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people–a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence.
There were of course political contingencies in all of this. Had eighteenth-century France defeated Great Britain in the numerous wars on the seas, North America might be French-speaking today.
The Founding Fathers succeeded in the delicate operation of uniting the thirteen colonies into a federation. In fact, the Antebellum United States was quite fragile, the Founders having never really decided the issue of whether ultimate sovereignty resided in the states or in the federation. As ever, the free surrender of sovereignty by independent states is a rare and difficult affair. In the event, Lincoln’s armies decided the matter, thus establishing federal supremacy (on the back of a highly-idealistic appeal to abolish slavery) once and for all.
We can only speculate how North America had developed if the country had been split into northern United States and a southern Confederate States. There likely would have been a hostile stand-off, like that between India and Pakistan. As in Europe, the countries might have become more prone to violate the rule of law and adopt libertidical and arbitrary measures in the name of national security. Certainly, Anglo-America’s domination of Europe would have been impossible in these circumstances and a more aristocratic and martial culture might have been sustained in the South.
The uniqueness of Anglo-American culture is also evident in the very prestige of Founding Fathers and of the Constitution. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the U.S. is one of the only countries in the world with a genuine constitution in the ancient sense, as most memorably expressed by Aristotle: not merely a dead text, a cold set of procedures, but a Lawgiver’s prescriptions for a way of life informed by a certain culture and ethos. As Aristotle said: “a constitution is the way in which a city lives” (Politics 4.11, 1295a34).
In this sense, every genuine constitution represents a limitation on the democratic principle of majority rule (certain actions which the majority might desire are unconstitutional) and is a reflection of a society’s culture and values. This is only the case if the Founders are prestigious and if their constitution in some sense reflects, perhaps radicalizes, the underlying culture. A constitution is then not merely a document or a “neutral” set of procedures or what have you.
In most countries, the “constitution” is a barely-respected document which can be modified virtually at will by parliamentary supermajority or even instantly abolished by referendum (which destroys the whole point of a constitution as a check on majority rule). In most countries, including Great Britain, the law and “rights” are whatever the government says they are. The European nation-state, even in “democratic” form, is in fact inherently authoritarian. Today in most countries, it persecutes nationalists, but they can easily “flip” onto a different course, as we see in Italy and the Visegrád countries.
The U.S. Constitution by contrast is a real constitution, which leads to many of the rather strange peculiarities of U.S. politics. In the rest of the democratic world (and America is a kind of democratic-oligarchic country), there has been a steady march towards the democratic version of Max Weber’s “Iron Cage”: namely a march towards social-democracy, answering man’s desire for ever-more economic security giving him a guaranteed income (whether in the form of hand-outs or protected employment). This, however, limits the individual’s drive, his horizons, and in the end domesticates him. At the same time, the social-democratic state is not above using mass surveillance, censorship, and gun restrictions to further enfeeble and pacify the population.
Just your normal, every British CCTV-facial-recognition-enabled Nanny/Police State.
Ameica’s alternate destiny as a Nanny State/Police State is evident by the counter-examples of Britain and Canada. These two comically authoritarian “progressive” countries – where individuals can be jailed for irreverent tweets and “hate” literature is solemnly burned by the authorities – are what America would have become without the Constitution and the prestige of the Founding Fathers.
In America, the First Amendment still completely protects free speech from government censorship, a unique phenomenon in the world (although other forms of censorship, through social pressure, has always inevitably existed). The Second Amendment still protects the gun rights of many. More generally, the power of the Senate – and the disproportionate power this gives to underpopulated and rural states – has generally slowed the centralization of power and the development of the welfare state.
The U.S. has inevitably centralized to a great extent since Lincoln established federal supremacy: we can think of Wilson’s income tax and Federal Reserve, Roosevelt’s Social Security, and Johnson’s Medicare and Medicaid programs. The courts can justify almost everything, more or less implausibly, in the name of the “general welfare,” the interstate commerce clause, and the Fourteenth Amendment (Equal Protection Clause). However, there is no question that the U.S. is still “behind” the rest of the developed world in these respects. The total tax rate in the U.S. is “only” 27% of GDP, as against an average of 41.5% in the Eurozone.
I suspect that the “individualist check” posed by the U.S. Constitution has helped to maintain the dynamism of the U.S. economy relative to the social-democratic stagnation of other countries. America’s PPP GDP per capita is a whopping $59,500, almost 50% more than either Japan or the European Union. America’s high per capita wealth is all the more remarkable given the substantial black population, which has always been subaltern, poor, crime-prone, and dysfunctional.
Admittedly, one can wonder how much of the U.S. figure represents “real” wealth as opposed to accounting gimicks, e.g. health insurance and whatnot. On the whole, I am inclined to say it is real. The figure is all the more remarkable in that population growth has been much higher in the U.S. than in either Europe or Japan, meaning job and wealth creation have been even more massive. Anglo individualism probably partly contributes to this: by way of comparison, relatively-flexible and less-taxed Britain has created four times more jobs over the last decade than has France (although GDP per capita has stayed about the same, because France has had less population growth).
Of course there are other factors. America has bountiful cheap and indigenous energy sources, remarkably achieving energy independence recently not through lower consumption, but greater production. However, strikingly, America is considerably wealthier than Canada, which has even more fossil fuels at its disposal. The “exorbitant privilege” of the U.S. dollar is a real though hard-to-quantify factor, as the U.S. is free to have limitless deficit spending and to monetize its debt, thus perpetually sustaining a very high level of demand (the exact opposite to the macroeconomic model followed in Continental Europe under German leadership).
There are also the economies of scale enabled by the sheer size of the U.S. economy. The benefits of this are particularly evident in tech. European nations will often produce an indigenous social media platform (e.g. DailyMotion, France’s YouTube), which will be successful for a while, before eventually being wiped out by the sheer size of the American competitor.
Finally, perhaps the most important factor is America’s brain-draining the rest of the world. America has the largest concentration of intelligent people on the planet outside of China. Silicon Valley represents not just White American and Jewish brilliance, but Asian intelligence as well. This means America can develop cutting-edge technologies. France autonomously developed Minitel, our own Internet, but naturally this eventually fell by the wayside.
.png)
The ever-increasing importance of law, institutions, and intelligence to economic development is evident by the contrast between the United States and Argentina. Argentina, a vast settler-nation with ample natural resources and land, almost equaled America’s standard of living in the early 1900s, but has since collapsed in comparison.
The important thing is that all the factors are working together and reinforcing one another: American individualism, dollar supremacy, scale, and cognitive elitism are all sustaining one another, and all the while reducing the pressure for and delaying social-democratization.
I am not saying whether these things are good: American liberty and wealth is typically used irresponsibly. Americans are fat, drug-addled, and feast on cultural garbage (don’t worry, the rest of the West is steadily following you down this path). There is something damning in America’s lack of self-control and the lack of high culture. Is it true that all American political literature produced since The Federalist Papers has been inferior to them?
With the exception of the divisive issue of slavery, American society has been characterized by consensus (often stifling, in fact) and social peace, enabled by limitless land wealth and economic prosperity, in contrast with the rest of the world. Most other countries have had revolutionary nationalist, social, or religious movements, leading to periodic civil wars, revolutions, and dictatorships. While these may sometimes be inevitable or, more rarely, be salutary, they generally simply end up damaging and setting a country even further back (witness France, Russia, Germany, China, Venezuela . . .), thus further reinforcing American hegemony.
I cannot say I am too sympathetic to the origins of the American Revolution. Admittedly, the Revolutionaries only wished for reciprocity, for the recognition of their rights as Englishmen, as loyal British subjects, to “no taxation without representation.” However, really, the British Parliament’s demands were quite moderate, not even covering the military costs necessary to defend the colonies from Amerindians. “Reciprocity” among “equals” is a slippery slope, leading to all our troubles since then. The American Revolution was really a case of insubordination, as Sam Dickson has argued, of men revolting against what was, at that time, really the most moderate and lawful government in the world. Some people can never be satisfied, a recipe for permanent strife.
That said, the Founders used a mere tax revolt as an opportunity to create a genuine political work of art, a bold experiment in law and liberty, under a vast federal republic. The results, good and bad, speak for themselves. The American Revolution succeeded because it was organic, it did not seek to change everything or to annihilate the past, but to build upon the past and Anglo-Saxon culture. (I’d actually argue that the German Revolution of 1933 was similar in this respect, in contrast with the French and Bolshevik Revolutions.)
American power has continued to grow and sustain itself over the last two centuries. This has not been due to any particular brilliance of American statecraft. On the contrary, American foreign policy under Wilson and Roosevelt, and during the Cold War and thereafter, has been almost universally inept. The many wars and various interventions America has engaged with have generally not served the American interest in any sense (most notably the wars in Vietnam and Iraq). U.S. foreign policy has tended to favor drowning nations in money and bombs rather than any clear doctrine, understanding of other countries, or, increasingly, even risking of American lives. In France, the muppet news show Les Guignols de l’Info typically showcases Sylvester Stallone as the spokesman for U.S. government policies.
Nonetheless, American power has remained, because of the sheer dynamism of American society, rather than the insight of her politicians. The decisive wars were won through economic might and atom bombs. In the past, virile primitive barbarians frequently conquered decadent civilized societies. With modern science, the bug-men can consistently crush would-be samurai. On which: there was something chilling about the indecorous “hooting” which accompanied the U.S. declaration of war against Imperial Japan.
Time will tell for how much longer American power lasts. I am not inclined to write it off any time soon. Advanced economies in general remain relatively dynamic and the U.S. is the most dynamic among them. Interestingly, economic dynamism and cutting-edge innovation in Europe remains where it has been over the last 600 years: in the famous “Blue Banana” from Milan via the Rhine to Manchester. This area is less dynamic than America but will remain an important global pole.
America, while declining with Europe in economic importance relative to China, will remain a military, diplomatic, and cultural behemoth. (Although, we can ask whether “American” cultural power is really American. Texas is as much of a victim of Hollywoodian and New-Yorker cultural imperialism as is France, perhaps even more so.) America is considered a “safe” refuge and guarantor for national bourgeoisies across the world, from Western Europe to Japan. America’s hegemony is generally soft, indirect, and compatible with a “fat, dumb, and happy” existence as passive consumers.
America’s share of global GDP will inevitably go down with the Third World’s partial convergence to the Northern standards of living. However, the thing is that most of that extra wealth will be scattered across numerous semi-functional nations (India, Brazil . . .) rather than viable rivals to the U.S.
Too many people are infatuated with echoes. That is mere nostalgia. They take a declining old society, which may have vestigial autonomy from the liberal West, as the “wave of the future.” Charles de Gaulle’s France in the 1960s, to take only one spectacular example, was not actually a viable counter-model, but merely a nation little slower to walk along the downward path. As Jean-Marie Le Pen writes in his Memoirs: “While we may deplore it, we will never be able to live again like we did a few decades ago. And this does not only concern dining or money. Our parents’ life would be too hard for the sybarites we have become.”[2]Jean-Marie Le Pen, Mémoires: Fils de la nation (Paris: Muller, 2018), p. 26.
We should, as good archeofuturists, however indeed draw inspiration and perhaps even practices from archaic societies. We must blow on the embers of Tradition wherever these still burn. But we must be conscious that Tradition will, in any case, have to operate in a new environment, in a different way.
That isn’t say to say that American hegemony or exceptionalism will prove eternal. I would not be surprised if secession were a viable prospect by mid-century, due to both demographic and cultural change (a dysfunctional and potentially aggressive Non-Asian Majority combined with an increasingly-radicalized and enlightened White Minority) For the foreseeable future however, I expect that America’s combination of size, dollar hegemony, energy, natural individualist dynamism, cultural power, and cognitive elitism will continue to make the leading superpower outside of the Sinosphere.
America, warts and all, is a testament to the unsuspected power of law and liberty. American identitarians should, as reformers, build on this tradition, which gives them some leeway in terms of freedom of speech and freedom of association, and which still resonates with many among the people. We should always build upon the past, the best of our traditions, rather than arrogantly assume we can will something superior into existence ex nihilo.
Notes
[1] On the general expansion, development, and dynamism of Europe in the Middle Ages, see Robert Bartlett, The Making of Europe: Conquest, Colonization, and Cultural Change, 950-1350 (Princeton University Press, 1993).
[2] Jean-Marie Le Pen, Mémoires: Fils de la nation (Paris: Muller, 2018), p. 26.
The difference between us and everyone else is that the US government will sell an American a Combat Rifle to train with. In other words, our people are recognized as real citizens.
http://thecmp.org/cmp_sales/rifle_sales/
Nice to see a positive evaluation of America from a foreigner for once. Thank you.
I’m an American, but borne of European (not Anglo either) parents.
Since I was a little boy I’ve always loved my country and being American.
Good article.
Takeaway, I guess, based on:
and
is:
Now, there are some things conspicuously missing from the article. Demographics change, destruction of middle class and that 1 %/deplorables thing.
I guess that could’ve been mentioned, even addressed, but, well…..
Anyway, given those parameters, the challenge is how to live in that paradigm.
Not easy I guess for, I’d say, 95 % of authors, commentators and readers here.
All good.
A strange and ignorant sort of sentimentality, that belief. It implies, for instance, that America wasn’t different in, say, 1914.
A very shallow article here by someone who does not know the USA, a country hosting the world’s biggest gulag with 2.2 million prisoners in carcerated … about 1 out of every 45 working-age males in prison at this moment … whereas jailing in Western Europe is about 1 out of every 1000 citizens, in the USA it is 1 out of 140
Durocher buys into USA schoolboy ‘Constitution’ cult propaganda, and the supposedly glorious ‘First Amendment’ … As shown in the recent US Dept of Justice filing on crimes involving Robert Mueller, that ‘Constitution’ can be totally and instantly nullified by judges who don’t respect it, US judges even endorsing fake documents claiming people agreed to ban their own freedom of speech for life, and ordering that court appeals be banned from court records and the internet … whilst lawyers who oppose such schemes instantly lose their USA law licences
Durocher thinks USA ‘law’ is like in Hollywood movies, which points to the real ‘strength’ of the USA – its domination over global media and propaganda, via Hollywood, the CIA’s Wikipedia, etc
The USA has become especially corrupt internally since about the time the Soviet Union fell, with every aspect of US culture – the courts and law, health care, etc – becoming a criminal racket
The USA and China, both had the benefit of being huge countries in resource-rich regions with a moderate climate … There was no doubt that in earlier USA development, economic growth was fuelled by an overall positive entrepreneur-friendly legal environment … but those days are over
US small business creation has been hit hard for some time now, too many pressures and rules and legal problems … the USA is run by out-of-control monopolists, and the place is being poisoned, rather badly, both culturally and literally (the food)
Many USA people are okay, fun, etc … but the USA is ultimately a disturbing place, and quite dangerous if one collides with or is targeted by its police-state system, or the gov-encouraged mafia lawyers stealing people’s money, as savvy European business people know … there is no ‘rule of law’ there, it is wide-open court gangsterism now, as President Trump himself suffers when the Hillary-&-Bush-tied judges (most of them) block Trump’s actions
The USA has a lot of past wealth to draw upon, and a final filip from the last years of the US dollar as ‘reserve currencey’ denominating global debt … but the USA is not a very nice place, with a future either broken into pieces, or becoming a new kind of multi-cultural, bigger sort of Mexico
Change Mexico to Brasil and I agree.
Still…..20-30 years till then.
Plenty of time for surprises (pleasant or not, depending on who’s who).
Ummm… NOPE.
The Founders very explicitly vested ultimate sovereignty in the States, and the people. It’s absolutely clear from the writings of Publius and others.
In fact there was significant subterfuge and misdirection by the centralists (led by Hamilton), up to and including their acceptance Bill of Rights. In fact they understood (where the Jeffersonians did not) that the Elastic Clause was designed to furnish a mechanism by which the Bill of Rights could be parsed away in due course.
The final resting place of sovereignty is made clear enough in the 10th Amendment: if the central authority was sovereign, then the 10th Amendment would be meaningless. (It’s de facto true that the 10th is meaningless since the Civil War, but it was certainly not the Founders’ intention that the 10th Amendment was a dead letter).
That is not remotely contentious: the notion that State sovereignty was extinguished by the ratification of the Constitution is an ahistorical shibboleth, promulgated by those who wanted to centralise power (e.g., Lincoln, following in the footsteps of Hamilton).
Sovereignty Is Un-Alienable, Secession NEVER Prohibited
Ho ho ho–”ahistorical shibboleth”?–how about damnable lie and lying? (a) ONLY states were and still are SOVEREIGN–which was perfectly understood under the Articles of Confederation.
(b) Sovereignty is UN-ALIENABLE.
(c) The union had only “DELEGATED POWERS.” These powers were listed and enumerated, and note the 10th Amendment (consisting of 28 words) by which states retain all powers “NOT PROHIBITED”–well, secession was not prohibited, was it?
(d) Note further, the states exercised that sovereignty by SECEDING FM THE ARTICLES Constitution in order to make the United States union. “Union” was made up of states which previously seceded, both fm Britain, and then fm Articles Confederation.
(e) States retained sovereignty OBVIOUSLY, as they NEVER would have voted and entered a “union” knowing they could NEVER get out of it–as they found they had to get out of the previous Articles Confederation. Why would the new union be any different fm previous Articles? Only the states were sovereign, and that’s why the union was called “United STATES”–a “state” being it’s own country, w. it’s own laws, etc., only the Constitution being “supreme,” but which “supremacy” was merely DELEGATED power.
(f) Several states EXPLICITLY noted at the time of ratification of Constitution that if the union didn’t work out, they’d exercise their right to leave.
What people need to realize is that northern states understandably objected to Dred Scott Sup. court ruling, southerners taking their slaves to the western territories–or even to the northern states–thus making use of this slave labor and hence not using the FREE labor of the white citizens. I myself can quite sympathize w. the northerners. Overall, northerners wanted to remove black slavery to enhance the economic privilege of free white labor–perfectly understandable.
Unfortunately, war hysteria was generated as in states of Kansas and California, and in the whole country, the northerners persuaded the south was trying to dominate them, spreading slavery to western territories and then politically ruling overall, constraining free white labor.
Well now, compare the USA to the UK vis-a-vis gun rights in 1920. We were able to own machine guns, silencers, cannons and even hand grenades. The UK was going down the road to hell by controlling rifles because they represented a threat to the government in the UK. Big difference in outcome a century later, huh?
http://www.dvc.org.uk/dunblane/clayton_1.pdf
Fear and Loathing in Whitehall: Bolshevism and the Firearms Act of 1920
“If the Firearms Act of 1920 had licensed only handguns, Shortt’s claims before the Commons would be at least superficially plausible. If the Firearms Act of 1920 had included all firearms, it might be argued that it been drafted in an overly broad manner in an attempt to disarm criminals. But the inclusion of rifles (but not shotguns) in this licensing measure suggest that the fear expressed throughout more than two years of Cabinet discussions and reports drove this bill: Bolshevik revolution. In a revolutionary struggle against soldiers, a shotgun’s value is limited because its range is limited. Soldiers armed with rifles can engage a insurgent force armed with shotguns at a distance of 100 to 150 yards with no fear of serious injury, even if the insurgents
outnumber the soldiers by a significant margin. Soldiers confronting revolutionaries with rifles, however, would be at serious risk of injury or death, depending on the number or marksmanship of the revolutionaries.
“Furthermore, the concern about radicalized veterans that play such a prominent part in secret reports throughout 1919 and 1920 is easy to understand as part of the fear of revolution. Contrary to the myth of the Minuteman in the American Revolution, armed civilians have seldom played a significant effective part in any war against an organized military. The major deficiency of armed civilians is partly a shortage of modern weapons of mass destruction, partly a matter of training, and partly the psychologically toughening experience of combat itself.[96]
The Cabinet imagined that there were large numbers of radicalized veterans of World War I.[97]Had this been the case, they would have had the training and combat experience to make them a serious fighting force, especially since, by the admission of General Wilson, much of the British Army in England at that time consistently largely of recent recruits without combat experience.
The evidence is clear: the proximate cause of the Firearms Act of 1920 was a fear of revolution, which the Cabinet believed might enjoy sufficient popular support to actually overthrow the lawful government. Home Secretary Shortt’s statements to the Commons about disarming criminals, while a plausible explanation for the licensing of handguns, are not supported by Jones’ diary or the secret Cabinet papers. There is no written evidence to substantiate Cabinet concerns about non−political crime, but enormous evidence that the Cabinet believed a violent revolution was imminent in which the police and military would be outnumbered by combat veterans. The functional analysis of the Firearms Act is consistent with this fear, and not consistent with a fear of non−political crime.
Based on what the Cabinet believed might happen, the decision to restrictively license rifles in the interests of self−preservation made perfect sense. It is, however, hardly a proud moment, for it suggests that the Cabinet believed that the masses were so opposed to the Government that large numbers of them were ready to rise up −− and the Government was prepared to deny the rights of Englishmen in order to preserve a system of government that had lost much of its legitimacy in the pointless and brutal bloodshed of World War I.
The US Civilian Marksmanship Program dates back to 1903.
“The Office of the Director of Civilian Marksmanship (DCM) was created by the U.S. Congress as part of the 1903 War Department Appropriations Act. The original purpose was to provide civilians an opportunity to learn and practice marksmanship skills so they would be skilled marksmen if later called on to serve in the U.S. military. ”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_Marksmanship_Program
So yeah, the USA wasn’t different in 1914.
This is a silly article, given its assumption that things will continue upon the trajectory of the past quarter millennium, just as the United States teeters on the edge of an abyss of its own making. The tragedy is less its own demise than the fact that it is bringing the rest of the world down with it.
POTUS should give young Americans something to dream about: a manned Mars mission. We basically stopped because Blacks demanded and got huge outlays from the white taxpayer. No need to evaluate the net result of all that money, you can see the results in the big cities.
An active space program to a definable goal, Mars, would reenergize the STEM community. Lots of now retired people were inspired by the Walt Disney Space Flight programs of the 1950s. Family members told me they themselves were inspired.
The USA broke up the fantastic government/industry/taxpayer team that got us to the moon.
Time to bring that back!
“in fact virtually none of Third World has been able to organize themselves as influential actors”
That is because it is US policy (PNAC) to bomb potential rivals coming out of the “third world” back into the stone age (see Libya)
Thank God for the S-300, 400
A characteristically perceptive essay by Mr. Durocher. I would raise one quibble, however:
While I would condemn a great deal of US foreign policy since the First World War—or actually for that matter since the revolution against England— I believe it has been very canny in certain regards, and that these have greatly enabled the US’s rise as a hegemonic power.
Firstly, as Pat Buchanan details in his book A Republic, Not an Empire, American foreign policy from independence to the Spanish-American War was focused on acquiring geographically contiguous, largely uninhabited land that waves of settlers could develop. This is in important to contrast to contemporary European (or for that matter later American) policies of indefinite overseas imperial rule over other peoples. For instance, in the aftermath of the Mexican-American War in the 1840s, the US did not seize and rule Mexico’s core as a colonial Raj, which it easily would have had the military capacity to do. The US instead acquired substantial, but mostly unpeopled, territories in the west, which it intended to settle.
Secondly, the US, like England before the First World War, has been very good (relatively speaking) at staying out of disastrous major power wars and endless guerrilla wars. Phillip II of Spain, Louis XIV, Napoleons I and III of France and Wilhelm II and Hitler of Germany all came to power when their nation occupied a pre-eminent place in Europe, and indeed to some extent the world. They squandered their nation’s might, however, in costly wars of aggression and interminable occupations.
Whereas the US, after the War of 1812, stayed out of European conflicts in the 19th century, and only entered World War 1 and World War 2 after European powers had done most of the fighting. Like a hyena, the US ravenously devoured the carcass of Eurasia after the German, French, British, Russia and Japanese lions had finished mauling one another near to death for it. (Much as England benefited immensely from the Napoleonic Wars.) The US overextended in the Cold War, as in Vietnam, a gigantic strategic blunder, but for the most part it followed the wise doctrine of containment devised by the brilliant George F. Kennan—i.e. defend its allies and let the USSR eventually collapse under its own imperial weight.
That is all to say, what I think is significant here is, as is so often the case, is the “dog that didn’t bark”—the US’s avoidance of fighting a “man to man” war against another major power. (In World War 2, both Japan and, especially, Germany had massive commitments of their forces elsewhere by the time of war with the US.) However, as with all empires, success has bred arrogance that may prove to be a patricide. If the US wishes to slow the (in my view, still inevitable) decline of its power, it must avoid direct war with China and/or Russia at almost all costs.
By the way—I (a fairly young American) learned about Minitel through Houellebecq’s novel The Elementary Particles, in which it is mentioned in some brief asides. Otherwise, I doubt I would have ever come across the term.
I wonder how history may have played out IF the French didn’t lose Canada. Suppose the British Empire made peace with France ruling over Canada. Then, would the colonies have been willing to rebel against the British?
Perhaps, out of fear of French Canada, the colonies would have stuck closer to the British Empire as protection.
But the British Empire expended huge sums to defeat the French in Canada(especially because of the insistence of the colonialists). With the French out of the picture, the American colonies no longer feared the French and became more defiant against the Mother Country.
Another result of the French-and-Indians War was that the British decided to tax the colonies. Having spent so much to defend the colonies and defeat French Canada, the British Motherland thought that increased taxation was only fair. But the colonies disagreed, and there followed the rebellion. But here’s the thing. The Revolutionaries had NO CHANCE of winning against the British without outside help. After all, only 1/3 of colonialists rebelled while another 1/3 fought for the Crown(and another 1/3 remained neutral). So, why did the American Revolutionaries win? Only because the French entered on their part. And why did the French side with the rebels? For the French, it was sweet revenge. The British Empire, prodded by the colonialists, took on French Canada and robbed France of all that wonderful territory.
So, what better way for the French to get their revenge by aiding the rebel-colonists against the British Empire? As all the major battles involved French troops, it was the French that really made American Independence possible. But this soon proved to a Pyrrhic victory for the French Monarchy. It became financially even more exhausted than the British Empire after the French-and-Indian Wars. Strapped for cash, the French Monarchy had a difficult time managing social unrest, and there followed the Revolution that toppled the king.
Even though the French Monarchy made American Independence possible, the Americans soon sided with the French Revolutionaries. Next, if Napoleon hadn’t been so ambitious on the Continent, maybe he could have done more build up the Louisiana Territory with French settlers. While Anglo-Americans were itching to grab that territory for themselves, they just couldn’t do it because France had done so much for the Americans. Also, having severed ties with the British Empire(that still held Canada), they were gonna get no help from the Crown to just grab the Louisiana territories. But then, a miracle for the Americans. Because Napoleon was strapped for cash, he sold the entire territory for peanuts. (Later the dumb Russians sold Alaska to Americans.)
Now, let’s roll back history a little. Why didn’t French Canada develop as quickly as the 13 Anglo colonies. Partly it was the weather as it was colder up there. But the other reason was the different sets of property rights in UK and France. The French Monarchy considered all the Canadian territory as its own private property. So, there was less incentive(and freedom) for common Frenchmen to move to the New World and begin anew. In contrast, Anglos who moved to America were given the opportunity for private ownership and enterprise, and that was powerful incentive for many more Anglos to try out their luck in the New World.
Now, suppose the French had held onto French Canada and changed the incentives for Frenchmen to move there. Keep in mind that France held both Canada and the vast Louisiana territories. Imagine if many French moved to Canada and then moved down and settled the Louisiana territories. They could have been the masters of America. And there might have been no French Revolution. And there might have been no American War of Independence either.
If British Empire and French Empire had made peace in the New World, then there would have been no French-and-Indian Wars, which led to taxation of the colonies that led to the rebellion by colonialists. If there had been no French-and-Indian War, the colonialists might have clung closer to the Empire out of fear of the French. Also, if there had been peace between French Empire and British Empire, the French most certainly would NOT have aided Independence struggle of the rebellious colonialists. Any attempt to break away from the British Empire would have been easily crushed by British troops. In such scenario, the French Monarchy would not have expended huge sums to aid the colonial rebellion against the British. And flush with cash, the French Monarchy would have been far sturdier against social and political problems.
It would have been a world without American Independence and French Revolution. It would have been a world in which the French still controlled Canada and had claims over vast Louisiana territories. In such a world, if the French had incentivized French migration to the Americas like the British did, Canada and and 2/3 of the America could have ended up in French hands, and the 20th century might have been a Franco-Canadian-Louisianan Century. Would such have been better?
My understanding is the author is a French-American dual citizen.
He speaks English with a flawless American accent, implying most likely a good deal of time resident in the USA.
There is no mystery to American Power. It’s the 3 L’s: Land, Lineage, and Legacy.
Obviously, if America were 1/20th of its real size, it could not have been a superpower despite cultural and political factors. After all, Anglos did pretty well in New Zealand, but it’s no superpower. As for Australia, it is huge, but most of the place is uninhabitable.
America was the best land in the world. All that vast territory in temperate zone. Not too hot, not too cold, and with lots of arable land with best soil in the world. Western Europe is also in temperate zone but small in size and lacking in resources. Russia is huge, but much of it is cold and desolate. China is huge, but for its size, rather lacking in good arable land and resources. In contrast, US has good weather, great farmlands, tremendous amounts of natural resources in oil and minerals.
Then, there was the Lineage. Anglos were intelligent and homogeneous(racially). That meant lots of ability and unity. Pretty solid DNA material.
There was also the Legacy. Anglos developed certain manners and attitudes that were conducive for both Order and Freedom. Too much order stifles progress. Too much freedom leads to chaos. Anglos developed a way to found freedom upon order. So, Anglo freedom wasn’t about acting like stupid drunkards but by using discipline to foster self-control that could allow for higher freedoms in thought, enterprise, adventure, discovery, and experimentation. It was different from the freedom of savages and barbarians whose life revolves around the passion of the dong and butt. It was about repressing wild energies and building character so that individuals, as men of honor and culture, could be free as ideal gentlemen and ladies. Such a mindset and attitude made for a culture of greater trust, rule of law, and sense of honor. People interacted on the basis of contracts than on petty kinship or autocratic subservience.
And precisely because the Anglo Way and especially the Anglo-American Way revolved around ideas about laws, contracts, honor, trust, and obligations, it was less culture-specific. And this meant that new immigrants who were non-Anglo could also adopt the Anglo-American way. It was easier for non-Anglos to assimilate into Americanism that had a set of rules than a set of rites and rituals. It’s like it’s easier to convert to Christianity than to Judaism. It’s easier to become a Buddhist than a Hindu. Christianity and Buddhism are credo-faiths whereas Judaism and Hinduism are ethno-faiths. While Americanism had a particular racial and ethnic imprint(that of Anglos), the basic modes of Americanism could easily be adopted and practiced by non-Anglos, at least if they were white(as a Anglo-ized German or Pole pretty much looked like any Anglo-American).
So, Anglo-Europeans(non-Anglo whites who became Anglo-Americanized) joined with Anglo-Americans in the American Enterprise? And why not join when there was so much promise in living in America than in cramped old Europe(where democracy and individual rights didn’t come to fruition for most nations until the late 19th century, but even then, so much of European history in the 20th century was about aristocratic war of WWI, communism, Fascism, National Socialism, ethno-imperial war of WWII, and Iron Curtain. (Granted, one could say US had its own tragedies with war with Indians, destruction of nature, and the Civil War, but history moved too fact in the US for anyone to grieve for too long.)
That is the essential backbone of why America became a great power. The 3L and the easily Anglo-Americanization of newcomers. It was far easier to forget your original identity and become an Anglo/American than, say, a Swede, Pole, or Swede, all specific identities rooted in historical particularism. Granted, French did try to universalize Frenchness, but it’s surely easier to comprehend and adopt Anglo-Americanism with its powerful but simple sets of rules than Frenchness with so much emphasis on haute culture and intellectual sophistication. While the Anglos could be snobby, they were also buttoned-down and more pragmatic. Being a decent law-abiding shopkeeper was enough to be Anglo, whereas you needed some degree of Culture to be French. It’s like American fast food is more universally appealing that various French cuisines that are good but require some degree of refinement to appreciate. Though Angl0-Americanism wasn’t exactly a Fast Culture(like fast food), it was more digestible. (It was with the fading of Anglo-emphasis in American Culture that it really turned into a Fast Culture. Today, you can be a total barbarian slob whose only interests are tattoos and going crazy at Walmart on Black Friday. THAT is Americanism.) Also, America unleashed certain repressed energies in the Old World that was overly bound by tradition. Americanism unleashed just enough vigor of barbarism to add charge to Western Civilization. We can see this in the American Western. It’s about creating order and civilization but also about adventurousness and individuality.
Now, two other factors made America bigger in the world. Jews and blacks. Jews have been tireless in science, business, entertainment, intellect, and etc. When Anglo-American creativity, pride, and fire began to fade in the second half of the 2oth century, Jews took up the slack with lots of great writers, artists, and activists. Jews made Hollywood, the dream factor of the world. Now, would America have had a great film industry without Jews? Maybe. After all, Walt Disney wasn’t Jewish. But Jews have knack for such things. They also came to dominate gambling. And many Jews were prominent song-writers of the 20th century.
Of course, Jews drew a lot of their musical influences from blacks. And blacks, with their jive rhythm and louder voices, played a huge role in the development of American music that came to influence the world. Even white performers like Elvis heavily drew on black influence. The black-Jew chemistry in music was highly interesting and productive.
America also gained prominence in sports because blacks are better at it. So, black Americans outran Europeans and everyone else. Black American boxers beat up Europeans and Russians. Without Jews, American business, technology, and culture would have grown less. And without blacks, there would have been no Jazz, Rock, and Rap. And US wouldn’t have been dominant in sports. If not for Joe Louis and Jesse Owens, the top boxers and runners of the 40s could well have been Europeans.
But for the Core Anglo/America(that of Anglo-American and Anglo-Europeans), Jews and blacks were a mixed blessing. Jews did contribute tremendously to the US, but they also used much of their capital and influence to subvert, shame, and degrade Anglo/America. Today, Jewish globo-homo Power is waging race war on Whites.
And even though blacks brought back many medals and trophies for America, what does this really mean? It means cucky-wuck white boys worshiping black muscle that kicks their white ass and even kicks the butts of Europeans, the racial brethren of Anglo/Americans. Also, black sports victory in the US led Europeans to also worship blacks, and so, Europeans also imported a whole bunch of blacks to play for their nations. What does this all mean? It mean black guys in Europe kicking white butt and turning white guys into cucky-wuck wussies who surrender their jungle-feverish white whores to Negroids.
And together, Jews and blacks promote interracism where white guys are supposed to act like guilt-ridden wussy-cucks while white women are infected with jungle fever for Negro dongs and act like Ariana Grande who tanned her skin to near-blackness and imitates black ho’s with more butts than brains.
Today, despite cultural and moral decay of the US, there is still the land that produces tons of food, natural resources, and etc. And where money is king, the US attracts smart people from all over the world to try their luck in Hollywood, Las Vegas, Wall Street, Silicon Valley, and etc. In some ways, the total hollowness of American culture is liberating for many who don’t want any restraints to their dreams.
Also, US controls the world currency, and it can keep printing money. US also benefits from the fact that, no matter how corrupt and rotten it is, there are many nations that are even more corrupt and rotten.
People tend to compare US with other empires like Roman, British, and French, but it overlooks one important factor. US would be a great power WITHOUT an empire. Indeed, US itself like an imperial nation in its own right. It has both head and body. In contrast, Rome as a great power relied on ruling over vast non-Roman territory. Rome itself was a head without a body. Same with the Brits and the French. Lose their foreign empires, and they were no longer awesome powers. They could still be local great powers but not world powers.
So, when Rome lost its colonies, it was finished as a superpower. Worse, it got conquered.
When the British lost its colonies, its days as great power was over too.
But even if US brings home all its military from abroad, it would still be a superpower. And even if US cut off all trades with other nations, it could survive as a great power. The only other nations with this capacity today are China, Russia, and Brazil. China still seems to be rising. Russia is holding steady but has problems of corruption and laziness. Brazil has too many blacks, and it will never rise.
Also, empires like Rome were vulnerable because its weaponry wasn’t all that more advanced that those of its enemies. It all came down to spear, sword, and arrows, something the barbarians and others had as well. For Rome to remain on top, it had to be ultra-disciplined, but it’s difficult to maintain that level of militancy over time. People burn out eventually. In contrast, the US has advanced weapons and can blow up any number of invaders or attackers. Look what happened to Japan in WWII. So, most Americans can be slobs who never served in the military but still feel safe.
And yet, there is the problem of non-white invasion facing both US and EU. Both US and EU have the technological and military means to stop the invasion. But they don’t. If anything, the elites welcome the invasion, and even many ordinary folks support it? Why? Because the command-center of the West has been infiltrated and re-programmed to reject race-ism. That’s all it took. It’s like TERMINATOR 2. The robot that was originally programmed to fight humans was reprogrammed to defend humans. Same machine but different code, thereby radically different behavior.
At one time, US had been coded to be gloriously race-ist. But upon the re-coding by Jews and Wasp ‘progressives’, the new Americanism was virulently anti-race-ist. Indeed, the worst sin according to PC is for whites to side with other whites. Whites can now be ‘good’ only by welcoming endless immigration in the name of Diversity. Whites can gain moral credit only by supporting OTHER peoples.
This is, why, for the time being, whites must support Indian-Zionism(or Inzionism), the idea that Indians are the original owners of the land(just like Jews were original owners of Zion) and that the biggest historical ‘sin’ of America was ‘genocide’ of the Indians. Inzionists must conflate immigration with imperialism with ‘genocide’. To bring justice to the Indians, all future immigration must be ended RIGHT NOW. And all good Americans must work to restore Indian pride and numbers.
Now, if whites could be gloriously race-ist, they wouldn’t have to resort to Inzionism. But since PC says whites must serve others, whites should primarily get behind Indians and make the case that, because Immigration-Imperialism led to ‘genocide’ of Indians, there must be no more Immigration-invasion because America is really Indian land, which means that the main moral obligation of whites is to restore Indian pride and numbers.
Anyway, on the matter of immigration, the general rule should be ALLOW IN PEOPLE WHO ARE COMPARABLE TO YOUR PEOPLE IN NATURAL ABILITY. If you bring over lots of real dummies, they will drag society down with ineptitude and stupidity. There will be a huge permanent underclass.
But if you let in people who are considerably smarter than your people, they will take over command centers and may work against your people. Sure, smart people will contribute to society, but they may use their wealth and clout not for the host majority but against them. Also, don’t let in a race that is stronger than yours. Such race will beat up your kids in school, streets, in sports, and take your womenfolk. Just look what blacks are doing to whites. It’s reducing white men to a bunch of pathetic cucks.
Thanks for the comment! Your point is taken. Although perhaps I need to be more specific on what I mean by “sovereignty.”
Consider this on Nullification, which claims that the Founders mostly believed the federal courts should decide what is constitutional according to federal law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nullification_(U.S._Constitution)#The_Federalist_Papers
I fully agree the Founders thought the right to secession in principle (otherwise what was the basis for their Revolution?). However, I have the impression that – so long as the Union was operative – they did not firmly establish who was sovereign in the interpretation of the Constitution. This is Schmittian sovereignty: Who decides what the rules mean, in the final instance? In practice, both the Feds often did not have the full capacity to enforce their decisions, hence recurring Nullification Crises, until Lincoln of course.
Very good points!
There is a lot of ruin in a nation.
It is a good analysis which emphasises the momentum the USA has built up – which will almost certainly mean continued global dominance into the second half of the 21st century even while the Chinese economy becomes much larger. Short of a large scale nuclear war (US-China or US-Russia) I don’t see that changing. China cannot challenge the USA for cultural, financial-system, or political-structure global dominance, does not wish to challenge the USA for military dominance. At some point overwhelming Chinese economic power will cause a flip, but without an existential war like WW2 that will likely take longer than the 50 years it took the USA to replace Britain – and Britain never had the same full-spectrum global dominance as the post-Cold War USA.
In terms of weakness and decline, the flip from an Anglo-Germanic-Celtic dominated nation to a Jewish and “multicultural” dominated nation also occurred around the end of the Cold War and the failure of GHW Bush to achieve re-election. This puts the US leadership class misaligned with the ‘grunts’ the US needs for many aspects of its global dominance, military especially, and a growing internal tension. The US judiciary’s increasing hostility to the founding-stock people is notable, along with of course the media and entertainment industries, and now even the Silicon Valley corporations. But I think the weakening/fracturing process is still at an early stage and I would be surprised to see secession in mid century. It will take a major failure of the US empire’s global hegemonic strategy to see the nation ‘flip’ again, into outright rebellion against the ruling elites. As I said, a disastrous war with Russia or China seems the likeliest trigger – I think currently the elites are sufficiently aware of this danger to avoid it, but their own quality is declining as they become more entrenched. A more speculative risk would be the USA taking the ‘wrong’ side in a European civil war – bombing nationalists on behalf of the EU, say, or of ‘persecuted’ Muslims – thus bringing internal US fractures to a head. I think this is relatively unlikely since it would require (a) such a conflict to occur and (b) the US leadership class to critically misunderstand their founding-stock subjects and their ability to control the opinions of those subjects. Whereas an accidental war with Russia or China is well within the current realm of reasonable contemplation.
In the absence of such a break-point, I can see the USA remaining both intact and globally dominant through the end of the 21st century, even while China’s economy becomes several times larger in real terms.
And, who knows, Mormons in the asteroid belt, bringing the two thousand year Germanic expansion wave out into the solar system and beyond.
The author may be right that ‘American hegemony or exceptionalism’ will be around for a long while yet, but that status will not ‘prove eternal’. Whatever else, that is true. Nations rise and gain power. Then they must retain that power. And when they lose it they seek to regain it.
https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
As I suggested in a comment to your previous column: the USA is managed by a group of tight-knit aces of power management.
If there is one thing the country will be exceptionally adept at, it will be what relates with power (and propaganda).
I agree property rights in land have been a huge driver of American expansion – and Crown property has likewise inhibited Anglo expansion in Australia and Canada, both of which do actually have a lot of potentially habitable but unsettled or marginally settled land. Australia is the extreme case where almost the entire population is crammed into tiny coastal strips and there is almost no outlet for the pioneer spirit, pace Crocodile Dundee.
On the whole I can state that it is gimmick but that will require operating with apparatus which is beyond the field of “expertise” of American “economists”, granted with some notable exceptions. I will omit here the issue of continental warfare and of American real military history, but it was primarily lack of those which drove initial accumulation and creation of the infrastructure. WW II was a great facilitator of growth of American prosperity.
Agree from
to
Also, agree mostly about Jews but mostly not about Blacks.
This is what matters as we speak:
And this:
Including Russia and China.
You could be onto something here. That “a” option above.
There is one spot where that could happen, and rather soon.
Say….in the next 3 to 6 months.
As for “b”….now, that is an interesting question. I can’t say I am optimistic there.
Without Dr. von Braun’s tireless efforts and Walt Disney’s television programming, the USA would never had gotten to the moon by 1969:
We will never get to Mars if we count on international participation. If we ever get to Mars, it will be because of national will. I want America to do that; working aerospike engines for one stage to orbit. Visionary engineering of a Martian lander. Maybe even a working nuclear powered space rocket. I’m not talking about science fiction here, I’m talking something doable on a national basis. It means we could leave in the dust our international competitors by creating a steady pipeline of space innovations.
POTUS should do a Mars speech to kick start a renewed national space effort.
Here is my speculation:
The North was ruled by the industrialists. They would have enjoyed high protective tariffs. Immigration would have provided a large workforce, nurtured by the big tracks of fertile land in the West. North would have become an industrial powerhouse.
On the other side, South was ruled by agricultural landed powermen. They would have keep the same way of life, exporting raw materials, and enjoying low-cost manufactured items imported from Europe. They would have followed same path than Argentina or Brazil, that is: abundant exports of raw material never sustain development of a country upto the industrial stage.
These economic determinants are so powerful that the wealth difference between North and South is obvious today although they had been part of the same one economic system.
Let’s say fifty years later, or so, a highly mecanized army from the rich North would have conquered the South, or would have submitted it the way it dominates countries from Latin America. So the North would have not less be an industrial superpower than the real USA.
Then, when Europe went into its own large civil war, the powerful North, being quite secure in its big island on the west shore of Atlantic Ocean, would only have to wait for Europe to be devasted by the warring parties. Then the North would have come to Europe as the “libertador” and takes the bounties of the winner, without much more costs than in the actual history.
In contrast, the US has advanced weapons and can blow up any number of invaders or attackers.
US doesn’t have hypersonics.
Look what happened to Japan in WWII.
Japanese planes were superior at the start of WWW2. Japan was defeated because it was smaller and did not have ressources of its own. As soon as its maritime trade was blocked by the war, its fate was sealed.
This by the numbers approach is not fully explanatory. You have to look at the role of the illuminated societies which built up the Americas like a magnet for the purposes of catalyzing the world-ending reaction which will lead to the next cycle. The perplexing rise of China is simply the next phase of this process, incorporating the bulk of Asia into the program. For this reason I don’t believe we will be able to sit this out and coast forever. The world will be culled, and the myriad weapons developed in the past century will do it. It will only be luck if any one of us survives.
Shale oil and gas has saved the US economy, along with Silicon Valley, but those budget deficits and overall debt levels are too high. US politics is too divided for that to be fixed and I expect this to flare up as an issue sooner rather than later. The pace of demographic change is also so rapid now, with much due to the age differences with the white generations dying off.
Interesting had Britain intervened the South would have been akin to Canada, probably de facto part of the British Empire. Interesting implications for WWI, would an infantry regiment from Alabama have been shipped across the ocean as they were from Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Would this possibility have changed the calculus of the German leaders advocating war?
Anyway eventually the South would get air conditioning and subsequent economic growth.
Your ideas are interesting too. Could the South have followed the path to whealth like Australia and NZ did?
Not knowing a lot of details about these countries, I’m not sure of my judgement. Nevertheless let’s say that Australia&NZ, as raw commodities producers, had nevertheless been able to enrich themselves because these raw materials can be harvested by a (relatively speaking) small number of Whites. There was no need to feed a large slave workforce to manage the gigantic herd of cattle owned by just one farmer.
Also, you’re right, we should not forget that a contingency such as moderate climate or air conditionning can have a huge effect.
M. Durocher,
An excellent article! Thank you. I agree with your points on the size/space, presence of natural resources, and religious freedom as reasons for the rise of the United States.
As a Canadian, I largely agree with your representation of Canada as authoritarian and bound by political correctness. There were positive counter trends in the 1990s such as the regionally-focused Reform Party of Canada but this element of the Canadian right seems much less a part of the political scene today. Current Canadian conservatives mostly support a PC ideology, with some honourable exceptions such as Ricardo Duchesne.
Thank you for an interesting article!
I LOVED this paragraph:
Guillame, I am from the “real” America and my people are fond of those, like you, who have educated themselves about what General Jackson called the common man.
Thank you for educating yourself.
Merle Haggard of California was our cultural poet and I want to share this with you:
Enjoy the sound of our people
One question I still need to research is why didn’t European powers get more involved. They could easily have tipped the balance with regards to southern deficiencies in production and manpower. And it would have made sense to keep this large, bountiful continent divided: as in the examples provided by Durocher, many could foresee America’s ascent to global hegemony. Why more to prevent it wasn’t attempted is a mystery
Surprized to find but plattitudes, shalowness and banalities. Recycled conventionalities. Our esteem for the author drops steeply.
Well, I guess you are asking about European involvment in US Civil War.
I would say first that almost nobody in Europe, but luminaries such as Tocqueville and the german Friedrich List who both had spend some time in USA, had understood that USA was bound to become a superpower. Englishmen from the time may have been blinded, unable to think about the possible loss of their worlwide domination. Thus nobody thought about the long term interest of the purpose of dividing USA.
About England: My country is France, thus what I will say is just the opinion of a not very knowledgeable man. Nevertheless:
- On one side the economic interest of England was to sustain the South, which was a avid buyer of the paraphernalia “made-in-England”, and a reliable provider of cheap cotton. By contrast the North wanted the South cotton for it’s own manufacturing, and wanted to grow them against the British competitors.
- On the other side, the abolitionist movment was very strong in UK, to the point that it forbidden England to actually support South a lot. This point is not my own knowledge. I got it from recent exchange here with S.
- I guess that these two opposing forces explain british almost neutrality.
About France: France intervened in America at the time of Civil War, but its agenda was quite different from the Civil War matter of conflict. Here is the wikipedia about:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_French_intervention_in_Mexico
This military adventure was mostly a failure. French army of this Napoleon’s great-nephew was not very effective, as demonstrated later by Bismarck invasion of France in 1870. So I guess France was happy enough of the Civil War, which allowed it to go in Mexico without interference from the USA. Therefore the french choice to take no part in Civil war, and thus take no risk of South or North intervening in Mexico.
About Germany: It was still in its first phase, finishing to reunite german people under the prussian dominion. No foreign venture had yet been on the agenda.
I read how abolitionist sentiments in the UK precluded more support for the slaving South. It didn’t preclude support for the slaving Ottomans in Crimea (who were notably very keen to capture European women for their harems). Then again checking the growth of Russian power seemed imperative for the Brits and French at that time- but not that of the US, apparently.
Then again checking the growth of Russian power seemed imperative for the Brits
Oceania against Eurasia. The ocean master against the landmass master. This conflict is old and deeply rooted.
Today, US island replaces UK island. Putin replaces french king LouisXIV, or emperor Napoleon, or fuhrer Hitler. But the root of the conflict did not change.
Shale oil and gas has saved the US economy, along with Silicon Valley, but those budget deficits and overall debt levels are too high.
As dollar is the world currency, the US can just keep printing money.
This is why the global currency system must change so that the US economy will be more sober and balanced.
No mystery at all… Just scale of economy and a more advance form of colonization.
All wealth starts from natural resources plus labour. Everything in our daily life comes from nature, food, clothes, furnitures, plastic boxes, TV, smartphones, cars… come from soil, forest, oil, mineral ore etc.
Old Europe went to foreign lands to exploit natural resources and labour.
America imported slaves and immigrants to be exploited.
China exploit our own existing population.
The rise of America before WW2 is no mystery, just the scale of economy. Check the world powers of the past few centuries, Spain-> Britain-> Germany-> USA/Soviet Union-> China, each has a bigger population than the last. The trend is clear.
After WW2, the US established an improved and more effective form of colonization than the old European one.
The major change is the means to control the colonies, it changed from brute force of military to soft power of media/intelligence, to control both the masses and the elite. And the exploit changed from real materials to financial.
This “capital + media” has worked so spectacularly well that countries around the world fought to become US colony, willingly and proudly…
Truly impressive aaccomplishment… Perhaps America really is run by the Jews, the game is much superior than the Anglo or other old Europe.
The ruling class has wiped it’s ass with the(not worth the hemp it was written on) constitution a long, long time ago – the ink was barely dry.
Who would expect rulers to constrain themselves, by a document written by people that they themselves would consider terrorists? Not a chance.
As for rights? What you have in that document are temporary privileges , that can be taken away anytime, as they already have in the past – usually in the name of national security; infact, the whole damn document can be nullified in the name of national Security, and the stupid, dumb, fat, lazy people would go right along with it, because it’s already happened!
“The comment”,
Exacting, history is a numbers game, so now that we push the boundaries ….bye bye linearity. No historical models have much direct value, “ex nihilo” might be the rational choice. Or if prefererred, not numbers but quality concepts should rule.
Popular opinion against slavery in Europe made intervention impossible after the emancipation proclamation. In Britain, despite the most well known British emigrant, Patrick Celburne, fighting for the Confederacy, most immigrants went to the north and fought in the Union armies so the relatives of these back in Britain strongly opposed intervention. Ultimately intervention would still have been costly and risky, there was a lot of British investment in the US. Back then the US was seen as being benign and far away, isolated due to the Monroe doctrine. The popular perception of the US today, compared to recent times, was very different.
The wealth difference was obvious in 1860, and was the other way around. It is said that Natchez, Mississippi then had more millionaires as a percentage of its population than any other municipality in the United States. Wade Hampton II (1791-1858), the father of the Confederate general, owned land in South Carolina, North Carolina, Mississippi, and Louisiana, all profitably cultivated with the labor of more than 3,000 slaves. His wealth was described as astounding by a visiting British lord whose host he had been.
Southern wealth was in great part the perverse result of the 1808 prohibition of the trans-Atlantic slave trade, and gave the lie to Franklin’s 1751 contention that “The Whites who have slaves, not labouring, are enfeebled, and therefore not so generally prolific; the slaves being work’d too hard, and ill fed, their constitutions are broken, and the deaths among them are more than the births; so that a continual supply is needed from Africa.” In practice, the unavailability of such a “continual supply” made slaves more valuable, and as slave prices rose, this provided an incentive for their careful husbandry, as a sort of profitable livestock. As a result the slave population increased domestically, and a continual supply from Africa ceased to be needed.
The failure of the South was that it invested too much in slaves and did not convert its wealth into financial instruments. The greatest balance sheet transaction in American history took place when emancipation rendered most of the South’s assets worthless. Southern poverty dates from 1865.
The wealth difference was obvious in 1860, and was the other way around. It is said that Natchez, Mississippi then had more millionaires as a percentage of its population than ….
Ok, that’s a fact. Nevertheless I will not change my way to estimate the wealth of a country, which is to look at its GDP. To be a $millionaires at the time, you had to be very rich. So your report is more about the unequality of the slave system and the large farms.
The failure of the South was that it invested too much in slaves and did not convert its wealth into financial instruments.
Are you certain it was an error? If financial instruments had been giving more return than investing in slaves and farms, they would have invested in them.
Furthermore, what exactly was the capital loss of the south?
If you compute on the whole: These freed slaves were now salarymen. Let’s imagine they had been salarymen since the beginning of America (as if there had never been slavery). The total cost of them for the farmers, since the beginning, would have been more or less the same, since the salaries would not have been more than than the costs to provide for transportation from Africa, food, children growing, housing and so on.
It is a fact that each slave owner lost the value of its human herd. But the South, as a whole, lost nothing: Because previously they could not have sold slave to anybody but other Southerners. For each Southerner selling a slave and increasing its money account, there was a Southerner buyer whose money account decreased. So the loss of every individual slave owner doesn’t translate, if reasoning at the scale of the whole South, in a loss of actual whealth. South money, as a whole, could not have been increased by selling the slaves; Therefore freeing the slaves was not a loss of money. As long as the black peoples were staying here and willing to work, the South had lost nothing of its real capital, that is the human productive force.
In short: on one side, the slave buyer pay for work which will happen latter. On the other side, the farmer pays its hired workers for work which has already been done. But it does change nothing, in the long term, in the return of the farm.
Of course, this equivalence doen’t stand if the salaryman costs more than the slave. That is, if the salaryman can get wages above the minimum neeeded for survival and reproduction. Here comes the fact that some blacks leaved South to work in North. I don’t know the numbers, and I can’t say if there was a loss for the South.
I can believe that after 1865 the South situation went down. But my explanation was that they could not anymore sell for a good price the cotton to UK, and get cheap stuff from UK. They sold their cotton to the buyers from North, and buyed stuff from them. I mean: Thanks to tariffs, North gained a monopoly on the South external trade, from which North was able to collect the added value created by the activity of the South.
Next time when you feel like spouting platitudes about the “Holy Constitution”, perhaps you may explain how come so few Americans are actually judged by a jury, despite their “right to a trial by jury” being “guaranteed” by the said Constitution?
How come, if the Constitution says ratified international treaties are as powerful as the constitution, various states and villages shit on the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, and “allow” use and trade of cannabis, and worse? (In fact, local authorities “permission” would be void, unless also permitted by FBI and ATF.)
If there is freedom of speech, can you explain Butina and Shkreli sentences?
Until today, America is one of the shortest lived empires in history. Their world domination starts in 1940′s. Unless they survive a few more centuries, and provide humanity with something indelible, like the Julian-style calendar, or Zoroastrian-style monotheism, it is as if America did not exist. Trains are British, airplanes – French, cars and rockets – German. Computers are British, and so is DNA. Perhaps lasers are the one game changer made in America.
Despite all of the historical factors thoughtfully analyzed in this articulate essay, the fact remains that California has become an unpleasant and frustrating place for someone like me to live life. I used to think we are a generation or two further unraveled than the rest of the country, but I think I was wrong; it will happen faster. There is a saying in the training of ocean lifeguards: People often drown quickly, and quietly.
Sorry, but you dont get a space program ,the US has given Cape Canaveral to the Israelis. You will be paying for the launch of Israeli spaceships though.
”Israeli nonprofit SpaceIL and Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) presented today at IAI’s Space Division a time capsule that will travel to the moon – and remain there indefinitely – with the first Israeli spacecraft, which will launch from Cape Canaveral, Florida, in February, 2019
Well?
I would say that this all happened because king John did sign Magna Carta and he was not even Anglo Saxon. He was Norman.
Little bit shallow article (somebody already did mention it) but still good.
US always was the best peace of real estate (untapped) in the world.
Also the stream of emigrants from Europe bringing new ideas and methods largely contributed to progress. (internal competition)
Eventually the largest market for manufactured goods plaid the most important role.
And than after end of WW2 the picking of the brains of German scientist did kick the US further in development.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………..
But now
Germans do make better cars, and steel, and Russians make better machine guns, Indians are making better textiles and
not to mention Chinese who make better and cheaper gadgets.
I do not thing that the future of US does still looks so rosy
I am more pessimistic.
Days of wine and roses for US are coming to the end.
Natchez Miss had a higher percentage of millionaires than any city in the world before the war. The world not just Europe and the Americas.
I recently read a book about the economic destruction of the south after the war. You’re right that too much money was invested in slaves. When slaves went from being valuable livestock to free humans the south became poor and it took a hundred years to recover
Both WWI and WWII were caused by German economic success in E and SE Europe.
Edward Mead Earle, Ph.D., ‘Turkey, The Great Powers and The Bagdad Railway, A study in Imperialism’, 1923, 1924, New York
Lawrence R. Pratt, ‘East of Malta, West of Suez’, London, 1975
As to USA power, what is the problem ?
There was a continent hardly without people, genocide and/or illnessses, rich in almost all resources, agricultural an mineral.
USA history of the second half of the 19th century is mainly grabbing economic opportunities.
This grabbing of course had lofty ideological excuses, such as Manifest Destiny, abolition of slavery,
and the Monroe Doctrine.
The USA problem now, in my opinion, is that until now USA foreign policy was conducted for internal political reasons, a luxury that seldom existed in history.
These internal political reasons, jewish hatred towards Germany an important factor.
The present Trump versus Deep State troubles, in my opinion little more than that USA jewry cannot accept that the era of abusing the USA for their purposes is over, the USA simply can no longer afford it.
For those interested in jewish anti German propaganda in the USA
Henry Morgenthau, ‘Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story’, New York, 1918
Heath W. Lowry, ‘The story behind Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story’, Istanbul 1990
A recent article here in the Netherlands stated that Putin, Erdogan and Trump hate Soros.
No idea whatsoever about the superiority of Roman armament.
Each Roman soldier carried weapons and armour with the value of a whole village.
Laws existed to prevent that the barbarians got Roman weapons.
Roman armies were invincible, except in terrain circumstances very unfavorable to them.
So they were massacred in German forests, for example, advanced in single file.
In the Netherlands they hardly advanced north of the big rivers, water, marshes, ebb and flood.
Brittany, France, there also the tides were the Roman enemy.
What surprises me in the article and the comments is that I see no mention of the complicated economic, cultural and political relations between GB, the South, France, the North and British Caribbean colonies.
Alas, these relations were so complicated that I’m unable to remember them well, and thus summarise them.
Also, there is not one book among my books that describes them, pieces of information are in quite a number of books.
History is seldom simple.
And history just becomes interesting when one knows a lot of detail.
What an uninformed hubris. The scientists, engineers, technologists, etc. who built the US were Germans kidnapped by the CIA and forced to the US after the end of WWII.
In fact, the US achieved nothing. It is still violently poor imperialist country that relies on slaves-like labor force. It has been at war all of its life. I like comment 5 by Brabartian.
Archeofuturism = not thinking that your ancestors were abject morons and that you are a sui generis genius.
Yes, that must be it!
“If the US wishes to slow the (in my view, still inevitable) decline of its power, it must avoid direct war with China and/or Russia at almost all costs”. Few people in Washington seem to have taken this on board, indeed these same people see war as a way of slowing decline.
After reading this, I am left none the wiser as to the growth/mystery of American power. A varied cocktail of sanitized, feel-good history, revisionism, half truths (implying some truths) and veiled genuflection .
A glaring omission of violence, militarism abroad (Over 800 military bases across the globe and counting), unbridled greed to feed the insatiable elites and lately unrelenting MSM mind-numbing propaganda (masquerading as news and analyse), as decisive in the rise and sustenance of the American Empire, some elements arguably beginning with the nation’s inception. My own personal inclination: I will stick with Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States. Until an improved perspective from the viewpoint of the ruled and the vanquished emerges (comprising the vast majority both inside and outside the country), that is.
ALL nation/ cultures decline and dissipate, the same as radioactive isotopes. The USSA is in ineluctable and unstoppable disemblance.
It will split up into ethnic-states, White (Indo-European) and other. It is my hope that Christianity disappears.
Now that you’ve had your heaping plate of hot, steaming “Americana” feel good bull shit, it’s time for a little truth.
This sentence in the last paragraph of the article was totally gonzo: “America, warts and all, is a testament to the unsuspected power of law and liberty.”
And this is a lot closer to the truth:
““All the other stuff, the love, the democracy, the floundering into lust, is a sort of by-play. The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted.” D.H. Lawrence
You are correct.
When it comes to the Constitution of the united States, it exists only on paper because the citizenry has been so conditioned to accept the false notion that our “rights” come from government.
The Constitution of the united States is a charter of “negative rights” that puts strict limits on what government may do, to wit: ” Congress shall make NO LAW, etc.
According to the wisdom of the founders, our “rights” are endowed by our Creator and cannot be abrogated or limited.
The Constitution of the united States and its “Bill of Rights” has been so bastardized, abused, and nullified that we no longer live under a Constitutional form of government, and in many ways, are no better than other countries who consider their populations to be “subjects”, required to bend to the will of their “leaders”.
The U.S. has been under Zionist rule since 1913 when the Zionist banking cabal got their privately owned FED and IRS through a corrupt congress and a corrupt POTUS and with these two UNCONSTITUTIONAL acts the destruction of America was set in motion via the Zionist instigated wars and the debt created with the money created out of thin air by the FED and the taxing of the gains on this illegal ether created money by the IRS!
With around 260 Trillion in unfunded liabilities and 22 Trillion in upfront debt all as a result of the wars and MIC via the Zionist control of the American government, the America of our past is not the America of our future, it has been destroyed by the Zionist NWO operation of debt creation of money out of thin air via the FED and perpetual wars, America is headed for third world status!
Zionist control of America is the death of America!
Very superficial explanation and also is very dangerous explanation .
Europeans achievement has come at the back of the colonization . America has improved that motto and that principle
Religious diversity has been a feature of Europe . But it has been destructive . In US a, re;atuvely well fed nation did not have to fight over religion to make any economic fight manifest through religion . Religion is a force but the force was never needed tom be politically activated in US . There was no established church fighting its power in US because there was none . Religion has been a business in US .
Constitution ? Who knows about constitution ? How does it make US great ? It makes the infighting among the business or property based elite less homicidal and less destructive . But US’s nasty fight among themselves shouldn’t be forgotten – in senate in streets in congress – for first 150 yrs until that tension form 1900 started getup g exported abroad .
Slavery built an edifice on which more floors -different looking were added .
People who migrate to different distant land ,usually do better . It applies to a large group of people also .
historically other countries who came to existence from the invasion by foreign people ( Aryan in India and there are other ) have always risen above the contemporary .
“Can a nation be free if it oppresses other nations? It cannot.” Vladimir Lenin
February 23, 2015 America Has Been At War 93% of the Time – 222 Out of 239 Years – Since 1776
The U.S. Has Only Been At Peace For 21 Years Total Since Its Birth. Below, I have reproduced a year-by-year timeline of America’s wars, which reveals something quite interesting: since the United States was founded in 1776, she has been at war during 214 out of her 235 calendar years of existence. In other words, there were only 21 calendar years in which the U.S. did not wage any wars.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article41086.htm
The war started at a bad time for the South in terms of the cotton market — England was gorged with a huge surplus of cotton and unsold cotton textiles; a cotton asset bubble was in place. No cotton shortage occurred until 1862 after the Union victory at Antietam, so the Brits had no immediate economic incentive to support the South. Military victory nullified the potency of the cotton embargo.
Jul 29, 2013 The Origins of the American Public Education System Horace Mann & the Prussian Model of Obedience
In the 1830′s, American Lawmaker Horace Mann visited Prussia and researched its education methodology. He was infatuated with the emperor’s method of eliminating free thought from his subjects and designed an education system for Massachusetts directly based on these concepts. The movement then quickly spread nationally.
Although not starting with the letter L, another factor to the development of American prominence is Navigable Rivers, specifically the Mississippi and it tributaries. These rivers represent more navigable miles of transport that the rest of the world combined. Transport by water is less than one-tenth the cost of land transport. The importance river transport can be seen in the Blue Banana of Europe refereed to by the author.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_French_intervention_in_Mexico
the frech invaded Mexico
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Vuelta_de_Obligado
French and English invaded Argentina
french failures
Nicely expressed Opinion by Durocher.
Durocher is not the first Frenchman to examine America. There was Tocqueville:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_in_America
As a child in Brooklyn, I believed, and still believe that The Statue of Liberty, a gift from the French People, is the gift that keeps on giving. Lady Liberty to those of us who rode our bicycles over to the Belt Parkway to see that beauty – some 300 yards away.
And my favorite painter, Delacroix, with my favorite painting, (do I need a verb?).
https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=delacroix+liberty+leading+the+people&FORM=IARRTH&ufn=liberty+leading+the+people+eugene+delacroix&stid=142678c2-2d87-adb4-a172-19a2a66f5f15&cbn=EntityAnswer&cbi=0&FORM=IARRTH
Unfortunately: Durocher clearly, and cleverly obscures the truth, not only about America, but about his own France. He fails to see in France, the Yellow Vests, he fails to hear Alain Soral, Jean Marie Le Pen, any Le Pen, and, Dieudonné.
Of America, he fails to venture an honest examination of just Who is in Power, who controls the American Government, and with the government, the American people. There is no surprise here; Durocher is one of them; he works for Saruman, the Zionist Saruman.
Durocher quotes Jean Marie Le Pen, only to cleverly warn all lovers of Liberty, to Dispair, to Surrender, to give up all hope for attaining Liberty.
This partial quote is part of a warning voiced by a courageous man, it is not a surrender speech.
Durocher (marching in step with the Zionist owned Mainstream Media) obscures the heroic struggle waging in France, as he is guarding the door for the Rothschilds, lest the American people learn of the connection of Yellow Vests, to our Minutemen. Falsely analyzing, manicuring, American Political history, he separates the French people from the American People. This is not the first time this has been attempted. It is, nonetheless, a crime.
Who owns and controls the American Government, and its Citizens? Any suggestions Monsieur Durocher? Ever heard of the Rothschilds, and other Zionist Oligarchs? Heard mention of AIPAC?
Durocher is not the first to fail to properly examine, or just fail to honestly record the History, and the current reality of the United States (in this case, the United States of 2018). He will not be the last.
We Will Restore our Democratic Republic. There is no Liberty without its existence.
Durruti
1-this is verification of facts, historic ones.
2- this is article does not take time into consideration.
the naive author forgets three major factors.
1-the Us was a from the start a settlement of people wishing to stay, a colony of
development in the minds of the settlers. In africa, south america they were all colonies of Exploitation – the local incomers wanted to EARN money and valuable goods for a 5 – 6 years period and… get back to their homelands to enjoy them.
2-The number ONE factor of economic development is energy supply the abundant and cheaper they are, the greater the development will be. So in the subsequent centuries the world had the eras of a) COAL – and the country was full of coal b) then OIL – and again it revealed top rich in oil.
Well, the brits and romans have showed the same patterns of success and wealth.
And, let me add up that, outside the economy and the world dominance success story, the US of A is indisputably, the most criminal state in world History. History, not figure of speech.
By far, in all those years even because Hitler´s Germany for example has lasted only twelve years. The bs author also forgets that no nation or state or dominant society in History has ever ammended itself.
Durocher , the USA is the orgasm of european civilizations , don`t you think so ?
Germany just got an emperor in 1871, the king did not even like it.
Eliminating free thought, ever seen the list of for example German inventions around 1900, such as the Otto and the Diesel engine ?
And in what country can one, with a war going on, criticise this war in parliament ?
During WWI not in GB, but it did happen in Germany.
Then, German gymnasia were seen as excellent schools.
This type of school simply does not exist in english speaking countries.
USA education officers after WWII, sent to POW’s for denazification, had bad times with their english speaking victims, they observed USA white black racism in the USA army.
Regardless of the moral issues, emancipation was clearly a violation of previously-established property rights. Uncompensated taking. Theft. Or robbery, rather — given the degree of force involved.
Let’s look at an analogous situation: slavery was largely abolished in the British Empire in 1833. Slave owners were paid a total of £20 million in compensation. Doesn’t sound like that much in today’s currency, but £20 million in 1833 was roughly equivalent to 40% of Britain’s 1833 government expenditures/ 5% of British GDP. In straight purchasing power terms, that’s about £2 billion in present day value. As a percentage of GDP, it’s closer to £100 billion.
Where did the money come from? They borrowed it from Nathan Mayer Rothschild and his brother-in-law Moses Montefiore. The loan was paid off in… 2015.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/29/slavery-abolition-compensation-when-will-britain-face-up-to-its-crimes-against-humanity
[Pretty histrionic/ pearl-clutching piece overall, but that was a rather interesting factoid.]
Durocher , and Hispanic America is the orgasm of Spanish civilization plus amerindian civilizations , a much more difficult blend .
1/3 of all US federal prison inmates are violent illegal aliens.
Right out of a present day US junior high school. LOL
Those “colonized” were better off because of it. Now look at them.
The U.S. is a colony of Israel. Netanyahu is the dictator. Plain and simple.
Prove me wrong.
Good luck with that.
“the fantastic government/industry/taxpayer team that got us to the moon.”
Wish you had stayed there!
The US and European Anglos owe their success to their ability to feed on others like a parasite and due to their ability to divide and conquer others.
Very good book to understand the religious base of the USA : The American Religion , Harold Bloom
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/20944.The_American_Religion
It is hard to be a top dog and avoid fighting indefinitely. An alternative strategy is to attempt to have the rivals fight each other or fight smaller players around them: a re-play of the 20th century wars. That requires constant meddling and stirring up any potential conflict. Over the last generation Washington has done that well.
(You have to remember that people-in-charge always tell you the opposite of what they are actually doing: if your boss tells you ‘I am not f..ing with you‘ – he is f..ing with you, there is no other reason to say what he says. In the same way, if Washington constantly says ‘we want stability‘, it is because they are trying to stir up conflict. This is fundamental to power management – and most people miss it.)
The downside of that strategy is that with too many sponsored conflicts, the center over time loses control, random events start proliferating, local passions get inflamed, and at some point Washington has to step in. In most cases they cannot do it, or they cannot win (geography, complex local conditions, the avoidance of casualties).
US has also failed to successfully line up the most desirable conflict: China vs. Russia, or alternatively China vs. India. (The EU-Russia conflict has always been just a dream, due to the nature of today’s Europeans it would fizzle out very quickly.) If that doesn’t happen, Washington has basically two choices: a slow disengagement and turning inward (Trump), or going for the giant final fireworks (everybody else in Washington). This will get really interesting post-Trump.
Indeed we stole the inventions of the steam-, Otto and Diesel engines from the Papuas.
The airplane was an Eskimo invention.
The jet engine we stole from the black Africans, synthetic fertilizer from the Maoris.
Anti biotics and vaccins from the Arabs.
That’s impressive considering only 20% are foreign born.
Imports of grain from Northern States also proved more important, Corn was King.
The Guardian, Soros propaganda.
Solomon Katz, ‘The Jews in Visigothic and Frankish Kingdoms of Spain and Gaul’, Cambridge MA 1937
Judging from the legislation of the era jews were specialised in slave trade.
Jewish doctors seem to have been excellent in eunuch production.
Excellent of course relative, statements exist that one in ten survived.
Crimes against humanity, did anyone ever read the old testament: genocide, ethnic cleansing ?
Homophobia, a jewish invention.
Sol Bloom ‘the great accomplishment of Franklin Roosevelt was that he slowly prepared the USA people for war’, a some 70 million casualty war.
Sol Bloom, ‘The Autobiography of Sol Bloom’, New York 1948
In relation to this, the expulsion of some 800.000 Palestinians, what are we talking about ?
The Gaza concentration camp, not a crime against humanity, of course.
But indeed, British slave owners were compensated.
BTW, did not know that Soros found a new target: GB.
Had the idea that he was not in need of more enemies.
But indeed, Brexit is at odds with Soros’ philantropic Open Society.
One cannot ignore the geographic location and the geological/natural wealth of responses.
I might add the weather.
Continuous rescue from starvation of the early settlers by natives.
When you want to destroy your enemy, your best strategy is to make him feel immortal and invincible first. I wonder…
It would seem that 400 years or so of killing, infecting, enslaving or displacing countless millions of indigenous peoples, in order to asset strip their lands is absolutely fine, as they got diesel engines, ammonium nitrate and dodgy vaccines in return. Those lucky people should be eternally grateful for European largesse.
most of that can be rightly blamed on the Spaniards and Portuguese
btw who is to blame for the Black Plague that killed 30-60% of all Europeans?
i don’t see any of them returning to their mud huts, do you?
lol, that’s why every african and central and south american want to come here and not the other way around
Parasites? do tell
A little more history.
04/21/2017 Woodrow Wilson Pushed U.S. Into World War I And Communism, Fascism And Nazism Resulted
Good intentions are never enough to justify government action.
http://www.onenewspage.com/n/Politics/75e71rvsb/Woodrow-Wilson-Pushed-Into-World-War.htm
American power comes from natural resources, its secure location between two oceans and the foresight of the Anglo Europeans who founded and built it.
However it has been corrupted and is in decline.
Time to do a 180.
Guillaume Durocher ignores the elephant in the room! America hosts a PARASITE – the PRIVATE Central-Bank Owners. Their plan was always to make USA a great power, ON BORROWED MONEY, to serve as Foreign Legion of the Empire of the Great PARASITE. Then to destroy the patsy nation along with it’s massive debt, a 100 years later. Then the Great Parasite would jump to a new host: China as it turned out.
Any analysis of the rise and fall of the American empire without inclusion of the PARASITE is nonsense!
America got very lucky. Excellent safe location, weak neighbors, unused resources and plenty of those, excellent geography and climate. In military terms USA never was USSR equal. Nukes prevented the whole thing getting hot and America learning g the hard way that it is amateurish at best. Economically USA was dominant after the ww2 thanks to her location where it was safe from destruction other suffered. Were USA somehow connected to Russia on one side, Germany and France on another she would have never achieved this status. Others would put her down rather quickly. Now that resources squandered, others are back and there is no easy military options USA is going bananas sensing that her time is up. The debt load is unsustainable, economy is in ruins. Things going back to normal with USA as very local northern American state.
That Africans and Central Americans want to come here does not disprove my point. It makes it.
The West uses its military and economy to siphon off wealth of other societies. See dollar hedgemony and color revolutions the west does against foreign leaders who try to lead their people honorably such as Ghadaffi.
If the west would leave these people alone, the west would not be as prosperous but it would still be a mainly white nation.
Think on that.
“The Whites who have slaves, not labouring, are enfeebled, and therefore not so generally prolific; the slaves being work d too hard, and ill fed, their constitutions are broken, and the deaths among them are more than the births; so that a continual supply is needed from Africa. “
500K slaves were imported into British NA. By the civil war there were 4.3 million slaves/freemen of Aftican descent. Pretty significant population growth. Deaths did not outnumber births. NA slaves were well kept and treated like capitol, unlike in southern regions which treated them as a commodity and accounted for 10 million imports from Africa to maintain supply
Anyways, to understand America one must understand it was an illuminati project. The New Atlantis (so called by Sir Bacon) that would forge a NWO where the elites would rule the world. They lost control for awhile but Cecil Rhodes plan with Rothschild money recovered America by the end of the 19th century and the British Empire upgraded their base of operations to the New Atlantis
how did USSR get their nukes? stolen from USA
Russian economy last i checked was roughly equal to Italy
Victor Ostrovsky, ‘Mossad – the other side of deception’, 1994 describes, if it is a true story, I cannot know, how Mosssad made Reagan trying to kill Ghadaffi.
There is no such thing as ‘the west’.
You really think that for example German and Dutch populations approve of the destruction of countries as Iraq and Lybia ?
Why Iraq was destroyed, listen to the farewell speech of senator Hollings in 2004
It was not luck, it was total lack of moral scruples, which helped to get profits out of other’s blood. Even much talked about Lend-Lease was no charity, to put is mildly. The numbers are here:
https://www.quora.com/Has-Russia-paid-off-the-USSRs-Lend-Lease-debt
In June 1941 Harry Truman expressed the US position clearly, as was quoted in the pages of New York Times, saying, “If we see that Germany is winning the war, we ought to help Russia; and if that Russia is winning, we ought to help Germany, and in that way let them kill as many as possible …”
This was before the age of hypocrisy, “bringing democracy”, “human rights”, and “open society” lies were not invented yet.
In 1913 two different laws created two entirely different entities that are conflated as being similar when in fact they are quite different.
The federal reserve Central Bank is a progressive, crony capitalist institution that did not replace Andrew Jackson’ s decentralized banking system, but rather Grant’s statutory banking system that created NYC banking cartel that was unable to stop ( because it helped create) periodic credit panics.
In contrast, the 16th Amendment was the result of grassroots classical liberal, populist movement that rebelled against Guilded Age Republican crony capitalism. It was a reaction to Supreme Court decisions that enabled crony capitalist railroads, which were federal corporations, and speculators in federal lands to escape taxation under the US Constitution rule that direct taxes had to be apportioned according to Representation.
The Amendment did not create a new UN-apportioned direct tax, but only re-iterated that taxes on income are inherently excise taxes.
Excise taxes are laid on certain activities and privileges. Working for a living is NOT a privilege, but a right. Unless you have statutory “wages” from receipts paid by federally connected activities, you do not owe a tax.
Tens of thousands of Americans who understand this are filing educated tax returns and receiving full (as opposed to partial) refunds of all withheld taxes, state and federal, including payroll taxes! See http://www.losthorizons.com.
Is that why we hear so much about Italy lately? How it subverted elections all over the world and how it is an existential threat to the “exceptional” Empire? Maybe the US should sanction Italy?
BTW, if the USSR stole everything from the US, how come it developed the H-bomb before the US? Did they use the time machine?
It helps to be able to put two and two together. That immediately kills all propaganda BS.
This idea of yours is your idea.
An interesting case today is Mustang, up to now an inacessible valley in the north of Nepal.
The plan is to construct a road from China to Nepal that goes through Mustang.
Those living in Mustang see what is going to happen, more comfortable lives on the one hand, disappearance of their culture on the other.
They do not know if they see the change as positive or negative.
Another interesting case is Bhutan, a still medieval independent country, very poor.
Almost any modern invention is not allowed there.
Bhutan measures happiness, in my opinion a trick to keep the people quiet.
What we see over the whole world, with few exceptions, is that people want western style lives.
What the balance is of what the European cultures gave the world, and what these cultures took from the world, anyone can have his opinion.
If these opinions have any relevance, I wonder.
History cannot be changed.
What can be changed is what is written in history books.
What is happening right now is that what the European cultures gave to the world is taken for granted, even worse, what we did was just destructive, criminal.
What shall we do, when the next ebola outbreak happens, just surround the area with military, prevent any escape, and let anyone inside die ?
actually Italian GDP is higher than Russia
does it bother you?
There are lies, big lies, and statistics.
If your idea is that my opinion is that Wilson had good intentions, I must disappoint you.
Why are you struggling to justify the unjustifiable?
Portuguese and Spaniards are European so your point is meaningless. However, England, France, Holland and Belgium are just as guilty in this respect, although they now have better spin doctors. The Black Death is generally regarded as something European ships brought back from the Orient, being carried by fleas on rats, black rats that is. The ships should have stayed at home.
As for “them” not going home, well nowadays they are often in Europe because NATO has decided to bring them democracy by way of cuddly bombs and freedom loving terrorist proxies. I can’t blame people for getting out of their way but certainly things would have been much better if NATO had also stayed at home.
Yea, sure. Suffice it to say that the rent I would have paid if I were crazy enough to rent my own house from myself is counted in the US GDP.
What really bothers me is that every American resident is paying ~$2,300 annually for “defense”, while our Southern border is violated by millions of illegals every year. What’s more, the last indisputable US military victory was in 1983 over Grenada (population ~ 90,000).
I suspect by the end of the century, the Americas will be two giant nations divided by the Panama canal to be called America with its Spanglish speakers in the north and Columbia with its Spanguese speakers in the south… beyond that, it’s hard to predict what will happen!
what’s unjustifiable?
zulus slaughtering millions of their fellow blacks on their way down to South Africa and then claiming the whites that built that country stole their land?
native americans playing soccer with human heads, cutting out beating hearts for their sun god, scalping and torturing each other for centuries and then claiming Europeans were the bad guys?
You are an optimist.
me too
Whatever it was it had run it course. Luck did play large role. As I mentioned, without their safe location the rest would not work. But I do agree. America never was treaty worthy. I remember Indian treaties were discussed in 70s on Soviet TV and nothing has changed.
Well, when Italy can produce what Russia can we can discuss this funny opinion. I wonder how Italy is going ty o defend her interests? With fine shoes and Mazerati?
That’s because you are paying for offence.
I was just trying to honor Amerigo Vespucci and Christophoro Colon… two wiseguys from the Bronx!
Agreed!
Used Zinn’s text in class, as well as another that was similar, but updated. Nevertheless, there is no adequate text for American history, that:
1. Exposes the Zionist Oligarch control of the US, and most of the nations of our planet (I wonder why???).
2. Clearly explains what happened in Dallas on November 22, 1963, or on 9/11, or to the ship-Liberty.
3. Gives a straightforward description of the Ethnic Cleansing of the Palestinian People, (or mentions that our American taxpayers Fund$ this neo-Nazi Land Thieving Zionist Terrorism).
4. Love of America, Patriotism, Nationalism, and Religious and Moral Ideals, are roughly treated in all texts.
5. Sons of Liberty, Committees of Correspondence, Minutemen, our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution, our early Founders are carefully disrespected in All the texts, as well as by too many of the unsuspecting Professors.
In Our Occupied Country:
Texts are ruthlessly censored before they are allowed to be sold to University students.
Our students are taught Fear. Hell1 our entire People are taught Fear. [undergraduate course: FEAR 101]
Had my students, (who, are not used to reading, or searching for the truth, as they believe that whatever they are told, or see on TV is the truth), rely on Primary Sources – for information, besides my lectures, to learn History. A research paper, often based on a single book, encourages them to critically examine. No student is failed because he does poorly on the exams, (only if they do not take the exams, or do their written assignment, they will receive a failing grade).
Our people are taught to worship authority. That is their approved religion.
Authority and Fear – Fear authority.
However, those who fight to Restore Our Republic – leave fear at the door.:
Respect all! Bow to None!
God Bless Ron Paul, and all the other Patriots.
Merry Christmas to All!
Durruti
The best description of the greatness of nations always precede their imminent collapse. This piece is poignantly no exception. The source of the success, a benevolent underlying homogenous culture where intellect, wisdom and real science was held sacred has been completely undermined.
A parasitic alien has worked feverishly for a century to undermine every pillar and tenet of this nation while it attained its maximum heights. With the advanced decay, debasement of foundations and willful destruction of load bearing walls, the great weight of such powers has placed an unbearable burden purposely on these undermined foundations.
The prima-cord is strung underneath these points of engineered maximum stress, the wires connected – only the “pull it” order has yet to be given.
Witness the forces being aligned against our sitting president, a vicious machine of slander, political hacks, traitors, profiteers and racial demagogues who have the pillars of our success under their hateful surveys, this is the final minutes before the plotted destruction.
A nation this undermined cannot stand for long. The weight of its tremendous power will provide the momentum for its ultimate collapse. Already the America so many of us were born to is long a memory. There is no remnant of our nation in what we witness daily. Mortal enemies marching our streets, the rule of law a farce, justice a cruel joke and a malignant enemy spitting on us an openly laughing as we are made to suffer outrages designed to foment us into an open rebellion where we will be cut down by the millions.
A war is upon us. Our homelands are not our own, our institutions compromised and work against us. The last hours of the republic tick away.
US hegemony is imposed militarily, both covertly and overtly, throughout the world. It is maintained through the petrodollar, corporate power, and the Federal Reserve Bank and its overseas counterparts. Ain’t no mystery to me.
“Russians make better machine guns”
If that’s actually true, then the problem come squarely from the Cosmopolitan gun controllers in the USA. The Hughes amendment to the McClure-Volkmer Firearms Owner Protection Act of 1986 prevented the manufacture of new machine guns for sale to the American civilian. Small arms development in the USA is the province of private industry; no machine gun sales, less than optimum development. Did you know that Russian military firearms use the United States 1913 mounting rail? Everyone has adopted the USA 1913 optics mounting system to their small arms.
I wonder if the US Cosmopolitans ever considered that by making illegal new MGs for civilians, and having their anti-gun judiciary uphold it constitutionality, that their were handicapping US innovation? US market economy brings forth innovations like AK-47 safety lever bolt hold-opens.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_Owners_Protection_Act
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picatinny_rail
https://krebscustomak47.com/products/category/14-safety-selectors
Yes, the US government signed hundreds of treaties with various Indian tribes and broke every one of them. Did not prevent tribes signing those worthless treaties. Did not prevent some fools we all know form believing that America will defend them (and here are mean not only Kurds). As the saying goes, fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.
A NATO joke: Italy produced a new tank. It has four back gears and one forward – in case the enemy attacks from behind.
“Computers are British, and so is DNA”
Didn’t Nobel Prize winner James Watson attend our very own South Shore High School in Chicago?
“Plea bargaining” enables a defendant to obtain a better result from their standpoint as compared to a jury, hence “guilty” people might choose that in deference to a jury trial.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plea_bargain
Butina was charged with being a foreign agent.
It may be that ” America is one of the shortest lived empires in history,” but no one other than an American can claim: “We took the first steps on another world.”
That joke is older than NATO.
No doubt Germans thought the same about their staunch Axis allies.
Jiles,
When you talk about Muslims, do you bother to make a distinction that it is mainly extremist Muslims in Saudi Arabia that are the cause of extremism or you do just say Muslims this Muslims that?
There is such a thing as the West where the elites coordinate together and Germany and the Dutch are definitely a part of this.
At this point whether you bother to call out specific parts of the west or the west in general it means the same thing.
Agreed. Very true!
Absolutely!
Moreover:
Thus, resistance, free critical thinking are taboo while obsequiousness aggressively promoted and normalized, in the “free” society that our deluded MSM shamelessly tout. There can be no true liberty when elites continue to appropriate the right to think on the people’s behalf.
Gorbachov and Yeltsin then must be either Indians or Kurds.
You appear to know something about that topic, so, I got confused a bit.
And, my apologies to…..The Eternal …. for talking about this today.
So, I guess you are aware of difference between:
-machine pistol
-submachine gun
-assault rifle
-automatic rifle
-machinegun – and that one further into light, medium, heavy.
Could’ve gone even more but you got the drift I guess.
So, how about that …ahm…debate M-16 vs AK-47. here? I’ll pass, of course.
To the point, if you can choose betweeen:
PK(M)/whatever
or
MG-42/3/whatever.
Which one you’d take into an……. engagement?
Two approaches to the problem. Which one is better, for your use (should it come to that)?
All true, but the key element is missing. The USA hegemony is based on ideological hegemony of neoliberalism. And BTW both Russia and China are neoliberal countries. That’s probably why President Putin calls the USA administration “partners,” despite clearly anti-Russian policies of all US administrations since 1991.
Ability to use military is important but secondary. Without fifth column of national elites which support neoliberalism that would be impossible, or at least more difficult to use. Like it was when the USSR existed (Vietnam, Cuba, etc). The USSR has had pretty powerful military, which was in some narrow areas competitive, or even superior to the USA, but when the ideology of Bolshevism collapsed, the elite changed sides and adopted a neoliberal ideology. This betrayal led to the collapse of the USSR and all its mightily military and vast KGB apparatus proved to be useless.
In this sense, the article is weak, and some comments are of a higher level than the article itself in the level of understanding of the situation (Simon in London at December 21, 2018, at 9:23 am one example)
Still, the level of understanding that the destiny of the USA is now tied to the destiny of neoliberalism (much like the USSR and Bolshevism) is foreign for many.
So it might well be that the main danger for the US neoliberal empire now is not China or Russia, but the end of cheap oil, which might facilitate the collapse of neoliberalism as a social system based on wasteful use on commodities.
One fascinating fact that escapes my understanding is why the USA elite wasted colossal advantage it got after the collapse of the USSR in just 25 years or so. I always thought that the USA elite is the most shrewd out of all countries.
May be because they were brainwashed by neocon “intellectuals.” I understand that most neocons are simply lobbyists of MIC, and MIC has huge political influence, but still neocon doctrine is so primitive that no civilized elite can take it seriously.
I also understand Eisenhower hypocritical laments that “train with MIC left the station” and that the situation can’t be reversed (lament disguised as a “warning”; let’s remember that it was Eisenhower who appointed Allen Dulles to head the CIA).
“…about 1 out of every 45 working-age males in prison at this moment … whereas jailing in Western Europe is about 1 out of every 1000 citizens, in the USA it is 1 out of 140…”
I don’t think these figures tell the whole story. In reality this is just another hate Whitey figure. I suspect you will find new hate Whitey figures when the US is less than 50% White.
The reason that there are less prisoners in Europe is there are more Whites there who are less likely to be in prison in the first place. I couldn’t get exact numbers but looking at France the numbers of Whites in prison is 0.032%. From looking at
http://www.prisonstudies.org/country/france
and seeing that 70 per cent Muslim prisoners
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11352268/What-is-going-wrong-in-Frances-prisons.html
As Europe becomes more colored their prison population will go up. It’s not Whites fault, though you assume so, that colored people get thrown in prison a lot. Just like it’s not Whites loving guidance that Asians get thrown in prison less. It makes no sense to blame Whites for colored people in prison without giving us credit for keeping Asians out. Since I doubt you’ll grant us this the former is null also.
I was going to comment the exact same thing. You beat me to it.
Two points:
1] The US never went to the moon.
2]More importantly: “Because they are all ultimately funded via both direct and indirect theft [taxes], and counterfeiting [central bank monopolies], all governments are essentially, at their very cores, 100% corrupt criminal scams which cannot be “reformed”,”improved”, nor “limited” in scope, simply because of their innate criminal nature.”
http://onebornfree-mythbusters.blogspot.com/
Sleazons Greedings, onebornfree
“But here’s the thing. The Revolutionaries had NO CHANCE of winning against the British without outside help. After all, only 1/3 of colonialists rebelled while another 1/3 fought for the Crown(and another 1/3 remained neutral). So, why did the American Revolutionaries win? Only because the French entered on their part.”
Alternative history that does not adhere to facts is fatuous. The estimate of a tri-partite division of support for the Revolution was never based on data (no polling) and applied only to preferred outcome, not to the proportions of fighters. From John Ferling’s “Almost A Miracle,” pp. 558-559, over 100,000 men served as Continentals and many tens of thousands more as State troops and militia for a minimum of 130,000 American fighters during the war. The British army sent 42,000 men to North America (including for the defense of Canada), hired 29,000 Germans (some to Canada as well), and organized Provincial units totaling 21,000. The total British manpower applied to the reconquest of the Colonies was fewer than 92,000 on land. Not nearly enough to win.
The Continental Army steadily improved to the point that its professionalism matched that of the British by 1780. American militias were often formidable when fighting near home or when mounted, as were the Ulster-descended militias of the Carolina Piedmont. The backcountry Carolina militias defeated the local Tories (Ramsour’s Mill, etc.), British Provincials (Kings Mountain), British Regulars (Blackstock’s Farm) and contributed significantly to the defeats of British Regulars (Cowpens and Guilford Courthouse) that drove the inept Cornwallis toward Yorktown and the second surrender of a British army and the war’s end.
The French landed 3,000 men for an ill-considered and failed assault on British-held Savannah, and then withdrew the survivors. Six-thousand French soldiers were landed in Rhode Island and later marched south to contribute half of the Allied force at the siege of Yorktown. The French impact on the American Revolution was primarily through its world-wide attacks on British colonies and threatened invasion of Britain, which prevented British escalation in North America. The fact is that at the time the French-American alliance commenced in early 1778, in the Colonies Britain held only New York City. Later they recaptured Savannah and Charleston, but at no time during the Revolution did Britain have uncontested control significant expanses of American hinterland. Where they did attempt to exert such control (in New Jersey and South Carolina), their brutal methods increased rather than quelled resistance.
America in 1776 was a prosperous country. Family size was double that of Britain. The independence of the united colonies was demographically inevitable, barring a much larger war of genocide that would never have been supported by the British politicians or people.
M Durocher, the invasion, toppling or simple purchasing of over 15 Lating american countries in 40 years is no mystery.
Two NUCLEAR bombs in two carefully chosen japanese.next.to.surrender cities is no mystery.
No mystery whatsoever is the marshal plan, caused by sheer fear and hatred to socialism.
Zero mystery is ten years later the coup x an elected government in Iran just to enthrone a bloody dictator R Palehvi in order to get cheap oil guaranteed.
As well as the Guatemala coup one year later.
Oh, and what was the mystery content in the whole ‘Operation Gladio’ all over Europe just in case the locals fail hate the reds enough?
And the africans? and the suport for the apartheid btw?
What s mysterious in the atomic tests conducted with human guinhea pigs beings in the pacific?
WOuld the B ay of Pigs and the Dallas episodes reveal anything mysterious beneath the american power?
I won ´t here mention the dozen bloody coups and putsches in Latin america for the
subsequent nearly two decades – and the TORTURE schools and training in torture provided for free , repeat for free to the dictators thereof … – because it is too REVEALING, mr Durocher.
I recall president Charles deGaulle speech in lÉtoile square shouting just in face of JFK offer to ‘grant’ him the gentle US atomic bombs inside France: “La politique française est faite ´a Paris”. (the french policies are made in Paris).
Not any longer today, pas vrai, mrDurocher?
Spain helped a lot to the american revolutionaries , it is not properly recognized
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spain_and_the_American_Revolutionary_War
There are plenty of tank jokes. Here is a new one from Donbass.
- Why do Ukrainian tanks have four rear-view mirrors?
- To give crews a good view of the battlefield.
Here is a Russian joke.
- What is the most important thing in a tank?
- The most important thing in a tank is not to shit yourself.
The french are greedy colonialists and invaders . Their Napoleon invaded all Europe , from
Cadix to Moscow , produced 12 million dead europeans . Their toxic french revolution poisoned Europe and the world . France invaded half Africa , Mexico , Argentina , Algeria Indochina … France still exploits Africa with the CFA franc , France waged colonial wars till the 60`s . Recently France bombed Libia . France , just this week , offered to send troops to Siria to replace american leaving units . Enculès .
“So, how about that …ahm…debate M-16 vs AK-47. here? I’ll pass, of course.”
Been done a million times on the Internet. Basically, the M-16 takes a bit of maintenance to keep operating, and works when exposed to mud and is significantly more accurate and human engineered.
The AK-47 will work when neglected for years. Mud will kill an AK.
The first firearm I ever purchased with my own money is a Colt AR-15 SP1, semi-auto M-16. I like it.
I’ve never shot an AK-47. I do own a Valmet 7.62x51mm long barrel (RPK) so please don’t accuse me of nationalistic favoritism (It’s way to valuable to shoot). It would be the equivalent to a US Browning Automatic Rifle but a lot nicer in weight and handling.
PK(M)/MG-42
Most people would probably choose the PK; if I recall a rebarrelled to 7.62×51 was considered as a replacement for the US M60 GPMG.
https://www.forgottenweapons.com/medium-machine-guns/pk-pkm/
“1] The US never went to the moon.”
So that Surveyor 3 camera returned by the Apollo 12 crew and on display really isn’t there?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveyor_3
Agree, overall.
My comment was more about, how to put it, childish/nerd or simply amateur obsessive debates about the topic.
It’s just a toolbox, with tools, for a job. Different job and/or craftsman, different tools.
I guess that less a person was exposed to the real use of the tool more inclined he (rarely she) is to debate the topic. Nerds, of course, just love it.
Back to machinegun.
I was, actually, pointing to that debate about fast vs slow rate of fire regarding a particular use. Say, that scenario you’ve hinted a couple of times in your previous posts some time ago.
For that particular use, my take, a fast machinegun would be preferable.
Germany used that approach then and there, introducing even MG-45.
So, for that job, I’d pick, from a toolbox, MG-42 based design (like any of its subsequent variations from Spain through Germany,Yugoslavia etc. to Pakistan) over PK(M) and similar tools.
Providing, of course, access to sufficient ammunition and spare parts.
Very astute observations!
Durocher missed most of that. A Tocqueville, he is not. He even fails to observe, or obscures, vital events happening in France.
You note correctly:
.
Detroit, Milwaukie, Camden, a dozen other formerly industrial and prosperous cities, the Appalachians, and much of Southern USA already have the look of War Zones, with block after block of abandoned homes, and in the case of Milwaukie, the water is poison. NAFTA, supported by the Bushes, Clintons, & Obomber, and both puppet (Dem & Repub), political gangs, was only one of several acts that helped to accelerate the economic decay (and betrayal of the American People).
” Oh beautiful, for spacious skies
For amber waves of grain
For purple mountain majesties
Above the fruited plain” (words from song America the Beautiful)
For the Republic!
God Bless!
Merry Christmas!
“We took the first steps on another world.” And then we just happened to mislay the technology, LOL.
LOL, I am not talking about bargaining. If your sentence is up to 2 years, you don’t get a jury.
Re. Butina, as long as Kushner and Netanyahu had and have sleepovers, you can spare me this “foreign agent” BS. Selective “justice” is not justice.
If you think high school education, even in the magnificent Chicago, can help you learn crystallography, you need to attend college. You’ll be surprised how many new things you can learn there, especially if it’s not an American ‘liberal arts’ degree. Then it’s up to grad school, where they still teach you things, and it’s still not nearly enough.
You misunderstand my point.
The business model of the plantation worked by slave labor was an ancient one, as old as the latifundia of Ancient Rome. The plantations of the antebellum South were, as such enterprises had been from time immemorial, organized as sole proprietorships or ordinary partnerships. The modern form of the publicly-traded corporation was in its infancy, and before 1860 had mostly been used to raise capital for such enterprises as railroads. Obtaining a corporate charter was a difficult process, typically requiring a legislative act. This began to change in the mid-nineteenth century, but not soon enough to save Southern agriculture.
Imagine if someone like Wade Hampton II had been able to “go public” with his plantations, vesting the title to them in a corporation, thus converting his wealth into financial instruments. The magic of market capitalization would have made him even more astoundingly rich, as well as giving him much greater liquidity, and the ability to diversify his portfolio of assets. No longer would he have had only the ability to sell his slaves to other residents of slave states – investors all over the world could have had the ability to own a beneficial interest in them. A much broader and more geographically diverse ownership of such assets would have resulted and might have made slavery less politically vulnerable.
Abolitionism was a distinct minority position in the antebellum U.S. However, with the end of the trans-Atlantic slave trade in 1808, Yankee ship-owners could no longer profit from slavery, while Northern industrial and financial interests were engaged in political conflict with Southern agrarian interests over the issue of tariffs, which the North supported and the South opposed. This was the real background of the War Between the States.
Apart from a few true believers, abolitionism was mostly a convenient stick that Yankees could use to belabor the South while appearing to take the moral high ground. Lincoln in fact endorsed the Corwin Amendment in 1861, which would have guaranteed slavery in the South a Comstitutional immunity from any Federal interference. His later Emancipation Proclamation, issued in 1863, was a propaganda measure with no real effect in territory under Union control. The perception that the war was fought to free the slaves is one of the earliest examples of “ret-conning,” and on a massive scale.
The deciding factor in that conflict appears to have been that worldwide financial interests cast their lot with the North, because it seemed to be the better bet. John Taylor of Caroline in his Arator (1818), a book mainly about plantation management in the style of Cato the Elder’s De agri cultura, devotes some words to the inherent conflict between banking and landed interests, a point of view also expressed by Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson in their hostility to the First and Second Banks of the United States. Taylor points out the danger of the politicization of credit, which still remains a concern today.
Had the South been able to use modern financial instruments to capitalize its agriculture, it might have been less susceptible to the political and economic attacks that culminated in the war of 1861-5.
Joe Stalin said: “So that Surveyor 3 camera returned by the Apollo 12 crew and on display really isn’t there?”
N.A.S.A. is little more than a vast movie production studio, producing thousands of fake movies. Careful analysis of the moon landing footage reveals so many anomalies/visual contradictions that its not really even funny anymore.
I’m sure the 2 clips you posted would, upon close analysis, reveal many of the same anomalies/visual contradictions seen in many other clips. I’m not going to list them here, or argue the point – do your own research , if you care to, about this issue.
For a very brief intro to the subject see: “The N.A.S.A. Moon Landing Scam”:
http://onebornfree-mythbusters.blogspot.com/2018/09/onebornfrees-special-scam-alerts-no-64.html
Herald said: ““We took the first steps on another world.” And then we just happened to mislay the technology, LOL.” See:”NASA: It’s Not Possible to Land on The Moon”:
https://neonnettle.com/features/1289-nasa-it-s-not-possible-to-land-on-the-moon
regards, onebornfree
Herald said: ““We took the first steps on another world.” And then we just happened to mislay the technology, LOL.”
Regards, onebornfree.
What is interesting is that if it wasn’t for their coethnics in the US using their power to try and brown White America out of existence, the US could have concievably had the stability to cater to Israeli interests for a good while longer. Evangelicals practically worship Jews.
Did the population of France stagnate due to “Napoleonic Code’s mandatory division of inheritances among children and the French’s bourgeois spirit, preferring to “play it safe” by having few children”, or to the long lasting effects of the hecatombs inflicted by the ‘French’ Revolution (very much inspired and directed from the ‘Loges’ created by France in the ‘New World’) and by the hubristic Napoleonic adventures?
Your use of “neo-Nazi” reflects the indoctrination that you probably think you have overcome.
There were the ‘Nazis’ with the mythological ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ and there were the ‘Nazis’ without the mythological ’6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’.
http://www.codoh.com
What’s more impressive is your vast ignorance.
“Immigrants accounted for more than 30 percent of the federal prison population and nearly all of them are confirmed or suspected illegal immigrants, the government said in a new report Tuesday.”
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/7/30-percent-federal-prisoners-are-immigrants-dojdhs/
LOL
I looked at your scam-alerts and see no shadow of the USA flag. I see the solar radiation incident on the irregular surfaces of the USA flag. The outer uniform of the space suit is manufactured of Beta cloth is of high reflectance of radiation. Anyway, what does that have to do with an actual physical object, namely the Surveyor 3 camera that is on display? Are you claiming it wasn’t returned from the Apollo 12 flight? Make your case that it isn’t from Apollo 12′s return.
https://www.techtimes.com/articles/16064/20140921/nvidia-shoots-down-conspiracy-theory-about-moon-landing.htm
The Washington Times isn’t a reliable source, owned and run as it is by the Moonies.
Here’s the official data:
https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_citizenship.jsp
“If your sentence is up to 2 years, you don’t get a jury.”
I don’t think so.
“Scope of constitutional right
Currently in the United States every person accused of a crime punishable by incarceration for more than six months has a constitutional right to a trial by jury, which arises in federal court from the Sixth Amendment, the Seventh Amendment, and Article Three of the United States Constitution, which states in part, “The Trial of all Crimes … shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed”. Most states’ constitutions also grant the right of trial by jury in lesser criminal matters, though most have eliminated that right in offenses punishable by fine only. The Supreme Court has ruled that if imprisonment is for six months or less, trial by jury is not required,[4] meaning a state may choose whether or not to permit trial by jury in such cases.
Specifically, the Supreme Court has held that no offense can be deemed ‘petty’ for purposes of the right to trial by jury where imprisonment for more than six months is authorized. Justice Black and Justice Douglas concurred, stating that they would have required a jury trial in all criminal proceedings in which the sanction imposed bears the indicia of criminal punishment. Chief Justice Burger, Justice Harlan and Justice Stewart objected to setting this limitation at six months for the States, preferring to give them greater leeway.[4][5] No jury trial was required when the trial judge suspended sentence and placed defendant on probation for three years.[6] There is a presumption that offenses carrying a maximum imprisonment of six months or less are petty, although it is possible that such long an offense could be pushed into the serious category if the legislature tacks on onerous penalties not involving incarceration. No jury trial is required, however, when the maximum sentence is six months in jail, a fine not to exceed $1,000, a 90-day driver’s license suspension, and attendance at an alcohol abuse education course. The Supreme Court found that the disadvantages of such a sentence, “onerous though they may be, may be outweighed by the benefits that result from speedy and inexpensive nonjury adjudications.”[7] Such interpretations have been criticized on the grounds that “all” is not a word that constitution-makers use lightly.[8]
In the case of traffic offenses punishable by fine only (including parking tickets), and misdemeanor charges providing for imprisonment of six months or less, the availability of trial by jury varies from state to state, usually providing only for bench trials. The two exceptions are Vermont and Virginia, which provide the defendant with the right to a jury trial in all cases, which means if one is willing to pay the cost in case of a loss, one may even obtain a jury trial for a parking ticket in those states. In Virginia, one wanting a jury trial on a minor misdemeanor or traffic offense would actually have a right to two trials if they wanted a jury trial on the issue, first by bench trial only in District court, and then, if they lost, to a trial de novo in Circuit court, this time with a jury if they chose to do so.
Many juvenile court systems do not recognize a right to jury trial, on the grounds that juvenile proceedings are civil rather than criminal, and that jury trials would cause the process to become adversarial.[9]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juries_in_the_United_States
“Re. Butina, as long as Kushner and Netanyahu had and have sleepovers, you can spare me this “foreign agent” BS. Selective “justice” is not justice.”
“Maria Valeryevna Butina (Russian: Мари́я Вале́рьевна Бу́тина; born November 10, 1988; also transliterated as Mariia)[3][4][5] is a Russian citizen and alleged spy who pleaded guilty on December 13, 2018, to conspiracy to act illegally as an unregistered Russian (foreign) agent, under 18 U.S.C. §951, in the United States.[6][7][8] ”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Butina
Guilty as charged.
Nobel prize winner James Watson is an AMERICAN, not a Brit.
Much better! Thanks.
https://3dprint.com/95914/nasa-3d-print-f1-rocket-engine/
Greetings: And thanks for reading my comment.
You wrote:
You reply to only a minute portion of my comment. No crime there.
My father, Grandfathers (both sides), and my Uncles (both sides) fought the Germans in WW II, some also saw action during WW I.
My Belgian cousins served in WW II.
Dad served & saw action in the Belgian army; He later joined the American Army & served.
Background Prepared: Now, By the numbers.
1. The Nazis were totalitarians, and I see no redeeming human virtues in them. They committed crimes throughout Europe. I’ll just list some of the countries.
2. Czechoslovakia, (what was their crime against Germany?).
3. Belgium, (was neutral, and wanted – only to be left alone).
4. Holland (even if you argue that Belgium was useful for Germany to circle around the Maginot Line Defenses of France, WHAT WAS THEIR EXCUSE FOR INVADING Holland?)
5. Poland? (any excuses?)
6. Yugoslavia, (neutral)
7. Greece, (neutral: The Germans could get to Africa via Italy -WHY GREECE?)
8. Nazis also (along with the British) promised the Zionists, Palestine (someone else’s country). The key here, is that the British already controlled Palestine, had broken the Palestinian General- Strike of 1936, and crushed their military rebellion, and, therefore, could DELIVER ON THEIR PROMISE!
9. After the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor (ill advised and triggered), both Hitler & Mussolini, representing their Nations and ideologies, declared War on the United States (although it was not necessary for them to do so, and quite stupid).
10. Totalitarians, Dictators, are less able to heed correctives, or advice from their subordinates.
11. The “Night of the Long Knives” was where/when German Government Agent, Hitler, executed all the fascist leaders who were not controlled by the Zionist International banking Oligarchs. Hitler was subsequently appointed by Hindenburg – to the Chancellorship.
What don’t we know?
12. Yes, the so called ‘Holocaust’ was fake. The brutality of the war, and the chaos of the final year, led to a breakdown of the Nazi Prison System (their Concentration Camps), and to large casualties among prisoners and civilians. For those who can count, Russia and China suffered the highest casualties of the War, and the Yugoslavs/Serbs suffered the highest %percentage of casualties, 1 in 5.
Let’s wind this up:
The Nazi leaders were totalitarian scum, and by action and moral code, resemble the Zionist Stormtroopers, with their brutality and racialist intolerance (and repeated attacks upon other peoples’ countries, with their concurrent theft of land). The Nazi leaders-assisted the Zionist Oligarch’s plans for world control.
We Americans have been denied our Country, once proudly sovereign, and prosperous, but now only a craven cowardly puppet of the Rothschilds & other Zionist Banking Oligarchs.
I can’t believe I am not charging you for this!!!
Nazis are scum. Neo-Nazi, or Neo Zionist, precious little difference.
Democratic Republics are where we find Liberty.
God bless!
Merry Christmas!
Durruti
The constitution says anybody has the right to trail by jury; the Supreme Court says only people who risk more than 6 months. I guess brainwashing with the Oath, since kindergarden, helped you go past this contradiction as if it does not exist. The fact is the judges wiped their behinds with the Holy Texts – and that is only the most egregious example.
Did you also swear allegiance to Jared “Not-Guilty as Not-Charged” Kushner and his sleepover friends from Israel?
Well now, how are you going to force this “anybody has a right to trial by jury” onto the current judiciary, huh? I believe the current laws against new machine guns are illegal. Am I brave and foolish enough to make an MG and publicize it, so ATF can surround me with MP-5s and perforate me and jail me for 10 years if I surrender? You going to put your body forward to defend the “Holy Texts” in the face of governmental power?
It’s like Clayton Cramer states: “If you are the only one to show up for the Revolution, then you’ve made a big mistake.”
So you first, bud.
If you want to know how crazy evangelicals are read this from their conference at Trump Hotel:
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/prophets-gather-at-trumps-washington-hotel-to-unleash-angel-armies-on-his-deep-state-enemies/
It describes visions of angels, God speaking to them , calling themselves of the new world order, how they will take down all non believers……they are a insane Cult.
Okaayyy!
Many thanks for you taking the pain to go in these interesting details. Sure, I had not guessed what your true idea was (your fault: it was not clearly expressed ;=) with the financial instruments.
By the way, is not this a kind of rational explanation about why KSA wanted to sell Aramco?
- Several French-Catholic Québecers were mixed with Natives who lost their names and lands as they were forced to convert to roman Catholicism to marry Québecers.
- Similar fate for the French-Catholic Québecers (and the Irish) who were not among the families ”chosen” for the Vatican (Rothschilds) missions to populate Québec with 12-13 years old girls in exchange of a land: the unchosen lived in abject poverty. In Saguenay, the French had to rent lands to Price, work for Price, pay all goods bought at Price’s magasin général in ”Price tokens”. Several French and Irish workers left Canada to work as cheap labour in US factories.
- Today the remaining 3 millions French-speaking Québécers work directly or indirectly for anglo-US bankers and the French (Rothschild) connection, i.e. the IMF in Latin [sic] America and extreme-right ring groups having ZERO respect for human rights. After all didn’t Mauricio Macri say in Davos that all people in Latin America are descendants of Europeans? !!
7. Greece, (neutral: The Germans could get to Africa via Italy -WHY GREECE?)
Greece was a neutral Country that the British invaded in 1941, forcing the German response.
Similar things happened in Norway and Yugoslavia.
Like the old Germans used to say, Churchill was an even greater murderer than Hitler.
Half true: half fantasy, but of you don’t want it thought that you rely only on your imagination don’t commit such solecisms as saying Hindenburg appointed Hitler Chancellor after the Night of the Long Knives. The appointment was in January 1933 and it was 1934 when Hitler unleashed Himmler and the SS on Roehm’s SA.
The US isn’t going to go downward enough to hit Brazilian or Mexican lows for 3 major reasons
1. The next generation will be 30% Hispanic and 50% whites. After mixing, a new, redefined white majority forms.
2. The US will still have its cognitive elites, much more talent than Brazil and Mexico has.
3. US is operating on the Anglo platform, not Latin American platform (to borrow phrase from AP).
I predict the US will move downward in 2050 but it will be a rich country rather than very rich country.
Apologies:
Hitler appointed Chancellor 1-10-33.
Night/s of the long Knives 6-30-34.
My main point stands, Hitler was a (paid) agent of the German State, from the end of WW I, to his end. It is common for Lenin, and Trotsky to be accused of being agents of the Germans. Stalin also accused many of that crime. But, Hitler, whose employment by the German Government is a documented -open book- is never commented upon by the establishment Ahistorians.
Agent Hitler’s actions, the very orders he received, (such as to infiltrate the German Workers Party), are documented. Below is one of dozens of links available.
http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/joins.htm
I have read some of your fantasies and omissions, which include a reluctance to comment on my major points. The necessity of Americans, such as myself, to attempt a Restoration of our Democratic Republic, that was definitively finished off-(assassinated), on November 22, 1963, is not approached by yourself, not even with the aid of a 10 to 12 foot pole.
I fantasize about enjoyable things, not politics, or history.
And:
You must DOCUMENT your above statements. Never read about the British or French invading Greece, Norway, or Yugoslavia. Although they did have contingency plans to help (cynically use them), if they were invaded.
As you well know, Italy invaded Greece – October 1940. Greece did not invade Italy. Britain, also did not invade Italy. Germany helped Italy to subdue the Greeks, after April 1941.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Greece
The “British invaded” Greece, and “Similar things happened in Norway and Yugoslavia” Hmmm!
As for “Churchill was an even greater murderer than Hitler.” That statement is hardly a ringing endorsement of, (or even defense of), Agent Hitler and the German State 1933-1945.
We must all correct our mistakes – even though I do not recall making any.
God Bless!
OK, the camera issue [briefly]:
If you research, without pre-bias [ i.e not assuming that the Apollo films/photos are genuine _or_ false - i.e. a neutral position], the issue of the ability of any cameras using film to operate in the extreme temperature environment of the moons surface, you should, if you are honest with yourself, conclude that it was/is completely impossible for any camera using film to operate in those conditions.
And even that leaves aside the issue of the fact that even if it _were_ technically feasible for a film camera to operate in those extreme conditions back then, astronauts with heavy gloves on would be entirely incapable of manually operating such cameras.
But like I said before, do your own research.
Regards, onebornfree
The Italians and the Germans invaded Greece. Britain came to Greece’s aid, despite military opposition to transferring forces from North Africa, they were right and Churchill was wrong.
You are correct. Getting involved with illegal automatic weapons (never a good idea) and publicizing the fact is not only unwise, but inadvisable, to say the least. It is never a good idea to snub the nose of those with the “power to imprison and destroy”.
However, in the case of unregistered automatic weapons, the whole concept of the “law” is that it is a “tax issue”, nothing more, and as such, it could be argued, from a constitutional stance, that imprisoning someone for 10 years and fining them $10,000.00 for mere possession of an unregistered automatic weapon over failure to pay a $200.00 “tax” constitutes “cruel and unusual punishment and is constitutionally offensive.
Why has no one in such a situation adopted this line of thinking and brought it to federal court?
LOL You’re just the typical Zionist playing the strawman game.
The Washington Times was not the “source”. The US Homeland Security and the US Justice Department are.
I’ll take numbers from Homeland Security and the US Justice Department that I cited over the notoriously leftist & incompetent Dept. of Corrections.
You can live in your fantasy.
You’ve got to be one of most incompetent, indoctrinated persons to post here. While you espouse an anti-Zionist sentiment, your statements indicate that they have you wrapped up tightly in their hands.
Well at least, you reject the fake & impossible ’6M’.
Who cares about your grandfather? As if he knew / knows the the truth of the matter. LOL
facts:
- Britain & France did not declare war on the communist USSR which invaded from the east and took 60% of Poland.
Lithuania, Iran, and invasion & annexation of parts of Romania.
- USSR invaded Finland, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, invaded & annexed parts of Romania, invaded Iran, invaded northern Norway and the Danish island of Bornholm, yet the ‘Allies’ did nothing.
- Poland invaded and annexed parts of Czechoslovakia, held large parts of German territory, was engaged in atrocities against German civilians. Yet the ‘Allies’ did nothing.
- The “neutral” US had been attacking German U-boats & shipping, while supplying both Britain & the USSR long before Germany’s declaration of war on the US.
- Brits invaded & were mining Norway at Narvik before Germany arrived & stopped it.
- France had positioned 2 million soldiers on the Belgian border, and the BEF had almost another half million.
- France and England were already violating Belgian and Dutch “neutrality” with impunity by flying aircraft over the lowlands.
- It is important to remember that France had already invaded Germany, the Saar in 1939, and that throughout this entire period Hitler was begging Churchill to negotiate a return to the status quo.
- British invaded Iceland and Iran
BTW, ‘The Night of the Long Knives’ was legitmate action to stop a government overthrow. That action would have been taken by every country in the world.
I suggest you look at politial map of the world of the period and you will see who the true ‘totalitarian scum’ was.
Want to debate? Go to: WWII Europe / Atlantic Theater Forum: http://forum.codoh.com/viewforum.php?f=20
If you consider Homeland Security and the US Justice Department reliable sources of info, I have a mountain to sell you. Will throw in the Moon at a huge discount.
Durruti said: “….The necessity of Americans, such as myself, to attempt a Restoration of our Democratic Republic…”
H.L. Mencken said:
“Democracy is a sort of laughing gas. It will not cure anything, perhaps, but it unquestionably stops the pain.”
“Democracy is the worship of jackals by jackasses.”
“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”
“If x is the population of the United States and y is the degree of imbecility of the average American, then democracy is the theory that x times y is less than y.”
“All of democracy’s axioms “resolve themselves into thundering paradoxes, many amounting to downright contradictions in terms. The mob is competent to rule the rest of us – but it must be rigorously policed itself. There is a government, not of men, but laws – but men are set upon benches to decide finally what the law is and may be.”
regards, onebornfree
AnonFromTN said: “If you consider Homeland Security and the US Justice Department reliable sources of info, I have a mountain to sell you. Will throw in the Moon at a huge discount.”
Ho! ho! ho!
The gullibility of the average Amurkun never ceases to amuse/amaze me. Everyday they are hit in the face by facts that entirely contradict their continued faith in “good government”, and everyday they continue to ignore that info, and vote for a Trump [ or some other alleged "good guy/"white hat"]] to make everything better for them.
My hats off to the ” public education” [ aka government indoctrination] system. It’s done a bang up job of convincing almost everyone around me [ with their own money, extracted by force, no less] that government is good, trustworthy, efficient etc. etc. etc. I have to admire that little “education” scam, if nothing else
Homeland “Security”, my a$$!
Regards, onebornfree
A bit optimistic estimate.
1. Possible.
2. Agree.
3. Now….hehe….you sure about this? I guess it’s operating, barely, on remnants of it and less and less on alarming rate.
Well…I was/is/will be focusing on an average citizen, not a country. Especially those in “flyover” states.
That “rich” has tendency to accumulate at the very top.
The squalor on the bottom…..and middle, looks like it.
You think it’s ok to shoot civilians of one’s own country who are disarmed?
Hiding behind Mencken is not a crime.
I disagree with you both.
Republics are like an Irish Stew. Some Republics have more onions, some have more lamb, or potatoes, but all are nourishing.
The Republic sports a division of power, that allows varying amounts of input by the People (Marxists use the term Masses). This input is known as Democracy.
Republics, as with Irish Stew, are unpredictable, but superior to any Tyranny.
We Americans must Restore our Republic!
God Bless!
*I will compose an essay, an Ode to our and others, Republic! Perhaps Unz will print it. Unz? Unz?
Well, I do, and the rest of my family does.
You mentioned “invaded.” Offer some evidence of invasion of Belgium – by France, or by Britain. Germany actually invaded Belgium, on 2 occasions.
I have not the time to meticulously correct all the factual errors in your statement.
If you insist that the Anglo Zionists committed many crimes, and they did, and continue to do so, that fact does not exculpate the German/Prussian Oligarchs from their crimes of imperialist aggression.
I’ll debate you! Wait! I am debating you!!!
Have a Merry Christmas!
Saudi Arabia of course wanted liquidity and diversification, which are risk-reducing objectives that would have been achieved by its sale. I think, though, that a more immediate incentive has been the development of large oil and natural gas reserves in the United States through fracking, which has reduced the oligopolistic control of oil markets hitherto enjoyed by OPEC, coupled with the depletion of cheaply extractable oil reserves in Saudi Arabia. Both these phenomena have made Aramco a less desirable asset to hold – hence the Saudi disposition to peddle some of it off.
The oil-producing countries of the Middle East have for a long time societally exhibited a kind of behavior akin to what we often observe in individuals that have won a lottery or have somehow otherwise come into a large amount of money without exerting any effort to get it. They have not considered that it might not always be there, and have not husbanded their wealth wisely with a view to that possibility.
It has been easier for the Saudis to hire foreigners when work has to be done rather than to do it themselves, or even to learn how it should be done. Their young men prefer to live as rentiers and to devote whatever intellectual effort they can manage to memorizing the Koran, rather than to become engineers, architects, builders, manufacturers, or pursue any other kind of productive activity. To borrow Franklin’s description of the children of slaveholders, they have “become proud, disgusted with labour, and being educated in idleness, are rendered unfit to get a Living by industry.”
It is probable that some of the senior Saudi leaders recognize this, and know that unless they can reverse it and become less dependent on oil revenues before world markets give them an ugly surprise, their continued ability to rule will be destroyed in the chaos and violence so common in the Middle East. So far as I can tell, although they may have recognized the problem, they haven’t figured out a solution for it.
Permit me to give contrary explanation. America’s economic success is not supreme despite the existence of (often criminal) underclass but is due to the existence of this underclass, whether white, Hispanic, south Asian, but especially black. A lot of America’s economy activity is due to the government mandating very large projects such as the Hoover Dam, the Interstate Highway network, the modern high-tech military (where many engineers work). Many projects, in this day and age, cater to the lower classes, especially public schools (and, to a lesser extent, urban revitalization). Without the underclass that required services such as schools, prisons, government offices, shopping centers (and often grotesque looking ones), many companies – such as construction firms – would have less business. If it wasn’t for government welfare, the underclass would not have any way of paying for these services.
Was it Sam Francis who said that there was a hidden alliance between the overclass and underclass? Think about that for a minute.
I think that the author is missing the influence of one more European country on America: Prussia. Prussia was the German state that transformed itself, in the time span of a century or so, from the weakest country in Europe to one of the most powerful. It unified the other states into modern Germany. Our modern public schooling system, public welfare system, and other “progressive” institution owed a great deal to the state that eventually became the corner stone for Adolf Hitler’s Third Reich.
Do you count on people giving you so little credit that they won’t even bother with your links? Well I did and it diminishes your credit even further as it gives absolutely no support to your assertions – made with unstated implications only to be guessed at – that Hitler was a paid agent of the German government from WW1 to his end or that his career was all in the employment of the German government – presumably while composing Mein Kampf in prison???? Please don’t waste our time with silly and inaccurate irrelevancies.
I was referring the the actual Surveyor 3 camera assembly that removed from the lunar lander and returned to the USA onboard the Apollo 12 spacecraft. No one has given any proof whatsoever that it didn’t return from the lunar surface.
“The television camera on Surveyor 3 consisted of a vidicon tube, two 25 and 100 millimeter focal length lenses, shutters, filters, and an iris mounted along an axis inclined about 16 degrees to the central axis of the spacecraft. The TV camera was mounted under a mirror that could be moved in azimuth (horizontally) and elevation (vertically). The operation of the camera was completely dependent upon the receipt of proper commands from the Earth. Frame-by-frame coverage of the lunar surface was obtained over the complete 360 degrees in azimuth, and from +40 degrees above the plane normal to the camera’s Z-axis to −65 degrees below this plane. Both 600-line and 200-line modes of TV camera operation were used. The 200-line mode transmitted over an omnidirectional antenna and scanned one frame every 61.8 seconds. A complete video transmission of each 200-line picture required 20 seconds and used a bandwidth of 1.2 kHz. The 600-line pictures were transmitted over a directional antenna. These pictures were scanned as often as once every 3.6 seconds. Each 600-line picture required a nominal one second to be read from the image vidicon, and its transmission required a 220 kHz bandwidth, using digital picture transmission. The TV photos were displayed back on the Earth on a slow-scan TV monitor that was coated with a long-persistence phosphor. Its persistence had been selected to match the nominal maximum frame rate. One frame of TV identification was received for each incoming TV photo, and the picture was displayed in real-time at a rate compatible with that of the incoming image. These data were recorded on a video magnetic-tape recorder. The camera returned 6315 pictures between April 20 and May 3, 1967, including views of the spacecraft itself, panoramic lunar surveys, views of the mechanical surface digger at work, and of an eclipse of the Sun by the Earth.[4]
“The Apollo 12 Lunar Module landed near Surveyor 3 on November 19, 1969. Astronauts Conrad and Bean examined the spacecraft, and they brought back about 10 kg of parts of the Surveyor to the Earth, including its TV camera, which is now on permanent display in the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveyor_3
As for your elucidation of film cameras operating in a lunar environment, the USA has been operating film surveillance CORONA satellites since 1959.
” The acetate-based film was later replaced with a polyester-based film stock that was more durable in earth orbit.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corona_%28satellite%29
How do you operate a mechanical device in extreme environments? By using special non-outgassing lubricants (“space qualified”) developed just for that purpose. These are commercially available products that are sold for use on electrical actuators and DVRT sensors, and cost a pretty penny. At a suburban Chicago firm, they are kept under lock and key.
No denying that 19th century Prussia did a lot of modern things first but how direct was the influence on the US? How much of the causation was the intellectual climate of the times, particular writers, other examples? After all the US came late to the welfare state and infrastructure spending for employment.
The Apollo programme was riddled with a multitude of inconsistencies from start to finish but forget all that and just watch the press conference with the Apollo 11 crew. Anyone who then still believes. well that is their privilege, though I would have to wonder just how and any further discussion would then be completely pointless.
I agree whith what you said.
But the reason I asked you about the Aramco sale, was because of your idea with the South plantations:
A much broader and more geographically diverse ownership of such assets would have resulted and might have made slavery less politically vulnerable.
I mean: today the KSA must accept only US$ for its oil, and spend part of its revenues to buy US treasuries. They know it’s monkey money. And we’ll not speak about the expensive arms sale from USA to KSA. In short, USA is racketeering KSA.
Would they refuse, I guess they’ll go the way all oil producers went after they threatened the $ (Kadhaffi, Hussein). One clue of this I find when MBS and the King went to Moscow and signed a purchase contract for russian S-400s. That happened around October 5, 2017.
So let’s say Aramco becomes a public corporation. Then A much broader and more geographically diverse ownership of such assets would have resulted and might have made KSA less vulnerable.
As someone who spent around 13 years in the US I completely agree with you.
Whoever wrote this article has probably never lived in the US. The country has been deteriorating rapidly ever since I went there for the first time in late 80s. Especially after the 2008 fiasco.
Americans are fearful, sad, disorganized, manic, ignorant people completely turned against each other and even against themselves.
I have never seen so many dirt-poor homeless people in any other country and I have been around the world a few times.
plus in all other countries even very poor people have friends and family to rely on at least a little bit – not so much in the US. I have never seen so many psychopaths, and sheeple so brainwashed to worship psychopaths.
It’s a place full of fear and confusion where most people expect Jesus or other imaginary friends and masters to come to solve all their problems any day now.
The most hopeless place I have ever seen – and very poor too. I have met some of the billionaires there they are also desperate and fearful.
The way their country is structured is not good for anyone. It’s a very strange, unhappy and poor place I hope to never visit again. And I would really like to get rid of my US citizenship also
I prefer hard physical evidence such as a Surveyor 3 camera on display.
https://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/documents/NTRS/collection2/NASA_SP_284.pdf
“Analysis of Surveyor 3 material and photographs returned by Apollo 12″
doesn’t this fear start with :
“God is everything – you are NOTHING!”
repeated million times by American children brainwashed and fear-mongered into submission as soon as they start walking and talking?
Instead of focusing on objective reality, collaboration, fun etc
Fear is also good for shopping – that’s why one of the foundations of marketing is called Panoramic Fear – when sheeple are made to fear everything – so they become more impulsive, go home, watch TV in fear and shop (on borrowed money)
“And I would really like to get rid of my US citizenship also”
The US State Department has a web page on this:
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal/travel-legal-considerations/us-citizenship/Renunciation-US-Nationality-Abroad.html
So go for it and be happy in your new status!
‘Don’t let truth get in the way of a good story’, or ‘if there’s a good story, let it be, don’t spoil it with the truth’.
“Don’t hesitate to twist the truth as long as it improves your story”.
You must DOCUMENT your above statements. Never read about the British or French invading Greece, Norway, or Yugoslavia.
That’s not surprising, since France surrendered to Germany in on June 22 1940.
Huh?
Yes, indeed – diversification will make Saudi Arabia less economically vulnerable.
However, that’s not the ultimate reason for Saudi Arabia’s effort to sell Aramco. Here is that reason:
https://money.cnn.com/2018/09/12/investing/us-oil-production-russia-saudi-arabia/index.html
The United States is now the world’s largest producer of crude oil. In other words, Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries now have an “oil weapon” that isn’t as useful to their political purposes as it used to be. This makes Aramco a less desirable investment, but it is politics rather than economics that is the primary concern.
Since the 1970s, the policy-making establishment both in this country and in Europe have been paralysed by the fear of another Arab oil embargo. At last some of our politicians have come to recognize that this is not the threat they have so long thought. Recent Saudi actions reflect this.
“The United States was blessed among nations. On the north, she had a weak neighbor; on the south, another weak neighbor; on the east, fish; and on the west, fish.”
–Jules Jusserand, French Ambassador to the US, 1910
The Moon landings were early science fiction movies, and rather poor ones at that.
Adolf Hitler served time in No PRISON.
Hitler was housed in a large Luxury Suite, with a cook, secretaries, and anything he desired. His phony (and short) ‘imprisonment’ of 9 months was a publicity stunt.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/hitlers-cushy-prison-life-in-the-1920s-revealed-2008754.html
The Munich Putsch was designed to fail, and fool those who believed that Hitler was a Revolutionary, and a true German patriot. He was none of those, but an Employee, an Agent, who politically resembles Hollywood Obomber, and Casino Trump (among others). Hitler’s controllers used the Pretend Prison time to prepare a book and an image for him.
You appear to Like Hitler. Why not just come out and say it? What have you to fear?
Hitler was prepared/taught, as has been Obomber, and Trump, to front for the Zionist Oligarchs. Hitler’s controllers/programmers carefully orchestrated the German attack on most of Europe, including Russia. Europe has not yet recovered from that horrific destruction. Pay attention: for a war (or a fight) to take place, someone must throw the first punch, and someone must receive it. After the beginning, the real business (goals), of war come to fruition.
Hitler, Stalin, Chamberlain and Churchill, and Roosevelt, and the other major leaders, all played their parts in the Theatrical Production. “All the world’s a stage.”
[Please do not waste your time reading this too carefully. You have too many built in mental blocks to understand. Just go along with the fantasy histories; you will be happier.]
There’s also “moon rocks” on display, with no proof as to where they actually came from.
Thanks for adding to the discussion.
Yeah, but that’s pretty much irrelevant to the current argument. The “moon rocks” have already been examined by scientists.
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1970GeCAS…1….1S
“The Apollo 11 Samples: Introduction”
Who says they were unarmed?
Besides, resisting arrest is generally considered dangerous worldwide.
Nonsense. Compare the moon landings these early lunar movies. Apollo is much better because it uses REAL Lunar background.
- Now that the ”cash” has been transferred in foreign countries like Canada (2008), the mainstream media here are in constant US bashing mode, and Americans are depicted as barbarians, the USA as an obese, dysfunctional country, a declining power, a TITANIC.
- However, Canada is definitely not better than the US, in fact it’s a banana republic in service to the Crown and the City of London. Canada is, has always been a totalitarian country that shows zero tolerance for those who contradict the lies, biased news, fake news, and idiocies vomitted 24/24 by the mainstream media, like the propaganda for “humanitarian actions” of the White Helmets, the MEK, the Kosovars, or the Ukronazis.
- Canada has become a totalitarian country, and freedom of expression or democracy are virtually dead. People cannot pacifically express their opinion during “G7″s, Montebello, Sommet des Amériques, without seeing their legitimate protests destroyed by agents provocateurs and rude or violent police repression.
- Canada has become a paradise for swindlers of all sorts, a paradise for mining corporations known for their complete disregards for human rights, a paradise for IMF exploiters ready to sell their countries and make a quick buck, a paradise for those who sign secret bilateral agreements so that Canadian workers don’t even know for whom they are working.
- In conclusion, it’s good for us Canadians to read you Americans on sites like Unz, Ahtribune, RayMcGovern, Antiwar, Consortium, Amcon, etc. where we can learn how deeply corrupt this “country” is.
-I believe America still represents the country of the “free”, and am sure America will find a way to “reinvent” herself. Americans are not barbarians, idiots, obese, arrogant people, as the CBC, AFP, or Powercorp like to pretend. On the contrary, Americans are usually easy to approach and talk, they don’t have the coldnesss of the Anglo-saxons, or the pretentiousness of the French Canadians. Natives have a voice in the USA, whereas in Canada they are prisoners in reservations.
said: “We Americans must Restore our Republic!”
I agree 100%.
The site below provides much details on the brutal and violent aspect of European colonization of Kanata (i.e., “Canada” for the Brits and French).
The Canada Syndrome,
a Captivating Mass Psychosis
Coalition to Oppose the Arms Trade
http://coat.ncf.ca/
Rendered Captive by Barbed Wire and Maple Leaves : One Captivation after Another
First Nations, First Captives: Genocidal Precedents for Canadian Concentration Camps
The Occupation(al) Psychosis of Empire-Building Missionaries
Religious Guardians of the Peaceable Kingdom:
Winnipeg’s Key Social-Gospel Gatekeepers of Canada West
Liberal Advances in Canada’s Racist Lawmaking
Crushing Rebels, Radicals and Reds:
The Bunker Mentality, All in the Woodsworth Family Tradition
Why the Social Gospel turned a Blind Eye to Mass Internment
Racist Roots of Toryism and antiSemitism
Czarist Pogroms to Canada’s WWII Internment Camps for Jews and Communists
Left-Right Camps: A Century of Ukrainian Canadian Internment
Glorifying Ukrainian-Canadian Veterans of OUN/UPA Terrorism
Waffen SS Galician Division Revered by Canada’s Ukrainian Right
Yes, disclaimer, sure they were. I don t back french past -and present- misdeeds.
Which makes them today the more funny poor devils, having to bark as an US lapdog, which DeGaulle did not.
and the same fate may, mutatis mutandis, await the US, in the future since you reason the China by sheer GNP growth can out pace the US four, repeat 4, fold… just do the math.
I don t forget that the mysteriously sourced world power is by far -quantitavely and even qualitatively as an output of a planned A.g.e.n.d.a – the most criminal state in world History.
Unarmed and disarmed are two different things.
My point is this. Suppose we accept your assertion as correct, i.e., that the people killed on the Night of the Long Knives were conspiring to overthrow the government. Obviously, the government would have every right to arrest these people. What any government operating according to the rule of law does not have the right to do is kill those people without there being an immediate threat to the lives or wellbeing of the arresting officers.
If you are suggesting that all of the people arrested were armed and resisting arrest, I would suggest you’re wrong and that a significant number were asleep when arrested and subsequently killed. They were neither armed nor resisting. There is no excuse for executing these people without trial and conviction.
If some were armed but not resisiting, and those people could be disarmed peacefully, then there is no just cause to execute them without trial or conviction.
If some people were both armed and resisting, then the arresting officers had just cause to use deadly force only up until the resisting armed person surrendered. After the point of surrender, there is no longer any just cause to execute them without trial and conviction.
That said, the party reported the deaths of 85 people. Of that 85, what number do you believe were armed and/or resisting when they died?
Doing that:
What was whitewashed out of history is that many of the French who fought for American Independence were actually french-speaking Haitian volunteers of african ancestry.
Your point?
And what’s the relevance of Hitler’s being a ‘government agent’, rather than being a fanatical German nationalist ‘in tune’ with the general belief of the Germans, including the Government, that Germany was the victim of Allied aggression in 1914, denying any ‘war guilt’, and hence the alleged moral invalidity of the Versailles Treaty? He was, on the other hand, full of praise for the Brest-Litovsk Treaty. And when he became Chancellor he became also a ‘payed’ agent of the German Government!
times change.
destroying the economy except for the 1-5% (give or take)
and
the wars for the jew
have finished old, now dying, glory.
will take a bit but the grave is waiting.
of course, great violence after 2024
when trump leaves office.
Really?
If it was science fiction, they went to a lot of trouble to put on the charade. As a kid, because of a family connection, we had some guest privileges on the grounds at NASA to catch a couple of launches each of Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, each bigger and mightier than the last. Those launches happened, they made actual smelly smoke and lots of noise. The Vehicle Assembly building is actually there, Pad 39A was there, I got to walk alongside the tractor as it made it’s way for a few dozen or hundred feet, it was SLOW with a full load. I saw them putting those Saturn Vs together, I got to see, in person, three Apollo launches. Hell of a show. Majestic. We was Kangs then..
But I guess after their launches, they flew over the horizon, landed at a studio and put on a show from there, 5 times. And no one from inside ever gave away the secret that it was all a fake. Remarkable! The landings, the TV, the re-entry of those ships, I guess they dropped the capsules into the air from a high-flying bomber each time, complete with parachutes and charcoaled outer cladding from ‘re-entry’. Then, to throw us a curve ball, Apollo 13. Man, it’s the best-kept conspiracy EVER.
Well, aside from Bob and Jack Kennedy.
Key-word: Anglo-Saxon. Super-race, whose countries are by far the most accomplished in human affairs, in every regard, so much so that any other discussion of the human condition is rendered moot.
Those engaging in treason typically carried / carries with it, execution; armed or unarmed when captured.
I suggest you review worldwide norms of the period and even today.
Really? The people who set fire to the Reichstag weren’t executed upon capture; three of the four were actually acquitted. Even during the war, the Scholls were afforded a trial before being executed.
I think you’re finding it difficult to defend your authoritarian position.
Carroll Price wrote that the moon landings were science fiction and you then go on to insinuate that he stated that the rocket launches were non-existent, and of course, he stated no such thing. Needing new reading glasses? Reading comprehension difficulties? Or, just plain dishonest?
Stop digging Wally FFS!
Mystery of British Industrial Miracle —
The East India Company began collecting taxes in India, and then cleverly used a portion of those revenues (about a third) to fund the purchase of Indian goods for British use. In other words, instead of paying for Indian goods out of their own pocket, British traders acquired them for free, “buying” from peasants and weavers using money that had just been taken from them.
It was a scam – theft on a grand scale. Yet most Indians were unaware of what was going on because the agent who collected the taxes was not the same as the one who showed up to buy their goods. Had it been the same person, they surely would have smelled a rat.
Some of the stolen goods were consumed in Britain, and the rest were re-exported elsewhere. The re-export system allowed Britain to finance a flow of imports from Europe, including strategic materials like iron, tar and timber, which were essential to Britain’s industrialisation. Indeed, the Industrial Revolution depended in large part on this systematic theft from India.
On top of this, the British were able to sell the stolen goods to other countries for much more than they “bought” them for in the first place, pocketing not only 100 percent of the original value of the goods but also the markup.
After the British Raj took over in 1858, colonisers added a special new twist to the tax-and-buy system. As the East India Company’s monopoly broke down, Indian producers were allowed to export their goods directly to other countries. But Britain made sure that the payments for those goods nonetheless ended up in London.
How did this work? Basically, anyone who wanted to buy goods from India would do so using special Council Bills – a unique paper currency issued only by the British Crown. And the only way to get those bills was to buy them from London with gold or silver. So traders would pay London in gold to get the bills, and then use the bills to pay Indian producers. When Indians cashed the bills in at the local colonial office, they were “paid” in rupees out of tax revenues – money that had just been collected from them. So, once again, they were not in fact paid at all; they were defrauded.
Meanwhile, London ended up with all of the gold and silver that should have gone directly to the Indians in exchange for their exports.
This corrupt system meant that even while India was running an impressive trade surplus with the rest of the world – a surplus that lasted for three decades in the early 20th century – it showed up as a deficit in the national accounts because the real income from India’s exports was appropriated in its entirety by Britain.
Some point to this fictional “deficit” as evidence that India was a liability to Britain. But exactly the opposite is true. ”
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/britain-stole-45-trillion-india-181206124830851.html
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/britain-stole-45-trillion-india-181206124830851.html
This is the economic machination Britain played on India
“The East India Company began collecting taxes in India, and then cleverly used a portion of those revenues (about a third) to fund the purchase of Indian goods for British use. In other words, instead of paying for Indian goods out of their own pocket, British traders acquired them for free, “buying” from peasants and weavers using money that had just been taken from them.
It was a scam – theft on a grand scale. Yet most Indians were unaware of what was going on because the agent who collected the taxes was not the same as the one who showed up to buy their goods. Had it been the same person, they surely would have smelled a rat.
Some of the stolen goods were consumed in Britain, and the rest were re-exported elsewhere. The re-export system allowed Britain to finance a flow of imports from Europe, including strategic materials like iron, tar and timber, which were essential to Britain’s industrialisation. Indeed, the Industrial Revolution depended in large part on this systematic theft from India.
On top of this, the British were able to sell the stolen goods to other countries for much more than they “bought” them for in the first place, pocketing not only 100 percent of the original value of the goods but also the markup.
After the British Raj took over in 1858, colonisers added a special new twist to the tax-and-buy system. As the East India Company’s monopoly broke down, Indian producers were allowed to export their goods directly to other countries. But Britain made sure that the payments for those goods nonetheless ended up in London.
How did this work? Basically, anyone who wanted to buy goods from India would do so using special Council Bills – a unique paper currency issued only by the British Crown. And the only way to get those bills was to buy them from London with gold or silver. So traders would pay London in gold to get the bills, and then use the bills to pay Indian producers. When Indians cashed the bills in at the local colonial office, they were “paid” in rupees out of tax revenues – money that had just been collected from them. So, once again, they were not in fact paid at all; they were defrauded.
Meanwhile, London ended up with all of the gold and silver that should have gone directly to the Indians in exchange for their exports. ”
aljazeera
What Britain did, US perfected across the globe . Printing money and council bill sound so close and intimate . Slavery ,immigrant labor, extracting mineral from Congo, getting oil from Iran , Latin America ,forcing arms sales to Iran / saudi– sound so close to the pillage, tortures and the extortion of the Indian farmers .
LOL. A Zionist calling someone “authoritarian”.
And of course you dodged my points about worldwide behavior indicating that Germany’s behavior was no different than others.
The Reichstag fire debuked, it was indeed started by communists, not ‘the Nazis’.
Fire in the Reichstag, By Peter Wainwright : https://codoh.com/library/document/1986/
and:
The Reichstag Fire – Was It A False Flag ? : https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=11254
Sophie Scholls propaganda shot down here:
The White Rose: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4428
You’re in over your head.
That’s it? That’s your reply?
I notice you can refute anything I have commented on. Grow up.
http://www.codoh.com
I don’t know what you think you’re accomplishing by posting links about the Reichstag Fire and Scholls. The issue isn’t whether the history about these events are true. It’s about whether the people involved were executed without trial. And in both cases, there were trials.
So you’re right that Germany’s behavior in these cases was like that of other countries, which also tried people before executing them. The exception it appears would be the Night of the Long Knives, on which people accused of treason were summarily executed. And you defended that because you have deep seated authoritarian tendencies.
I once believed in Zionism but I don’t anymore, precisely because I saw that there was no way to support it and remain committed to democracy, rather than authoritarianism. In short, I admitted I was wrong.
You should do the same and admit you’re wrong that Germany “did what other countries do” in the case of the Night of the Long Knives, or at least admit that you’re fine and dandy with shooting people without trial.
Now don’t forget the famous moon rock in the Dutch National Museum, donated by the Apollo 11 crew in 1969. Forty years later this prized exhibit was found, on closer examination, to be nothing more than a piece of petrified wood. Of course, NASA has been taking the p*ss big time for nearly fifty years but no matter, the most loyal Apollo supporters will never be able overcome their cognitive dissonance. Still it’s good fun to listen to their patriotic waffle.
When you rely on secondhand stuff do try and furnish us with something better than the witterings of Jason Hickel, Fellow of the Royal Society of the Arts. He doesn’t understand concepts such as opportunity cost quite obviously and is in fantasy land proferring an imagined India which could have done what Japan did… just for a start.
Yawn. You still have not proven that the traitors: 1. did not resist arrest 2. weren’t armed
IOW, you don’t have the required facts.
And you still believe other countries did not summarily execute attempted coup members. Laughable, but that’s your problem.
And all of this from someone who falsely claims to a ‘Villanova faculty member’ and now no longer a Zionist. Both lies as demonstrated at: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11798&p=88277&hilit=mathis+professor+lee#p88277
Bye.
Guess I got under your skin. Good.
Really.
” However, in 2009 the Rijksmuseum of the Netherlands declared that the “goodwill moon rock” it had received in 1992 from the estate of Netherlands Prime Minister Willem Drees was bogus. This “moon rock,” which had been exhibited for more than a decade on a gold-colored piece of cardboard, weighs 89 grams (3.1 ounces) – far larger than the 1 gram piece of lunar basalt 70017 affixed to the Netherlands Apollo 17 lunar sample display. Testing of the Rijksmuseum “moon rock” in 2009 showed it to be a piece of petrified wood, likely from Arizona. The Rijksmuseum had insured this “moon rock” for ƒ100,000 (€50,000 [$85,000] in 2012 currency) upon its receipt.[4][5][6][7][8]
“An investigation showed that United States Ambassador J. William Middendorf II had presented Drees with the “moon rock” on October 9, 1969. The Apollo 11 astronauts were visiting the Netherlands at that time on a goodwill tour. Drees’ grandson speculates that his grandfather, who was nearly deaf, and blind at the time, formed the mistaken impression that the “moon rock” he received was from the Apollo 11 mission. When Drees’ “moon rock” was received by the Rijksmuseum in 1992, the museum phoned NASA to verify its provenance and was told over the phone, without seeing the piece, that it was “possible” it was a Moon rock.[4] USA Today says the discovery of a bogus “moon rock” at the Rijksmuseum should serve as a wake-up call for all the countries of the world and all the states of the United States that received the Apollo 11 and 17 lunar plaque displays from the Nixon administration to locate the displays and fully secure them.[4][5][6][7]
“According to Moon rock researcher Robert Pearlman, both the Netherlands Apollo 11 and Apollo 17 lunar sample displays are in the National Museum of the History of Science and Medicine in Leiden, Netherlands.[1][2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands_lunar_sample_displays
The basic premise if the writer is correct . The exploitation was massive and destructive for India and was highly instrumental in building the base of UK and its white territories- US Canada and Australia even after US independence . Without India ,Uk would be living in 16 the century.
Today USA prints money , loots Africa ,Saudi, Latin America and sells arms to saudis ( and Iran of Shah ) and protracts its business interest with the power of the military .
Even thus book so pro UK : Financing the Raj: The City of London and Colonial India, 1858-1940 by Sudetland slip up and expose the secret of one way movement of gold and silver and reverse traffic of paper money in 18th and 19 th hundred .
RC Dutta -lecturer of London College in 1900 did a great job of exposing the practice .
Well, winning that debate was sure easy. But then losing debates is the norm for you. LOL
For a fraudulent “Villanova faculty member”, you and your BS Zionist “holocaust” fantasies have sure been crushed for all to see. Highly recommend for everyone:
CODOH routs fake “Villanova faculty member” Andrew Mathis of the Zionist “Holocaust’ Controversies” in debate after debate: https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4451&p=72138&hilit=mathis+thames+mulegino#p72138
British system whether it’s 1900 0r 1700 or now in post 2001 is essentially same . It’s the generational blot, its in their DNA. They distort their motives of engagement in Libya Syria Iran Iraq. They distort their nature of involvements in Kenya China and Russia ( choose the century that’s relevant ) . They get BBC or Manchester Guardian to expose to the world their much appreciated benevolence, unselfishness and the utter emotional need of the subjugated countries to have British Royal love . DNA has not changed for those generational stakeholders. It can be summed up as penchant for free money at any cost . India just happened to be one of the worst like Ireland – a very bad illegal operation- a ‘Meth Lab ‘ . They ruined everything that was beautiful about the world.
Is it ok to shoot unarmed Afghans ? Is it ok to shoot unarmed Iraqis? Is it to ok to shoot disarmed Palestinian?
The history of the Land Revenue administration in India is of the deepest interest, because it is intimately connected with the material well-being of an agricultural nation. I n the earlier years of the British Rule, the East India Company regarded India as a vast estate or plan- tation, and considered themselves entitled to all that the land could produce, leaving barely enough to the tillers
and the Ianded cIasses to keep them alive in ordinary years. This policy proved disastrous to the revenues
of the Company, and a reform became necessary. The Company then recognised the wisdom of assuring to the
landed classes the future profits of agriculture. Accord- ingly, Lord Cornwallis permanently settled the Land Revenue in Bengal in I 793, demanding from landlords
go per cent. of the rental, but assuring them against any increase of the demand in the future. The proportiorl
taken by the Government was excessive beyond measure ; but cultivation and rental have largely increased since
I 793 ; and the peasantry and the landed classes have reaped the profits. The agriculturists of Bengal are
more resourceful to-day, and more secure against the worst effects of famine than the agriculturists of any other Province in India.
A change then came over the policy of the East India Company. They were unwilling to extend the Permanent Settlement to other Provinces. They tried
to fix a proper share of the rental as their due so that their revenue might increase with the rental. In Northern India they fixed their demand first at 83 per cent. of the rental, then at 75 per cent., then at 66 per cent. But even this was found to be impracticable, and at last, in I 855, they limited the State-demand to 50 per cent. of the rental. And this rule of limiting the Land Revenue to one-half the rental was extended to Southern India in 1864. An income-tax of 50 per cent. on the profits of cultivation is a heavier assessment than is known in any other country under a civilised Govern- ment.
https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/dutt/EcHisIndia2.pdf
The link you provide to the exchange between Ms. Lee says nothing about my having taught or not taught at Villanova. I did teach there, as an adjunct, between 2000 and 2009. I never claimed to have permanent faculty status there, and you can’t show otherwise.
Everything taken to an extreme eventually becomes the opposite.
Bostrom notes that although advanced AI was was predicted to be already here by scientists, “it would have had high chances of ending in disaster” .
If intelligence is the decisive strategic advantage then it is only a matter of time.
Absolutely not. It’s a war crime in all three cases. What’s your point?
Wow! I had never thought of the Brits being human beings before. But I do draw on my Irish ancestry to have a laugh with Indian friends about how well we did out of the opportunities we took from the oppressor’s régime.
What “system” do you refer to? That sounds a bit like something consciously designed which no one has ever accused the great muddlers-through of doing wrt Empire.
As for the DNA you do know you are just using fashionable metaphorical jargon don’t you and it doesn’t apparently help you remember the vast difference in background between Old Etonians Cameron, Johnson etc and Scots Tony Blair, Gordon Brown plus Jews Mandelson and the Milibands under whom the UK foolishly lined up with the US post 9/11 – or to remember since you apparently insist on seeing continuity between the old imperial Britain and today’s remnant that millions of British people actively expressed their opposition to the Iraq war. Come to think of it you might like to consider the DNA continuity which provided anti- nuclear protests in the 60s to 80s and campaigners against slavery, burning of widows and child labour in the 18th and 19th centuries.
Hahahaha……….war crime, a?
What if the unarmed guy of those three groups above is is 6.2, 250 pounds of muscle in a fit of rage and fast approaching a trooper screaming “I’ll kill you”? And, the trooper is 5.8, 170 pounds, with a RIFLE? Distance 30 feet.
What if there are several unarmed guys of the similar type and a single soldier? Even two?
Ah, wait, I know: shoot in the air. If they don’t stop shoot them in legs. You sure about legs? Above knee of below? What if you get the artery?
What if a trooper is clearing a room and unarmed guy jumps on him and grabs his rifle?
What if an unarmed guy is in front of an armed guy aiming at the trooper, simply covering him? Can’t happen?
Or…..dozens of similar scenarios?
Crackup.
It seems that the East India Company declined in all sorts of ways in the early 19th century and, even if their people hadn’t declined in ability and morals the increasing numbers of Indians with acquaintance with modernity and often a Western education leaving the East India Company in place was bound to bring shame to responsible British legislators who allowed it. Some of the attitudes of the British Indian civil servants – not to mention their wives or somewhat less intelligent soldiers – seem unbelievably ridiculous and wrong today but they were a new, honest and well meaning class. Anyone who fantasises about alternative histories ought to ask why the Mogul emperor or some of the myriad rich potentates within India, many hardly impacted by the Brits until 1947 faced them with real loss of power, didn’t try and do what the Japanese did.
Britain was not very powerful compared to France, and then Germany, so it needed way of outmatching them, and it came up with one. Many entities act so as increase their power by any means necessary. A country does not need to have conscious central direction to work intelligently. Termites and ants work toward a common objective of their nest without self awareness.
You seem to be suggesting that there are some unelaborated good points. There were after all a lot of countries weaker and less populous than France and Germany. Wouldn’t a simpler model explain more if it was based on the business and economic aspirations of people to become richer and what you might emphasise in what you saw could have been a prudent specialising in niches and a maximising of the advantages of being maritime and protected by the sea.
Continuity at home ? No. Continuity abroad- yes. Burning of widows ? What about burning of witches ? lynching of blacks? Burning of witches disappeared . Same would have to the customs of the burning of widows without the help of some ragtag beggars uncouth uncivilized soldiers from Britain .
It is the continuity that I refer to because in your reference to the practices of burning of the widows I see the same parallel here in USA and there over in Australia and UK- and whats that
?
That is the saving of women by Laura Bush in Afghanistan . That is unshackling the women across Iraq and MENA. People drank from that empty bottle few times before voting 2nd times Bush.
We know those hyphenated human . One of them is Mattis . Rest include Tony and his clowns who voted him few times to power.
Now go and think that for 17 years and then come back to me .
DNA has just spread across the pond to US and Australia. That is a big difference.
As your were saying I suppose.
Derision is the 2nd of the 3 stops before you reach the truths .
Did the average British person live better than ordinary people in countries like France, and Germany? I doubt it and Adam Smith did too. Britain was stronger though.
I happen to believe in the primacy of foreign policy
The Indian Empire was kept by Britain after it had ceased to be profitable (because the opium grown for trade with China could not be forced on it any more). Ireland was much the same, the big estates there ceased to pay in the 19th century and were a net drain on Britain. But both were kept as a source of manpower. Ireland could not be used in WW1 and was got rid of, India was kept on for WW2 and then let go.