By Francis Lee for the Saker Blog
“The weak and ill-constituted shall perish: first principle of our philanthropy. And one should help them to do so … What is more harmful than any vice? Active sympathy for the ill-constituted and weak.’’ (1)
The Beast awakens – Second Time Around
Such were the sentiments – customarily referred to by Charles Darwin as the ‘’survival of the fittest’’ and of Friedrich Nietzsche’s worldview (see above); and moreover these are to all intents and purposes the unstated and philosophical stance of the incumbent ruling elites in the west. This is a dialogue delineating an unapologetic and ruthless amoral agenda presently emerging from the salons, studios and lecture halls and presently doing the rounds in the usual media and academic outlets. This project entails what is essentially a cultural revolution, a revolution sui generis; a massive project involving the construction of a fundamentally new order imposed from above and to be realised through a ‘Great Reset’. But this reset is nothing new, it has been in a long incubation period and even tolerated a qualified democracy; although this democracy never sat easily alongside the oligarchic elites; moreover, even this minimal democracy was to become an increasing irritant which finally has to be done away with. This has been a long struggle for elite hegemony, and these are early days to make any provisional assessment of these developments which are yet to play out.
Philosophical and Political déjà vu
What we can say, however, is that the origins of these theoretical roots (basically fascism) go back well-beyond the 20th century and into the late 19th. At that time (and to a lesser extent in ours) there has always been a general philosophical drift which was always an unquestionably right-wing, romantic-reactionary movement. It should be borne in mind, however, that it often contained a justifiable disappointment with bourgeois democracy, a disillusioned and sometimes relatively forward-looking experience of its social limitations. Let us recall Anatole France’s mockery of democratic equality before the law, magisterially prohibiting rich and poor alike from sleeping under the Parisian arches. On a more serious note there were the novels of Honoré De Balzac and his unforgettable quote in his novel Per Goriot: ‘’Corruption is powerful in the World: talent is scarce. So corruption is the instrument of swarming mediocrity, and you will feel its point everywhere.’’ Other French writers Zola, Stendhal, Flaubert et al. All also drew attention to the squalid reactionary swamp of French and by extension the rest of Europe’s bourgeois society and its ‘culture’.
Imperial Echoes
During the 19th and well into the 20th centuries there was a characteristic mixture of accurate criticism and muddled reactionary tendencies which were also to be observed in the writings and drama of George Bernard Shaw, together with his view of imperial rule – i.e., the white man’s burden – in Britain’s far-flung empire: He shamelessly opined that ‘’Good government is better than self-government.’’ Moreover, his literary side-kick, H.G.Wells’ eugenic disposition went even further, noting that ‘’ … those swarms of black and brown, and dirty white, and yellow who do not come into the new needs of ‘efficiency’ were self-evidently otiose. The world is a world and not a charitable institution, and I take it that they will have to go. The whole tenor and meaning of the world as I see it, is that they will have to go.’’ Yes, indeed British imperialism was leading the field culling the colonial unpeople and being closely followed by the French, Belgian, Spanish, Portuguese and Americans. (2)
Additionally, the leading Fabians of that time the Webbs (Beatrice and Sidney), writing in the New Statesman exhibited an unspoken assumption of white racial superiority vis-à-vis the ‘non-adult’ races … what caused them particular concern were the differential birth rates between the races which logically implied that the white races were (from their point of view) in danger of being swamped by the non-white multitudes whose capacity and aptitude for the sort of civilization which Mr and Mrs Webb had in mind; this seemed to be wanting when comparison was made with the ‘higher races’. Even more worrying was the possibility of large-scale interbreeding which the Webbs regarded as a grave threat to western civilization.’’ (3) Such was the late 19th century imperial weltgeist. But of course the inhabitants of the colonial south were indeed the ‘unpeople’ to be viewed in the same way as domestic animals.
Cecil Rhodes 1853-1902 was another important figure in the British imperial juggernaut and led expeditions which led to war in what became known as Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe); these were the Zulu wars, and later after his death in 1902 in South Africa, the Boer Wars. Rhodes was the leading figure in the British South Africa Chartered Company, (BSACC) and made no secret of his ambitions to plant the Union Jack in every African territory from Cape Town to Cairo. This was quite naked imperialism with strong overtones of a militant racialism.
One V.I.Lenin was to write in this connexion:
‘’In the most flourishing period of free competition in Great Britain between 1840 and 1860, the leading bourgeois politicians were opposed to a colonial policy and were of an opinion that the liberation of the colonies, their complete separation from Britain, was both inevitable and desirable. Benjamin Disraeli, a statesman (who twice served as UK Prime Minister) was generally inclined toward imperialism, declared: ‘’The colonies are millstones around our necks’’. But at the end of the 19th century the British heroes of the hour were Cecil Rhodes and Secretary of State for the Colonies, Joseph Chamberlain, who openly advocated imperialism and applied the imperialist policy in the most cynical manner.’’ (4)
Assuredly, British imperial policy was not without its critics of course. J.A.Hobson’s seminal work Imperialism: A Study, was first published in 1902 and was taken to be a definitive work on (British) imperialism. This along with Leonard Woolf (husband of the novelist, Virginia) wrote the classic study of imperialism: Empire and Commerce in Africa 1920. Lesser-known contributors included Leonard Barnes author of The New Boer War (1932) and Empire or Democracy (1939) who noted ironically, that ‘’no nation has ever colonised, annexed, or established a sphere of influence from motives of disinterested philanthropy toward a native people.’’ (5) It should be added that this imperial war machine policy was also applied in the United States during the Spanish-American wars which were by no means restricted to the US but stretched out to also encompass the Philippines. Moreover it should also be remembered that racism in the United States was probably even more toxic than that in Europe.
Democracy: Decline and Fall
However, in the non-English-speaking, world – primarily Europe and even more so in Germany – venomous political and philosophical irrationalist currents were to emerge from the depths of human consciousness and depravity and which were to give rise to the emergence of a new type of politics and culture -namely the rise of fascist/nazi regimes in Italy, followed by Germany. The murderous policies of these movements and the ferocious hostility was to be particularly directed in Germany toward social, political and ethnic groups: socialists, communists, trade unionists, religious groups like Seventh Day Adventists, homosexuals, gypsies, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Soviet POWs and of course Jews and others who had become Europe’s new unpeople. In earlier times such philosophical ramblings were products of those professors ensconced in their ivory towers of learning. Their ruminations were initially restricted to the academic elites. But in the fullness of time the culmination of these depraved doctrines became visible in the death camps of Auschwitz-Birkenau, Buchenwald and Belsen. This was not supposed to happen in a civilized society or even Europe, and all the overblown claims to, and obsession with, ‘scientific status’ of much 19th century thought – From Bentham to Marx – rested ultimately upon one article of faith: the belief in the innate rationality of man. Predictably this particular weltgiest with its attendant political cockpit produced an irrationalist backlash in the later 19th and earlier 20th century and moral ambience of the fin de siècle and those theorists who were in large part responsible for bringing it about – Sorel, Nietzsche, Freud and Pareto, for example – as well as the experience of the 20th century which was to cast doubt on what was always a piece of question-begging.
‘’In this connexion, German philosophy in the imperialist age proceeded, as we shall see, from Friedrich Nietzsche to Oswald Spengler and later in the Weimar period from Spengler to Fascism. If we stress this spadework by German philosophy from Schopenhauer to Nietzsche onwards, it might be objected that we are dealing with esoteric doctrines which circulated within quite small groups. We believe on the contrary, that one must not underestimate the indirect, subterranean effect on the masses of the fashionable reactionary ideologies analysed so far. These effects were not limited to the direct influence of these philosophers’ actual books, although it should be remembered that editions of the works of Schopenhauer and Nietzsche certainly never reached many tens of thousands. But by universities, public lectures and the press, et cetera these ideologies also spread to the broadest masses – needless to say in a coarsened form, but this strengthened rather than weakened their reactionary content, their ultimate irrationalism and pessimism, since the central ideas now received greater attention at the expense of qualifying statements. Through such ideologies the masses can be intensively corrupted without ever glimpsing the immediate source of the corruption. Nietzsche’s barbarising of the instincts his vitalism* his ‘heroic pessimism’ and so forth which were the necessary products of the imperialist age, and his speeding up of the process operated on the minds of tens of thousands of people who had never even heard of Nietzsche.(6)
Democracy or Empire?
But the external wars against those ‘lesser breeds without the law’ – Rudyard Kipling – came home to roost in the imperial heartlands, albeit with many centuries in the making. The methods used by the Athenians came back to be used against their own populace – now the unpeople – which eventuated in the decline of the Athenian state itself. As Pericles noted: ‘’It is right and proper for you to support the imperial dignity of Athens … But do not imagine that what we are fighting for is simply a question of freedom and slavery: there is also involved the loss of our empire and the dangers arising from the hatred which we have incurred in administering it. Nor is it any longer possible for you to give up this empire, though there may be some people in the mood of sudden panic and in a spirit of political apathy who think that this would be a fine and noble thing to do. Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go.’’ (7) The Athenian city state seems to have had its own cadre of neo-cons, but the outcome would be the same today as it was then: decline and fall.
Conclusions:
At the present time it is something of a cliché to say that the world is experiencing a crisis of huge dimensions, as the economic political and geopolitical tectonic plates simultaneously collide. Both domestic and economic policies are now subsumed under the all-encompassing global disaster, particularly in the West and Global South. When the everything bubble blew up in 2020, it arrived like an economic volcano, and the decline of the American century became manifest and spread to Europe which is presently threshing about like a landed salmon. Euro/American weaknesses are both internal and external and are becoming increasingly difficult if not impossible to turn around. Moreover, its chief allies in Europe are at a loss and appear to be being dragged into the political/economic maelstrom. This is bad enough but given the wretched performance of the Atlanticist elites who seem to be living in a bygone age, the future of the Atlanticist bloc becomes increasingly problematic.
Additionally, the emergence of the Sino-Russian alliance casts an ominous shadow – both geopolitically and economic – over a corrupt and declining west. This not just a matter of concern to the imperialist bloc but also and of crucial importance as a beacon of light to the Global South with the Chinese sponsored Belt and Road Initiative. Nemesis not only seems to have arrived but is actually knocking at the door.
NOTES
* Vitalism: Vitalism is the belief that “living organisms are fundamentally different from non-living entities because they contain some non-physical element or are governed by different principles than are inanimate things”
(1) Friedrich Nietzsche – The Anti-Christ – p115 – paragraph 2.
(2) H.G.Wells – Anticipations – London 1918 – p.317.
(3) New Statesman -The Guardianship of the Non-Adult Races and the Great Alternative – August 2, 20 1913. – Quoted in Fabianism and Colonialism – Francis Lee – p.189.
(4) V.I.Lenin – Imperialism the Highest Stage of Capitalism – Moscow 1920 – pp. 15, 75, 88, 96, 100.
(5) Critics of Empire: 1902-1919
(6) Georg Lukacs – The Destruction of Reason – p.84
(7) Speech by Pericles – 430 BC – The History of the Peloponnesian War – Thucydides.
This is an excellent, practical overview of the wrong world-view which is behind most of the most horrible excesses of the age. Because it is a wrong world-view, (a) the resulting outcomes are painful, and (b) the exploitative structures enabling the wrong world-view will decay over time. Side by side, a right world-view will also emerge; which, because it is right, is also durable, timeless. The Saker’s Vineyard is playing a great role in the emergence of the right world-view, and it is a privilege to participate.
“He shamelessly opined that ‘’Good government is better than self-government.’’”
Events in South Africa and in a great many other places prove that this is correct. The fact that it upsets a lot of people to state this reality is neither here nor there.
Under the Roman Empire, many peoples in different countries thrived for centuries. However, when their senate became corrupt and taken over by oligarchs, the Empire started to unravel.
I was born in Egypt. For many years, I did not understand why the English were so excited about finding Roman remains. Why I had to pass an exam in Latin when I was 13. Later, it became obvious. The English were much better off under the Romans than under the previous and subsequent self-governement.
Doubtless, we will all be rather sad when our wish comes true and the US Empire collapses. Many elderly people in the ex-Soviet Empire look back with nostalgia at those times.
Can you quote a passage from a historical work, where Roman subjects praise Rome, and basically verify your sentiments here?
If by thriving you mean a fascist system that organizes and puts everyone to forced labor, then sure, you are right.
I was born in Iran. My village had a total of 13 families living in homesteads. Everyone had extensive tracts of land which were used for rain-watered wheat cultivation, qanat-watered fruit orchards, and pastures for sheep. The village itself was lost in a jungle of ancient Plane, Poplar, Willow, and Persian Olive trees, planted by our ancestors hundreds of years ago.
Today, the village has a population exceeding 5000. Most people live in apartments. Every family has at least 1-2 cars. All the ancient trees were cut down to make way for apartments.
50 years ago, everyone in my village was poor. They subsisted exclusively on what they themselves produced. They even made their own clothes, rugs, mud brick houses, etc. 100% self-sufficient. 100% clean organic food, and clean water. 0% luxury, which is what western culture uses as a gauge of prosperity and development.
Today, most people in town are quite wealthy, by Iranian standards. Flat screen TVs in every house, smartphones in the hands of every child and adult, the whole shebang.
50 years ago, everyone was healthy and happy. Today, I dare you to find one healthy and/or happy person in the village.
In my village, the winters get very cold. All year, old women would be roaming around in the valleys, collecting twigs and dry wood for winter. There was always work to do, to survive. It was hard, but nobody was depressed, and we had 2 very old men who were opium addicts in the whole population.
Enter the Islamic Republic of Rome, and their development crusade. 50% of youth in town are addicts today. All the old women are depressed; thanks to gas heating, and modern appliances, there is no work for old women anymore. And all the waters are polluted from agricultural chemicals and pesticides.
Ask anyone in town: was there more wealth 50 years ago or today? They will say today. Ask anyone, were people happier 50 years ago, or today? Literally everyone will say 50 years ago.
I imagine Rome did the same to Britannia.
Thanks
Hence the back to the land movement which started in teh US in the 60’s and is increasingly flourishing in Europe today. Franc 24 covers it regularly, in English.
Good government would be a great blessing indeed – were it available.
The term “survival of the fittest was first used by Herbert Spencer, not Charles Darwin. It is found nowhere in Origin of the species.
This is simply the Goyim and … story. From the class of chosen-ites to today’s untouchables.
Goyim always already expendable (irrespectie of colour or creed)
Charles Darwin not only did not coin the phrase “survival of the fittest” (the phrase was invented by Herbert Spencer), but he argued against it.
One more proof of the permanent propaganda we are bombarded since centuries past.
not sure about this one …. hs
Great piece. There is this passage about the leading Fabians that I would like to bring up a propos other authors who contribute here (and some commenters as well):
Two weeks ago, in the open threads about Covid which were subsequently closed due to excessive noise, I wrote myself that
To which Saker replied:
I was on the verge of responding, but by then no further replies could be submitted. Francis Lee’s excellent article above made me recall this.
Not going into specific articles, suffice it to say that the Webbs’ white imperialist chauvinism and contempt of ’lesser peoples’ are very explicit in (some of) the articles published here by Paul Craig Roberts and Jimmie Moglia. As Francis Lee writes:
”But the external wars against those ‘lesser breeds without the law’ – Rudyard Kipling – came home to roost in the imperial heartlands, albeit with many centuries in the making.”
This is the crux of the matter. Neoliberalism doesn’t care about peoples’ complexion or religion. So the angry outbursts of hurt Whiteys are falling on deaf ears. Ukronazis and their beliefs in saving the white West are, well, at least in need of a little reality check.
The comments with white racist content are all but non-existent here. Far more prominent are various contemptuous views on what’s ultimately going to kill Western imperialism forever: the Sino-Russian block. Lots of doom and gloom accompanied by projections about oligarchy, despotism, and what not. Francis Lee nails it in his concluding statement:
”Additionally, the emergence of the Sino-Russian alliance casts an ominous shadow – both geopolitically and economic – over a corrupt and declining west. This not just a matter of concern to the imperialist bloc but also and of crucial importance as a beacon of light to the Global South with the Chinese sponsored Belt and Road Initiative. Nemesis not only seems to have arrived but is actually knocking at the door.”
To name the names is not bad from time to time, just to make sure that the Sakers public is and remains a decent one. Thanks Nussiminen.
Yes, it was Herbert Spencer and not Charles Darwin. It’s always a problem when you have to proof-read your own work, errors are bound to occur.
Still without Herbert having read the following from Origin of The Species, perhaps, most likely, the term may never have been coined or submitted for critique/debate, kept speakers, philosophers, lecturers, writers, grifters, cads, journalists, scientists, anthropologists, biologists and a plethora of other professions, companies and individuals, in work.
‘ It is not the strongest of the species that survive,
nor the most intelligent,
but the one most responsive to change’
Take HRH Prince William for example, not the brightest of buttons and hence, his Imperial handlers will be rubbing their hands, manipulating that inferior brain, shaping the country in their image and for the length of his reign, the likelihood of a further generation of mindless land/resource grab.
Fingers crossed the current opinion/ sway towards a non Royalist future will continue to gain momentum as another 50/60 years of this mediocrity of mindset from the existing shadow shallow government will return Britain to post industrial status.
Humans are but ONE group of animals among a myriad types of living organisms. They exercise great influence on the history of the planet “for a moment of time”. Just as they seek to ‘divide and conquer’ among themselves, so they do with the rest of life on this planet, and also with non-living materials.
Life-forms come and go. They prevail, then fail. So with humans. People and unpeople. Humans and non-humans. Animals and non-animals. And so on, and so on.
Which life-forms co-exit best with their environments, with their ‘being’? Which the least? Does this hold a lesson for humans?
The struggle for freedom is perpetual. The oligarchs’ idea of the world doesn’t differ much from the practices the Ottomans have in the Balkans – primae noctis or lords right. The Ottomans demanded they sleep with the bride on her wedding night.
The Ottomans preferred boys though but would relegate primae noctis to local coverts.
Similarly, nowadays we have oligarchs getting ready to start ordering us surrender our first-borns to their gay cohorts. That is not all: you have to love it having your offspring taken away. The other crazy oligarchs that “prophesied” the pandemic now wants us to eat algae whilst he is busy buying up fertile land by hundreds of thousands of acres across 11 US states. He is gearing up to block the Sun too.
Oligarchs are the same throughout the history: never enough, always hungry for more. The only thing that changes is the scope which increased with technology.
The western oligarchs had to ease off their blood sucking during the mid and late 20th century due to the fact that there was a socialist empire to the East that provided free and universal health care, education, public housing and transport.
Now that the socialist empire is no more the oligarchs are taking their masks off.
It is interesting to apply the”good government is better than self government” paradigm to the Chinese case. Their future leaders are carefully selected, trained, goiven experience and scrutinesed for flaws, given further training, and as time passes the weks are winnowed out and the competent progress. It is that approach that has allowed the unparalled advancement.
I see in the Russian approach a similar focus on demonstrated competence as a requirement for progression through the leadership ranks but with less clear structurd process.
And then I compare the western examples and I shudder at the complete lack of competence, the endless dishonesty and the total lack of character exhibited by those who wind up in charge. If their actions have any phipsophical basis beyound short term gree it is impossible to discern it.
Rather than trying to parse meaning from German philosophers I gain more satisfaction from reading the likes of Sun Tzu whose observations have certainly stood the test of time.
Model society. Built by 1, 4 billion goyim. Win-Win principle. Not “us only” as with the non-goyim.
Curiously, when I saw the lead photograph I took it at first for a picture of Theodore Roosevelt! Not too bad a guess, in fact, since many of his views were extremely similar to Nietszche’s. Roosevelt was a world-class advocate of “white Aryan” supremacy when Hitler was learning to walk. Yet somehow – so powerful is the USA’s aparatus of deception and propaganda, and so capable of changing history 180 degrees within a few years – that today hardly anyone associates Roosevelt (and Winston Churchill) with Hitler, although their racial views were very close. Until Churchill fell out with Hitler, that is – when he suddenly became a fervent lover of the Jewish people and somewhat anti-racist.
“I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place”.
Hitler? No, Churchill.
“I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion. The famine was their own fault for breeding like rabbits”.
Hitler? No, Churchill.
The really funny thing is that Roosevelt and Nietszche, advocates of the “superman” and the supremacy of the fittest, were both weak, sickly physical specimens. Roosevelt built up a whole apparatus of deception to conceal his bodily weakness, pretending to be a rough, tough, cowboy and bear-hunter. It was all fiction – Goebbels could have done no better.
Germany was bankrupt after World War I and its industry layed in ruins. The big elefant in the room is of course, which banks financed Hitler and his Nazis? Which companies delivered automobiles to Germany? The answer lies in the United States of America…
It was the war of Judea on Germany.
The author could not help himself but invoke the name of Hitler. As a historian (and for the sake of objectivity), he should also look for the names of Berman and Frenkel (GULAG), Kaganovich (Holodomor), Goloschyokin (Shaya Itsikovich, Goloschyokin genocide in Kazakhstan), and similar “eternal victims” whose progeny demands from the western educational system to learn about “incomparable sufferings” due to “antisemitism,” yet they never ever touch on the enormous role of the Sasson family (Jewish) in the rape and destruction of India and the important role of bankers Schiff and Loeb (Jewish) in the rape and destruction of Russia.
Until the honest historians are allowed to research what happened in Auschwitz-Birkenau, Buchenwald, and Belsen, the author should be more careful with his pronouncements. Otherwise, he puts himself (inadvertently) in a company with Elie Wiesel and Ilya Ehrenburg, two pernicious liars and propagandists.
And yes, the concept “survival of the fittest” was first articulated by Spencer.
@Lenard
Also take notice when the money avalanche started to descend onto Adolf in comparison to certain important events in Russia..when the hope for an international ‘revolution’ had been laid to rest finally and Finintern had to act swiftly.
Great piece. There is this passage about the leading Fabians that I would like to bring up a propos other authors who contribute here (and some commenters as well):
Two weeks ago, in the open threads about Covid which were subsequently closed due to excessive noise, I wrote myself that
To which Saker replied:
I was on the verge of responding, but by then no further replies could be submitted. Francis Lee’s excellent article above made me recall this.
Not going into specific articles, suffice it to say that the Webbs’ white imperialist chauvinism and contempt of ’lesser peoples’ are very explicit in (some of) the articles published here by Paul Craig Roberts and Jimmie Moglia. As Francis Lee writes:
”But the external wars against those ‘lesser breeds without the law’ – Rudyard Kipling – came home to roost in the imperial heartlands, albeit with many centuries in the making.”
This is the crux of the matter. Neoliberalism doesn’t care about peoples’ complexion or religion. So the angry outbursts of hurt Whiteys are falling on deaf ears. Ukronazis and their beliefs in saving the white West are, well, at least in need of a little reality check.
The comments with white racist content are all but non-existent here. Far more prominent are various contemptuous views on what’s ultimately going to kill Western imperialism forever: the Sino-Russian block. Lots of doom and gloom accompanied by projections about oligarchy, despotism, and what not. Francis Lee nails it in his concluding statement:
”Additionally, the emergence of the Sino-Russian alliance casts an ominous shadow – both geopolitically and economic – over a corrupt and declining west. This not just a matter of concern to the imperialist bloc but also and of crucial importance as a beacon of light to the Global South with the Chinese sponsored Belt and Road Initiative. Nemesis not only seems to have arrived but is actually knocking at the door.”
First, you are conflating “racism” and “supremacism” with “white imperialist chauvinism” and “contempt for the putative ’lesser peoples’.
When several categories are conflated into a single “bad bad bad” thing, this shows the lack of factual evidence or logic.
Second, when you accuse two authors of “not so discreet White racists/supremacists” you need to either provide the evidence with actual quotes or apologize to the authors you have so smeared.
Last but not least, since “racist” is a VERY ambiguous word, you should have started by providing a definition, even your own.
Bottom line: your reply is just unsubstantiated finger pointing. I would ask you to do better next time.
Kind regards
The Saker
”Second, when you accuse two authors of ’not so discreet White racists/supremacists’ you need to either provide the evidence with actual quotes or apologize to the authors you have so smeared.”
My pleasure! The first quotes below are all taken from PCR’s submission The Feminization of Western Men, published on May 5th:
PCR’s endorsement of Jean Raspail’s The Camp of the Saints is a very obvious give-away. Sort of like promoting Mein Kampf as one’s prime guide to Slavic peoples and culture.
As for Jimmie Moglia, here’s a gem from his submission The Great Reset and the re-emergence of neo-Malthusianism, published on June 23rd:
Again, this kind of reactionary sloganeering is definitely the exception and not the rule here. And it’s not present in all the posts authored by PCR and JM. But these posts do degrade the blog all the same.
Okay, wait, to “reactionary sloganeering” is now racism?!?!?!
The quotes you provide are definitely debatable, one can disagree or agree with them, but there is NOTHING “racist” or “supremacist” about that.
Again, I think you owe these authors an apology
Cheers
The Saker
”The quotes you provide are definitely debatable, one can disagree or agree with them, but there is NOTHING ’racist’ or ’supremacist’ about that.”
Sorry, but explicitly accusing ”people of colour” for ”raping White people in public all over Europe” and calling them a ”de-civilizing inflow” certainly amounts to racism. Jean Raspail’s ’The Camp of the Saints’ makes precisely these claims oozing with smears and innuendos, hence proving that at least PCR has the same racist outlook as did Sidney and Beatrice Webb in their time.
Maybe I could make an apology to Roberts and Moglia based on my own profound contempt of the Euro-trash, inciting Russia to consider nuking this lot right where it’s residing. But this is, after all, different from Roberts’ and Moglia’s lines of reasoning because:
a) Russia is being coveted by the omnicidal West, and has suffered enough already.
b) The West keeps instigating imperialist wars abroad, partly with the aim of bringing refugee torrents into its heartlands (whose demographic prospects would otherwise spell doom). Roberts and Moglia are blaming the victims. Pretend as if imperialism doesn’t exist.
c) I certainly don’t mind people’s complexion when Russia takes due action.
Lee, buddy, leave Nietzsche alone, he is not where you want to put him.
Totally agree. Nietzsche was also one of the main thinkers revolving around the concept of the philosophical gap between “the monarchic, codified” vision of the world and the “nomadic, unstructured” one.
I remember an essay wrote by Deleuze in which they refer to Nietzche about the concepts of the “administrative machinery of the despot”, who wants to “codify everything”, versus the “war machinery of the nomad”
This concept was used in the book “A thousand plateaux” in which Deleuze and Guattari point out several characteristics of the “resistance bodies”. It’s not a surprise that countries under siege by the big ruler (such as Cuba or Iran) follow defensive paths very similar to those described in this book.
A great read about it (in Spanish – a Google translation won’t work due to the complexity of the language and concepts):
http://estafeta-gabrielpulecio.blogspot.com/2010/07/gilles-deleuze-pensamiento-nomada-sobre.html
Yes, this is an ignorant caricature of Nietzsche.
Yes, the reception of Nietzsche’s work had been extremely manipulated by his sister Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche. Nietzsche described her shortly before his death as “…instills in me an unspeakable horror: here works a perfect hell machine, with infallible certainty about the moment when one can wound me bloodly”. In a double-bind, she cared about him when he was sick, but controlled him, and in particular after his death, she controlled the reception of his works, not hesitating to falsify and forge his writings. On the birthday of Richard Wagner, she had married Bernhard Förster, an ultra-nationalist German high school teacher who had been fired from his civil servant status and school employment due to aggressive and severe antisemitic activism. They emigrated to Paraguay, founding a right-wing nationalist German community “New Germania”. He committed suicide in the age of 46. Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche returned to Germany and advanced her distortion of Nietzsche’s work (she controlled his legacy) to the fraudulent main philosophical legitimation of the German Nazi ideology.
King Solomon:
I find more bitter than death the woman who is a snare, whose heart is a trap and whose hands are chains. The man who pleases God will escape her, but the sinner she will ensnare. Eccles. 7:26
If old Tru-deau could see? if only?
Also remember, the concentration camp was not invented by the Germans, but by the British. Thousands of innocent Boers, mostly children and women, were brutally murderded in those camps, so that the British could conquer South Africa. The ‘superior’ British empire versus the ‘inferior’ Dutch farmers…
Yes, concentration camps were certainly invented by the British during the Boer War 1899-1902. I never suggested otherwise.
Yes I’m sure you know about it. I just thought to write it again in the comments because I think it adds well to the the ideas discussed in your article :)
I beg to disagree. While I do not wish to minimise the vileness of some British deeds, concentration camps – not necessarily by that name – have existed for a long time; perhaps as long as history.
One can think, for instance, of “Indian reservations” in North America. Or the still more inhuman “walking concentration camps” like the Trail of Tears.
The famous English king Henry V was notorious for his technique of capturing towns and cities by besieging them and waiting for the people inside to starve or die of disease. The same method must have been used by hundreds of less notorious rulers throughout history. “There is nothing new under the sun”.
@ Tom Welsh
and read this…
….with the abnormal wealth of such men as the Nizam of Hyderabad, a descendant of the Mogul emperors, who ruled over 15 million poverty stricken subjects for decades. Reputedly, he had more wealth than any other man in the world, with a net income of $ 15 million annually. Much of his wealth came from the fabulous valley of Golconda, one of the world’s richest diamond mines.The Nizam had 500 wives, and he gave his favorite one a gold Rolls Royce. He ate all of his meals off golden plates, and boasted that the English displayed 24 golden plates in London, while he had golden place settings for 150 guests. One of his favorite diamonds was the l82 oz. carat diamond that he used for a paperweight. He sat in chairs and relaxed on couches of solid gold, and had a carriage of gold built that was not usable because of its weight.
If Stanley Jones endorsed socialism, it was perhaps because he had stood among the beggars and hungry children in the shadow of the Taj Mahal. It was without doubt the most beautiful tomb in the world. It was built by the Indian ruler, Shah Jahan, as a memorial to his favorite wife, Muntaz-i-Mahal, which means “Bride of the Palace.” It took 20,000 workmen 21 years to erect the Taj, and when the workmen finished the delicate tasks of carving their rnarble and alabaster into 70-foot domes rising 150 feet high, they undoubtedly gazed at the slender minarets, supposedly built as towers for prayer, mirrored in the reflecting pools beside the tomb, and then turned to Shah Jahan for their reward. Did he give them a smile of appreciation or a hand of gratitude? No, the payment they received for creating one of the beauties of the world was the ugly point of a soldiers knife that pierced their eyes. Shah Jahan wanted to make sure no other monarch woyuld ever again have a Taj as beautiful as his.
Ludwig of Bavaria a genius builder of those magnificent pools etc and especially Neuschwanstien Castle and what happiness did he find ultimately? Little to nothing he died lonely in a mountain lake. But to build all these magnificent structures he taxed the Bavarian’s so unmercilessly that they scarecely had money for food.
Attila the Hun had all the workmen who buried him in a colossal grave, his body encased in a coffin of gold , a second coffin of silver and then a coffin of iron. After the workmen buried him with all his spoils of war all the workmen were murdered so that no one would know where his grave was.
Alaric buried in a river and the workmen to were all killed.
On and on it goes crazy insane people for whom a hell would be too good for really and thankfully does indeed exist!
Kudos to the Saker who makes it possible for meaningful discourse to come about.
Corruption is powerful, talent is scarce…. now just hold on them is fightn words (joke)?
Well, this is too over simplified,
corruption = talent ( u gotta have extreme talent 2 b corrupt- it is just that corruption 4 ppl in the long run is just a big waste of ur Creators (Almighty’s time) bc he will just put them (corrupter in eternal damnation).
It is also takes talent 2 figure out what the corrupter r up 2 , then 2 try and fix it takes courage…hence good deeds…hence heaven path… hence ur article.. guess ur reason 4 writing(The real reason)
Appolige ahead 4 editorial errors
I think was in reference to concentration camps run by a supposedly-Christian European empire against another European-rooted culture, which illustrates in stark terms the utter depravity of the British Empire despite its pretending to be cultured and civilized. I had read that 28,000 Boers died in these camps
Interestingly, not many people outside the Russian Orthodox civilizational space are the least bit aware that the first concentration camps in Europe were run by the Austro-Hungarian Empire against the Russian natives of the province of Galicia (in what is now southern Poland, northwest Ukraine, and other areas nearby). There were quite a few camps, and the best-known are Terezin and Talerhof, run from 1914 to 1918. There were tens of thousands of Russian natives murdered in the villages, and tens of thousands living and dying in the camps.This was partially to take revenge for early losses of the Austrian Army against Russia, and partially to promote by violence the so-called Ukrainian (“borderlands”) separatist movement, in order to destroy forever the sense of Russian adherence in provinces that had been affiliated — ethnically, religiously, and culturally — with Rus’ for over a thousand years. Now northwest “Ukraine” is the hotbed of the fake “Ukrainian” nationality.
I have two comments for this piece:
1. I would agree that Rhodes and the other anglo supremacists do seem to be the progenitors of the revolution we’re seeing now. However, that this revolution appears to have taken an obvious departure from whiteness leads me to two possibilities: 1. It is, in fact, still basically the same old anglos working towards their white supremacy, which doesn’t even include – and never genuinely did – the whiteness of the white ‘unpeople’; 2. those who are really pulling the strings, i.e., those who were behind even Rhodes et al, weren’t/aren’t that white at all. In the case of the former, I’ve found it interesting when, at the time I read any kind of manifesto or constitution that refers to the so-called ‘power of the people’, I stop thinking ‘many people’ and replace it with only a very small group of power-mad people. For instance, when communism talked about the equality and the happiness of ‘the people’ etc., which group of people did this definitely include? And again, but this time with America, when the founders wrote of ‘the people’ being free from tyranny and the like, could this not have simply referred to those who would eventually rule America (more and more), thanks to being free from the restraints of who they saw as the tyrants (such as various so-called churches like the Roman one?) Well, it’s an idea.
2. Despite the fact that “survival of the fittest”, in practice, refers ultimately to physical might over physical weakness, it is nevertheless an abstract concept. But before reason can be assumed to be valid, we must admit to truth/reason/meaning/order existing in the universe, and this could only be if there’s a God. In placing our faith in truth/reason etc existing, we place our faith in God, as well; and when God exists – and He’s good – this bestial “survival of the fittest” can not stand as any valid principle in life. So why is, and why must, God be good? In fact, the answer to the question lies somewhere in the very argument that has helped us to this point in the first place: reason. For is not the ability to think properly, with all the good that necessarily follows, not a gift from a creator who’s *benign? But, of course, the malignant now among us will want to spoil the mood by trying to get us all to think that there’s no right (or wrong) – a right or wrong, albeit woefully contradictory, statement if there was one!
*In other words, an evil creator would definitely have made us plum dumb