Hard left wins in Greece

The interesting question is not whether Greece leaves the Euro, or the Euro leaves Greece, but how many of the opposition will be arrested before the next election.

The victory of the hard left was made possible by arresting the hard right and forbidding them from campaigning.

Which had the effect of discouraging anyone from disagreeing with the hard left

Greek politics is already dominated by police intimidation and the direct use of state power to punish dissent.  Election of a hard left party is likely to increase the use of police intimidation and the direct use of state power to punish dissent.

The left, which is to say the state, talks about the side of history.  History tells us that if you use state power to suppress your opponents on the right, by and by your opponents on the left will use state power to suppress you.

184 Responses to “Hard left wins in Greece”

  1. Simon says:

    How racism should be discussed:

    http://youtu.be/N3RQvEUayzQ

    • jim says:

      How racism should not be discussed

      “let me say at the outset I am not a racist”

      How racism should be discussed

      “Racist is just a hate word for white, used by people who intend the destruction of the white race. Being white, I am therefore racist. Being proud of being white, I am therefore proud of being racist”

      Whenever you say “I am not a racist” you accept the frame of those who intend our eradication.

      • Simon says:

        jim, it’s a comedic sketch. You’ll have to watch past the first thirty seconds.

        • Dave says:

          It’s a good sketch. As Anonymous Conservative explains, leftists are a herd of rabbits who ruthlessly out-group anyone who doesn’t toe the latest party line. Because they’re so terrified of being out-grouped, the most effective weapons against them are not facts and logic, but mockery and ridicule.

        • jim says:

          Watched to 2:47

          Realized it was comedic sketch about three leftists piously out lefting each other, while be shockingly not left enough for the leftmost leftist.

          Still could not stomach it.

          • Adolf the anti-White says:

            Anti-immigration party guy was struggling to synthesize his actual racial ideas with a PC view of the world. He doesn’t want Australia to be Asian, but doesn’t want to be a racist.

            Leftist woman gave the typical leftist party line.

            Interviewer was comedically honest. He acted too stupid to completely agree with the leftist party line, and so reality slipped through.

            Here’s how I think we ought to discuss race:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTSdESoCeYk

          • Alan J. Perrick says:

            The issue of white survival is a joking matter to anti-whites, case in point.

            A.J.P.

      • Adair Neto says:

        “Racist is just a hate word for white, used by people who intend the destruction of the white race. Being white, I am therefore racist. Being proud of being white, I am therefore proud of being racist”

        That’s false! All data and life experiences proves that black people are victim of violence and a lot of other injustices. I am white and I’m not racist. The big deal of talking about racism is to stop the exploitation of black people (who suffers much more violence, earns much less money under same circunstances, etc.) How much black people were killed by whites? A LOT! How much white people were killed by black? A few. Whites are killing blacks and say that the “white people” (propaganda!) is the victim.

        You are the executioner playing the victim. And all this “the left wants… ” “the left is…” is just a us versus them thing. Which is great for populism.

        • jim says:

          Obviously we see black violence against whites motivated by hatred of whites every day on you tube.

          Whenever race hustlers go digging for white violence against blacks motivated by hatred of blacks, all they come up with is a case like George Zimmerman.

          When a black man enters a house, beats the crap out of the white woman alone in the house, and kills her baby just for the hell of it, not racism, indeed the opposite of racism. When Trayvon Martin (black) attacks George Zimmerman (part black mestizo) after calling him a hateful epithet that means “white”, not racism. When George Zimmerman defends himself, racism.

          Anti racist means anti white. So when Martin Trayvon used a hateful epithet for whites before attacking George Zimmerman, not racist, but anti racist. “Racist” is what people call whites before attacking them, robbing them, killing them.

          Observe actual usage of the term “racist”. Only whites can be racist, and all whites are racist. “Racist” just means “cracker”. Words mean what they are used to mean, and that is how the word “racist” is in fact used.

          If you guys had called Trayvon Martin “racist” because he used a hate word for “white” before physically attacking someone he perceived as white or whitish, then you might have a claim that it is something other than a word you call white people before harming them.

          • Adair Neto says:

            Yep, that’s true: there is violence from black against white. But is far less than the contrary. That’s obvious in statistics and in a conscious daily experience.

            There are misuses of racism, of course. But the central idea is the fight against inequality, no matter against who (black, asian, white, etc.).

            The explanation why racism is most used in violence against black people is obvious: they suffer more violence due to prejudices similar to yours.

            • jim says:

              Yep, that’s true: there is violence from black against white. But is far less than the contrary. That’s obvious in statistics and in a conscious daily experience.

              You are just being silly.

              If you guys found a real example of white violence against blacks, you would be putting up giant posters everywhere. If white violence happens against black people, why is it that every case that you make into posters, for example Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, it turns out that the black man made an attack on a white man, in substantial part out of hatred of whites.

              Poster girl female pilots crash their planes. Poster boy victims of white violence turn out to be thugs.

          • Adair Neto says:

            “If you guys found a real example of white violence against blacks, you would be putting up giant posters everywhere. If white violence happens against black people, why is it that every case that you make into posters, for example Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, it turns out that the black man made an attack on a white man, in substantial part out of hatred of whites.”

            That’s silly.

          • Alan J. Perrick says:

            “Racial equality” is a code word for White Genocide.

            If ONLY black countries were being flooded with hundreds of millions of non-blacks to solve some “race problem”, EVERY black country from Africa to the Carribbean and, by some coincidence, even Belize were being flooded, people would say that this “race problem” was actually a black problem and that this policy of bringing in non-black was, in fact, anti-black.

            However. this policy of racial genocide is not being carried out in the black countries. It’s happening in white ones.

            Diversity means chasing down the last white person.

            A.J.P.

        • R7_Rocket says:

          @Adair Neto

          According to Progressive theology, Whites are Raaacist. Thusly, Adair Neto is 100% White, therefore, Adair Neto is 100% raaacist.

          However, I’m only 50% White, therefore, I’m 50% raaacist…

          Or we could just dump the whole idiotic Trotskyist raaacist crap overboard.

  2. peppermint says:

    I wonder how long the coalition will last. Everyone knows that if the government falls, they get the Golden Dawn; a condition not too dissimilar from Mubarak’s Egypt

  3. Racial ethnic solidarity is ok when it involves technology transfer to a hostile foreign power.

    ——————————————
    Morteza Gharib, Caltech vice provost, said he was “best friends” with Dr. Weihs, the Israeli with whom restricted information had been shared.
    Troian says she informed Adam Cochran, Caltech’s Associate General Counsel, that Gat had posted information to a public site that revealed the key operating principle of the JPL micropropulsion device. This violated federal regulations
    Ares Rosakis, division chair, was one of the first people informed about Gat’s behavior. Troian says that after the FBI questioned her about the situation, Rosakis warned Troian that her behavior was becoming “dangerous” for the Division and for Caltech.
    Edward M. Stolper, Caltech provost who told Troian she would be “miserable” if she didn’t cooperate in covering up the Israeli espionage software that the israeli student had introduced to CalTech Jet Propulsion Lab networks
    http://www.ifamericansknew.org/us_ints/sp-caltech.html

    • Peppermint says:

      We just talked about Jewish subversion, Jewish infiltration, Jewish indoctrination, and the international Jewish conspiracy to sap and impurity our precious bodily fluids last week. Come back for the second Thursday of February and we’ll discuss how relevant that piece of industrial espionage is to the big picture.

      • Ian says:

        Ha ha. It’s funny because dumb paranoid people believe that Jews sometimes do bad things. Ha ha ha those dumb paranoid people.

        • Peppermint says:

          There are many things to accuse the Jews of. This faggot chose to insinuate, not accuse, them of something everyone knows they do, and the chinks do on a larger scale than the kikes.

          Why not push the issue of ritual murder, which had curiously followed the Ashkenazim around? Or the continued sex slavery and corruption of politicians? Go big or go home. Really, the lives of a few children are nothing compared with the future of the race – why not focus on the Holocaust lie, its formation, and its use to push sexual degeneracy?

          The biggest thing to accuse the Jews of is snivel rights laws and hate speech laws, going back to the Statute of Kalisz. Which is part of the current White genocide crisis.

          And that’s it. That’s the most we can possibly accuse them of.

          This has been discussed to death here, so he only point in posting about it again is to note the current split in the NRx community between the Radix / DailyStormer activists and the NRx passivists, with the Socialist Matter kiddies and Henry Dampier unsure of which side they are on.. Psychology teaches us that one can be a perceiver or a judger, a rightist or a leftist, a sperglord or a normalfag. Our goal is to tell the truth faster than they can use misconceptions to torment a revolution. Their goal is to use half-baked ideas to develop a plan to do something or other.

          Lastly, why am I, a former Occutard, telling others not to use activism to get pussy while maybe doing something that might be helpful or not? If I can’t mitigate the effects of my sins, justice will demand that the Lord punish me in Purgatory or Hell. And if the Lord doesn’t exist, justice may not be done – is that a scary thought? If it is, you can help by not being an activist.

  4. Hidden Author says:

    More accurately, a vote for extremists of any type is a vote for one (wo)man, one vote, one time as fascists and Islamists have also been known to use democracy to undermine democracy.

    • jim says:

      The error of the Weimar republic was that they failed to arrest their political opponents. The error of the Greek regime was that they arrested the least dangerous, rather than the most dangerous.

      • Hidden Author says:

        Aren’t you in favor of the abolition of the Weimar Republic and all its equivalents ever? You’ve made it pretty clear that you are not a fan of democracy…

        • jim says:

          If they had the will to arrest their opponents on the right and left, would no longer be the Weimar republic.

        • Peppermint says:

          If only the Habsburgs and Hohenzollerns had been able to shut down discussion of the German Question in the 19th century. Weimar wanted to both do what the Habsburgs couldn’t and do it without the tools that the Habsburgs had. The only tool Weimar had was to buy off German men, which is disgusting. The current plan is to both buy off and replace German men.

      • Hidden Author says:

        Also when the dictatorial parties (the Nazis and the Communists) far outnumbered the democratic parties (the liberals, the Christian Democrats and the Social Democrats), the only way they could win would be to declare a dictatorship of the democratic parties…which would undermine their purpose of being, democracy. So in the end, the Germans of 1933 had a choice between a Nazi dictatorship and a Communist dictatorship. Ever afterward, the Left would blame German capitalists for choosing the Nazi dictatorship as if the Communist dictatorship were apostles of benevolence.

        Once the Allies abolished the Third Reich and established an occupation government (in effect a military dictatorship), qualms about establishing a democracy through anti-democratic means went out the window: Too much blood had been shed by the war fought by the last German dictatorship. The new German Constitution allowed the mainstream German democratic parties to ban Nazi and Communist parties. But even then, Nazi and Communist parties operated underground and eventually Communist parties were legalized. In fact, even when the mainstream German democratic parties sought to ban the neo-Nazi National Democratic Party, German courts have ruled the ban illegal: Something to do with entrapment based on how the German police have infiltrated the NDP with their agents and informers…

  5. spandrell says:

    The good part of the leftist singularity is when the 80% left gets shafted by the 90% left. Good fun. Spain is next apparently. Gonna be an interesting year.

  6. […] ministry of defence or public order, though it seems that it will not get them.” (Relevant predictions from […]

  7. A.B Prosper says:

    When not if this coalition falls apart and the Lefties fail is when the fund starts. I feel sorry for the Greeks.

    Upside though, Golden Dawn has many military and police supporters who now know that Greek democracy is a sham if they didn’t already and once the situation gets dire enough? Since the Left pays dirty so can the Right.

    • jim says:

      Coalitions with communists usually fall apart by the coalition partners going to jail or disappearing, rather than the coalition partners voting against the communists.

      I don’t expect anything dramatic to happen either with debt or repression, not immediately. All my life Greece has been in financial crisis, and all my life the crisis has been getting worse. All my life Europe has applied political repression, and all my life the repression has been escalating. The financial crisis will get worse somewhat faster, and the repression will get worse somewhat faster. I expect the communists to remain in power until removed by violence, but an ever thinning pretense of democracy will be maintained, which pretense the rest of Europe will mostly pretend to believe.

    • Peppermint says:

      Golden Dawn has many military and police supporters who now know that Greek democracy is a sham

      That’s great. Are they going to stage a coup, knowing that the US and the EU will try to destroy them is they succeed? Or are they going to be hounded out and neutered like VXXC’s truthkeepers, with mandatory retirement for killing a Negro to keep up morale?

      And if they do stage a coup, these are national ~~socialists~~ we’re taking about, in an already dangerously socialist country. German NS can be excused due to the and the partisans. These guys are going to let le Happy Merchant say that the silly goyim need globalism

  8. EasyE says:

    What a load of crap.

    First, let’s dispense with the euphemisms: Golden Dawn is not just a “hard right party”– it’s a neo-Nazi party that goes into Greek hospitals, and threatens to physically throw out Syrian-born and Turkish patients.

    http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119536/greek-neo-nazi-group-golden-dawn-may-succeed-elections
    http://greece.greekreporter.com/2013/04/24/golden-dawn-invades-nikaia-hospital/

    Second, the “hard left” did not arrest Golden Dawn leaders– the center-right New Democracy Party arrested them for belonging to a “criminal organization” following the murder of a rap musician by members of Golden Dawn.

    Perhaps they shouldn’t have been arrested, but let’s be fulsome about the circumstances. Germany, France and other European countries would’ve done the same.

    Third, if anything, the arrests galvanized the Golden Dawn Party, which finished in 3rd place. http://rt.com/news/226207-golden-dawn-greece-election/

    “The left, which is to say the state, talks about the side of history. History tells us that if you use state power to suppress your opponents on the right, by and by your opponents on the left will use state power to suppress you.”

    Fourth, “the left” was not doing the jailing in Greece’s sordid modern history. The Colonels were a right-wing military junta (1967-1974) that jailed all of its political opponents from “the left” with the support of U.S. Administrations. In fact, Golden Dawn’s leader publicly met with the Colonels who are still alive.

    I don’t like the Greek left either, but you’re just making things up.

    • jim says:

      First, let’s dispense with the euphemisms: Golden Dawn is not just a “hard right party”– it’s a neo-Nazi party that goes into Greek hospitals, and threatens to physically throw out Syrian-born and Turkish patients.

      A little background: These people entered the country illegally, with a nod and wink from the government that would neither keep them out, nor admit to letting them in, and are on the path to citizenship,through various creatively interpreted technicalities, when they should have been deported.

      The intended outcome of this policy, applied in every white country, is that whites shall become minorities everywhere.

      Once outvoted, whites will become a market dominant minority. In most of the world, most of the time, market dominant minorities get exterminated or ethnically cleansed, as whites were ethnically cleansed from Detroit. Not immediately, and not all the time, but in the long run, that is the way to bet.

      Second, the “hard left” did not arrest Golden Dawn leaders– the center-right New Democracy Party arrested them for belonging to a “criminal organization” following the murder of a rap musician by members of Golden Dawn.

      Blatantly trumped up charges. And those that manufactured those charges, will in due course find themselves arrested on trumped up charges by those further left.

      • Adair Neto says:

        “The intended outcome of this policy, applied in every white country, is that whites shall become minorities everywhere.”

        Miscigenation is the rule of life and genetics. There is no escape. As I said, there is no true/real/pure white.

        “Once outvoted, whites will become a market dominant minority.”

        And why should whites be a dominant? Because you are white? (I am too)

        You said that whites are being exterminated. That’s absolutely not true. Whites rules the world (that’s pretty obvious).

        • jim says:

          Whites are market dominant because we can obviously see them to be market dominant even when they are out of power, persecuted, and a tiny minority, as for example, in the Congo and the former Rhodesia. Their market dominance comes from their superior qualities. Same problem as the Jews and the overseas Chinese. Likely to have the same consequences. Observe what happened in Detroit and in Rhodesia.

          Market dominant minorities don’t always get exterminated, and they don’t immediately get exterminated. But, in the long run, that is the way to bet.

          • Adair Neto says:

            Their market dominance comes from violence and advanced techniques of war (which doesn’t make whites superior). A group is only superior to another by an arbitrary point of comparison.

            If you see violence and a awful societal structure (know as “civilization”) as better, whites are superior; but if you change your point of view, whites would be inferior.

            Every culture has amazing things, they are just different. Indeed, if were martian, you’ll certainly think that martians are better. You are being biased by your taste (you live by an emotivism and transform it in an objectivism).

            If white people are “superior” because their “civilization” and violence, I don’t want to be superior in this way (laughs).

            What would you do if you were an minority in point of being exterminated? Anyway, the thought that you are presenting is the same thing that slavery supporters used and was simply destroyed by every scientist.

            • jim says:

              Their market dominance comes from violence and advanced techniques of war

              Then why are whites still market dominant in countries like the Congo and Zimbabwe, where they are being terrorized by the majority?

          • peppermint says:

            » If you see violence and a awful societal structure (know as “civilization”) as better, whites are superior; but if you change your point of view, whites would be inferior.

            » Every culture has amazing things, they are just different.

            Cool story bro. Now fuck off to the Australoid or Bushman reservation and we’re not giving you any medicine when you get sick because you don’t need it.

          • Adair Neto says:

            @peppermint I agree that medicines are good. But one specific thing doesn’t make the whole society the best one. If that was true, then eastern countries would be the best because they have the best philosophy.

        • R7_Rocket says:

          @Adair Neto

          “And why should whites be a dominant? Because you are white? (I am too)”

          I’m only 50% White, but I find the attempt at their destruction quite disturbing.

          “Their market dominance comes from violence and advanced techniques of war (which doesn’t make whites superior).”

          You do realize that nuclear weapons exist and that technological trends point to more nukes in the hands of more states and organizations… I highly doubt that low IQ races are going to have a handle in this future environment.

          • Adair Neto says:

            “low IQ races”

            Do you know that this is a big myth from slavery times, don’t ya?

            • jim says:

              That certain races are on average dumber than others is obvious. Particularly obvious is the lack of overlap at the high end. Progress is driven by the very smartest white males, and there just are no brown males or white women that smart.

          • The Observer says:

            “Do you know that this is a big myth from slavery times, don’t ya?”

            https://iontheworld.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/iqworld.jpg

            You’re too short for this ride, science denier.

          • peppermint says:

            people say Whites have an IQ of 100 and Blacks have an IQ of 85, which sounds like 15% less, which is notable but not too much different, like the difference in weight between women and men.

            In reality, chimpanzees are reported to get scores between 40 and 90, depending on methodology. That means Blacks either overlap with chimpanzees in terms of intelligence, or the distance between Blacks and Whites is half the distance between Blacks and chimps.

            IQ has been the dirty little secret of psychology for the past 100 years. More than that, it is literally the only scientific claim psychology has ever made.

            Now, Neto, you have a choice. You can take the blue pill, and when you wake up, you’ll forget about all of this and go back to your normal life of donating to the SPLC and going to #blacklivesmatter die-ins to try to meet cute girls, while every so often wondering why despite the best efforts of half a century of social engineers Blacks still don’t have equal outcomes.

            Or you can take the red pill, and find out how deep this rabbit hole is.

          • Dan Kurt says:

            re: jpg of IQ of World posted by The Observer

            It is not just IQ but also Standard Deviation of the Mean of the IQ that is important. The 105 mean IQ of North Asians with a SD of 10 will not produce the number of >150 IQ individuals that the 100 mean IQ of Whites with a SD of 15 will produce.

            Dan Kurt

        • Harold says:

          Where do leftist get their obsession with racial purity? They never fail to trot it out. Sure, we are told, erroneously, that the Nazi’s were obsessed by racial purity, but even this seems insufficient to explain the utter obsession of the left with racial purity, or rather, with our supossed fucks given about racial purity. One begins to suspect projection. That is, they think if they believed the things we do, they would be obsessed with racial purity, so we must be. And they tell themselves there is no such thing as pure races to tamp down their own impulses.

    • pdimov says:

      “Golden Dawn is not just a “hard right party”– it’s a neo-Nazi party”

      I don’t think there’s anything neo- about Golden Dawn. Seems very ordinary Nazi to me. Wouldn’t be surprised if their political platform matches NSDAP’s to the letter.

      But I’m not Greek and I don’t live in Greece, so if you’re either, perhaps you know better.

      “Third, if anything, the arrests galvanized the Golden Dawn Party, which finished in 3rd place.”

      Not according to what I’ve read – they’ve lost a bunch of support. (And it’s not just the arrests, two Golden Dawn members were murdered by the “hard left”.)

  9. EasyE says:

    “A little background: These people entered the country illegally, with a nod and wink from the government that would neither keep them out, nor admit to letting them in, and are on the path to citizenship,through various creatively interpreted technicalities, when they should have been deported.”

    Lol– you’re getting your nativism mixed-up. Who is “these people”? There have been “Turks” in Greece for centuries. (Kemal Ataturk was born in Thessalonika). So Greeks are “white” but Turks are not “white”? What makes them “white”? Having been to both countries, I can assure you they look identical.

    “Blatantly trumped up charges. And those that manufactured those charges, will in due course find themselves arrested on trumped up charges by those further left.”

    Lol– and Golden Dawn is a champion of free speech? Golden Dawn’s leaders have spoke highly of the Colonels– the right-wing military junta that jailed leftists without ANY charges at all.

    And the conservative New Democracy Party is now “left”– LOL.

    This is Bizarro World, wholly detached from reality.

    • jim says:

      So Greeks are “white” but Turks are not “white”? What makes them “white”?

      Not so long ago the Turks genocided the Armenians, who were pretty much the same ethnicity as the Greeks. If Greeks become a minority in Greece, they are in the same boat as the Armenians.

      Greeks are not very white, and Turks are slightly less white, the difference being scarcely perceptible. But small differences often create more hate than large differences. When the Turks genocide the Greeks, they will say, truthfully enough, that they are doing it on religious rather than racial grounds.

      The mass importation of inferior races would be less menacing if the state that was bringing them in was not also indoctrinating them that the former majority is hateful, evil, vile, and deserves punishment.

      • Adair Neto says:

        Jim, you talk about how “this is more white than that” and etc. but there is no “true” or “pure” or “real” white. Genetics is pretty clear on that.

        • jim says:

          Tell that to “23 and me”.

          • Adair Neto says:

            It doesn’t destroy my argument. “23 and me”.

            It just shows how each human being is different from each other and also shows the similarities between people (which is ethnicity; I do not doubt its existence).

            But 1. there isn’t a pure “ethnicity”; 2. what we have now as ethnic groups now are just result of human evolution and a lot of miscegenation; 3. these differences between human genes doesn’t make a group superior to another (remember that superiority needs an arbitrary point of comparison).

            “23 and me” is very controversial (about its efficacy inclusive) anyway.

            • jim says:

              According to “23 and me”, those subscribers that identify as white are, on average, genetically 99.5% white. Those who identify as nonwhwite are, on average, around seventy to eighty percent genetically nonwhite.

              The races in America show no sign of mingling to the extent that would make genocide of whites unlikely or impractical.

              And when they do mingle, as for example George Zimmerman, does not stop Trayvon Martin from trying to kill him.

          • Adair Neto says:

            You are comparing a ethnicity to the whole “other”. Of course other will be greater and show more diversity.

            What kind of “white genocide” is this in which white people kills black and whites are being exterminated?

    • Contaminated NEET says:

      What a clumsy, ridiculous attempt to paint Jim with the big scarlet R! Whether Turks or Greeks are white or non-white has nothing to do with it. White or not, Greeks are not Turks, and Turks are not Greeks, and despite how similar they look, each group considers the other an outgroup.

      • Adair Neto says:

        What defines what is ingroup and what is an outgroup? There is no clear distinction.

        • jim says:

          What defines the outgroup are the people doing the killing. See Detroit. Also see the liquidation of the kulaks, the Armenian genocide, etc. The Armenians were pretty much the same ethnicity as the Greeks, and those that the Greek government intends will become the new majority are those that killed them. And, at the same time, the Greek government indoctrinates its new voters with hatred of the majority, soon to be the former majority.

          • Adair Neto says:

            In a lot of cases, the ingroups is doing the killing. Have you seen the nazis?

            What is the matter if the government is of the same ethnicity than those who killed the “original ethnicity of this land” (which is a fallacy)? The man/woman in 2015 have nothing to do with a genocide of last century. His/her genes won’t make him/her a killer.

            And if your saying is true, America should be leaved for indigenous.

            • jim says:

              Have you seen the nazis?

              No. In order to have seen the nazis I would need to be at least eighty five.

              And it seems to me that the lesson of the Nazis is that if you are Jewish, you should head off to Israel and kick the arabs out, which implies that whites should similarly ensure that white countries remain white, just as Jews should ensure that Israel is Jewish.

          • Harold says:

            “America should be leaved for indigenous.”
            Another of their favourite tropes. I’ll believe they care about indigenous rights to land when they complain about the Bantus stealing South Africa from the bushmen. Until then I’ll assume they just enjoy whacking whites with any stick in reach of their anti-white hate filled minds.

        • R7_Rocket says:

          “What defines what is ingroup and what is an outgroup? There is no clear distinction.”

          Uh, oh. We might be dealing with a psychopath here…

    • Steve Johnson says:

      So since they’re so indistinguishable from Greeks then how did Golden Dawn know who they were when they were kicking people out of hospitals?

      Yet somehow they were able to tell.

      Funny that.

  10. jim says:

    Lol– and Golden Dawn is a champion of free speech?

    You will recall I criticized the Greek government for repressing its least dangerous enemies, rather than its most dangerous, rather than criticizing them for repressing their enemies. If there was a red scare going in parallel with the brown scare, things would be fine.

  11. EasyE says:

    I have a straightforward question: are you a neo-Nazi?

    You seem to think that Golden Dawn is not dangerous, and indeed was justified in attacking Turkish patients (i.e. ‘these people’) in hospitals.

    Jim, why not have the courage of your convictions, and come out and say it?

    • George says:

      “Neo-Nazi” – lol.

    • Peppermint says:

      We are more racist than most nationalists and less socialist than most libertarians, so you’re not going to get anywhere with this kind of rabbit disqualify argument here.

    • jim says:

      You are trying to provoke the no friends to the right, no enemies to the left death spiral, which ends with the victims knocking on the door of Harvard and the New York Times and begging to be given a few small scraps of respectability. We are wise to that trick.

  12. EasyE says:

    “We are more racist than most nationalists and less socialist than most libertarians, so you’re not going to get anywhere with this kind of rabbit disqualify argument here.”

    SS badge to Peppermint for admitting to being an extreme racist. Oh I’m not trying to change your minds– I just want to expose what brand of moron habitat this brave board of anonymous posters.

    “You are trying to provoke the no friends to the right, no enemies to the left death spiral, which ends with the victims knocking on the door of Harvard and the New York Times and begging to be given a few small scraps of respectability. We are wise to that trick.”

    LOL– I love the smug, pseudointellectual posing. My guess is you’re mostly dropouts toiling away in obscurity in some government job. LOL– you clowns are a hoot!!

    • Moolie McNigger says:

      Thank you, communist internet wise man, grand intellectual giant you are,for telling off the poor retards who are too dumb to grasp the eternal truths of Marxism. White people must be made to continually apologize for their existence. And the ones who actively resist must be told that they are the Nazi monogoloids they are. Because only a complete idiot would disagree with leftism.

      But I must critique your critique. I mean you called them dumb, you called them underemployed basement dwellers, you imply they are socially retarded, but you didn’t also call them homosexuals. You also didn’t call them a bunch of weirdos who couldn’t get laid with a girl to save their lives. If you’re going to ignore some filthy white trying to rationally explain his position and counter with ad hominems make sure you cover the whole Grade 1 bases. Not just calling the honkey devil a dumb loser.

    • R7_Rocket says:

      @ EasyE

      Define “racism”.

  13. Adair Neto says:

    Violence is not exclusive to the Left. It is very present in Right too. The totalitarianism and the impossibility to listen to critiques is what makes a state to punish dissidents. Your own post proves that both Left and Right can arrest the opposition.

    I live in a liberal, right-wing state and the violence to opposition here is much stronger then in left-wing countries near.

      • Adair Neto says:

        Prove me wrong, please. Saying liar without arguments won’t do that.

        There are a lot of examples of right-wing (Latin America dictatorshisps around 60’s, Nazism) and left-wing (USSR, China) totalitarianism.

        • jim says:

          Allegedly, Pinochet killed three thousand people. If a Marxist ruler kills only ten thousand, he gets nominated for sainthood.

          • Adolf the anti-White says:

            Allegedly, Pinochet killed a few hundred for political reasons.

            The three thousand number includes police officers murdered by leftists, Marxist militias, execution of criminals for non-political reasons, and such.

    • peppermint says:

      I see. Brazil is a right wing state because the party currently in office claims to be right wing. Just like the United States in 2005.

      Do you mean that it suppresses its left enemies more than it suppresses its right enemies? If so, why is there no explicitly racist political party, but there is an explicitly Marxist political party? Why are there Marxist professors, but no racist professors?

      • Adair Neto says:

        My state (São Paulo) is the most right wing one here. The police is commanded by the state, so specially here there is a lot of police violence against left-wing manifestations (against bus fare, etc.). But this is very present on other states too. The right-wing manifestations are simply empty.

        The president (Dilma Rousseff) is from a pseudo-left party which decreases worker’s rights and so on.

        There are a lot of racists political parties. Jair Bolsonaro (from PP) is a fascist, torture apologist and militarist deputy who won a lot of votes. Most parties here never follow it’s name and paper. Our politics are very different than US’ and Europe’s politics. There are much more racist professors here than marxists. I live in an academic background and can guarantee that.

        • jim says:

          “pseudo left”. This sounds like the argument that the reason that socialism produced such bad economic outcomes was that it was state capitalism.

          You have a government that certainly thinks itself far left. You have the largest gay pride parade in the world. Does not sound like you are overrun by rightists.

          Your “right wing” violence is being done by leftists, not by Jair Bolsonaro. People in Brazil are hoping for right wing violence to curb crime and left wing violence, but are not getting it.

          Each branch of the left claims to be the leftmost, and proceeds to persecute those it deems insufficiently left. When one branch is victorious, and hailed by all as the leftmost, some elements of that branch claim to be lefter than other members of that branch, and the process repeats, resulting in doctrines becoming ever lefter.

          • Adair Neto says:

            About pseudo-left: one of the left main aspirations is to be good for workers, create more rights to them and this things that you should know. And Brazil (which is very politically diverse and not ruled by the party of the president; the strongest force here is PMDB, a far right party) is doing the very contrary. I’m not talking about who is more left, just saying that what our country does is completely opposed to most fundamental left ideals.

            Who is doing violence here? The right wing governors, deputies and senators. An example: Geraldo Alckimin (from Opus Dei, I think), governor of São Paulo. Violence is encouraged by Jair Bolsonaro and by mass media (right wing liberal). They encourage beating thieves by civilians, death penalty… Right wingers are encouraging violence and left is fighting against it (left here is very peaceful).

            You didn’t saw our last elections and don’t know what is going on here. If you do, you wouldn’t say that.

            • jim says:

              PMDB is not far right. Or even right. All Brazilian parties are far left or even further left, because rightists and even centrists are demonized and persecuted. A significant fraction of the PMDB are former Marxist guerrillas, “Movimento Revolucionário 8 de Outubro”, who engaged in communist terror with the aim of creating a totalitarian Marxist state by terroristic violence, who eventually gave up on such methods after murdering large numbers of people, and never got punished, much as in the USA, the weathermen never got punished, despite bombing the pentagon etc.

              That is your party of the extreme right!

              Brazilian political parties cover the spectrum from the crazy murderous left to the murderous crazy left.

              What you are calling right wing violence is committed by people who claim to be the vanguard of Marx’s proletariat. It is violence between leftists, each faction loudly claiming to be the leftmost of them all.

          • pdimov says:

            “Each branch of the left claims to be the leftmost, and proceeds to persecute those it deems insufficiently left.”

            Leftists use “left” as a synonym for “good” and “right” as a synonym for evil. That’s why Golden Dawn is “extreme right” – they are Nazis, Nazis are extremely evil, therefore extreme right.

          • pdimov says:

            “one of the left main aspirations is to be good for workers, create more rights to them”

            In the hypothetical situation in which black immigrants take jobs away from white workers, racism would be good for the workers, but I’m pretty sure you would still classify it as far right and oppose it.

          • peppermint says:

            Golden Dawn can usefully be called the rightmost major party in Greece right now.

            Calling for civilians to commit violence against thieves would not be an extreme right position in the US right now. The Republican Party does nominally support the right of civilians to shoot armed robbers and burglars. The fact that it is an extreme right position in Brazil shows that Brazil is to the left of the US.

          • Adair Neto says:

            @jim, I’ll say to you the same that I said to @Ala:

            Your understanding of Brazil’s politics is simply wrong, it does not correspond to reality.

          • B says:

            >The Romans allowed Jewish theocracy until Jewish rebellion necessitated the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple.

            Germany magnanimously allowed Poland’s existence until Polish aggression necessitated its destruction.

            • jim says:

              So what were the grounds for the great Revolt of Judaea?

              Which started in Caesarea Palaestina, which, being a new and maritime city, was full of non Jews, very much analogous to Singapore, the analogy being England/Rome Java/Judaea Singapore/Caesarea Islam/Judaism

              My recollection is that some Greeks were sacrificing a chicken to their gods near a synagogue – which is to say, not inside a synagogue nor on a synagogue.

          • B says:

            >Which started in Caesarea Palaestina, which, being a new and maritime city, was full of non Jews, very much analogous to Singapore, the analogy being England/Rome Java/Judaea Singapore/Caesarea Islam/Judaism

            Which took off like wildfire in Judea, Galilee, Idumea etc.

            >My recollection is that some Greeks were sacrificing a chicken to their gods near a synagogue – which is to say, not inside a synagogue nor on a synagogue.

            Context. This was after 70 years of Roman provocation including demanding an idolatrous statue be put up inside the temple. The immediate pretext was that the Greeks sacrificed in front of a synagogue (not “near” a synagogue.”) Things really got going when the Romans robbed the Temple.

            • jim says:

              >My recollection is that some Greeks were sacrificing a chicken to their gods near a synagogue – which is to say, not inside a synagogue nor on a synagogue.

              Context. This was after 70 years of Roman provocation including demanding an idolatrous statue be put up inside the temple.

              Which was not put up inside the temple. The Jews got their way on that confrontation and on every other confrontation over religion, but would not take “Yes” for an answer, leading to the Great Rebellion over Greeks obnoxiously sacrificing a chicken in Caesarea.

              Things really got going when the Romans robbed the Temple.

              Things really got going when the rioters defeated the cops: “Jucundus, the master of the horse, who was ordered to prevent the fight, came thither, and took away the earthen vessel, and endeavored to put a stop to the sedition; but when he was overcome by the violence of the people of Cesarea, ”

              You know the Romans don’t take that kind of thing quietly.

              That the master of horse (the cops) took away the chicken sacrificing gear tells me that the Jews were well on the way to winning this one also.

          • B says:

            4. Now at this time it happened that the Grecians at Cesarea had been too hard for the Jews, and had obtained of Nero the government of the city, and had brought the judicial determination: at the same time began the war, in the twelfth year of the reign of Nero, and the seventeenth of the reign of Agrippa, in the month of Artemisius [Jyar.] Now the occasion of this war was by no means proportionable to those heavy calamities which it brought upon us. For the Jews that dwelt at Cesarea had a synagogue near the place, whose owner was a certain Cesarean Greek: the Jews had endeavored frequently to have purchased the possession of the place, and had offered many times its value for its price; but as the owner overlooked their offers, so did he raise other buildings upon the place, in way of affront to them, and made working-shops of them, and left them but a narrow passage, and such as was very troublesome for them to go along to their synagogue. Whereupon the warmer part of the Jewish youth went hastily to the workmen, and forbade them to build there; but as Florus would not permit them to use force, the great men of the Jews, with John the publican, being in the utmost distress what to do, persuaded Florus, with the offer of eight talents, to hinder the work. He then, being intent upon nothing but getting money, promised he would do for them all they desired of him, and then went away from Cesarea to Sebaste, and left the sedition to take its full course, as if he had sold a license to the Jews to fight it out.
            5. Now on the next day, which was the seventh day of the week, when the Jews were crowding apace to their synagogue, a certain man of Cesarea, of a seditious temper, got an earthen vessel, and set it with the bottom upward, at the entrance of that synagogue, and sacrificed birds. This thing provoked the Jews to an incurable degree, because their laws were affronted, and the place was polluted. Whereupon the sober and moderate part of the Jews thought it proper to have recourse to their governors again, while the seditious part, and such as were in the fervor of their youth, were vehemently inflamed to fight. The seditions also among the Gentiles of Cesarea stood ready for the same purpose; for they had, by agreement, sent the man to sacrifice beforehand [as ready to support him;] so that it soon came to blows. Hereupon Jucundus, the master of the horse, who was ordered to prevent the fight, came thither, and took away the earthen vessel, and endeavored to put a stop to the sedition; but when 20 he was overcome by the violence of the people of Cesarea, the Jews caught up their books of the law, and retired to Narbata, which was a place to them belonging, distant from Cesarea sixty furlongs. But John, and twelve of the principal men with him, went to Florus, to Sebaste, and made a lamentable complaint of their case, and besought him to help them; and with all possible decency, put him in mind of the eight talents they had given him; but he had the men seized upon, and put in prison, and accused them for carrying the books of the law out of Cesarea.

        • Ala says:

          Adair Neto is full of crap (but you already knew that).

          Brazilian politics is a pendulum that has the Worker’s Party to the left and the Social-Democratic Party to the “right”. The whole spectrum fits comfortably within the left wing of the current U.S. Democratic Party. A run-of-the-mill, Fox News Republican would be greeted as the second coming of Hitler in Brazil, if any such existed. There’s no such thing as libertarianism anywhere to be seen, and the idea itself is barely thinkable.

          To give you an idea, take the candidates in Brazil’s 2014 election. Dilma Rousseff, of the Worker’s Party, who was reelected, is a former Communist terrorist. Her opponent, Aecio Neves of the Social-Democratic Party, is the grandson of one the main civilian leaders of the opposition to the Brazilian military government of 1964-1985 (that is, “moderate” left), while his running mate, Aloysio Ferreira, is another former Communist terrorist. The idea that Sao Paolo state police is violent against left-wingers would be laughable if far-left street protesters did not routinely shut down the center of the Southern Hemisphere’s largest metropolis.

          The PMDB, which was referenced above, is a party machine which supports every government whatsoever in exchange for appointments and perks. Since it does get many votes, it ends up being fundamental to form a governing coalition, no matter who wins the elections. It has no ideology and is proud of it. No one could possibly call it rightist even in the ordinary, non-NRx sense.

          Mr Jair Bolsonaro is a former military officer, now a Congressman, notable for being the only one who defends the record of the last Brazilian military government (1964-1985) in the 500-plus National Congress. Keep in mind that opinion polls routinely show that Brazilians think the country was better back then, but this is an opinion which has absolutely no representation in the Legislative except for Mr Bolsonaro. He’s a populist, with a flair for outrageous statements and made-up drama, partly because of his personality, partly because it’s the only way he can get some face time in the national media. Calling him a fascist, a torture apologist or militarist is just slander: he’s an ordinary “patriotic” democrat, he just is tough on crime and thinks the military government was not really a dictatorship. (That’s a defensible thesis, even if I think he’s wrong on that.)

          The press is a colony of the Cathedral. Perhaps Jim is right that Brazil has the world’s largest gay-pride parade, but keep in mind that the numbers are heavily inflated. At the same time as the freak parade, the big-C Conservative evangelical churches hold “Marches for Jesus”, where attendance goes into the tens of millions, and which go by almost entirely unmentioned by the national media.

          • jim says:

            The left always believes itself out of power, struggling against the man, since it opposes reality itself. The left orders utopia. Utopia fails to result. Someone must be punished.

            Thus, for example, the failure of people affirmative actioned into jobs they cannot do is proof that they are being held back by the evil thoughts of white males.

          • Adair Neto says:

            Your understanding of Brazil’s politics is simply wrong, it does not correspond to reality.

          • Adair Neto says:

            And my gosh! To say that Brazilian Military government was Left is ridiculous. Everybody here, from extreme left to extreme right, acknowledges that it was a right-wing government.

            It seems that for NRx everything is left-wing. You need more reality, folks.

          • Adair Neto says:

            Sorry for more one comment here, but what you are doing is this:

            – “A” does exactly the opposite thing that Left advocates;
            – You call “A” Left.

            Please, folks, if you want to convince someone, you need reality and truth, not absurd syllogisms.

            • jim says:

              No matter how left wing the party in power, utopia fails to ensue. Since the rule of the left necessarily results in utopia, every other left faction can then claim that the party in power is insufficiently left and that the right rules.

          • Adair Neto says:

            About elections: Workers Party is, in pratice, a center-left party. The Social-Democratic Party is, in practice, a center-right (is pretty liberal).

            PMDB does what the market says. Which is, by definition, right wing.

            • jim says:

              Your definitions are hardly standard.

            • jim says:

              The PMDB does not do what the market says. Rather, it legislates contrary to reality, and reality wins. When reality wins, you interpret this as the PMDB doing what the market says, rather than reality inexorably proceeding despite laws making reality illegal.

          • Dave says:

            After the latest Argentine election I wondered, what percent of the population voted for socialist parties? I consider Democrats very socialist and Republicans slightly less socialist, but for this purpose I only counted a party as socialist if it described itself with that exact word.

            Guess what? All parties in Argentina claim to be socialist! Socialism got 98% of the vote, with 2% of the ballots blank or invalid.

          • B says:

            >Herod the great died around the time Jesus was born. Herod Antipas was governor of Galilee. After the death of Herod the Great, Jerusalem and most of Judea wound up in the hands of rabbis and levites, pretty soon in the hands of rabbis,

            This is a blatant lie. Jerusalem and most of Judea were in the hands of the prefect, who appointed the high priest. To the extent that there was a Jewish ruler, it was Herod Antipas.

            >who became progressively holier, and progressively more inclined to confront the Romans from a position of overwhelming weakness.

            Yes, Poland is forever invading Germany, or at least provoking it.

            The alternate explanation, that as Jewish rule became progressively weaker, the Romans felt free to act in more provocative and oppressive ways, would be counter to your agenda and can’t be countenanced.

            >The underlying military theory of the Rabbis seemed to be that the weaker they were, and the more they were objectionable to the Romans, and the holier they were, the more God would be forced to intervene.

            The rabbis were stuck between a rock and a hard place. They did the best they could with what they had. And we see they’re still around, long after the Romans are gone.

            • jim says:

              >Herod the great died around the time Jesus was born. Herod Antipas was governor of Galilee. After the death of Herod the Great, Jerusalem and most of Judea wound up in the hands of rabbis and levites, pretty soon in the hands of rabbis,

              This is a blatant lie. Jerusalem and most of Judea were in the hands of the prefect,

              Says the guy who a moment before claimed that Herod ruled.

              The Roman prefect appointed the high priest – but the high priest nonetheless gave him lots of grief and had lots of power. The Romans sought to co-opt the religious leadership. To some extent they succeeded. To some extent they failed. There were continual agitations over religious issues. For example Pilate set up shields in his palace containing an inscription referring to the emperor as divine. Crisis ensues. Pilate has temple fund an aqueduct. Crisis ensues. These endless crises reflect rabbinical power and the power of the temple bureaucracy, and their taste for confrontation. A military detachment enters Jerusalem prominently displaying eagles. Crisis ensues.

              It is entirely unreasonable for Jews to demand that a Roman Legion cannot display roman eagles. And if the high priest was merely a puppet of the prefect, would have had no drama applying temple funds to build an aqueduct for the city of Jerusalem.

              These religious crises continually escalated, eventually resulting in the completely disastrous and foolish rebellion against Rome, over issues that ranged from the absurd to the ridiculous.

              The rabbis were stuck between a rock and a hard place.

              Should have accepted Romans displaying Roman eagles. Should have been grateful for the aqueduct. Should not have made drama about inscriptions in the palace where Pilate lived and worked.

          • B says:

            >Says the guy who a moment before claimed that Herod ruled.

            Herod ruled in his day. You said “in Jesus’ day.” This overlaps both with the rule of Herod and the rule of Herod Antipas (who in his time was the closest he could get to a king.)

            >It is entirely unreasonable for Jews to demand that a Roman Legion cannot display roman eagles.

            On the Temple? It is entirely reasonable. Is it unreasonable to demand that Romans do not rob temple funds, burn Torah scrolls or expose themselves to worshippers in the Temple?

            >And if the high priest was merely a puppet of the prefect, would have had no drama applying temple funds to build an aqueduct for the city of Jerusalem.

            You are being a typical communist. Any attempt at resistance means the enemy is actually in a position of power.

            >These religious crises continually escalated, eventually resulting in the completely disastrous and foolish rebellion against Rome, over issues that ranged from the absurd to the ridiculous.

            Burning a Torah scroll, demanding a statue of the emperor be placed in the Temple-these are just minor quibbles to a man who wants Icelandic Neopagan Unicorn Worship. But to someone with actual religious principles…

            >Should have accepted Romans displaying Roman eagles. Should have been grateful for the aqueduct. Should not have made drama about inscriptions in the palace where Pilate lived and worked.

            Should they have raised a statue of Caligula in the Temple and sacrificed to it, as well? When Roman soldiers exposed themselves in the Temple, should they have offered them a blowjob? Perhaps when Romans burned a Torah scroll, the Jews should have held a barbecue?

            • jim says:

              >Says the guy who a moment before claimed that Herod ruled.

              Herod ruled in his day. You said “in Jesus’ day.” This overlaps both with the rule of Herod

              Jesus was an infant in the days of Herod the great.

              and the rule of Herod Antipas

              Herod Antipas did not rule Jerusalem or Judea, which is where most of the troubles and craziness was.

              >It is entirely unreasonable for Jews to demand that a Roman Legion cannot display roman eagles.

              On the Temple? It is entirely reasonable.

              Trouble is they would not take yes for an answer. Having gotten their way on the temple, where it was reasonable, demanded their way everywhere all the time. Including the palace of Pilate and the barracks of the legion, which was unreasonable. They just got stroppier and stroppier and holier and holier. They were looking for a fight. They were picking a fight with Rome. The more grief one gave Rome, the holier one was.

              Just as holiness competition led to bigger phylacteries, and more onerous burdens for other people to carry, holiness competition led to taking bigger risks with Rome.

          • B says:

            >Jesus was an infant in the days of Herod the great.

            Again, so what? Herod the Great was part of the long downward spiral that led to the destruction of the Temple.

            >Herod Antipas did not rule Jerusalem or Judea, which is where most of the troubles and craziness was.

            The rebellion was everywhere, most strongly in Galilee.

            http://mushecht.haifa.ac.il/archeology/ExhibitionC_eng.aspx?id=10

            >ITrouble is they would not take yes for an answer. Having gotten their way on the temple, where it was reasonable, demanded their way everywhere all the time.

            Those uppity Jews, demanding that soldiers not expose themselves in the Temple, that the emperor not demand a statue of himself be put up in the Temple, that Romans not rob the Temple, that they not burn the Torah…

            >They just got stroppier and stroppier and holier and holier. They were looking for a fight. They were picking a fight with Rome. The more grief one gave Rome, the holier one was.

            Oh, yeah. Poland just wouldn’t quit PROVOKING Germany. Also, white racists keep outraging people of color, forcing more and more Fergusons and LA riots.

            >Just as holiness competition led to bigger phylacteries, and more onerous burdens for other people to carry, holiness competition led to taking bigger risks with Rome.

            I just checked my phylacteries. About normal size. Not very onerous. I looked around the other morning, and almost everyone else had normal-sized phylacteries as well. The holiest guys had tiny ones, so they could wear them all day long, but they didn’t make a big deal out of it. The small ones are in size comparable to the ones found at Qumran, from 2000 years ago. Which tells us that over 2000 years, standard tefillin might have doubled (assuming that the couple found at Qumran were representative in size of all tefillin) . Quite the holiness competition.

            With Rome, the issue was total governmental mismanagement and misalignment of incentives. The Romans wouldn’t leave well enough alone. Every few years, another insane emperor, another idiot prefect with more ideas to improve the Jews’ standing as Roman subjects.

            • jim says:

              >Jesus was an infant in the days of Herod the great.

              Again, so what? Herod the Great was part of the long downward spiral that led to the destruction of the Temple.

              You were, and by the sound of it still are, unaware that there were over seventy years between the last Jewish kings over Jerusalem, and the destruction of the temple, and in those seventy years Jewish religious authorities became ever more intolerant both of Roman paganism and of inadequate holiness amongst their own people.

            • jim says:

              >ITrouble is they would not take yes for an answer. Having gotten their way on the temple, where it was reasonable, demanded their way everywhere all the time.

              Those uppity Jews, demanding that soldiers not expose themselves in the Temple, that the emperor not demand a statue of himself be put up in the Temple, that Romans not rob the Temple, that they not burn the Torah…

              Pontius Pilate had shields (plaques) in his palace honoring the emperor. Normally those shields would have the face of the emperor on them, but, out of respect for the Jewish ban on graven images, no face of the emperor. But the Jews objected to the shields anyway.

              The Romans treated the Jewish religions with great, indeed excessive, respect, in the face of endless and ever escalating provocations. Eventually they got pissed. If you will not take yes for an answer, eventually the answer will be no.

              I just checked my phylacteries. About normal size. Not very onerous. I looked around the other morning, and almost everyone else had normal-sized phylacteries as well.

              Today’s phylacteries are approximately cubic, which mean they stick out conspicuously and are very noticeable. You don’t need anything that large to have a verse on your head and on your arm, which was the original rationale of the phylacteries.

          • peppermint says:

            Pilate was, after all, willing to kill Jesus to try to make the rabbis happy. We can’t understand their dynamic by just denouncing the rabbis. Pilate was feckless, and if he had told the rabbis to go to hell sooner, the whole revolt thing and “punishing” the Jews by dispersing them could have been avoided.

            It was a mistake to try to punish the Jews by dispersing them, because Jews want to be dispersed. Punishment would have been to wall them in and leave them to rot.

            • jim says:

              I am pretty sure the Jews did not want to be exiled and chased from one country to the next.

              The Jews in the west suffered the usual problems of a market dominant minority. The whole reason I want white countries to remain white is that it really sucks to be a market dominant minority.

          • peppermint says:

            The Jews aren’t simply a race with characteristics X, Y, and Z, functioning as a market-dominant minority. That’s the old way of looking at race. The new way of looking at race is to note the co-evolution of culture and race. The Jews are a race of parasites that have evolved to primarily parasitize Whites. Like toxoplasmosis, they can have other hosts, but they mostly only reproduce in White host countries.

            • jim says:

              Jews in the grip of the Cathedral are being successfully assimilated, are ceasing to be Jews, are becoming progressives and progressives do not reproduce, just as the worshippers of Moloch did not reproduce.

              Cathedral doctrine that all religions, rightly understood, are progressivism, aligns with the natural tendency of religions to convergently evolve to leftism through holier than thou disease, and is proving more successful than the old style formal conversion.

          • Y.Ilan says:

            “Mostly only reproduce in White host societies”
            Are you trying to sound completely clueless on purpose? Nowadays the only Jews that reproduce succesfuly exist in a Jewish-majority society. I guess you’re simply entirely sure that Jews aren’t even human, which would explain your obssesion with us.

          • Peppermint says:

            I agree that you should go to Israel and evolve into humans. You were either humans or close to humans once and have the genetic material for it. Human biodiversity should be a good thing. Godspeed.

          • B says:

            >Pontius Pilate had shields (plaques) in his palace honoring the emperor. Normally those shields would have the face of the emperor on them, but, out of respect for the Jewish ban on graven images, no face of the emperor. But the Jews objected to the shields anyway.

            This story only has one source, which is Philo. Josephus mentions nothing of it. In Philo’s story, Pilate puts up the shields as a deliberate provocation after the debacle of the eagle in the Temple. The shields have an inscription with the emperor’s divinity mentioned. The Jews complain to the emperor, Tiberius, who rebukes Pilate, suggesting that even the Romans knew that Pilate was in the wrong.

            If this story was true, it took place 40 years before the Great War, and thirty years after the revolt of Judah of Galilee. Which doesn’t fit your narrative of the rabbis provoking the poor Romans endlessly until they just couldn’t take it anymore.

            Furthermore, what got Pilate finally fired was his massacre of the Samaritans. Now, you can say lots of things about Samaritans, but certainly not that they adhere to fanatical rabbis.

            >The Romans treated the Jewish religions with great, indeed excessive, respect, in the face of endless and ever escalating provocations. Eventually they got pissed. If you will not take yes for an answer, eventually the answer will be no.

            Yes, yes, they were very reverent. When I want to show my respect to another religion, I do it by putting up idols in their holy places, exposing my genitals there, burning their holy scrolls, robbing their tithes, etc. Only fanatics could object.

            >Today’s phylacteries are approximately cubic, which mean they stick out conspicuously and are very noticeable. You don’t need anything that large to have a verse on your head and on your arm, which was the original rationale of the phylacteries.

            You presume to advise us on phylacteries! Wonderful. Perhaps I can give you Elon Musk’s number so you can tell him how to build spaceships and electric cars?

            Egyptians also had cubic phylacteries, considerably larger than ours. As I mentioned, the holiest among us take the advice of the Gaon of Vilna and have the smallest possible phylacteries which they wear all day. We put ours on for prayer in the morning and then take them off, which I guess in your system means that our rabbis invented a new stricture and then loosened it

            • jim says:

              Pilate puts up the shields as a deliberate provocation after the debacle of the eagle in the Temple. The shields have an inscription with the emperor’s divinity mentioned. The Jews complain to the emperor, Tiberius, who rebukes Pilate, suggesting that even the Romans knew that Pilate was in the wrong.

              Not a debacle. Pilate could have simply killed the protestors, but chose mercy. And, if a deliberate provocation, Jews rather too easily provoked. If emperor Tiberius tell Pilate to cool it, not evidence that Pilate was in the wrong, rather that the Romans were going out of their way to avoid stirring up a religious leadership that was becoming ever more prickly about ever more tenuous real or imagined slights.

              If eagles on the temple, that is a first small step on a path which ends in Jews being assimilated to Roman official paganism. If no honors to the supposedly divine emperor in Pilate’s palace, that is the first small step on attempting to forcibly remove pagans, in particular Romans, from Israel. In retrospect, it is clear that Romans should have drawn a line there, and started killing Jews until they accepted Romans conducting themselves in Roman ways. That or withdrawn from Israel.

              Furthermore, what got Pilate finally fired was his massacre of the Samaritans

              I don’t think so. Massacring armed rebels was pretty standard Roman procedure. Usually followed by massacring their families, friends, neighbors and anyone in the general vicinity. There is no way Pilate could have got in trouble from killing armed rebels.

              >Today’s phylacteries are approximately cubic, which mean they stick out conspicuously and are very noticeable. You don’t need anything that large to have a verse on your head and on your arm, which was the original rationale of the phylacteries.

              You presume to advise us on phylacteries!

              I did not advise you. I observed. I observe that the actual purpose of phylacteries today is conspicuous holiness, not their stated purpose, their real purpose is for one Jew to be conspicuously holier than another Jew, hence the sarcastic comment by Jesus that rabbis “enlarge their phylacteries”. Clearly, what we are looking at today is the considerably enlarged version, the impractically and excessively enlarged version.

              The purpose of shared ritual is to make a people one.

              So now I advise you: it is a very bad thing to have stuff that makes some of those people more holy than others of those people, and pretty much suicidal for a state religion to have such stuff.

              have the smallest possible phylacteries

              The smallest possible phylactery is the size and thickness of headband or armband, the form factor of headband or armband if we are going by the original stated purpose of the phylactery. What size limit do you have in mind?

          • peppermint says:

            inability to take yes for an answer and constantly crying poisecution is part of the Jewish strategy. It works on Whites, who succeed where we succeed by being fair and open-minded. The fact that the Jews continued to follow their strategy even when they had a country of their own just proves that it is indeed their strategy. It was a mistake for the Romans to try to punish them by dispersion, but, the Romans didn’t understand evolution in the way that we do now.

            Successful communities develop parasites. The Jews and the Whites have existed since the beginnings of civilization, and have been behaving is more or less the same way since before we have good records. Whites have been fighting rats, flies, and mold since the beginning of civilization as well. Eventually, the Jews get kicked out, or the society falls apart, or both. Our children who grow up watching The Discovery Channel and playing The Last of Us would be able to understand it even if we won’t, except that the Jews right now look like they will be able to pass a bunch of new laws against talking about them and anyone else, and everything is falling apart right now, not in 20-40 years.

            • jim says:

              The fact that the Jews continued to follow their strategy even when they had a country of their own just proves that it is indeed their strategy.

              Jews whine about persecution excessively, but the holocaust of the German Jews would make anyone paranoid. I don’t see Israeli Jews whining about persecution excessively. Israel actually is persecuted.

          • B says:

            >Not a debacle. Pilate could have simply killed the protestors, but chose mercy.

            What a wonderful man! I wonder why the Romans fired him.

            >If emperor Tiberius tell Pilate to cool it, not evidence that Pilate was in the wrong

            Yes, if Tiberius tells Pilate he’s wrong, it’s evidence Tiberius was wrong. When the Legate of Syria fires Pilate for more of the same shit, it means the Legate is wrong. What did they know, anyway?

            >I don’t think so. Massacring armed rebels was pretty standard Roman procedure. Usually followed by massacring their families, friends, neighbors and anyone in the general vicinity. There is no way Pilate could have got in trouble from killing armed rebels.

            Well, either you know better than Josephus, or you know better than Vitellius, the Legate of Syria, who fired Pilate for massacring the Samaritans. I guess that’s the essence of the Gospel of Neoreaction, As Revealed to Jim. You just take your favorite historical theory, and stretch the primary sources to fit, and if they disagree, so much the worse for them.

            >I did not advise you. I observed. I observe that the actual purpose of phylacteries today is conspicuous holiness, not their stated purpose, their real purpose is for one Jew to be conspicuously holier than another Jew, hence the sarcastic comment by Jesus that rabbis “enlarge their phylacteries”.

            You presume to know better than us what the actual purpose of our commandments is! Wonderful. Especially considering that two days ago you didn’t know how to spell “tefillin.” As for Jesus’ rabblerousing advice (“the rabbis think they’re better than you are!”)-I’ll consider it when I decide I’d like my children to eat porkchops and marry non-Jews.

            >So now I advise you: it is a very bad thing to have stuff that makes some of those people more holy than others of those people, and pretty much suicidal for a state religion to have such stuff.

            Thank you for the advice. The Jewish perspective on the matter is that there is a minimum required for each commandment but no maximum. As different people are different, some will be more zealous in performing one commandment, some in performing another. This is as it should be.

            >The smallest possible phylactery is the size and thickness of headband or armband, the form factor of headband or armband if we are going by the original stated purpose of the phylactery. What size limit do you have in mind?

            The smallest possible size is determined by the requirement to have either one scroll with four passages or four separate scrolls (depending on whether the tefillin are for the arm or head,) with the relevant passages written clearly, with the crowns on the letters, etc. This means that the smaller the tefillin, the harder it is to write them properly, which is reflected in price. You are supposed to wear them all day, so the smaller the better, but wearing them requires maintaining physical purity, taking them off before going into bathrooms, filthy places, cemeteries, etc., so most people wear them when praying in the morning and then remove them.

            • jim says:

              What a wonderful man! I wonder why the Romans fired him.

              I see no evidence that the Romans fired Pilate. The normal term was a couple of years. Pilate ran Judea for ten years. He seems to have died very shortly after retiring, which suggests he ruled Judea until he became ill and chose to return home and retire.

              Yes, if Tiberius tells Pilate he’s wrong

              You do not know that Tiberius told Pilate he is wrong. And events proved that Pilate was right.

              The smallest possible size is determined by the requirement to have either one scroll with four passages or four separate scrolls (depending on whether the tefillin are for the arm or head,) with the relevant passages written clearly, with the crowns on the letters

              That is compatible with armband or headband form factor. Since no phylactery is ever in the headband form factor, the actual function of the phylactery is, as Jesus implied, to be conspicuously holy.

          • B says:

            Philo: “Pilate was one of the emperor’s lieutenants, having been appointed governor of Judaea. He, not more with the object of doing honour to Tiberius than with that of vexing the multitude, dedicated some gilt shields in the palace of Herod, in the holy city; which had no form nor any other forbidden thing represented on them except some necessary inscription, which mentioned these two facts, the name of the person who had placed them there, and the person in whose honour they were so placed there. (300) But when the multitude heard what had been done, and when the circumstance became notorious, then the people, putting forward the four sons of the king, who were in no respect inferior to the kings themselves, in fortune or in rank, and his other descendants, and those magistrates who were among them at the time, entreated him to alter and to rectify the innovation which he had committed in respect of the shields; and not to make any alteration in their national customs, which had hitherto been preserved without any interruption, without being in the least degree changed by any king of emperor. (301) “But when he steadfastly refused this petition (for he was a man of a very inflexible disposition, and very merciless as well as very obstinate), they cried out: ‘Do not cause a sedition; do not make war upon us; do not destroy the peace which exists. The honour of the emperor is not identical with dishonour to the ancient laws; let it not be to you a pretence for heaping insult on our nation. Tiberius is not desirous that any of our laws or customs shall be destroyed. And if you yourself say that he is, show us either some command from him, or some letter, or something of the kind, that we, who have been sent to you as ambassadors, may cease to trouble you, and may address our supplications to your master.’

            Jim: “and that’s exactly how it happened, too. Damn arrogant Jews!

            Philo: (continuing) “And those who were in power in our nation, seeing this, and perceiving that he was inclined to change his mind as to what he had done, but that he was not willing to be thought to do so, wrote a most supplicatory letter to Tiberius. (304) And he, when he had read it, what did he say of Pilate, and what threats did he utter against him! But it is beside our purpose at present to relate to you how very angry he was, although he was not very liable to sudden anger; since the facts speak for themselves; (305) for immediately, without putting any thing off till the next day, he wrote a letter, reproaching and reviling him in the most bitter manner for his act of unprecedented audacity and wickedness, and commanding him immediately to take down the shields and to convey them away from the metropolis of Judaea to Caesarea, on the sea which had been named Caesarea Augusta, after his grandfather, in order that they might be set up in the temple of Augustus.”

            Jim: “Well, you know, Tiberius wasn’t really upset. Philo must be exaggerating…”

            Josephus: “But when this tumult was appeased, the Samaritan senate sent an embassy to Vitellius, a man that had been consul, and who was now president of Syria, and accused Pilate of the murder of those that were killed; for that they did not go to Tirathaba in order to revolt from the Romans, but to escape the violence of Pilate. 89So Vitellius sent Marcellus, a friend of his, to take care of the affairs of Judea, and ordered Pilate to go to Rome, to answer before the emperor to the accusations of the Jews. So Pilate, when he had tarried ten years in Judea, made haste to Rome, and this in obedience to the orders of Vitellius, which he durst not contradict; but before he could get to Rome Tiberius was dead.”

            Jim: “PICS OR IT DIDN’T HAPPEN!”

            As for the tefillin, I’ve explained about six times that those who wish to be more holy don’t make larger tefillin but smaller ones, and wear them all day long.

            • jim says:

              Jim: “and that’s exactly how it happened, too. Damn arrogant Jews!

              Given overwhelming Roman military superiority, a reasonable compromise would have been that Romans should follow Roman customs, and Jews follow Jewish customs. Instead, Jews demanded that Romans be subject to some Mosaic law when in Israel – and the Romans conceded.

              Which necessarily resulted in demands that they be subject to other Mosaic laws when in Israel.

          • B says:

            >Given overwhelming Roman military superiority, a reasonable compromise would have been that Romans should follow Roman customs, and Jews follow Jewish customs. Instead, Jews demanded that Romans be subject to some Mosaic law when in Israel – and the Romans conceded.

            >Which necessarily resulted in demands that they be subject to other Mosaic laws when in Israel.

            Romans wished to administer places at a minimum cost. Doing this meant making concessions to the local way of doing things. Your hero Raffles didn’t go walking into local mosques and wiping his ass with the Koran. The Jews had one holy city, Jerusalem, with one Temple. All the Romans had to do was stick to the Greek settlements like Caesarea, take their tribute and be chill. But no, they couldn’t leave well enough alone. It was one thing after another. What sense was there in putting the eagle up on the Temple, or demanding the erection of a statue of Caligula in it, or burning a Torah scroll, or having their soldiers showing their genitals to worshipers? Net result: one legion lost, lots of soldiers lost, a formerly productive province devastated.

            • jim says:

              Your hero Raffles didn’t go walking into local mosques and wiping his ass with the Koran

              The Muslims never asked that he stop drinking beer, or serving wine when he invited the local aristocracy around, which he regularly did to either bribe them into doing what he wanted, or to shake them down for gold, or shake them down to fund various projects. And if they had made difficulties over the numerous immoral activities the British engaged in, I am pretty sure he would have walked into the local mosque, covered it in blood, and burned it to the ground, not because beer was all that important to him, but because he could see where such a demand would lead.

              The local Muslims were disturbed by many of the activities of the British, but would never dream of mentioning it to the British, for fear of the likely response.

          • B says:

            Nobody asked Pilate to stop eating pork or sleeping with boys. The Roman activities the Jews objected to were public and explicitly directed against the public aspects of Judaism. Raffles’ equivalent would not be drinking beer at a reception, but rather putting a statue of Mohammed in the main mosque. This would eventually result in total insurrection, which he would not have been able to handle.

            We don’t really see this kind of behavior by a colonial power towards its subjects’ religious institutions unless it really despises those institutions and is willing to commit to total war to see them destroyed. This is what Pilate was trying to achieve, hence his rebuke from Tiberius and eventual recall by the Legate.

            • jim says:

              Nobody asked Pilate to stop eating pork or sleeping with boys. The Roman activities the Jews objected to were public and explicitly directed against the public aspects of Judaism. Raffles’ equivalent would not be drinking beer at a reception, but rather putting a statue of Mohammed in the main mosque.

              OK then, Raffle’s public equivalent was allowing Christian Churches to be built, and protecting Christian missionary activity, which goes directly against Islam in a way that is far more direct than setting up plaques honoring the divine emperor in Pilate’s palace goes against Judaism. The equivalent of what Raffles did would be the Romans setting up a statue of the emperor as a God in the public square and soliciting and pressuring Jews to burn incense.

              And Raffles private equivalent would be as if Pilate invited aristocratic Jews around for a party featuring roast pork, which partying and socializing was dangerous to turn down.

          • B says:

            >OK then, Raffle’s public equivalent was allowing Christian Churches to be built, and protecting Christian missionary activity, which goes directly against Islam in a way that is far more direct than setting up plaques honoring the divine emperor in Pilate’s palace goes against Judaism.

            Raffles did this in Singapore, which was not the equivalent of Jerusalem but rather the equivalent of Tiberias or maybe Caesaria. Meaning, it was not a holy city but one that Raffles/the Romans built. Notice that Tiberius told Pilate off and had him move the shields to Caesaria, which ended the issue.

            The incident with the shields needs to be taken in context. The context isn’t merely that the shields had an idolatrous inscription on them, but that the incident was bookended by two other incidents which made it clear that Pilate was itching for a fight with Judaism and attempting to provoke such a fight.

            The equivalent of what the Romans did would be Raffles not merely occupying Mecca and Medina but putting up pagan statues there. Nobody has so far been insane enough to try that.

            >The equivalent of what Raffles did would be the Romans setting up a statue of the emperor as a God in the public square and soliciting and pressuring Jews to burn incense.

            No. The equivalent of what Raffles did would be the Romans building a port city on the coast and building pagan temples in there, which they did and which caused no issues.

            >And Raffles private equivalent would be as if Pilate invited aristocratic Jews around for a party featuring roast pork, which partying and socializing was dangerous to turn down.

            I doubt Raffles forced pork and alcohol on the local Muslims. I will eventually read the source material. I suspect that I’ll find disparities between it and your summaries, just like with Josephus, Feynman and Philo. At the very least, judging by his abolition of slavery everywhere he went, I suspect Raffles was not the swashbuckling pirate of your description.

            • jim says:

              >OK then, Raffle’s public equivalent was allowing Christian Churches to be built, and protecting Christian missionary activity, which goes directly against Islam in a way that is far more direct than setting up plaques honoring the divine emperor in Pilate’s palace goes against Judaism.

              Raffles did this in Singapore

              Raffles did this everywhere within the large and ill defined area that he ruled or had substantial influence over.
              In addition to preserving the artifacts, fauna, and flora of his colonies, he also allowed religious freedom in his colonies, especially important as the Malay states were largely Muslim. However, Christian schools, especially schools for the very young and impressionable, were started by missionaries in all of his colonies.

              In addition, he systematically favored the never entirely suppressed Hinduism and animism at the expense of the Islam that had been imposed on top of them, most famously in Bali, within which the theoretically dominant Islam was entirely suppressed by Raffles in favor of the still furtively practiced Hinduism and animism. Islam has never recovered in Bali, and during his rule, many aspects of Hinduism became important and dominant everywhere, even though in most areas formerly ruled by Raffles, Islam has substantially recovered.

              Had the Romans done the equivalent of what Raffles did, they would have insisted that all Jews everywhere be free to engage in polytheistic practices, and not only given Jews the opportunity to give the emperor divine honors and pressured them to do so, but encouraged them to revive the practice of ancient half suppressed pagan religions – which were less likely to call for war with Rome.

              Islam was a problem for Raffles for much the same reasons as Judaism was a problem for the Romans, and under the supposed principle of freedom of religion, he not only attacked it with Christianity, but with traditional and not entirely suppressed Hinduism and animism. Under Raffles, the kinds of pressures applied by Muslims to ensure religious monopoly were entirely forbidden, but the kinds of pressures applied by Hindus received considerably more favorable treatment.

              Islam is an inconveniently martial religion. Judaism used to be an inconveniently martial religion, but has ceased to be one, which is why you needed secular Jews to retake Israel.

          • B says:

            >Had the Romans done the equivalent of what Raffles did, they would have insisted that all Jews everywhere be free to engage in polytheistic practices, and not only given Jews the opportunity to give the emperor divine honors and pressured them to do so, but encouraged them to revive the practice of ancient half suppressed pagan religions – which could be more easily brought into line with Roman paganism.

            They did both these things. At the end of the Second Temple period, there was a blossoming of idolatry and assimilation. But they also did things that were worse.

            • jim says:

              The Romans allowed Jewish theocracy until Jewish rebellion necessitated the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. Raffles did not allow Muslim theocracy, indeed specially discriminated against it while favoring Hindu theocracy.

        • Dr. Faust says:

          Since there seems to be a lack of definition of what makes right and left different I think it’s best to start there in any discussion.

          The highest ideal of leftism is equality. This is established as the greatest good and I believe is one of the reasons for Jim’s theory of the ever increasing nature of leftism. Left begets more left since equality is impossible. The best evidence is the lefts greatest sin: racism and sexism. Two forms of overt inequality held as the greatest evil. While it’s easy to name leaders who’ve killed more than Hitler it’s harder to find someone posed as the devil as much as he. His sin was preaching against equality and not murder.

          What then is the right’s virtue? The closest thing one can come to it is preservation. To conserve what is is a right idea. The rightist seeks to prepare for winter, to guard against threats seen and unforseen, to honor their ancestors, to preserve their culture, country, and religion.

          Both right and left are cults of personality. They are driven by biology and not evidence. A white female raised in a Chicago suburb is not going become a rightist. Nor is a young man raised in rural Idaho likely to be a liberal. Debate serves little function if your goal is to sway someone away from their beliefs.

          • B says:

            >What then is the right’s virtue? The closest thing one can come to it is preservation. To conserve what is is a right idea. The rightist seeks to prepare for winter, to guard against threats seen and unforseen, to honor their ancestors, to preserve their culture, country, and religion.

            This is the basic failure of Jim’s neoreaction. By definition, it is free of ideals for which to strive, and is just nihilism with extended family values.

            Leftism, while criminally insane, has the great advantage of coming up with an endless series of beautiful dreams, ideals for which talented men can live and die.

            What does neoreaction have to offer, to inspire a man to die for it? A man who has a family, a tribe, a nation, a piece of land, might die to preserve all these, but such a man already has a religion and ideology to go with them, and doesn’t need neoreaction. What does neoreaction have to inspire an involuntary celibate with a miserable job, neighbors who think he’s weird and a dysfunctional family living a couple of states away (hi, Peppermint)? The most you’re gonna get out of these people with NRx is lots of internet comments, and maybe an awkward meetup where they secretly all decide they like each other much better online.

            • jim says:

              A man who has a family, a tribe, a nation, a piece of land, might die to preserve all these, but such a man already has a religion and ideology to go with them, and doesn’t need neoreaction.

              But despite your enthusiastic ethnocentrism, you don’t really have tribe and nation, nor a piece of land, in that your government is disturbingly subservient to the Cathedral, and apt to repress people with your religion and ideology.

              You, as much as any neoreactionary, are planning to fab up an ideology so that you can have tribe and nation and piece of land. But your plans are both too drastic, and not drastic enough, and are excessively priest centric for a project that will require warriors.

              Israel, and Jews, are allowed to get away with stuff that ordinary whites are not allowed to get away with. But that is just the Cathedral cutting you extra slack. It does not cut you that much extra slack, and the leash is being tightened.

          • Simon says:

            Oooooohhhhhhhhh, that’s nasty, B! Not very sporting at all, old chap. You are right, of course. Neoreaction has no chance at all against Leftism, mainly because it provides no motivation to do anything.

            If you stuck to comments like this instead of your interminable screeds about Jews you would be bearable. I get ethnic solidarity, but fair dinkum you take it to another level. Nauseating.

            (BTW peppermint’s good value)

          • B says:

            My interminable screeds are just a reaction to Jim explaining how we invented everything last Wednesday.

            If you want something better than Leftism, it will have to be a system of thought and behavior which is compelling enough to the smart and the dumb to get them to sacrifice for it and work together, and reproduce themselves. Judaism is the system I’ve got. Feel free to go with Neoviking Unicorn Worship or whatever, but you won’t-it’s too stupid to attract the smart and too intellectual to attract the stupid. So NRx will stay where it is, as a largely negative phenomenon.

            Peppermint likes it-any neurotransmitter boost is an improvement on his status quo.

            • jim says:

              feel free to go with Neoviking Unicorn Worship or whatever,

              You are trapped by the doctrines that got Jews in trouble in the first place. It was secular Jews that brought the Jews home, and it will take a certain amount of cynical examination of the way religion works to bring Judaism home.

              When priests get too much power and warriors too little, the priests do crazy shit to demonstrate superior holiness to each other, the crazy shit gets them in trouble, and then they find they are not very good generals.

          • Simon says:

            I’m a Mormon, mate. We’re doing pretty well.

          • Simon says:

            You are dreaming.

          • B says:

            >But despite your enthusiastic ethnocentrism, you don’t really have tribe and nation, nor a piece of land, in that your government is disturbingly subservient to the Cathedral, and apt to repress people with your religion and ideology.

            Glass is half full and getting fuller. We have a tribe and a nation, which could use improvement, and a piece of land upon which we are consolidating our grasp. It’s not a quick or easy process, but it’s moving in a positive direction. If you compare the situation to what it was 20, 50 or 100 years ago, it’s much improved.

            >Israel, and Jews, are allowed to get away with stuff that ordinary whites are not allowed to get away with. But that is just the Cathedral cutting you extra slack. It does not cut you that much extra slack, and the leash is being tightened.

            The leash has gotten more and more frayed, and recent attempts to tighten it have not succeeded as well as expected. See Indyk’s Complaint. Within Israel itself, the leash is disintegrating. For instance, Tel Aviv University just put on an exhibition of art from the Southern Judean settlements (to much protest and indignation from leftist professors.) This is about tantamount to NYU putting on an exhibition of paintings created by Christian white nationalists from Idaho. Settlements are growing-have quadrupled in the last 20 years. The army is increasingly a Religious Zionist institution, to the point that the left is starting to panic. The Religious Zionist vision is cohesive, well-rooted and has notable successes demonstrable from many aspects. To the regular non-intellectual secular Jew, it shows big, cohesive families and communities with values. To the intellectual, it shows Robert Aumann. Etc. So I’m hopeful for the future.

            To succeed, you guys would have to create, out of thin air, an ideology that would mobilize your power base, which is alienated and atomized hipsters, without going to the lowest common denominator. You have no ideals, and no idea on how to get any, since the only ideals with which you are familiar (I mean in a personal way, not from books) are those of the left. And you would have to attract not only Peppermints but men of action and enterprise, so this ideology would have to be very deep and attractive on many levels. I estimate the odds of success as slightly below those of ISIS establishing a global Caliphate.

            Mormons made a deal with the devil. Can’t say I blame them-the US Cavalry in those days was a lot more formidable than today.

            • jim says:

              You have a religion designed to show that some Jews are holier than other Jews. For this to become a state religion in place of progressivism, has to become a religion designed to show that all Jews, or all ruling class Jews, are adequately holy – a religion that does not get up the noses of secular Jews, that can win, if not their enthusiastic support, their adequately pious hypocrisy – which it is currently designed to exclude.

              You have a religion designed for exile – which is why it took secular Jews to conquer Israel. You have a religion that could not conquer Israel. Religious Zionists wanted the colonial powers to waft them in. They still, for the most part, do not really want the temple mount.

              So, you have as much a job of constructing something that works as anyone else, and perhaps a harder job. You have the advantage that the threat posed by the Cathedral is more direct and obvious, which motivates people to go along with a solution, but you do not in fact have a solution. A state needs a state religion.

              Rule by religious leaders in the time of Jesus, coercive political power in the hands of rabbis, lead to rapidly escalating holiness, which eventually led to exile. The Talmud contains, among many other things, a pile of propaganda for that failed system. Should you implement something similar to that system, you will get similar results for similar reasons.

              You remarked that phylacteries remained constant. No they did not.

          • Dave says:

            My definitions:

            Rightists address inequality by supporting a social hierarchy with the best people on top. The best people don’t always have the best offspring, so there must be some degree of meritocracy.

            Leftists address inequality by taking ever more extreme measures to *make* everyone equal, only succeeding when everyone has been killed.

          • B says:

            > For this to become a state religion in place of progressivism, has to become a religion designed to show that all Jews, or all ruling class Jews, are adequately holy – a religion that does not get up the noses of secular Jews, that can win, if not their enthusiastic support, their adequately pious hypocrisy – which it is currently designed to exclude.

            Oh, “everyone’s a winner.” Yeah, that will go well. The religion is not designed to lower itself to the level of the secular, but to elevate them.

            >You have a religion designed for exile – which is why it took secular Jews to conquer Israel.

            The only reason that there was an appropriate number of secular Jews after 2000 years of exile, and that those Jews had what it took to conquer Israel in terms of talent and persistence, and that they chose Israel, is because of this religion.

            >A state needs a state religion.

            Your idea of a state religion is, frankly, garbage.

            >Rule by religious leaders in the time of Jesus, coercive political power in the hands of rabbis, lead to rapidly escalating holiness, which eventually led to exile.

            In the time of Jesus, rule was in the hands of Herod, a rebellious slave of a degenerate dynasty, who himself was the puppet of a cruel and degenerate Roman Empire. What led to rebellion was that empire’s oppressive rule, and what led to exile was the result of the Hashmoneans steadily increasing secularism rotting the nation for the preceding centuries. The rabbis, whom you blame for this sad chain of events, were the only reason that after all this and 2000 years of very hard times, there was a cohesive Jewish nation which was capable and willing to conquer Israel. If not for them, we’d be like the Samaritans or Karaites of today.

            >You remarked that phylacteries remained constant. No they did not.

            Do tell?

            • jim says:

              Oh, “everyone’s a winner.” Yeah, that will go well.

              If you allow holiness competition, not all persons of Jewish descent in Israel can be Jewish by religion. If not everyone can be Jewish by religion, Judaism cannot be a state religion. Progressivism, on the other hand, can be a state religion despite its holiness competition, because it provides salvation by electing Obama, so the state religion of Israel will remain progressivism. And progressivism intends to destroy Israel.

            • jim says:

              >Rule by religious leaders in the time of Jesus, coercive political power in the hands of rabbis, lead to rapidly escalating holiness, which eventually led to exile.

              In the time of Jesus, rule was in the hands of Herod, a rebellious slave of a degenerate dynasty,

              Wrong, as usual. You know considerably less than you think about history of the Jews.

          • R7_Rocket says:

            B says:
            “Feel free to go with Neoviking Unicorn Worship or whatever, but you won’t-it’s too stupid to attract the smart and too intellectual to attract the stupid.”

            My preference is the various nameless machine cults floating around Silicon Valley and other places like it. After all, Christianity didn’t have a name when it existed initially as a bunch of cryptic Greco-Jewish cults.

          • B says:

            >If you allow holiness competition, not all persons of Jewish descent in Israel can be Jewish by religion.

            There is no holiness competition per se. There is a basic set of commandments which is in everybody’s reach, which it says in the Torah. Then people can go beyond the minimum in various of these commandments, but it’s multidimensional, so nobody can be highly zealous in each one. Then there are various loopholes: someone who keeps one Shabbat properly, it’s as though he has fulfilled all the Torah. Likewise, settling the land is equal to all the Torah. Etc. Which is how I can deal with the Haredim on an equal footing.

            >>In the time of Jesus, rule was in the hands of Herod, a rebellious slave of a degenerate dynasty,

            >Wrong, as usual. You know considerably less than you think about history of the Jews.

            Really? Who were Herod and Herod Antipas, itinerant merchants?

            >My preference is the various nameless machine cults floating around Silicon Valley and other places like it. After all, Christianity didn’t have a name when it existed initially as a bunch of cryptic Greco-Jewish cults.

            Nobody will risk death or reproduce in the name of a nameless Silicon Valley machine cult.

            • jim says:

              >>In the time of Jesus, rule was in the hands of Herod, a rebellious slave of a degenerate dynasty,

              >Wrong, as usual. You know considerably less than you think about history of the Jews.

              Really? Who were Herod and Herod Antipas, itinerant merchants

              Herod the great died around the time Jesus was born. Herod Antipas was governor of Galilee. After the death of Herod the Great, Jerusalem and most of Judea wound up in the hands of rabbis and levites, pretty soon in the hands of rabbis, who became progressively holier, and progressively more inclined to confront the Romans from a position of overwhelming weakness.

              Pilate sent Jesus to Herod Antipas, possibly because Jesus was a Galilean, more likely because Jesus was a hot potato, and Herod Antipas a Jew. Herod Antipas sent him right back.

              The underlying military theory of the Rabbis seemed to be that the weaker they were, and the more they were objectionable to the Romans, and the holier they were, the more God would be forced to intervene.

          • R7_Rocket says:

            B says:
            “Nobody will risk death or reproduce in the name of a nameless Silicon Valley machine cult.”

            Some of the cults are natalist, some are not. Elon Musk has five surviving children.

            As for unwillingness to risk death, tell that to the Mars One volunteers and Michael Alsbury.

          • Mark Citadel says:

            Glad I am Orthodox. Our church does very little in the way of liberalism. Regardless I think Mark Yuray has dismissed this stupid idea of starting a scientology-esque cult.

            The original Reactionaries were Traditionalist Christians (primarily Catholics). The most Reactionary movement in Europe during the interwar period was the Romanian Iron Guard, an Orthodox organization. Golden Dawn itself has explicitly voiced disgust that Tsipiras was the first Greek head of state since the country’s conversion not to swear on the Bible.

            For well over a thousand years prior to the 1700s and its heresies, Europe was white, Christian, hierarchical, and bountiful in harvest. Such shall be the future. And I will not hesitate to add that many people are going to be martyred for this future. They will be of blood, spirit, and soil.

            As in the prediction of the Kali Yuga, many will turn away from the Traditions of their forefathers in this dark age, but at the coming of the golden age, they will return to devotion once more. There is no new religion coming, there are no more prophets to be heard. There are just the Words handed to us by our ancestors and in this struggle, we honor them.

          • peppermint says:

            » first Greek head of state since the country’s conversion not to swear on the Bible.

            since Constantine? Was there even a Bible in Constantine’s time?

            I thought the head of state was Constantine II, but I guess he’s been shoved off into exile. However, considering what John Charles of Bourbon did after Franco died, well, maybe the next time a king is set up by a fascist, he can refrain from legalizing sodomy.

          • Mark Citadel says:

            apologies. Not the head of state, the prime minister, which is what Tsipiras will be. He was sworn in on a political oath after the election.

            It went something like this…

            “I pledge allegiance to egalitarianism, Marxism, obeying the European paymasters, killing unborn children, and marrying two men, so help me Pol Pot.”

          • B says:

            >Some of the cults are natalist, some are not. Elon Musk has five surviving children.

            Good on him! On the other hand, I doubt Musk would have five children if he was living under severe strain, financial and otherwise. Maybe I’m wrong.

            >As for unwillingness to risk death, tell that to the Mars One volunteers and Michael Alsbury.

            Big difference. Risking death as a test pilot or in a spaceship is movie stuff, going out in a blaze of glory. Half of the hominids walking around with a pair of testicles would sign up. No need for a machine cult. Risking miserable, inglorious, lingering death, humiliation, crippling, etc…that is what you will have to inspire your followers to face.

          • R7_Rocket says:

            B says:
            “Risking miserable, inglorious, lingering death, humiliation, crippling, etc…that is what you will have to inspire your followers to face.”

            Kinda like Mars One…

        • Dan Kurt says:

          re: “I live in an academic background and can guarantee that.” Adair Neto

          This goes back a ways as I got my undergraduate degree in 1963. A math and engineering professor with a double doctorate who was from Poland and escaped before WW2 taught for a few years in Brazil before making it to the USA. He told us during a class that he was astonished that while he was a professor he never encountered in Brazil any student with superior intellectual ability. They had, he said, enthusiasm and self confidence but lacked smarts. He was surprised by that discovery.

          Dan Kurt

  14. Glenfilthie says:

    Oh I wouldn’t say they ‘won’, boys.

    Oh sure, these leftist tools won a battle – but the war? Fellas – socialists are self-defeating. Consider:

    – they own the media. Newspapers can’t sell copy anymore and even their web based business is in decline. Nobody with an IQ above freezing trusts a journalist or a newspaper anymore and a few have gone bankrupt

    – they own the schools and universities – and they have become intellectual and moral wastelands. Our children know all about why Johnny has three daddies and why Bush=Hitler … but none of them can read or handle basic numeracy

    – they own the courts and crime has skyrocketed. The resentment of the average otherwise law abiding citizen is at a slow boil right now…when the real effects of socialism come home to roost – the heat and pressure will blow the lid off that island and the people responsible will find themselves lucky if they aren’t hung from the lamp posts.

    Pass the popcorn…and lock and load. Idiots like these are funny but they have a nasty habit of sharing their misery with others.

    • peppermint says:

      You could have said the same thing when Carter won the election in the US

      • jim says:

        The trend is ever leftwards, even though leftism sucks worse and worse.

        Not only could you have said the same thing when Carter won, you could have said the same thing in 1820 when King George was denied his divorce.

        • Pepperdork says:

          “The main thing neoreactionaries do is blog. One common feature of the movement is a long-winded — ridiculously long-winded — and oblique prose style, eager to show off its mastery of historical trivia; it seems more poetry than politics at times.

          This is right-wing politics in its dotage: radical, deliberately “transgressive” posturing in obscurantist prose, a worthy bookend to the Frankfurt School, and perhaps evidence of the horseshoe theory of politics.

          Like its doppelganger, you wonder how they imagine anybody is going to be persuaded to vote for it. (Which is why neither is all that fond of voting.)”

          http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Neoreactionary_movement

          LOL– fucking spot-on!

  15. Mark Citadel says:

    This is not so bad. Syriza are an incompetent gang of Maoist-lite. They will crash the economy into the dirt, and as even leftists admit, the only option will be Golden Dawn. All of the centrist parties have been discredited.

    • jim says:

      If the alternative is Golden Dawn, Germany will probably fund Greece. And if they do crash the economy into the dirt, Communists do not give up power easily.

    • Dave says:

      No matter what happens, the EU will not let Greece go broke, because that would place the Democratic Social Welfare State on the wrong side of history.

      The EU is a cabal of twenty-eight DSWSes. Just as opening the Berlin Wall instantly doomed every Communist Prison State to illegitimacy and irrelevance, the death of one DSWS is the death of all. The masses might keep voting for the DSWS, but an insolvent entity cannot collect taxes, borrow money, or buy anything without advance payment in gold coin.

      • Thales says:

        I’m inclined to agree. It’s a long con, and they can’t risk a loss of confidence. So long as there is value from, say, hard-working Germans, that can be transfered within the EU, it will be transfered by any means, surreptitious or otherwise.

        • Peppermint says:

          European unification is about Stormfront nationalism, but not explicitly, because as soon as you admit that Whites exist, you start to wonder about the German Question and the Czech Question, which leads to wars until there’s a principality for every language. The Germans want to be continental overlords and are willing to pay for it, but since they can’t admit it to their subjects or themselves, they are doing a more harmful job of sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids than the Jews could ever dream of.

          We’re going to need a more advanced racism than Stormfront’s to convince the Germans to stop paying for the Greeks. That, or a more advanced anti-communism, which would probably be more to Moldbug’s liking.

      • jim says:

        Yes. Greece threatens to fall, demands to be carried, will be carried.

        • Mark Citadel says:

          I agree, but for how long is carrying them economically viable? Must we not take into account possible economic headwinds from other directions this year? Europe is like a teetering glass 4D chess set, ready to be smashed by a hammer.

          • jim says:

            There is a lot of ruin in a nation. Not much ruin left in Greece, but the rest of them have been carrying Greece for this long, can continue to carry it for a while longer.

  16. Zach says:

    The old man is steadfast. Treating all with equal respect while being against equality.

    Who is this man? What does he represent? How? Why?

    Jim is quite the enigma. I love the old dog. Glad this blog is taking off!

    • Dave says:

      I love how the SJWs who infest other blogs make a few posts here and then go away. We’re proud to be racist, sexist, etc., so there’s nothing for them to grab onto. Accusations of racism are like DDT — if you spray it everywhere all the time, the bugs become immune to it.

      • Zach says:

        Yeah… I see what you’re saying.

        OFF-TOPIC

        I keep a low profile (really), but I see this dude everywhere. He takes on all comers. That he responds to my idiotic posts with the utmost respect… is really telling to me. He’s fighting the good fight. Even if we don’t agree sometimes.

        Refreshing.

      • jim says:

        SJW “Don’t you know that the reason blacks underperform is the legacy of slavery”
        Me “Whites invented everything, built everything first
        SJW “Racist!”

  17. Mowgli says:

    “I walked to Master Moldbug but the road was too long. I visited master Jim and he hit me with a stick.”

    I love this blog. Please don’t stop. Adair Neto, study Moldbug or continue to be hit by Jim’s stick.

  18. […] eyes on Saudi Arabia. Going over the cliff in Greece, and […]

Leave a Reply for Mowgli