by Paul Craig Roberts
When Trump was elected I wrote that it was unlikely that he would be successful in accomplishing the three objectives for which he was elected—peace with Russia, the return home of offshored US jobs, and effective limits on non-white immigration—because these objectives conflicted with the interests of those more powerful than the president.
I wrote that Trump was unfamiliar with Washington and would fail to appoint a government that would support his goals. I wrote that unless the ruling oligarchy could bring Trump under its control,Trump would be assassinated.
Trump has been brought under conrol by assassinating him with words rather than with a bullet. With Steve Bannon’s dismissal, there is now no one in Trump’s government who supports him. He is surrounded by Russophobic generals and Zionists.
But this is not enough for the liberal/progressive/left. They want Trump impeached and driven from office.
Marjorie Cohn, whom I have always admired for her defense of civil liberty, has disappointed me. She has written in Truthout, which sadly has become more like PropagandaOut, that the House must bring articles of impeachment against Trump for his abuse of power and before he launches a new civil war and/or nuclear war.
This is an extraordinary conclusion for a normally intelligent person to reach. What power does Trump have? How does he abuse his non-existent power? The ruling Establishment has cut his balls off. He is neutered. Powerless. He has been completely isolated within his own government by the oligarchy.
Even more astonishingly, Marjorie Cohn, together with 100% of the liberal/progressive/left are blind to the fact that they have helped the military/security complex destroy the only leader who advocated peace instead of conflict with the other major nuclear power. Cohn is so deranged by hatred of Trump that she thinks it is Trump who will bring nuclear war by normalizing relations with Russia.
Clearly, the American liberal/progressive/left is no longer capable of rational thought. Hate rules. There is nothing in their lexicon but hate.
The American liberal/progressive/left has degenerated into idiocy. They think that they are fighting “white nationalism” in the White House and that Trump is a champion or symbol of “white nationalism” and that there will be no victory until Trump and all symbols of “white nationalism” are obliterated.
Little do they understand. Ajamu Baraka spells it out for them in CounterPunch. White Supremacy, he writes, is inculcated into the cultural and educational institutions of the West. Liberal and leftist whites are also white supremacists, says Baraka, and Trump and the “alt-right” are nothing but a superficial useful platform on which the white supremacist American liberal/progressive/left can parade its self-righteousness. Ajamu Baraka’s conclusion is “that in order for the world to live, the 525-year-old white supremacist Pan-European, colonial/capitalist patriarchy must die.” It is not difficult to see in this statement that genocide is the solution for the white plague upon humanity. Little wonder the “alt-right” gets exercised by the anti-white propaganda of Identity Politics.
Non-white immigration will finish off the shards of remaining European civilization. All current demographics indicate that all of Europe and North America will sooner than you expect be occupied by non-white majorities.
The problem is not so much the immigrants themselves as it is that they are taught to hate whites by white liberal/progressive/leftists. The destruction of statues will not end with Robert E. Lee’s. Thomas Jefferson and George Washington are next. They owned slaves, whereas the Lee family’s slaves were freed by will three years prior to the Lincoln’s invasion of the South. The Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln memorials will have to be destroyed also as they, too, are momuments to racism. Indeed, according to the Identity Politics of the Liberal/progressive/left the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution are White Supremacy documents written by racists. This doubles the indictment against Thomas Jefferson and adds all of the Founding Fathers to the indictment. All are guilty of institutionalizing White Supremacy in America.
The uninformed insouciant Average American may think that this is a joke. But no. It is the orthodoxy of the white American intellectual class. It is taught in all the universities.
In Atlanta they are talking about erasing the heads of the South’s generals carved into Stone Mountain. Mount Rushmore in South Dakota will be next. It has carved into it the heads of Washington, Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt, and Abraham Lincoln. All racists, and Roosevelt was a colonialist and imperialist to boot. Lincoln was the worst racist of all.
Economist/historian Thomas DiLorenzo reminds us that “to his dying day, Lincoln was busy plotting the deportation of all the black people in America, including the soon-to-be-freed slaves.” https://www.lewrockwell.com/20
The following statements are all statements that are in Abe Lincoln’s Collected Works:
“I have said that the separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation [of the white and black races] . . . Such separation . . . must be affected by colonization” [sending blacks to Liberia or Central America]. (Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln vol. II, p. 409).
“Let us be brought to believe it is morally right, and . . . favorable to . . . our interest, to transfer the African to his native clime.” (Collected Works, vol. II, p. 409).
“I am not nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races. I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people” (Collected Works, vol. III, pp. 145-146).
How did Lincoln in the face of his own words and deeds get to be the hero who liberated blacks from slavery? The Emancipation Proclamation did not free a single slave, as Lincoln’s Secretary of State complained. It was a war measure that only applied to slaves under the jurisdiction of the Confederacy in hopes of fomenting a slave rebellion that would pull Southern soldiers off the front lines to rush to the protection of their wives and children. In 1861 the year the North invaded the South, President Lincoln said, “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so” (First Inaugural Address). In 1862 during the war, Lincoln wrote to Horace Greeley: “If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it.”
Lincoln was elevated to the undeserved position of black liberator by the historical lies made up by white liberal/progressive/leftists who hate the South. They are so consumed by hate that they do not understand that the hate that they teach will also devour them. They should read Jean Raspail’s book, The Camp of the Saints. People taught racial hate do not differeniate between good and bad members of the people they are taught to hate. All are equally guilty. As one Third Worlder wrote to me, “all whites are guilty,” even those such as myself who speak out against the West’s atrocities against the darker-skinned peoples.
The Amerian liberal/progressive/left has long been engaged in demonizing white people exactly as Nazis demonized Jews and Communists demonized capitalists. One would think that the liberal/progressive/leftists would be aware of what happened to the Jews and to the Russian, Chinese and East European capitalists and bourgeois middle class. Why do the liberal/progressive/leftists think they will escape the consequences of teaching hate?
What has Charlottesville taught us other than that the hate expressed by the liberal/progressive/left exceeds the hate expressed by the white nationalists themselves. When it comes to hate, the White Supremacists are out-gunned by the liberal/progressive/left.
Hate is the hallmark of the American liberal/progressive/left, and hate always ends in violence.
The Northern ruling economic interests had no interest in devoting resources to a war to free slaves. They wanted the Union held together so that there would be no competition for the lands west of the Mississippi and so there would be an agrarian sector to which to market northern manufactured goods protected by tariffs against lower priced British goods.
The northern work force didn’t want any freed slaves either. The large number of recent Irish immigrants driven out of Ireland by the British starvation policy called Lincoln’s war “a rich man’s war and a poor man’s fight.” What freed slaves meant for the northern working class was a larger labor supply and lower wages. In 1863 when the Republicans passed the draft, the Irish in Detroit and New York rioted. The rioters took out their anger and frustration on northern blacks, many of whom were lynched. It is not clear to me whether more backs were lynched in the North during the war or in the South during Reconstruction. If there are any memorials to the Irish, those racist statues will have to be taken down also. Perhaps even the Statue of Liberty is racist.
And we haven’t yet heard from Native Americans. In his excruciating history, The Long Death: The Last Days of the Plains Indians, Ralph K. Andrist describes the genocide of the Plains Indians by Lincoln’s Civil War generals, William Tecumseh Sherman, Phillip Sheridan, Grenville Dodge and other of the first war criminals of the modern age who found it a lot easier to conduct warfare against Southern women and children than against armed troops. Against the Native Americans Lincoln’s generals now conducted a policy of genocide that was even more horrible and barbaric than Sheridan’s destruction of Virginia’s Shenandoah Valley.
Lincoln historian Professor Thomas DiLorenzo provides a synopsis of the genocide of Native Americans here: http://www.independent.org/pub
During the eight year presidency of General Ulysses S. Grant, 1868-76, the Union generals conducted a policy of extermination against the Native Americans. Entire villages, every man, woman, and child, were wiped out. The Union Army’s scorched earth policy starved to death those Indians who escaped fire and sword.
Professor DiLorenzo writes:
“Sherman and Sheridan’s troops conducted more than one thousand attacks on Indian villages, mostly in the winter months, when families were together. The U.S. Army’s actions matched its leaders’ rhetoric of extermination. As mentioned earlier, Sherman gave orders to kill everyone and everything, including dogs, and to burn everything that would burn so as to increase the likelihood that any survivors would starve or freeze to death. The soldiers also waged a war of extermination on the buffalo, which was the Indians’ chief source of food, winter clothing, and other goods (the Indians even made fish hooks out of dried buffalo bones and bow strings out of sinews). By 1882, the buffalo were all but extinct.”
Indian warriors who were captured were subjected to the type of trials and executions that the George W. Bush regime gave Saddam Hussein: “hundreds of Indians who had been taken prisoner were subjected to military ‘trials’ lasting about ten minutes each, according to Nichols (1978). Most of the adult male prisoners were found guilty and sentenced to death—not based on evidence of the commission of a crime, but on their mere presence at the end of the fighting.” In other words, POWs were executed, for which the US executed German officers at Nuremberg.
The Union massacre of the Indians began before the Civil War was won. DiLorenzo reports:
“One of the most famous incidents of Indian extermination, known as the Sand Creek Massacre, took place on November 29, 1864. There was a Cheyenne and Arapaho village located on Sand Creek in southeastern Colorado. These Indians had been assured by the U.S. government that they would be safe in Colorado. The government instructed them to fly a U.S. flag over their village, which they did, to assure their safety. However, another Civil War ‘luminary,’ Colonel John Chivington, had other plans for them as he raided the village with 750 heavily armed soldiers. One account of what happened appears in the book Crimsoned Prairie: The Indian Wars (1972) by the renowned military historian S. L. A. Marshall, who held the title of chief historian of the European Theater in World War II and authored thirty books on American military history.
“Chivington’s orders were: ‘I want you to kill and scalp all, big and little.’ ( Marshall 1972, 37). Then, despite the display of the U.S. flag and white surrender flags by these peaceful Indians, Chivington’s troops ‘began a full day given over to blood-lust, orgiastic mutilation, rapine, and destruction—with Chivington looking on and approving’ (Marshall 1972, 38). Marshall notes that the most reliable estimate of the number of Indians killed is ‘163, of which 110 were women and children’ (p. 39).
“Upon returning to his fort, Chivington ‘and his raiders demonstrated around Denver, waving their trophies, more than one hundred drying scalps. They were acclaimed as conquering heroes, which was what they had sought mainly.’ One Republican Party newspaper announced, ‘Colorado soldiers have once again covered themselves with glory’ (Marshall 1972, 39).
DiLorenzo reports: “The books by Brown and Marshall show that the kind of barbarism that occurred at Sand Creek, Colorado, was repeated many times during the next two decades.”
General Sherman, a war criminal far in excess of anything the Nazis were able to produce, wrote to his wife early in the Civil War that his purpose was “extermination, not of soldiers alone, that is the least part of the trouble, but the [Southern] people.”
His wife responded: Conduct a “war of extermination” and drive all Southerners “like the swine into the sea. May we carry fire and sword into their states till not one habitation is left standing” ( Walters 1973, 61).
DiLorenzo observes that Sherman did his best to take his wife’s advice.
The extreme hatred and barbarity to which the Northern war criminals had subjected Southern non-combatants broke like fury over the Plains Indians. Distinguished military historians have described the orders given to General Custer by Phillip Sheridan as “the most brutal orders ever published to American troops.”
Clearly, if we are taking down statues, we can’t stop with Robert E. Lee. We will have to take down the Statues of Lincoln, Grant, Sherman, Sheridan, and all the rest of the Union war criminals who implemented what they themselves called “the final solution to the Indian problem.”
The designation of the northern invasion of the South as a civil war is itself a lie. The term “civil war” is used to cover up the fact that the North initiated a war of aggression, thus removing the sin of war from the North. A civil war is when two sides fight for control of the government. However, the South had no interest or intent to control the government in Washington. All the Southern states did is to use the constitutional right to end their voluntary association with other states in the United States. The South fought because the South was invaded. Southerners did not regard the War of Northern Aggression as a civil war. They clearly understood that the war was a war of Northern Aggression.
As brutal as Lincoln’s war criminal armies were to Southern civilians, the inhumanity of the brutality toward Southern people escalated during the long period called Reconstruction. The Northern ruling Republicans did their best to subject the South to rule by the blacks while Northern “carpetbaggers” stole everything that they could. No white Southern woman was safe from rape. “Civil War” buffs have told me that there were southern towns in which all the women were hidden in the woods outside of town to protect them from the Republican Union soldiers and the former slaves that the Republican agents of Reconstruction encouraged. What happened to the South at the hands of the Republicans was no different from what the Russians and Americans did in Germany when the Wehrmacht surrendered. The demonized KKK was an organization that arose to protect what remained of the South’s honor from unbearable humiliations.
Consequently, for decades no Southern person would vote Republican. The Democrats lost the “solid South” by aping the Reconstruction Republicans and again bringing Reconstruction to the South, using federal force instead of persuasion.
No real facts are any longer taught in the US about the so-called “Civil War.” In the place of the actual history stands only lies.
In an accompanying guest contribution, economist/historian Professor Thomas DiLorenzo explains the real reason that Lincoln invaded the South. He shows that Lincoln’s success in conquering the South destroyed the political character of the United States that had been formed by the Founding Fathers. He also shows that the Union policy of conducting war against civilians created the precedents for the massive war crimes of the 20th and 21st centuries. Seldom does the opportunity arise to acquire an enlightening and accurate history lesson from one article. That is what Professor DiLorenzo has delivered. http://www.paulcraigroberts.or
The conclusion of this article:
The United States of America is a genocidal colonial country of White colonialists who massacred millions of natives and transported millions from other continents as slaves…..And now their past is coming back to haunt them and divide them.
The US has no right to exist as a genocidal White Supremacist nation just as Israel has no right to exist as a European-Zionist Jewish colony/crusader state in the Arab Islamic Holy lands.
They are destroying one another just as they destroyed other nations…..the Americans deserve everything coming to them…..Justice will be finally unleashed upon them, and so will God’s wrath.
It is time for Americans to accept their downfall.
When Zion shouts, “Look over there, a scary White Suprematist!”, both Eric Zuesse and PCR duck for cover and scream excitedly, ” yes, I can see him, or at least his shadow – we are lost!”, not realizing that they were tricked by a cheap ruse, a hoax, a psyop and that you probably won’t find a single American who identifies as a White Supremacist outside Intel circles.
Both run quickly to their laptops to save America, not aware that anything they will hastily write up, will only lead to more confusion, more paranoia, more hysteria – exactly as Zion has intended.
The actual, very racist, supremacist, organized, crime syndicate behind it: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/08/20/the-secret-jewish-roots-of-black-oppression-white-supremacy/
They are not trying to save America at all…..they are simply stating how the US got to where it is, with a history lesson.
And blaming the entire US history on “Zion” is not accurate. It deflects the responsibility of the US society, military, politics, culture and tradition.
As the Saker has wisely asked: “how did we ever let things get that far?!”
The US has willing “allied” itself with “Zion” on many different levels.
Thank you Paul. Yes, I read `camp of the saints` many years ago; today I watch it play out in real time. Another must-read book is: `Rulers of Evil`; there, Americans can read some more real history of their country (assuming they are still literate. I doubt their sanity but, surely they can still read!).
I am sceptical about “Camp of the Saints”. It had been a paid work targeting the discourse on immigration by some prominent restrictionists. The discourse on immigration, in my point of view, is a red herring to distract from the real problem. All the other points Paul raised, however, are very much valid.
Thank you PCR for tthis article with very interesting historical views.
Here from Europe I have to tell sadly, that the same discussions are going to remove statues and street names, and abolish innocent traditions, just because shouting SJW’s consider them now ‘racist’.
I couldn’t find the link, but some time ago I read to my astonishment that on an US university black students had asked for a separate campus building. And there only black students would be allowed. That’s kind of a reverse apartheid.
When I heard what kinds of things my children were taught in history lessons, I was also astonished. Those teachings have changed into ‘political correctness’. Schools with a significant muslim population don’t teach the Holocaust anymore to avoid ‘uproar’.
Trump may be ‘on a leash’, but a nearly powerless president is also dangerous. Departments, agencies, the Pentagon – they seem to go in all kinds of directions without communication or lead.
There is a massive bureaucracy without a vision.
Eventually the USA will choke on itself.
This is all news to the Americans because they never look outside their own country, of course. To anybody who have watched the collapse of the Soviet Union and the pointless battle with statues of dead people that followed, it is clear that nothing good will come out of it. Ukraine is the most recent example of poor old Lenin pulled down of every pedestal – have the lives of Ukrainians improved because of that? Sad, sad, sad… Nation fighting their history (past) has no future. History (past) is there to be understood, and learned from.
“History (past) is there to be understood, and learned from.”
Sure is. That is so true. It is why pulling down statues to the glorification of the evil Lenin is an appropriate thing to do. Get rid of that mass murdering liar. It is not a good idea to celebrate that critter. Far better to learn from the historical evidence of his incompetence, hubris, dishonesty and sheer malevolent evil and make certain it does not happen again.
Si
While not a big fan of Lenin. I believe what Russians say about that. That make no mistake,an attack on the Lenin statues isn’t about Lenin,its an attack on Russians instead. The people of Donbass know that well. And they totally oppose the tearing down of those statues.
On another not about the US leftist jihad on statues. An official in New York wants to remove the Columbus statue. And in Baltimore a Columbus statue was defaced. If the Liberals think they’ve seen some mad Southerners. I’m going to buy a huge bag of popcorn while the Italian-Americans get started. A short “talk” with those Liberals by “Tony Soprano’s friends” is going to be fun to watch. A lot of stores might run out of concrete for shoes.
As usual, the gist here is: “To hell with Russian public opinion”.
The problem with ” Holocaust teaching” is that is always about how ONLY the Jews suffered. Never about the Roma and Others suffered. When the Holocaust comes up in any form is about the suffering of the Jews. World Jewry does not count the suffering of Others. Palestine is an excellent example too.
Speaking for myself and perhaps others, with all the Holocaust books, movies, documentaries,poems, speeches, accounts ( some from blatant liars) rammed ad nauseum into us Non- Jews, I am quite pleased is no longer taught. After all, million human beings died and suffered . Not just the ” self- chosenites”.
If the Holocaust is going to be taught, then let it include all those that were murdered, raped and tortured. Not just the self- proclaimed ” eternal victims” ( the Jews).
It can get quite revolting listening to the Eternal Whiners that dismiss the murders of the Other, ALL the time. I am not a Muslim but I’d be in an uproar too having to listen to the non ending harping about the ” sufferings of the Jews” and THEIR Shoah.
PCR, PCR, there are hardened revolutionaries who love your writing. But this time, I beseech you, think it possible you may be mistaken. At least, partly mistaken.
You are not wrong to say that the white-liberal “Antifas” are no better in general than the open white supremacists. You are not wrong about the genocides and the brutalities, even if a little selective.
But man, we want the North Atlantic empire, that was founded on slavery, torn down. We want the unjust tributes, that flow in that North Atlantic direction, abolished. That does not mean we want genocide of whites, and still less does it mean that we want reparations. We want the whole damned set-up torn down. We read you because we think you agree with this.
Personally I wish you would, for your part, read what Karl Marx wrote, contemporaneously, about the American Civil War. I think you might be very surprised.
When the Bolsheviks came to power in Russia they had the same idea. And were led (heavily) by the same type of people. A huge number of them Jewish.They wanted to overturn and tear down the “Russian” part of that society .They tried to destroy,for at least until the 1930’s, everything connected to “Russia”. They divided the Ukrainians and Belorussians from their ethnic roots as Rus-sians. They torn apart the Russian Orthodox faith. They demeaned Russian culture.They torn down monuments to Russian history.And ended with a Russia that which would have been 300 million strong by the year 2000,having less than half that number today.They took an ideal for equality and economic justice for peoples.And turned it into a murderous “jihad” against the majority peoples of the country.They believed that by tearing down that majority, it would allow their minority to be able to divide and control the different peoples in Russia. And they would never again worry about the majority controlling them. That in my opinion is genocide.The same types of people lead the anti-European American movement in the US.Whether they actually want a genocide of European-American “people”,I don’t know. But beyond question they work for,and want, a genocide of European-American culture and history.And just as with the Bolsheviks in Russia,they are well on their way to success.
And whilst they employ the assistance of the Zionist Christians today, in the en,d they will attempt to destroy them as a reward for their services, hating Christ and Christianity deeply.
Welcome back to the Saker Paul Craig Roberts, and wow, what an article to come back with.
Its true that “White Supremacy …is inculcated into the cultural and educational institutions of the West.” But any nation or tribe who comes out on top for whatever reason will always believe that they are superior, its part of human nature. The wheel turns endlessly, sometimes some are on top, other times others are at the top.
While I don’t really care too much about whats going on in the USA, I do care about Europe. Europe going Sharia would be a loss to humanity. The only negative aspect of the USA disappearing would be the void they leave behind, a void which Russia might not necessarily want to fill.
Let the USA pay for the sins of the white man, so that the rest of us can exist in peace afterwards, maybe.
The American sins have their origin in Europe.
After Europe gave birth to their bastard children the US and Zionist Israel, these two bastard children started using their parents as slaves once they became stronger and more powerful than their parents.
The usurious and evil banking system and the colonial superiority of the Whites was born and spread from Europe.
Justice will be unleashed upon Europe in another way….by assimilating them into the African and Asian continents, cultures and religions. The White mans way of life in Europe of individualistic Godless materialism is unsustainable. The birthrate of this lifestyle of raising dogs and cats will cause the people to be replaced by people who are willing to have children and families.
You cannot blame the corruption of an entire continent only on liberal/progressive/homosexual supporting leftists…..all components of Western societies have played a role. The West has finished itself off demographically since the sexual revolutions of the 60s.
In other words, the White Europeans should prepare themselves to be assimilated. It is irreversible and inevitable, assuming Europe will not be nuked that is by a war with Russia.
Agreed, American sin has its origin in Europe. Agreed also that the bastard children of Europe, the US and Israel, have done countless harm to others. Agreed also that the assimilation process is irreversible and inevitable. Agree with everything you say.
But Europe also has so much good in it, the literary works of Alexandre Dumas (The Three Musketeers), the eisbein (pork lower leg portion, preferably in the 1kg range) and big beers of Germany, the brandy / cognac of France. The planet would be a poorer place without that kind of stuff. Letting Islam go and destroy all of that is worse than what ISIS did in Palmyra or what the Taliban did to the Buddhas in Afghanistan.
I’d much prefer it if some of those in Europe, such as France and Germany, were to survive, but unfortunately its more likely that the USA will survive, the Southern part of it that is. Those Rednecks still have their cohesion and fornicate like bunny rabbits (the less you work the more you sexercise), so will provide some resistance to the elite.
“Those Rednecks still have their cohesion and fornicate like bunny rabbits (the less you work the more you sexercise), so will provide some resistance to the elite.”
Maybe, assuming they are informed enough to recognize the elites in the first place and properly act… PCR glancing over the geopolitical dimension of the American Civil War is like ignoring that dimension today. Find the article, _”U.S. Civil War: The US-Russian Alliance that Saved the Union.”_ England, long-time enforcers for the bankster cartel, wanted to support the Confederacy. It’s not unlike how the US currently supports the Kurds to balkanize Syria. Tsar Alexander II, who had ended serfdom in Russia, sent naval ships to support the Union and prevent England from sending their military aid.
Rejoining the US by force was a bad choice, but getting “trampled upon by the nations of Europe,” as President Jackson put it, would have been even worse.
Thanks you just proved Roberts point for him,European genocide.I wonder if you would accept the opposite so willingly,non-European genocide. Somehow I doubt that would be the case.A much better plan in my opinion would be a “no genocide” anymore for anybody.
‘Genocide’ has a very specific meaning and cannot be applied to the loss of beer, books, pigs feet or cultural artefacts any more than it can be equated with the death of an ideology.
‘Genocide’ specifically means the killing of a racial, national or religious group, as defined by the UN and throwing it around so casually in relation to other inanimate objects is ridiculous and inflammatory in an already volatile situation.
‘United Nations Genocide Convention, which was established in 1948, defines genocide as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group”‘.
and
‘ The hybrid word “genocide” is a combination of the Greek word génos (“race, people”) and the Latin suffix -cide (“act of killing”)’.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide
Interesting,though books would certainly be debatable. And in case you aren’t aware pigs feet aren’t a common food among European Americans (not at all). While many German and Czech descended people (among others) might dispute you on beer: But genocide has various meanings.
“Cultural genocide or cultural cleansing is a concept that lawyer Raphael Lemkin distinguished in 1944 as a component of genocide. ”
“Article 7 of a 1994 draft of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples used the phrase “cultural genocide” but did not define what it meant. The complete article in the draft read as follows:
Indigenous peoples have the collective and individual right not to be subjected to ethnocide and cultural genocide, including prevention of and redress for:
(a) Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities;
(b) Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources;
(c) Any form of population transfer which has the aim or effect of violating or undermining any of their rights;
(d) Any form of assimilation or integration by other cultures or ways of life imposed on them by legislative, administrative or other measures;
(e) Any form of propaganda directed against them.”
“In practice:
It involves the eradication and destruction of cultural artifacts, such as books, artworks, and structures, and the suppression of cultural activities that do not conform to the destroyer’s notion of what is appropriate. Motives may include religious ones (e.g., iconoclasm), as part of a campaign of ethnic cleansing in order to remove the evidence of a people from a specific locale or history, as part of an effort to implement a Year Zero, in which the past and its associated culture is deleted and history is “reset”, the suppression of an indigenous culture by invaders and colonizers, along with many other potential reasons.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_genocide
While genocide can be a debatable term,and is. It still is seen in more than one context.
Non of us in this blog are “planning anything”.
The course Europe is on is irreversible and inevitable unless something catastrophic or very sudden occurs.
And a bunch of immigrants out breed people who do not want to breed is not genocide…..Do you even know what genocide means ?
The key is the allowing of so many immigrants to enter a country to begin with. That was/is a stupid idea in Europe and some other states. I know that coming from a non-European background you aren’t going to agree on that point. So I’m not really troubled that you disagree. As to genocide,as I posted above there are many different meanings to it. I figure if the shoe was on the other foot. As it may have been at one time. You’d be more likely to see that point. But since its not you don’t want to understand it,that’s fair enough.
Uncle Bob 1,
‘Eisbein’ (pigs foot) is a traditional German delicacy still eaten today by Germans, people of German descent and other Central Europeans influenced by German cuisine and their descendants.
I lived in Germany for 7 years and tried it several times when it was on offer.
Irish people also eat it but call it ‘pig’s foot’ not ‘eisbein’ for obvious reasons.
I am sure that other peoples eat it also, given that peasant peoples who kept their own pigs weren’t in the habit of wasting any edible foodstuffs.
Eating wasn’t invented by McDonalds.
Putting a qualifier such as ‘cultural’ before another word narrows the meaning in a specific way. It does not make use of the terms ‘genocide’ and ‘cultural genocide’ interchangeable.
the development of language in human was to convey clarity of meaning between humans to further social cohesion. Meaning and ever more specific meaning matters. Meanings are not interchangeable.
You are making a case for fudging specific meaning if not dispensing with it altogether, just as dishonest politicians do when they are trying to deceive the electorate into voting for them and their fraudulent policies in a deliberate con-job.
Saker asked a question, ‘how did we get here?
This is part of the answer, a deliberate scam by slimy people perpetrated on others who didn’t think to question the very dodgy assertions of an authorititive voice.
You are doing that here.
I believe we were talking about European-Americans in the US. And let me be more specific,the US Southern European-Americans. I’ve lived more of my life here than anywhere else.And not a single European-American that I know would consider the eating of pig’s feet as a part of their culture,to be persevered. Anymore than eating dogs or cats would be popular among Chinese-Americans.I’m not going to say pigs feet are never eaten. I see them sometimes in stores. Always only a couple of packs of them. And usually in the “reduced” food area, because they don’t sell easily. As to your “snide” comment on McDonald’s. That would be funny, if there weren’t hundreds (or more) McDonald’s all over Europe.Even Russia is said to be one of the big McDonald’s money makers Worldwide.So “take the log out of your eye,before complaining about the splinter in someone else’s”.
Even though the word genocide is from ancient Greek and Latin. The word is from the 20th Century. To be exact,1944,invented by the same person who also invented the term “cultural genocide” to expand the useage.
“In 1944, Raphael Lemkin created the term genocide in his book Axis Rule in Occupied Europe. The book describes the implementation of Nazi policies in occupied Europe, and cites earlier mass killings.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide
“Cultural genocide or cultural cleansing is a concept that lawyer Raphael Lemkin distinguished in 1944 as a component of genocide. ”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_genocide
So baring that in mind. I’d think your comment fits more into the “You are making a case for fudging specific meaning if not dispensing with it altogether, just as dishonest politicians do when they are trying to deceive the electorate into voting for them and their fraudulent policies in a deliberate con-job.”
Again,you need to fix that “log” problem,before lecturing me about my perceived “by you” faults.
I do not disagree with your view that it is not smart to let in so much immigrants.
You should stop assuming things like that I am a non-Europe lol, or that I want genocide on Europe or that I cannot imagine of a reversed scenario you are constantly mentioning. Read carefully what I am writing and how I am writing it.
I am stating the facts on the ground and what I believe to be the truth…..without emotions and even without opinion.
As for this issue of switching shoes and imagining of a reverse situation where Europeans are committing genocide against neighboring regions and continents……I believe the Europeans have done their best to colonize and suck the life out of the other continents.
Besides, no genocide is being committed by others against the Europeans, and the Europeans themselves are allowing these immigrants to come in and they are themselves not having children and families.
If other nations in the neighboring continents would also have such policies and being in such a scenario (rich, open-borders, a possibility to become a citizen, negative population growth) then obviously people would be flocking to such nations too….even White Europeans……it is only logic.
In some of your previous posts you mentioned not being of European descent. That is what I was referring to. So I can only accept what you’ve said in the past. If that wasn’t correct,so be it. Japan seems to have the right policy. They refuse to stop being Japanese. And something like 98% of the Japanese are ethnic Japanese still,in an age of “globalism”. Political correctness is less important to them than their cultural survival.China and Korea seem to feel that way too.The West for some insane reason can’t seem to grasp that.
I had never heard any of this stuff before about Lincoln, supposedly the great benefactor of blacks. Live and learn.
———————-
The following statements are all statements that are in Abe Lincoln’s Collected Works:
“I have said that the separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation [of the white and black races] . . . Such separation . . . must be affected by colonization” [sending blacks to Liberia or Central America]. (Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln vol. II, p. 409).
“Let us be brought to believe it is morally right, and . . . favorable to . . . our interest, to transfer the African to his native clime.” (Collected Works, vol. II, p. 409).
“I am not nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races. I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people” (Collected Works, vol. III, pp. 145-146).
How did Lincoln in the face of his own words and deeds get to be the hero who liberated blacks from slavery? The Emancipation Proclamation did not free a single slave, as Lincoln’s Secretary of State complained. It was a war measure that only applied to slaves under the jurisdiction of the Confederacy in hopes of fomenting a slave rebellion that would pull Southern soldiers off the front lines to rush to the protection of their wives and children. In 1861 the year the North invaded the South, President Lincoln said, “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so” (First Inaugural Address). In 1862 during the war, Lincoln wrote to Horace Greeley: “If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it.”
Lincoln was elevated to the undeserved position of black liberator by the historical lies made up by white liberal/progressive/leftists who hate the South.
“In Atlanta they are talking about erasing the heads of the South’s generals carved into Stone Mountain. Mount Rushmore in South Dakota will be next.”
If statuary is to be properly cleansed of all representations that might be judged as politically incorrect by current ‘Social Justice Warrior’ standards, it’s going to require a lot more effort to rectify the over-representation of the most obvious ‘oppressor group’ among them. I wonder if the non-white stallions will be spared when all of their white male riders are toppled. Probably not https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/03/28/nyregion/28XP-GIRL-01p/28XP-GIRL-01p-master768.jpg
Those whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.
Mr Roberts writes: “Ajamu Baraka’s conclusion is “that in order for the world to live, the 525-year-old white supremacist Pan-European, colonial/capitalist patriarchy must die.” It is not difficult to see in this statement that genocide is the solution for the white plague upon humanity.”
When I read that statement, I read it as clearly stating that an outmoded ideology, i.e. a set of ideas, must die and yet Mr Roberts translates it as a call for genocide which is nowhere indicated.
Outmoded, outworn ideologies often do die or at least wither away to irrelevance if they no longer serve any useful purpose. How does that equate to genocide, particularly when it isn’t mentioned in the original quote?
Agreed. Ajamu Baraka understands clearly and speaks wisely. I don’t hear him as an ethnic cleansing enthusiast.
I first heard Ajamu Baraka speak during the Presidential debates in 2016. He is a brilliant person who explains anti-imperialism very clearly and rationally, and he basically converted me to his side. I recommend looking up his writings very much.
https://blackagendareport.com/story-charlottesville-was-written-blood-ukraine
How far is the line from the “cleansing” of ideas to the “cleansing” of people.You might want to ask the nazis,Bolsheviks,or Khemer Rouge,about how far that line is.And double check with the Armenians and Yazdi about that. In today’s World ,ISIS shows us how a cultural jihad moves very quickly to a genocide of people.Lopping the heads off statues first, and then people are next.
i had my intuitions, but now i know clearly:
uncle bob 1 is PCR. get it? robert = bob (for short)
the signs were there all along – the persistant calls for “China/Russia to urgently do something…”,
but the latest comments top the line.
Haha,you really flatter me,but certainly insult Roberts with that comment.
Donald Trump in rescue of the DNC establishment!
http://bit.ly/2uOnrVl
The problem I see with articles like that is they don’t make sense.They foolishly think that if one side committing violence is not racist they should get a pass on that. The reports and videos clearly show massive violence on both sides there.And yet the one side is let off the hook because the other side are despicable. They both are guilty and Trump was 100% correct to condemn violence on “both sides”. There is no law that says its OK to beat people because I don’t like them. That’s the liberal argument in 2017. But in the 1930’s Germany it was the same type of argument from the nazis. It was wrong then,and its wrong now.Its a disgrace that liberals who “claim” to believe in law would dare make that argument.The second point is the constant attacks on Trump as some kind of racist. And without a single bit of proof to that. Being against illegal immigration is “not racist”. And in fact being “for” illegal immigration could be considered racist. By encouraging and working to bring into your country a specific racial or ethnic group.There are points that could be made about Trump being a bad President (like all of them were). But attacking him for things he “isn’t”, is not the way to go.
I believe that the end of the US empire would be a positive thing for the world. But what we are witnessing is not the end of the empire:
There is a Weimar republic feel to the US right now with its financial/ economic woes, political infighting and extremism. The “deplorables” and white conservatives, who seem to be the only people who actually oppose foreign military interventions, are being ruthlessly attacked and sidelined. Instead of dismantling the US empire, what is being dismantled is the internal i.e. domestic resistance to the empire. I, for one, feel very worried about what comes next.
Thanks for that, Serbian girl. Most folks here seem to have gone already overboard and the storm hasn’t even come yet. : )
I like the nautical metaphor.
PCR is overboard in his pessimism.
Other whites are way overboard in their self-flagellation, to the same degree that most of us are in denial that our forebears did anything wrong.
I choose a course between these two opposites:
Just as Afro-Americans born in the last 50 years didn’t have a chance to suffer “300 years of slavery” by being born way too late for that and not having lived nearly long enough to chalk up such Sufferor Credentials, I haven’t had the opportunity to commit the crimes of white people that came 300-200-or 100 before me. Even if I were so inclined to identify with them or ANY other particular skin color. Which I am not.
I reject guilt by association and both guilt and hate mongers as being equally idiotic.
to Serbian girl:
I agree with your statement i.e. “feel very worried about what comes next.”
In my opinion if a state has over-debted itself and an overblown military without an economy which can swallow it without problems the necessary step would be – as history tells us – a war in order to lessen some problems.
However, as USA hasn’t learnt over the time (in this regard it is easy to go back and see how often they had – without any direct war – econimic desasters) how to handle economy and balance the budget sheets there will be no real problem solved.
History tells – the blow usually comes if a state is without balance – in this PCR is right – and usually eats itself from within. If USA will start a war it will loose it simply because the inner strength isn’t existing. Why ? Because first of all the “elite” tells that the population is “dispensable” and second because a war started with the hypocrisy as well as arrogance towards other cultures and most of all towards our earth cannot not win. Any country – equal in power – will fight in order not being subordinated by USA. This is a much different point.
monika
Very astute words, SB.
When I try to explain to people who say “Trump must go; he is a madman,”
and I say, He is not a “madman.” He is under extreme pressue to follow a militaristic agenda simply to save himself and his presidency.
Then comes the question: Why? Why do they want to destroy him?
Me:These are deep state players who want to continue to rule the World from Washington, DC, and military bases around the world.
Next comes the questions, or challenge: But why, why do they want to do this? (the implication being: That doesn’t make sense, so none of what you say makes sense.)
I am kind of stumped, because I don’t know the answer. Why do these deep state actors want to—and think they can–control the rest of the world?
My only answer, but it sounds weak and unconvincing, is “Because the MIC and the elites makes a lot of money from these conflicts.”
I try to explain that this is an attack not on Trump but actually on the presidency.
“But why, why??”
Seems to me like the problem is not Trump’s putative “madness” but the madness of the Dr. Strangeloves of different niches in the deep state.
Trump was a fool not to surround himself with an effective team.
I think that must flow from his general ignorance of how government works, what the executive branch consists of, etc. Of course, Obama, too, was “led” after his election by Bush holdovers. It would probably have been better if Trump had been “led” by more Obama holdovers, but Obama scotched this himself. The hatred of Trump and outrage at losing was too great.
But, just finished “I Heard You Paint Houses,” on the story behind the Hoffa rubout. By Charles Brandt. Fantastic book, and exposes so much about the American state/culture. It is like a full-body PET scan of the inside workings of American politics and also culture. All who post at this site should read. Also, PCR. It is also, BTW, a great read.
Includes why JFK was rubbed out, and how.
Other patsies, who supplied the three sharpshooter weapons. The book consists ca. 50% of oral history by the guy who took out Hoffa, Frank Sheeran, and 50% the author’s analysis. Sheeran taook out his friend Hoffa. Explains why JFK was taken out partially to sideline Bobby (or course there were other agendas, but the overlap between the CIA and the Mob was pretty big). And how Oswald also was rubbed out, and why. The role of the mob. Sheeran was another patsy. The modus operandi of the the Mob. Working with the CIA. Joe Kennedy Sr. (a mobster) couldn’t control his sons. So, JFK “got his house painted.” that way, Bobby was also taken out as his AG. This is how politics is done in t his country. this why journalists just as Michael Hastings, Gary Webb, others such as Seth Rich and Shawn Davis get their houses painted. This book explains clearly why eye witnesses never “see” anything. Seems like the Mob mentality and MO has metasticized.
The USA is in deep shit.
Katherine
Katherine,
Thanks much for your detailed recommendation of I Heard You Paint Houses — I will seek this out.
As an attempt to answer to your question: “Why do these deep state actors want to — and think they can — control the rest of the world?” … I wish to offer a thought, which draws upon the history of our present conflict — more specifically, the Cold War. I suggest this because, in a nutshell, I think you already have hit the nail on the head when you refer to “the madness of the Dr. Strangeloves of different niches in the deep state”.
As you recall in Kubrick’s film, it’s the mad General Jack D. Ripper who attempts to corner the president into an all-out pre-emptive nuclear strike against the then-USSR, “for the sake of our country and our way of life”. The key phrase here, I think, is not the nationalistic “for the sake of our country” but rather the more abstract claim to “our way of life”.
Looking at the big picture, my sense is that the deeper agenda hasn’t really changed much since Cold War 1.0. A relatively small group of ruling elites, and the deep state actors that serve them, feel that “our way of life” is preeminent, and if it’s necessary to kill several hundred million Russians and Asians in nuclear fire to maintain “our way of life”, then so be it.
That is why they want all of this, then, simply to maintain “our way of life”.
Serbian girl
I think that is a very shrewd point.
Many people in the past have usually associated “the left” with being on the moral high ground, anti-war, pro-normal working people etc and have quite possibly even seen themselves as being “on the left”.
Actually if you listen to intelligent alt-right discourse, much of it is common sense and reasonable and the same for some left wing ideas. Both groups actually have many similar problems ( eg victims of a financial elite ) though they are expressed differently.
If these people were allowed to talk to each other and realise this – that they have more in common than divides them – they would present a force of resistance to the elite which would be overwhelming.
This situation – of rational dialogue amongst compatriots about the problems in the country today – therefore absolutely must not be allowed to happen as sanity and reason are the antithesis of all that the global elite stand for.
Countering this powerful negativity and forcing sanity to prevail is the biggest challenge the American people face.
It is terrified of rational discussion and people communicating positively amongst themselves. So it is just a blizzard of hate-noise
We must discard labels and analyse situations by the facts.
Yes,I see that too. The riots in the streets with these “protest marches” on both sides. Reminds me of nothing more, than the nazi-communist street fighting in the late 1920’s and early 1930’s.There too the elites let the police stand by. And later they let the police favor the nazi bands in the fighting. Once the average German got tired of the street violence, and demanded “law and order”. Hitler was “able” to fill that bill. As the saying goes “those that forget history ,or doomed to repeat it”. The PTB know that most Americans don’t understand history,so that works for them.
I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.
In the National Guard (Army or Air)
The National Guard Oath of service is listed below:
I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the State of (STATE NAME) against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the Governor of (STATE NAME) and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to law and regulations. So help me God.
Some assumptions will be severely tested.
Those, in the cityes of the nation better get off their idiot-tubes, and make some preparations.
Sure, you can march 40 000 to 50 against a free speach rally, see if we care…but you’ll work up a mighty appetite from all that screaming and hollering.
I suggest, think long and hard what do you wish for, cos we, in the country have seen the unavoidability of exactly such a scenario, for many decades now.
I am actually surprised, that it has been delayed this long
Very simply put, in the coming festivities, your skin will b your uniform.
Do I like it?
Hell, nobody asked me before, if I liked what is going on…what’s the concern all of a sudden?
Pretty vacant idiology, but it closely resembles the organization of jailed populations.
So I say good luck to us all, that have it coming.
If I may be audacious and substitute the US theme, for a Russian one the justification for the interruption being justified by the content.
And good news is always welcome.
Joaquin Flores writes about the 4 recent US navy mishaps and then, referring to the quite bizarre 24 hour shutdown of all US naval operations, suggests that maybe just maybe, Russia has a weapon system involving electronics that can shut down the entire US navy – and more!
The thing is not do they have something like this, but are they using it to try to head off war?
Thanks to Russia, we might just avoid a nuclear war after all.
http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/08/breaking-us-navy-orders-halt-to-all.html
Level-of-Intrigue-wise this leaves the American soap opera way behind.
This thought went to my mind as well. Maybe fooling of the GPS satellite as well (the Iranians did that once to let the latest drone land in their country).
The US Navy can of course alsways hire Leonardo Caprio and Kate Winslet to help them with navigating ;-)
But I wouldn’t count out as well, that the US crew simply and arrogant thought ‘well,the other will change course for our mighty ship’. However, a tanker is not so manoeuvrable. The first 10 minutes or so nothing will happen on such a tanker.
Equipped with Sophisticated Radars and Sonar + very powerful Propulsion they can detect and evade any merchant ship, unless Sailing Deaf and Blind.
Forget Russian interference.
The US military, the navy in particular, has a serious drug problem. Perhaps they were stoned to deep stupor, and didn’t read their instruments?
I have heard stories about the dope in USN ships…but not recent stories.
Stuff from the 1990’s…”dead in his rack with the needle still in his arm”
The entire engine room watch tested and failed, but….”
And people who talk too much tend to fall overboard, at night…
And as a US Army contract worker (hey I needed the paycheck, I had kids…) I saw daily that with even minimal effort it was easy to get and use drugs, (even in the toilet at the Officer’s Club (I was shocked!))
So, yeah, I think that tin can skippers ought to stay out of the way of tankers and keep their glassy-eyed dope fiends below deck.
And, I ought to mention, Project Managers of “black projects” commit suicide by chainsaw…
I no longer would even think about working with those sort of people. They’re dangerous and insane.
Well Sputnik has a more simple view of these accidents – let’s say US exceptionalism at sea:
https://sputniknews.com/us/201708221056689316-us-navy-incidents/
….”There are dozens of ships passing through the Asian straits at the same time. But there are the rules of safety navigation that must not be ignored. But this is not the first incident of the kind. All of them arise from American exceptionalism and the ever growing US military presence in the global ocean. The US Navy regularly ignored navigation rules and endangers the safety of other countries’ ships,” ……….
Yeah but . . .
“A destroyer going through a difficult a passage like the Strait of Malacca would typically have half a dozen sailors, including two officers, on the bridge watching for the lights of other ships, (that didn’t happen) said retired Navy Capt. Bernard D. Cole, an adjunct professor at Georgetown University and professor emeritus at the National War College.
In such clogged traffic, it would also be common for the commanding officer or the executive officer, the two most senior officers on board, to be on the bridge,(doubtful they were) he said.
There would also be a navigator and other enlisted men in the combat information center scanning radar”
A further update from a Russian military expert Oleg Ponomarenko:
https://sputniknews.com/military/201708231056708443-us-destroyer-mccain-collision-negligence/
“It is sheer negligence that stands behind a US Navy destroyer’s recent collision with an oil tanker…..”
and the US response – it removes 7th Fleet commander over ‘loss of confidence’ after McCain collision:
https://www.rt.com/usa/400593-navy-remove-aucoin-mccain/
Indeed. A former colleague of mine has worked a few years on oil tankers, and actually steered once a large oil tanker through the small Street of Malacca. Some 200 ships per day are passing there, so multiple lookouts besides radar systems are no luxury.
A Navy destroyer of this class has multiple radar systems, alarms, Aegis. And many sailors.
This whole ‘hacking’ story is pure BS imho, and just a clumsy try to cover up for pure negligence.
Although it is quite similar to the USA foreign politics…
Btw, how do you ‘hack’ binoculars?
It’s easy to make cool criticisms about collisions at sea…well, we were not there…were we?
But the USN really does seem to have some sort of a “problem”, don’t they?
I, a man with considerable boat-handling experience and some in ships, cannot quite understand how, or why (?) a small warship can collide with an oil tankers…were they trying to ram? Asleep, loaded? Or was the collision deliberate? I do not know, nor even have a clue. But the story is “funny”.
Having been raised in the Southern USA, I’m privy to the real histories. My family lived it. It is really sad if they’re doing what PCR believes. For me it is simply the final stage of what the North cynically called ‘Reconstruction’ which was never anything but the pogrom for turning the South into a Republican fastness. I believe that ‘Reconstruction’ was successful, the Frankenstein that they created is now out of their control.
PCR is right about the Northern motive to retain tariffs against British competition. But that was a highly legitimate motive. Britain organized the conditions leading to the war, (something PCR fails to mention) in order to force free trade on the intended split union preventing the North from catching up with industrialization. Leaving the formerly united states undeveloped.
Just like the angloamerican establishment has maintained large part of the world in poverty. Boh the French and Russian ‘revolutions’ were likewise the outcomes of British special operations. The South on the other hand didnt mind to sell cotton without tariffs and to endulge in a life as landed gentry, presumably hoping to copy Britains upper classes.
Otherwise I agree about the anglosaxons being genocidal( and admired by Hitler.)
But I dont think the present generation of ordinary americans are to blame and I hope they will bring themselves together and stand up for their rights and not let this pessimistic perspective be realized.
“in order to force free trade on the intended split union preventing the North from catching up with industrialization. Leaving the formerly united states undeveloped.”
Right.
This was the policy of Britain.
They did it in India. You cannot understand the role of cotton and Britain in the Civil War if you don’t understand the role of cotton textiles in world trade, the industrisl revolution, and Britain’s (actually, still the East India Company’s) policies in Mughal India.
You can read about it even at Wikipedia.
Much that PCR spotlights is true. But still, he does not present the big picture.
As has been noted (as I have noted) on other threads, the Civil War was fought as much for the future of the lands of the West as for the freedom of slaves, per se.
After the Civil War, Northern industrialists did start investing in the industrialization of the South—especially the textile industry. A major driver of the industrial revolution generally.
“The largest manufacturing industry in the Mughal Empire was cotton textile manufacturing, which included the production of piece goods, calicos, and muslins, available unbleached and in a variety of colours. The cotton textile industry was responsible for a large part of the empire’s international trade.[13] India had a 25% share of the global textile trade in the early 18th century.[14] ***Indian cotton textiles were the most important manufactured goods in world trade in the 18th century, consumed across the world from the Americas to Japan.[15]**** The most important center of cotton production was the Bengal Subah province, particularly around its capital city of Dhaka.[16]”
. . .
“Indian cotton textiles, particularly those from Bengal, continued to maintain a competitive advantage up until the 19th century. In order to compete with India, Britain invested in labour-saving technical progress, while implementing protectionist policies such as bans and tariffs to restrict Indian imports.[28] At the same time, the East India Company’s rule in India contributed to its deindustrialization, opening up a new market for British goods,[28] while the capital amassed from Bengal after its 1757 conquest was used to invest in British industries such as textile manufacturing and greatly increase British wealth.[29][30][31] British colonization also forced open the large Indian market to British goods, which could be sold in India without tariffs or duties, compared to local Indian producers who were heavily taxed, while raw cotton was imported from India without tariffs to British factories which manufactured textiles from Indian cotton, giving Britain a monopoly over India’s large market and cotton resources.[32][28][33] India served as both a significant supplier of raw goods to British manufacturers and a large captive market for British manufactured goods.[34] Britain eventually surpassed India as the world’s leading cotton textile manufacturer in the 19th century.[28]”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_cotton
The South was part of Britain’s global economic hegemonic imperial plan whereby raw materials were shipped to Britain, local industries were made kaputt, profits were skimmed off the colonies and capital collected in Britain and was invested there. This was already the basic picture in the South and would have continued more intensely had the East India Company gotten a foothold in the Confederacy. The industrialization of the North would also have been negatively impacted. We know how jealously Britain protected its status as the most advanced industrialized nation. We know what happened to the upstart Germany, which was overshadowing Britain.
Naturally the North was not going to stand for having an economically hostile power all along its southern border and building competing transportation infrastructure from Virginia west through Texas and on to California and the Pacific. It might as well have lost the Revolution.
Just as Britain did not stand for letting Germany outrun it. For long.
Let’s be realistic.
Katherine
It is undeniable that the British Empire was built on exactly this, enabled by the Royal Navy’s iron control of maritime trade and trade routes and the East India Company’s opening and control of new markets. All backed up by military muscle.
What is interesting today is that a similar battle is being waged for control of trade routes and why certain areas of the globe, like the South China sea, Persian Gulf etc. are still flashpoints for trouble.
Its also why China’s OBOR proposal is a game-changer, potentially shifting the balance of finally from the so-called ‘sea-peoples’.
Lost the word ‘power’ somehow, not one of my favourites, from the final sentence. Call it a Jungian slip. :)
Should read:
Its also why China’s OBOR proposal is a game-changer, potentially shifting the balance of power finally from the so-called ‘sea-peoples’.
Is interesting that Lincoln’s murder seems to have forestalled the repatriation to Africa of the Negros then resident in US, which Lincoln was well into planning, even to discussing ship charters…
The murder had a political effect that made divide and rule a sure result…as we see to-day.
Where was “M I 6”?
You bet!
Katherine you wrote a solid piece, thanks Ms K!
I had a bit of confusion there: does LZ99 mean M 16 as in the US rifle or MI 6 as in British Military Intelligence Section 6?
If the latter, they (or rather their precursors) were certainly in there somewhere, meddling with the best of them. However they wouldn’t have been called MI 6 then and aren’t officially called that now.
https://www.sis.gov.uk/
Queen Elizabeth 1st built and used a vast network of spies in the 16th century to help her build her empire.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Walsingham
About the M 16, I am clueless. ;-)
LZ will take the bait and bite..
In colloquial speech for simplicity it seem like ” M eye six” ( MI 6 ) was the descriptive term that seemed best, though naturally everybody knows that in 1865 the English spies went under another rubric…
And everyone knows that the M-16 rifle can, ah, somewhat later…but Friend, you have telegraphed that you knew that…and thus told everyone what you are doing and, generally, your purpose.
That’s nice. Thanks.
LZ
Ok, this thesis of mine may be a bit fanciful, but here goes:
The competence of the US military in 1860 as well as 2016 rests on the historic service of members of military families stretching back to the Revolutionary war. These families come from the South and their values are very traditional and very, well for lack of a better word, old time male in the best sense–chivalry, honor, loyalty, integrity.
The techie folks rather mock this . When you have a naval ship that is run ultimately by computer and not by a human nexus of command, competence and loyalty, you can get mechanical mayhem. One has to study the Civil War to understand why the North had to resort to a scorched war against the Land and people of the South in order to prevail and why these latter day statues represent the national peace that was reconstructed afterwards. Later, there were more ugly political deals crafted to keep the South a poor, agrarian, quaint backwater with a source of cheap labor both white and black.
To label 150 years later this cultural tradition as racist amounts to historical reductionism at the best and obscurantist at the worse. Their military core tradition may be just what saves us ultimately.
Here is a fuller quote from Lincoln that Mr. Roberts used. Lincoln said it during his debates with Stephen Douglas.
” I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, [applause]—that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”
“Even more astonishingly, Marjorie Cohn, together with 100% of the liberal/progressive/left are blind to the fact that they have helped the military/security complex destroy the only leader who advocated peace instead of conflict with the other major nuclear power. Cohn is so deranged by hatred of Trump that she thinks it is Trump who will bring nuclear war by normalizing relations with Russia.”
– Once they took themselves on this boat of lies, with more and more political elites joining the chorus on putting the finger on one wound, new bleeding wounds comes to the surface. Whom to blame other than Trump ? They set a trap for themselves by trying to make Trump to fall in that trap. Now the situation will become more and more difficult to handle. They could impeach Trump who, by the way, has executed everything they ordered to him, therefore it is a real possibility that Trump’s fall will bring them down too. Even if they get Pence as a replacement, will not change the overall situation in good. They will point fingers at each other when the times arrives.
Sadly,its not an accident that “Marjorie Cohn” comes from a Jewish background. Both the neo-con elites (probably 80-90% ,certainly way over 50%) ,and the main SJW types all come from Jewish backgrounds. Must we believe that is somehow a coincidence,or is there a pattern there. We don’t know “for sure”. Though we do know, beyond question that its true.
‘Though we do know, beyond question that its true’.
No, we don’t.
What you are stating here is a belief, your personal belief which is no more beyond question than any other person’s personal belief.
The fact that many other people might also hold the same belief doesn’t make it true either. Truth is not the result of a popularity contest.
Please be more clear.
For someone so good at writing. And quick to argue. Your reading comprehension is sadly lacking. But let me explain it so maybe you can grasp it. Most of the neo-cons come from Jewish backgrounds. The list of neo-con promoters with Jewish names or bio’s is almost endless. Now maybe that is a coincidence, or maybe not. That we can’t be sure of (though very doubtful). But that there are so many of them with Jewish backgrounds is beyond question. Does that make it easier for you to understand.And no that isn’t an “opinion” of mine. Its a fact based on who those people are we read about constantly. If you dispute that, feel free to present proof that I’m mistaken.
Uncle Bob 1,
You are a master at the sweeping statement and the painting of a picture in broad brush strokes. That doesn’t substitute for accuracy, at all.
You set up the original statement and provide no proof except your belief that it is true.
You set up the original statement, the onus of providing credible back-up for your sweeping statements and thus proving your point is on you, not me.
I agree with most of your general conclusions, I take issue with the way you presenting them as ‘received truth’ from on high. They certainly are not that.
BTW, I really don’t like to argue, I’m retired and arguing is like being back at work.
Next time I say the Sun is out during the Day and the Moon at night. Should I give you a list of sources for proof that’s correct? I’d like to consider you an intelligent person. You certainly seem to be. And have good writing ability.Easily surpassing mine. Granted that is my ” broad stroke” opinion. Not backed up by sources,so I could be wrong of course. But assuming that I’m correct there. Why,since this site has talked (maybe 1,000 times,another sweeping number,but close) about the Jewish dominance among neo-cons.Would you need for me to list them as proof of a well known case.That would be a time consuming distraction on a topic so well known. Something I would expect to run into from someone practicing a form of hasbara. Is that maybe the case here.But this once, to make you happy,I’ll list the most notorious Jewish neo-cons. Who dominate that group in the US.Here is a small list of part of them,the bigger more well known ones. And it doesn’t include the many Jewish neo-cons in smaller posts.
Richard Perle
Paul Wolfowitz
Douglas Feith
Michael Ledeen
Scooter Libby
Charles Krauthammer
Stephen Bryen
David Frum
Robert Kagan
David Wurmser
Dov Zakheim
Henry Kissenger
Norman Podhoretz
John Podhoretz
Elliot Abrams
Frederick Kagan
Donald Kagan
Alan Dershowtiz
Daniel Pipes
Eliot Cohen
Bill Kristol
Irving Kristol
Max Boot
James Schlesinger
Marc Grossman
Joshua Bolten
Victoria Nuland (Not in the source. But so well known as the “cookie Queen” in Ukraine. I don’t think I need more proof on her.)
http://hugequestions.com/Eric/TFC/FromOthers/list-of-neocons-for-Iraq-war.htm
It’s somewhat disappointing that despite the near constant reference to “neocons” it’s clear that there is very little understanding of who they are and what their goals are (beyond that they are crazy American war-mongers). George W. Bush, admittedly not the most intellectually impressive President, did not himself know. Instead he asked his father:
“What’s a neocon?”
“Do you want names, or a description?” answered 41.
“Description.”
“Well,” said the former president of the United States, “I’ll give it to you in one word: Israel.”
A number of books have been written about the neoconservative movement. See, for example, Jacob Heilbrunn’s “They Knew They Were Right”.
I’ve already posted a few links which are useful but here they are again:
Project for the New American Century signatories here:
http://www.publiceye.org/pnac_chart/pnac.html
For neoconservatism in cultural context Kevin MacDonald is good:
http://www.kevinmacdonald.net/understandji-3.htm
For recent historical political involvement of neoconservatives the following reference is useful.
http://www.voltairenet.org/article178638.html
Yes, it was said sarcastically of Libby by someone in the Government. That he either worked for Israel or the US depending on which day it was. Rather pathetic to know a citizen of your country is working against your interests for another country. While they are part of your Government. It the past those people would be called traitors. I guess that is a situation in reverse of the US stooges leaders that work for the US in many other countries. A bit of “payback” there.
Further upwards in this thread, you and UB1 had a vary good conversation on the genocide issue. This term has been defined (as noted on the above conversation) at the UN 1948, but the roots are dating 1945 with the end of ww2 and Nürnberg trials. Regarding the genocide : any genocide can be questioned or denied – even encouraged to do so in certain cases – without any consequences, but there is one genocide which cannot be questioned or (god forbid) denied without getting a severe punishment under a law agreed upon and applied openly in many countries (mostly EU). This is the biggest card ever obtained by the Zionists. What is disturbing, is the fact that this card is being used by every important political player, almost everywhere on earth, aiding the power of the Zionists and that is the biggest trap ever set to the mankind. Whenever is being evoked mainly in Europe and America by some protagonists, it provokes fear and retreat on the other side, making their heads bow down and remain silent.
I agree with you entirely, ioan, and respect your grasp of the situation as well as your more personal attributes.
I don’t have a simple answer, except to keep plugging away, speaking our respective truths in a non-aggressive manner while educating ourselves on the finer points.
I’ve been battling all my life as a union organiser, a thankless task maybe but worth it to me because I believe in the possibility of a truly more equal world, free of the worst aspects of oppression.
I have been apolitical for 40 years but us minions of all stripes (including non-elite Jews) would be far better served by uniting and combating our common enemy.
The North American Civil War, by Karl Marx, Die Presse, October 1861
“The whole movement was and is based, as one sees, on the slave question. Not in the sense of whether the slaves within the existing slave states should be emancipated outright or not, but whether the twenty million free men of the North should submit any longer to an oligarchy of three hundred thousand slaveholders; whether the vast Territories of the republic should be nurseries for free states or for slavery; finally, whether the national policy of the Union should take armed spreading of slavery in Mexico, Central and South America as its device.”
“Even more astonishingly, Marjorie Cohn, together with 100% of the liberal/progressive/left are blind to the fact that they have helped the military/security complex destroy the only leader who advocated peace instead of conflict with the other major nuclear power. Cohn is so deranged by hatred of Trump that she thinks it is Trump who will bring lnuclear war by normalizing relations with Russia.”
Obama, the darling of the liberal/progressive/left, also spoke of peace (without believing a single word of it, of course), so Trump is definitely not “the only leader who advocated peace”. You merely assume Trump was/is serious about peace. Amusingly, poor Trump is singled out by the liberal/progressive/left’s opprobrium sinply because he is a nominally powerful white male. Now, given the God-awful history of the US, a substantial dose of Schadenfreude seems totally justified as does the “cultural revolution” against the war criminals’ memorials. You wrote:
“Clearly, if we are taking down statues, we can’t stop with Robert E. Lee. We will have to take down the Statues of Lincoln, Grant, Sherman, Sheridan, and all the rest of the Union war criminals who implemented what they themselves called ‘the final solution to the Indian problem.’ “
Spot on and hats off, PCR!
Why would any one of sane mind think confederates are friends of Russia. Of all the various pindo groupings, those of the confederate mindset have been the most consistently hostile, in fact, they have been fanatically hostile. Actually, why would anyone, for that matter, besides other confederates, consider confederates can be trusted to be in it for anyone but themselves?
But on the other hand, confederates could be of benefit to Russia in an indirect way, as they generally are not the sharpest nor creative of mind. If one is faced with certain conflict, it’s always prudent to encourage to the command the least challenging of one’s enemy prior to the conflict going critical.
Vot tak, it’s a little more complicated than that. The “confederates” as you call them are some of the greatest POTENTIAL allies of Russia. Their morals, ethics, and general world-view are more compatible than not with Russian civilization. They also supply the vast majority of our military manpower. However, as you pointed out, they are not the sharpest tools in the shed, generally speaking. This means that a concerted effort will need to be made over many years to help them see that Russia is not the “atheist, communist Evil Empire” that their daddies trained to fight in the Fulda Gap. As an American I’m much more concerned about my own “people:” highly educated coastal urbanites. We as a rule are a cancer on the world, consuming more and more and producing nothing; and will never accept Russian civilization as a valid alternative to our secular humanist, indispensable, exceptional culture.
I am an associate scholar of the Abbeville Institute in McClellanville, South Carolina. If you want to know more about what Mr. Paul Craig Roberts wrote, go to our webiste.
http://www.abbevilleinstitute.org
“This doubles the indictment against Thomas Jefferson and adds all of the Founding Fathers to the indictment.”
“I have, through my whole life, held the practice of slavery in such abhorrence, that I have never owned a negro or any other slave, though I have lived for many years in times, when the practice was not disgraceful, when the best men in my vicinity thought it not inconsistent with their character, and when it has cost me thousands of dollars for the labor and subsistence of free men, which I might have saved by the purchase of negroes at times when they were very cheap.”
~ Founder and President John Adams, 1819
Adams knew that slavery was a huge, multinational institution, and it could not be ended at the drop of a hat. It would be like ending Wal-Mart slavery. Granted, Adams also said that, “Banks have done more injury to the religion, morality, tranquility, prosperity, and even wealth of the nation than they can have done or ever will do good.” So, I guess he needs a trip down the memory hole, too…
If America descends into Civil War, then that actually force the Americans to look inward and stop bombing, invading, regime changing, destabilizing, and economically raping other nations.
From the views of those who are on the receiving end of America’s unending crimes against humanity, a second American Civil War is an existential necessity.
America as a nation is an planetary-level threat.
The “United” States deserves to be broken into a million pieces and left to face its fate.
“… that actually force the Americans to look inward and stop bombing, invading, regime changing, destabilizing, and economically raping other nations.”
Doesn’t this assume there are powerful sides in the war which legitimately oppose the banksters and their racket warfare…? From the looks of things, the cartel is trying to control the anti-Trump side and the pro-Trump side (let’s be honest: Trump himself is controlled opposition).
If the crooks succeed in leading all major sides, why stop the racket wars at all? If anything, such a “civil war’s” main purpose would be solidifying stronger support for the racket and shielding the people really behind it all.
“War is the greatest injustice. We are not fighting the culprits. Those who pay, who incite, who use the media to make people turn against each other — this is who we should fight against.”
~ Donbass militia member Alexey Mozgovoy, 2015
The view in Russia on the American jihad against the statues:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=517&v=83T_btxCFaY
Your link doesn’t work.
Perhaps you meant this one, the previous video?
Clarity and precision make a difference in many things, ‘Discernment’ is knowing which of those things matter to people and which don’t.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83T_btxCFaY
Strange it just worked for me, I tried it after reading your post. But thank you,yes that is the same one.
Most of this video repeats what Americans already know, but I liked the quote at 0:26-0:49.
This is the true danger: that American history becomes foreign or evil to Americans.
You have no one to blame but yourself for believing anything that lying POS tells you. Maybe if you had lived in the metro area you would have been familiar enough with Trump to know that he has always been and always will be nothing more than a big mouth and a big ego. And also a thief.
Brilliant article. Enjoyed it very much. Looking at things in the US through my European eyes, it would appear that the US is destroying itself both internally, and on the international scene. The neo-cons who rule Washington and Wall Street have acquired imperial tastes, and the rest of the world does not like it at all. The latest anti-Russian sanctions were a nasty shock to Europe, as European firms have also been targeted. Instead of driving a wedge between Russia and Western Europe, all the neocons have done is to drive Western Europe closer to Russia. No, this will not happen overnight, but the road now leads to Moscow.
Lincoln was perhaps the Otto von Bismarck of North America
This is a very good artice and true to form, i.e., the truth. Not much to add about the article but as a warning.
Attention Marxist scum: if the “Camp Saints” do not get you the rest of us should.
I am a massive fan of Paul Craig Roberts, but this is the most depressing thing I have ever read. I am not claiming that any of it is not true – or partially true – but PCR’s piece presents the human race as if it is totally evil and always has been.
Well, maybe it has, and maybe it is, and maybe it always will be..
But I have lived on this planet for well over 60 years, and travelled throughout much of it throughout most of my life – as a tourist -but often on the unbeaten track hitching rides where PCR may never have been…
I have found the human race, exceptionally nice, warm and welcoming, often when we mainly communicate by gesture sign language – a little bit of English, French and German – and maybe a tiny little bit of Spanish and Russian – and a tiny bit of Arabic but mainly smiles eye contact hands arms and gestures…
In my experience the human race is not how Paul Craig Roberts describes it. It may have been before he was born – and it maybe in his experience in the USA.
I am English, and live in England.
It seems to me the USA has gone completely insane, but most of the rest of the rest of the world is O.K. – or would be if the USA would stop dropping bombs on us.
Tony
If you find that depressing, take a look at this, came out yesterday:
The US military project for the world
by Thierry Meyssan
http://www.voltairenet.org/article197541.html
The US elite has gone insane. The US has the largest internal and external debt in the world, the US Fed is printing the dollar backed by nothing, and worse for Wall Street, both Russia and China are preparing to introduce gold backed rubles and yuans, which will automatically cancel the US dollar as the worlds reserve currency. China and Russia are already trading in domestic currencies. Now you know why we have so much vilification directed against Putin, and China. As one analyst has stated, Washington DC will not go down without a fight in order to preserve Americas dominant position in the world. The word “dominant” should be translated as “imperial”.
Really good summary. “without a fight?”
How indeed will the mighty US fight it’s way out of it’s currency becoming worthless and unwanted?
Ora i bambini dormono
Nel letto di Sand Creek…
–Fabrizio De Andrè
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXhYK4j2d84