The reverse, of course, was also true: when I was in England, the average Brit had a ludicrous concept of what America was like. Al Capone and Billy the Kid combined to form their conception of a typical American.
So it’s dangerous for an American to make snap judgments about Europe, especially when there is no such thing as “Europe”. Despite what the mandarins of the EU would like you to believe, there is simply a collection of different countries and cultures which happen to lie in the same geographical area.
Since I began my focus on Europe in this space a couple of years ago, I have made it my policy to let various Europeans speak for themselves as much as possible. This is true even when it comes to Britain — most of my knowledge of the place is almost forty years out of date, and not really relevant to current events.
Thus, when I assert something about Europe, I try to make sure it is well-sourced by the folks on the ground, and I rely on the generous assistance of my European correspondents and translators to help me get it right.
With all this in mind, I present the opinion of our esteemed Danish correspondent and translator, Kepiblanc, taken from the comments on my earlier post. He was there last week in Brussels for the Counterjihad Summit, and now offers his own take on the Vlaams Belang controversy:
Charles Johnson’s blog “Little Green Footballs” is an archetypical American blog. Charles and his commenters seem to know American politics extremely well, but know next to nothing about Europe. The standard outcry is “Europe is doomed” whenever some stupid Eurocrat appears in theater. From time to time this mantra even looks like the wishful thinking and wet dreams of many Americans.- - - - - - - - -
And suddenly Charles and most of the commenters have gone into full moonbat mode, seeing ghosts and specters everywhere, especially in Vlaams Belang and Sverigesdemokraterna, thus labeling them “white supremacists” and even “Nazis”.
To me it seems that Charles is hoisting his flag of purity and innocence so high that his feet can’t reach the ground anymore. And of course the Muslim organisations such as CAIR noticed and haven’t hesitated to exploit this controversy.
From a European point of view Charles may be factually right. Those parties originated as “Vlaams Blok” and “Swedish Front” (I think) respectively, but have freed themselves of the past many years ago — not only in names. The same goes for many other European parties, for example the Danish People’s Party which originated as a split-off from Fremskridtpartiet, a protest-party of ignorant fools. Even if we look upon mainstream political parties, we can say “let he who is clean throw the first stone”. This means that if we insist on cooperation with absolutely 100 percent clean saints only, we will be pretty much alone in politics.
Then we can carry on sitting late nights in our clean cells with our shiny computers and blog to each other about the horrors of Islam while the Muslims riot the streets and gradually take over our civilisation. In that case I’m afraid that even Charles Johnson’s blog has a very limited timespan ahead.
Meanwhile the resistance is growing all over Europe. That fact was illustrated perfectly at the Brussels Counterjihad Conference so generously hosted by Vlaams Belang and some very fine — and realistic — Americans from CVF. Right in “The Belly of the Beast” — the EU Parliament. Most reports from 15 European nations gave hope and confidence. And recent elections in France, Germany and Switzerland underscore the trend.
Mid-November we will have general elections here in Denmark too, and — once again — immigration and Islam will be top issues.
As I have said over on a Little Green Footballs thread, there is no racism whatsoever in Denmark so we can safely vote for our most anti-Muslim and pro-Israel party, the Danish People’s Party. I am absolutely confident that the same is valid for the Flemings and Vlaams Belang.
No matter what the theorists over at “Little Green Footballs” think.
50 comments:
That would be very good news. Any delight a barbarian like myself takes in watching a European squirm is alwasy due his cowardice revealing his insencerity. Or the the other way around.
So if they are going to actually dig in, I'm going to pull up a chair and cheer them on.
It will be easy to tell the sides. The good guys will have notes pinned to their bodies with daggers, while others stand in a circle wringing their hands.
Oops, wrong litle country. Go Denmark.
Go kepi! You've managed to articulate something I've been mulling over for a very long time, but I've not wanted to say anything because the various ways I thought of trying to get the point across would inevitably have turned in to, or been perceived as, anti-americanism.
The problem is, I've experienced a lot of anti(whatever) on various American blogs and it's really quite disturbing to see it spouted by otherwise rational people. Raise a point of dispuite against the perception that Europe is inevitably doomed and, in some places, especially if you're English, the knives come out and all sorts of epithets are thrown. I don't like calling people names anyway, but I certainly dont' like receiving names like "wet" and "limp" - which have meanings to us Brits that go rather beyond what the americans throwing them realise - or the more obvious homosexual jibes. I've learned to ignore it.
It is by no mean a one-way street. My own brother will, without fail, trash-talk Americans without ever taking the time to understand what he's talking about. He's centre-right in his politics yet his first reaction to anything that comes from the States is almost rabid hatred, simply because we've lived our entire lives being fed the anti-american line. He once told me he trusted George Galloway more than he trusted the American government.
I understand he wasn't really aware of the full facts...
But yes, I think that Spencer put it best in that video recently when he drew attention to the tendency for small groups to descend into in-fighting through lack of 'perfection'.
It's rather ironic in a way. Europeans of all nationalities often criticise Americans for being parochial and insular, but we're no different in the end. It's a natural human trait to prefer the familiar and stick close to it. People who stick close to the familiar will attack the unfamiliar with surprising ferocity, so that you reach a situation where people who have never even left their own county - except perhaps for a trip to Blackpool (or France - or Cuba, if you want to be trendy, but they don't really count) criticise Americans because they're "not interested" in the outside world... I stopped thinking that way most of the time a long time ago when I actually visited the states, but I think it was finally knocked out of me when I started traveling abroad more widely. It's unproductive, and ultimately futile to spend so much effort trashing people you don't actually know anything about because it wastes energy that could be spent getting to know and understand those people.
But then that might mean leaving the comfortable familiarity.
So much of what America is comes from Europe, spanning from Rome to Stockholm, that it cannot be doomed. What can happen, as is happening in America, is the denigration of history and our understanding of it to the point where it is belittled beyond meaning. That has been an ongoing attempt to 'level' all cultures to bland equality and at a low level at that. While I do understand the Highland Dani of New Guinea, culturally I must say that they have given us very little in comparison to any of the cultures of Europe. Yet if all cultures are leveled to that of the Dani or Yanamamo in the rainforsests of the Amazon, we will lose all meaning to what we are as peoples.
The gifts we receive from those before us are to be passed on undiminished and built upwards, not chipped and leveled downwards. Although the weight of media and entertainment is crafted by those who no longer see value in American culture, likewise do they raise up in value those cultures that see murder and destruction as their sole means to achieve power and make them equal. Instead of investing the heritage we have with remembrance and building on it, we cut it down to gain immediate pleasures or say that 'that is not modern' and therefore not good. There is a strong and hard difference between acknowledging the mistakes of ancestors and yet still keeping their hopes for the future alive and strong, and saying that such past is worthless and lets just start over as 'new man' with no meaning behind us... and none in front of us.
Europe is only doomed if the peoples forget their past and no longer hold it as meaningful to themselves. Without culture Europe becomes a bland, homogenous continent and the people a walking ghost just waiting for death as life is meaningless. That goes on in America, too... the siren song of forget and be happy with what you have and care not about tomorrow.
Thus, like in America, the only people who can doom Europe are her diverse citizens. That is a prime worry, in an era where others are less civilized and see much value in their culture and none in our diversity.
Kepiblanc wrote: "Then we can carry on sitting late nights in our clean cells with our shiny computers and blog to each other about the horrors of Islam while the Muslims riot the streets and gradually take over our civilisation."
That's the one problem I have with LGF.
I have always valued it as a newswire and correcter of MSM falsehoods (the Reuters Fauxtography Affair was Charles' finest hour, IMO). As a venue for raising operational suggestions against Islam, however, LGF is subpar. The very fact that Charles minds his reputation (especially vis-a-vis its archrival on the Left, Daily Kos) means it isn't a free platform for discussion. When the recent commenting rule, "Comments that advocate violence will be cause for immediate banning with no appeal", was issued, I had a "There goes the neighborhood" moment. And when I tried (very gently and diplomatically--like I were walking on eggshells) to protest it, Charles said he was only asking commenters to avoid "loose cannon hate speech". I cupped my hands in my face at that.
And now LGF is in a total state of meltdown. The threads about the Left/Islam alliance have gotten fewer, in favor of focusing on Vlaams Belang and on alerting American right-wingers against any association with those who allegedly have Nazi ties or history. The "delete" button gets pressed far too often, and the other commenters are conscientious to show they toe the line by downrating those who don't do so. (The rating system itself, by the way, is a feature found and abused on Daily Kos. What Charles was thinking when he copied it to LGF, I can't imagine.) The forum is in the process of becoming an echo chamber. As a regular reader of Daily Kos, I know only too well of sycophancy toward Markos, its proprietor, by all those who fear an impending ban; on LGF things are just the same.
I had resigned myself to limiting my posts to bringing links from the left-wing blogosphere. But while this can be rewarding, entertaining and often important, this isn't my way. I scour the left-wing blogosphere in order to find arguments to address, not for the sake of reading their garbage. I'm an essayist, not a news courier. In the light of the recent developments, and having read (on US or Them) of Charles' policy against discussing deportation, I don't think I can hold on there. Being one of the most vocal proponents of mass expulsion of the Muslims, expelling them all from within or near all non-Muslim states, it is no wild guess for me that being banned from LGF is a matter of time. I can confine my comments to bringing links (which I don't want to do), but every player of "Yes, No, Black, White" loses the game sooner or later.
Charles has also complained that Google ignores the "Flag Blog" button at the top of the blogs. He complained because he wants something done about a blog that blasted LGF for condemning YAF's hosting of Nick Griffin. This, the call for silencing people just because they said something you didn't like (as opposed to death threats and terrorism instructions), is unacceptable in my mind. On my own blog, ever since I first formulated my commenting rules after having my comments deleted on Daily Kos, my policy has been to never delete a comment only because I dislike its content. Feelings of offense are not a legitimate reason to delete comments or ban writers (online) and speakers (in real life). I don't take this nonsense from anyone--from any political orientation, nationality or religion.
My mind on Vlaams Belang still isn't made up. The overload of information from both supporters and detractors makes it difficult for me to decide. I refuse to take a stand until I'm reasonably sure of the facts. Whatever the case regarding VB, I know that I've had it with LGF, on the grounds of freedom of expression. If we cannot even discuss deportation, then Kepiblanc is 100% right in saying we're doomed to stay in front of our computers while the Left/Islam alliance takes over in real life (God forbid). Youngster though I may be, I still have memories of the prehistoric age that preceded the Internet, and I have an idea real life is, in the end, where things really count. The Internet is good in the service of raising awareness and making suggestions, but this is worth nothing unless it moves things in real life.
I support free speech for right-wingers, left-wingers, LGF, Daily Kos, Vlaams Belang, Holocaust Deniers, 9/11 Troofers, Stormfronters--all except those who clearly threaten lives (Islamic imperialists in general, and anti-Zionists in my parochial case). And, despite my previous reservations, and despite not having fully made up my mind about everything, I stand with the European resistance against Islam. I know what I stand for myself, and that's sufficient for me; beyond that, I've had enough of feeling oh-so righteous while participating in this pointless cleaving of the resistance into two.
Baron, even if you really like it, please don't make a post out of the comment this time. Having said what I thought needed to be said, I now want to move on. I want to go back to the better days when I used to bring operative suggestions.
Kepi, thank you for this article.
HaShem be with you in this fight. The areas of doubt can wait for less pressing times.
I just read the Manifesto of Vlaams Belang and I see absolutely nothing offensive about it at all. Indeed, I agree with their statements regarding the rights of the people over the State, family values, freedom of the individual, preservation of traditional culture, etc...
So what is the controversy?
ZionistYoungster, your comment is probably the most encouraging defense of the free word and freedom of expression I've ever seen. Thanks.
ZY --
I thought your comment was excellent, right on the mark, but I wouldn't have made a post of it anyway, because I'm trying not to add fuel to the war with LGF. Kepi's comment had much to say on the substantive issues; that's why it's here.
As for Vlaams Belang -- CVF is working on a substantive compilation of factual information to counter all the hysterical assertions. This takes a long time to do, much longer than it takes to cry "Fascist racist neo-Nazi!" at someone, but eventually it will be posted, either at the CVF blog or at Counterjihad Europa. Then reasonable people can look and make up their own minds.
As for the unreasonable people, their minds will never change anyway.
But FYI -- Filip Dewinter has strong support from the Orthodox community in Antwerp. You may be able to verify that through your contacts. We hoped to have the Chief Rabbi of Antwerp, who is Filip's liaison with the Jewish community in Antwerp, attend the conference in Brussels, but there was a scheduling conflict -- he was in Jerusalem, I think.
Anyway, VB is proud of the support they get from the Jews, but IMHO they don't publicize it enough. I think they feel that if they do, they'd be bowing to the PC gods, groveling before all those people who demand that they prove themselves to be non-racist by reciting all the shibboleths. At least that's my take on it.
I think this LGF debacle may have been helpful if it assists you GoV guys in finally breaking free of the neocons and their media - including LGF. You need to understand that the neocon anti-"Islamofascists", with their "Invade the World/Invite the World" agenda, are not your friends. With your concern for the survival of our civilisation, you have far more in common with the Paleocons.
Try checking out eg the websites of Chronicles magazine, Taki's Top Drawer (Paul Gottfried is excellent), and The American Conservative. Also Lawrence Auster's blog, Vdare, and Steve Sailer's site. There's a lot of diversity of views there, from traditionalist Christian to secular Darwinist, and plenty of things to disagree with, but at least they're asking the right questions and looking for answers. The neocon-media echo chamber exemplifided by LGF is just the reverse. - Vol-in-Law
Kepi,
I wrote repeatedly, even devoted a whole blog post, criticizing left-wing Jews for focusing on Neo-Nazis and the Christian Right as if this were the 1930's literally, and urging them to pay attention to the real danger of today in the form of the Marxist-Islamic alliance. So when I saw LGF go that down spiral into being obsessed with Neo-Nazis, I thought to myself, "It's like the pilot decided to switch the engine off in mid-flight and submit to the nose-dive".
I hope LGF recovers and leaves this misfocus and gets back to being full-time on the Left/Islam alliance. But even in the best case, the constraints on free discourse on LGF are too much for me to bear. Charles has the right to put those constraints (his blog, after all), but I have the right not to put myself under them. There's a real world out there; there's no way the Muslim invaders could be repulsed without deportation by the shiploads and, dare I say, a certain measure of violence. No one's supposed to like it, but that's reality.
Baron,
Good, but I just wanted to make sure. I don't want undue attention on me right now (because that means having to spend a lot of time answering comments). I need to concentrate on thinking up new ideas.
Get the facts out there. Historical inaccuracy is the bane of our times. If it's true that Charles is relying on exhibits that are long past, then it'd be just as logical to condemn the late Oriana Fallaci for the anti-Jewish statements she made (but later recanted, and that's the whole point).
As for the Jews of Europe, I believe (on the assumption that it is really in our day that all those prophecies are taking place) that the Diaspora is on the way out. Even American Jewry, safe though it may be feeling there, isn't going to stay in the USA forever. This nation is coming back home.
HaShem bless you both.
ZY
Zionist Youngster,
I really liked your comment. You have expressed my muddled thoughts and doubts very succinctly. When I first discovered LGF and started reading it, I thought: finally, an Internet resource where one can say freely what one thinks. Now I realize that this is not so. Why can't why discuss things rationally, agreeing to disagree and not resorting to insults?
I am also disappointed in how Charles has made it a personal issue. It seems that he wants Pamela to apologize not only for her rhetoric (which she did) but also for her position and the comments by some of her posters.
Vol Abroad,
On inspiration from what you wrote, I suggest a slogan to counter the naivist-idealist "We fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here":
"They're here, so we have to fight them over here first".
Could do with refinement, I admit.
Felice,
The essence of PC is when you give too much of a damn what others think. LGF is great in numerous ways, but Charles' over-cautiousness as to his reputation constitutes his site's one egregious flaw.
On some threads on Daily Kos (they're called "diaries" there), when one commenter warned the others that it could end up on the front page of LGF, the thread starter ("diarist") would often say, "Why should I let LGF dictate my writing?" I hate Daily Kos with a passion, but I wish Charles would have taken a leaf out of their book on that matter. Instead, he's chosen to be held in high regard.
The Leftists, like their Muslim allies, are unashamed liars: if there are no real racists to be found, the Leftists will fabricate some from scratch. As the right-wing saying goes: "Racist" is Leftspeak for "right-winger who bested a Leftist in an argument". It's absolutely true. Yes, there are true racists (*cough*Stormfront*cough*), but they're insignificant in the scheme of things. In fact, multiculturalist "reverse" racism is by far the pervasive one.
I hope the future will really be race-blind. I'd gotten carried away, but Fjordman (on the LGF comments) gave me an idea to chew on: that the use of the term, "whites" doesn't have the same significance in Europe that it has in the USA. And whatever the disagreements between Fjordman and me (not many, actually), the fact is I have to rely on him and his like for an understanding of Europe, just as me and my fellow Israeli Jewish bloggers are the ones to ask about the situation in Israel.
IMHO this is going to be a very long war fought on many fronts. Some of our allies may be just as "dirty" as Vlaams Belang is accused of being (though I have my own doubts, the Baron is dead on when he speaks about neither side of the Atlantic being fully cognizant of what really goes on over on the other shore).
It's going to get really nasty before it starts getting better. "Dirty" or not, there'll come a time we'll value whatever allies we can find.
zionistyoungster:
""They're here, so we have to fight them over here first".
Excellent slogan! Reminds me that when General Dannatt was appointed head of our (British) armed forces last year, he called for the British army to leave Iraq and return home to fight the real fight for our survival, here in Britain. New Labour didn't dare sack him, instead they reinterpreted/ignored his call.
Iraq has been a disaster, strengthening Al Qaeda and, far more importantly, greatly increasing the pace of Islamisation here in the UK (and across the West). I've lived in London 7 years now, and every year things that were unimaginable last year become routine. The sheer speed of it is horrifying.
Vol-in-Law (Vol Abroad is my wife)
beats me why Charles would be so fixated on party like Vlaams Belang. as i commented on there. And I think there's a bit of egomania going on here.
For example how many parties and how many seats has LGF actually won?
meanwhile, the anti-islamist Vlaams Belang is putting words into practise and HAS seats and gets votes.
its easy to run a blog - its damn hard to actually go out there in the real world , with threats of violence from the far-left and islamists, and actually gain votes and seats.
If these LGFers are jumping up and down over Vlaams Belang , where is THEIR party in Europe?
You´re absolutely right, Kepiblanc.
One should never underestimate how diffucult it is to judge a movemt from a long distance.
It really p......me off, to see LGF as a media for swedish statepropaganda, brought to you directly from the loonies at www.Expo.se !
This past week has been very dramatic. I myself was banned from Hot Air for daring to suggest 'constructive engagement' with European neo-nationalists. I think some of these American bloggers are drunk on their own self-righteousness. They want the American context of race to apply to Europeans, which I think is absurd. This whole episode has been very enlightening. The Brussels Journal was right, PC attitudes regarding race (and the willful misunderstanding of religion and race) is widespread in the right blogosphere in America.
Because racism is the original sin in America many Americans try to prove their purity by witch-hunting racism in Europeans, as if the history and traditions of both were identical. This is unfortunate.
Zionist Youngster,
I like everything you write here, and I'm very happy to read it. You and I are clearly on the same side in this war. I take back what I said about you being part of the all-encompassing Left. It surely is devastatingly encompassing, as we see e.g. at LGF, but you have escaped it. Your mind is very clear, and you get things right.
We can resume our philosophical discussion about culturalism at some other time.
Conservative Swede,
I let myself get carried away by my knee-jerk reactions. What happened to me is no different from what happened to LGF, except that I snapped out of it in the end. Thank God. My disgust at seeing them pat themselves on their backs for "not being racist", congratulating themselves on an online forum while (no matter whether intentionally or not) damaging a budding resistance movement in real life, and, to crown it all, while LGF itself was accumulating fascistic anti-"hate-speech" rules at a frightening rate, woke me up to the reality.
I still say I can't take a liking to those who think blacks are of average inferior intelligence (and kindred ideas). That said, the conflation of the anti-Islamization movement in Europe with those who think that way is unwarranted, to say the least. But the crucial point for me was that, if I'm into thinking along the lines of, "I'll never forgive myself for having been part of this", then the PC-fest at LGF fits the bill much better. If I chose to be part of that misguided movement that could only enable the fall of Europe to Islam (God forbid), I'd never forgive myself later, after that happened. The danger from the Left/Islam alliance is--I say this now upon investigation, therefore with certainty--far, far greater, and more real, than the danger any "white racist, neo-Nazi" party poses. I thank especially the most recent posts on Brussels Journal, which, upon reading them, I decided to pause, think and investigate before coming to a verdict. I'm glad I did that.
As for culturalism, there needn't be a discussion about it at all. The reason I'm a culturalist is that culturalism fits my local situation best; my big realization has been that it doesn't necessarily fit elsewhere. The most educating thing about this whole exchange, acrimonious though it may have been at times, is the understanding I gained that I can't extrapolate from my realities to those of another place (or time).
Interesting that I, who always tell people to view Muslims as analogues of medieval Christians as regards religiosity (i.e. in that the Muslims overwhelmingly take their religions seriously) instead of committing the anachronistic fallacy of thinking they're "just like us, having dreams of life and love just like ours", failed to grasp my own error of mistaken extrapolation.
This all reminds me of the time when ADL's Foxman aided Turkish denial of the Armenian genocide. When that issue broke out, it split the Jewish blogosphere into two (the pro-Turks and the pro-Armenians, with moral and pragmatic arguments thrown about like crazy. I was on the pro-Armenian side). It passed after about a week. I'm not going back to LGF, but if I hear, after a month or so, that they're still harping on that issue, I'll have lost any respect I still have for them.
Thank you, friends. May God be with you in this most urgent fight.
Vol in-law,
You need to understand that the neocon anti-"Islamofascists", with their "Invade the World/Invite the World" agenda, are not your friends.
Absolutely true. And yes, I've seen this since long back.
With your concern for the survival of our civilisation, you have far more in common with the Paleocons.
We are Kafircons!
Try checking out eg the websites of Chronicles magazine, Taki's Top Drawer (Paul Gottfried is excellent), and The American Conservative. Also Lawrence Auster's blog, Vdare, and Steve Sailer's site.
Yes, these are good sites with a lot of food for thought. However, quite as the neocons too often prioritize fighting (imaginary) Nazis before fighting Islam, Paleocons too often prioritize fighting Zionism before Islam, and Tradcons fighting liberalism before Islam.
If your concern is Islam, join us Kafircons! The only true conservatives. Real conservatives are not ideological. We fully focus on the real threat, and do not get distracted from it by imaginary or secondary threats as the other prefix-cons.
I got banned from HotAir right along with Thomas the Wraith for including a link that suggested that the BNP and its leader had cleaned up their absurd antisemitism. Allahpundit, apparently a mind-reader, vehemently claimed that it was purely a political move. (Ironic aside: He supports Rudy Giulianni, who until recently, supported partial-birth abortion.)
I agree with Vol Abroad that the neo-con blogosphere is probably of little use to the doers: Fjordman, Con Swede, Dymphna, BB, and others. The neo-cons will hand-wring and second guess themselves into dhimmitude or worse, if they haven't already.
I also think that the American concept of race is little different than anywhere else, it's just hasn't fanned into a flame because of a good economy and free entitlements to minorities. Just as Cane slew his brother Abel, Americans are no different, despite what the elites say.
It is sad to watch otherwise good people turn on people on their own side. The Left employs Hitler's tactic of slandering an opponent until the opponent's allies give him up to avoid slander themselves. It's sad to see that the neo-cons don't recognize it.
ZY,
Last time around I was not being fair to you in the holistic view. I disregarded all the sensible insights and positions you had and focused it all on hitting on one single peg.
My purpose wasn't of course being fair in the holistic view, but to try to move that single peg. This is of course annoying and not seen as polite. Sometimes it's effective though, at least in bringing things to the surface (subconscious fears etc.)
Nevertheless, Charles at LGF is now doing a better job than I ever could in snapping people out of their knee-jerk reactions. I guess from now on I could just lean back and watch Charles do the job for me, while being mister Nice Guy from now on :-)
You are not the only one who I confronted in this kind of way. I did it recently with the Baron too. Quite as you, he snapped out of it too. Please notice that I do not claim in either of the cases that I won the discussion, because I didn't. Once the knee-jerk reaction was gone, and the perspective was changed into a practical perspective, the discussion at the same time became irrelevant, and any differences in opinion were no longer substantive. And in your case it was Charles who did the job. No, you did it of course.
People such as you and the Baron who look inside of themselves and use their intellect to make real changes of their position/perspective are the ones I respect the most.
Still, I could have been nicer to you. But unfortunately I'm far from perfect, and sometimes I get too impatient. But in these days I'm in an exceptionally good mood. Thanks to Charles we have glory days ahead of us with many rich harvests to collect.
Nevertheless, Charles at LGF is now doing a better job than I ever could in snapping people out of their knee-jerk reactions. I guess from now on I could just lean back and watch Charles do the job for me, while being mister Nice Guy from now on :-)
Boy is that the truth.
Prcaldude,
BNP is in the process of cleaning out their anti-Semitism. But unlike the Sweden Democrats the process is not completed. The best site for "bnpwatch" I consider Lawrence Auster's site.
Nevertheless, a link about this process (even if it hastily claims it to be completed), should not be censored. And about the fact that it made you banned, I say: Give me a P, give me a C, what does that make?
For a partner of course we prefer a party without anti-Semitical historical baggage (if possible). In Britain there's UKIP. But then again, we should not ostracize the BNP (there are already enough leftists and neocons doing so). Especially when they are developing in the right direction.
Dialog is always better than ostracism. Even anti-Semites can be snapped out of their knee-jerk reactions (yes, I did that too).
Boy is that the truth.
Many people are being devastated by what's happening now. But I smell fresh air. Quite as I did after the scenes at Schuman Square last month.
Real change IS painful. It's painful to see the world as you once saw it fall apart, the things you believed in fall apart. But we have to go through the fire to come out at the other side. I know for sure. You can imagine how many such fires of pain I had to go through, coming to the position I have today, starting as a Swede.
But we have nothing to complain about. I always compare it to how it is for people leaving Islam. I've read descriptions of ex-Muslims when the left Islam, and they went through literal bodily convulsions and nights of fever. It can only be compared to exorcism.
Cross-posted from BJ.
Robert Spencer, 34th minute of speech) ...I don't come here very often, but I have been shown .... around Antwerp, around Brussels and the buildings that go back to the 16th century. The history ... the culture, these things we don't have.
I grew up in Charlestown South Carolina in the United States, which is a town where we are very proud of ourselves because there is some buildings that date from the early 19th century and so what we have here is the visible monuments and I suppose if you live here its easy to start to take them for granted.
We have the visilble monuments of the greatest civilisation the world has ever known. And the greatest civilsiation that the world has ever known is not just manifest, although it is manifest those artwork and the music, remember music is forbidden in islam law. Mohammad said that in hell satan will pour molten lead into the ears of those who listen to music, Beethoven,Mozart, Bac..... molten lead....
[...]
Nobody had any hesitation, well actually a lot of people did, there were many people who had no hestitation of saying during the cold war that the western way of life was superior to the Soviet Communist model, you had radio free Europe, you had radio liberty, you had voice of america,beaming into communist countries the message that the way of life that was offered by people the Communists were out to destroy was superior and they ought to come around to the other side.
Does Johnson consider Robert Spencer a "nazi" now? I'm dismayed an angered at the neo-con stupidity now on display at LGF.
conservative Swede:
"Yes, these are good sites with a lot of food for thought. However, quite as the neocons too often prioritize fighting (imaginary) Nazis before fighting Islam, Paleocons too often prioritize fighting Zionism before Islam, and Tradcons fighting liberalism before Islam."
I agree re Tradcons, inasmuch as I think classical liberalism (not cultural Marxism or socialism) can coexist with conservatism in a healthy society. Re American Paleocons & anti-Zionism I also agree, hence Jewish paleocons like Gottfried are particularly useful.
Conservative Swede,
Count me a Kafircon and [Jewish] Theocon!
Because of their naivism, the neocons' policies aren't good for Israel either. Far too many of them think that the "Palestinians" are a real nation (and not the cover-up for the local chapter of the Islamic jihad they really are) and that an agreement between them and Israel could bring peace to the Middle East. Granted, most of the guys on LGF (including Charles himself) aren't of that opinion, and vocally criticize Bush and Condi for their follies; but they still have a gaping chink in the armor, in their unwillingness to acknowledge (and Charles' prohibition to discuss) that the only human (as opposed to miraculous) way to peace for Israel lies in cleansing it of all those who oppose its existence as a Jewish State. Meaning, all the Muslims, every single one of them.
Neocons tend to talk about the USA's aid to Israel in money and weapons. All well and good, and they won't find me expressing ingratitude, but the aid we really need right now is the turning of a blind eye while we drive all the Muslims out of the Land of Israel. All the US monetary and military aid to Israel isn't worth much when the US pressures the Jewish State to back down every time it makes a sensible move (q.v. Lebanon last summer).
One of the things that snapped me out was the thought that much of the criticism leveled against Vlaams Belang is of the same type as toward Rabbi Meir Kahane (may HaShem avenge his blood). Kahane was labeled a "racist, fascist, Judeo-Nazi" and what not, just for being the first to raise the uncomfortable but necessary issue that the Jewish State cannot stay a Jewish state if its Arab citizens (I say "Muslim" rather than "Arab"; I'm not a Kahanist, though I take after the great majority of his views), who ipso facto constitute a rival nationalism inside it, should ever become a majority; therefore they all must go. Kahane was so vilified by the Israeli Left (as treasonous a Left as you'll find anywhere) that even right-wingers in Israel washed their hands off him. A fat lot of good that did Israel. We got the disastrous Oslo Accords three years after his assassination.
About being nice: I'm still in a bad feeling for coming down on Fjordman on LGF. Yeah, people will say I didn't reach half of how other commenters treated him, but still. We had our spats, none of them pleasing, some of them unnice, but at least something good came out of it all: the understanding that criticism needs to be made only after 1) having all the facts, and 2) putting oneself in the other side's shoes for a few moments.
God bless.
ZY
ZY, I don't know how young of a youngster you are, but you are one of the clearest thinking people I've run into in the internet hinterlands. Thank you.
Just last night Charles banned me from LGF and accused me of white supremacism because I dared ask what was wrong with the idea of a white Europe. The kicker appears to be when I referred to myself, jokingly, as the last surviving Prussian nationalist (which in a very real sense, I am). Little did I know that someone, somewhere, appropriated that phrase, slapped a swastika on it, and did whatever those people do. Last night was quite the little ban-fest over there.
Yes, PC is here in America when anything about race or culture is discussed. I disagree with a couple of previous posters that race is seen in a similar manner in America and Europe. America is, in my mind, the only nation in the world not held together by race and culture, but by shared ideology. Because of our basic premise that the nation invites all, regardless of race, if they only share our values, sensitivity to racial issues is on a hair-trigger. The immigration debate is a prime example.
Anyway, wonderful thread, and thanks to all the posters and commenters her at GoV. It's become my go-to blog for news of the fight in Europe.
I am absolutely confident that the same is valid for the "Flemish"...
;)
LoL.
Reposting this from a previous comment thread. I hope nobody minds my self-important ranting. :) I suspect it's ended up as a summary of what has come before...
--
Well I'd Argue that, if Europe really is doomed, then it may well be because of people like Charles and LGF, as much as our own "leaders", sniping at anyone who tries to fight back against the problems we face over here and who doesn't fit the Doomed narrative. This debacle with LGF calling Vlaams Belang and other related parties Nazi is just the latest example of something that I've noticed for a while amongst the neo-con groups. Neo-cons are very often leftists mugged by reality, but they seem to retain a lot of the leftist dogma even as the shift to the political right, which means that presentation and narrative remain a large part of how they perceive the world - and, indeed, perception remains at the forefront of their activity; witness Charles' concern, verging on obsession, with his "reputation" on the web. The "Europe is doomed" narrative is no less silly than the old leftist "Europe is paradise" narrative, and in a large way it's a sign that those people have realised how daft that old narrative really was. Unfortunately they then swing right over in the other direction...
The result is that anyone who fights back gets shafted because they're refusing to stick to the narrative. The power of the narrative in the minds of those who follow it then forces them to try and bring things back on track, through fair means or foul, ultimately making it into a self-fulfilling prophecy.
In fact it reminds me of modern Christian concept of the anti-christ and the rapture (a concept that was not even heard of before the late 19th century). In the 70s it was decided that the soviet union was the anti christ (and it was a fairly good candidate if you're in to that sort of thing) and that the end of the world was obviously coming soon. I read a fairly good anecdote concerning this. Two christians are discussing the soviet union, when one mentions that he's going in to Eastern Europe to start ministering and setting up churches. The other turns to him and asks why he would do that, when the soviets are so obviously a sign of the end times. "You should find somewhere to hide, the Lord is coming soon, and before he does the soviets will rule the earth and execute anyone who doesn't follow their system."
The first man turns to his companion. "Communism is a failed system," he says, and then goes on. "I see a day when the soviet union will collapse, and I intend to have a network of churches ready to provide support and comfort for those people."
"You're wasting your time," his friend replies, and then they part ways. The pastor - I can't remember his name now - went into Eastern europe and set up his churches, and when the soviet union collapsed he was ready to help people get through the painful transition and probably saved hundreds, possibly thousands of lives. The other man never did anything and is still sitting around waiting for Jesus to come back.
Maybe it's just a story, but it's demonstrative of a wider truth. We can all sit here saying "Europe is doomed" and then shooting down anyone who tries to fight back, making our prophecy true in a terribly ironic way, or we can join the fight in whatever way we're able and encourage those who are trying to actively resist the threat. The Baron and Dymphna are doing the latter. Most people who post here are doing the latter.
They don't give a damn about narratives, they just want to save people.
People like those at LGF just want to prove how pure they are; they are becoming no better than the people we're trying to save ourselves from, demanding that we submit to their narrative, their idea that Europe is doomed and unsaveable. People of that calibre fight anyone who doesn't submit, defame their purity of purpose and call them names. Idealogical purity is what got us in to this mess, it is definitely not going to get us out of it.
"As I have said over on a Little Green Footballs thread, there is no racism whatsoever in Denmark... I am absolutely confident that the same is valid for the Flemings and Vlaams Belang."
Dixit, Baghdad Bob?
All I know is that many white supremacists are very good at hiding their hate and their agenda. I know this as a result of my job which brings me into the orbit of some incarcerated neo-Nazis. Just be extra careful whom you associate with.
I don't see the need for incorporating any existing political parties into the Anti-Jihad Resistance.
All you get is old baggage.
Let free people join this new effort without dragging in their old and small concerns, and freely fight this universal battle, of all who value liberty, against a theocratic tyranny.
It is not the national origin or the color of the opponent that matters in this War.
But their beliefs.
Getting distracted by petty concerns (Walloons vs. Vlaams, et al) takes the Anti-Jihad fight off course.
It's the Islamic imperialism, not whether French or Flemish is spoken in which parts of Belgium, that matters.
And if people cannot leave behind their smaller turf wars to battle in this Great Cause ...that is working to preserve Western Civilization (built by all shades of human beings) ...then they are weak allies.
This is a fight for human freedom against a dogmatic despotism.
Nothing less.
ZY,
You are on a roll and in a zone of your own in this thread. You have touched on so many important points.
I have been in the blogosphere quite a bit over the past week following this issue and I've read a lot of opinions, but, this is the finest conclusion that has been offered:
"The danger from the Left/Islam alliance is--I say this now upon investigation, therefore with certainty--far, far greater, and more real, than the danger any "white racist, neo-Nazi" party poses."
I agree.
And that new slogan is worth way too much to be kept under the wraps of this thread. I hope to quote it soon enough at my own site.
Re: LGF- Morgenholz makes already #5 so far in the past week the number of posters (including myself) I have counted without much effort that have been banned for comments "too far" to the right. Charles ought to thnk long and hard about his censorship practices the next time he posts articles about restrictions on freedom of speech (e.g. koran flushing) due to his double standards.
And immigration...to their credit LGF'rs spent quite a bit of time last summer opposing the Shamesty Immigration bill. There was lively discussion at LGF of returning illegal immigrants to their country of origin. To allow illegals to stay would be amnesty they said, and they opposed it vehemently. Returning illegal immigrants to country of origin is deportation. It is drastic, cold hearted and a logistical nightmare but..probably necessary. Yet try to mention deportation in the same sentence as "muslims" and its enough to get you banished.
I have been out of circulation for a while, so I'm still trying to catch up with the LGF issue...
A Jacksonian wrote, "Europe is only doomed if the peoples forget their past and no longer hold it as meaningful to themselves. Without culture Europe becomes a bland, homogenous continent and the people a walking ghost just waiting for death as life is meaningless."
I have been hosting my parents who are on vacation from Belgium, and while I have noticed a gradual change in their political opinions over the last 10 years (from moderately flemish-conservative to eurocentrically soft-socialist) this most recent visit revealed that we simply can't have meaningful political discussions anymore. My father is a largely self-taught man with a deep and abiding interest in history, and yet the things he used to "know" have been superceded by the platitudes that have swamped the mainstream Euro press during the last decade. Both my parents now see me as someone who repeats "American" (i.e., arrogant/conservative/cowboy-like) opinions without considering the "European", i.e. sophisticated and worldy view. I constantly have to remind them that I came to most of my current views after a lot of painful reflection (as it always is when you find long-cherished beliefs suddenly challenged), and they even seem to have forgotten that I rebelled against authority-for-its-own-sake long before I left Belgium.
So, these days, my Mom extols the virtues of not having a national identity, and my Dad warns me against "blindly" following Pied Pipers (like VB) who he suspects of having a hidden agenda. Never mind that Socialism is the political persuasion that routine employs stormtroopers (either by Government fiat or by proxy), and that the real, historical Nazis gained power without ever hiding their agenda.
As much as I personally "feel" that Europe may become lost, the fact that some Europeans are organizing to salvage what they may, holds out the hope for recovery. We either help them now, when it's a battle of thoughts and words - or we may, in the long(er) term, yet be faced with the choice of sacrificing blood and treasure - or not.
USorThem,
You were a big contributor for my thought-process. Your info that Charles had completely banned the discussion of deportation was the critical piece that cemented my decision.
Something I kept saying on LGF, but didn't get me the effect I desired (a lift on the ban on discussing deportation and other such measures), is: There is no politically-correct way of winning this war. This is the slogan I go by.
And there are the words of Rabbi Meir Kahane (may HaShem avenge his blood), which can be taken as a call for pragmatism in general: "It is better to have an Israel that the whole world hates than an Auschwitz that they love". Let us be hated, called "racists" and "apologies for Nazis", yada yada. It's better than being "morally pure" in the eyes of the world* but not lifting a finger in real life to stop the march of the Caliphate.
God bless.
ZY
---
* Like heck the Left is going to stop call LGF "a racist blog" because of Charles' stand against VB.
Salve ZionistYoungster,
fellow Kafircon:
I guess you have read Benny Morris. Otherwise you should. A Jewish Machiavelli. A very good man, quite as Niccolo himself.
You might also enjoy to see how my moderate position on culture/race (the most centrist position possible between the two extreme points) has been attacked at MajorityRights. Three subsequent comments by Fred Scrooby here.
Money quote:
"Apart from his misunderstanding of IQ itself and his seeming lack of a sense of behavioral traits other than IQ being partly hereditary, he attributes failure of the Mexican population to create a first-world country solely to “Mestizo culture.” So, if somehow eight million Nigerian Negroes could be made to adopt Swedish culture everything in Sweden would remain unchanged if its population of eight million were replaced with eight million Nigerians. Riiiiiight ................."
While I do not think race can be separated from culture (I'm not talking about individuals, but about groups, societies and the long term historical perspective). Culture can only be clinically separated from race in theory and ideology (while I'm interested in the historical perspective). While I see this as obvious, when referring to the hodgepodge of race, climate, culture, traditions, etc., that makes a certain ethnicity (out of which I mostly do not know what comes from what source and in what combination), I call this hodgepodge culture (or ethnicity, depending on the context). This makes the MR people go bonkers. This is comical as well as tragic.
Lawrence Auster has got a funny brain too.
I had written:
"I think I might have found myself a new career in the entertainment business (and while I'm at it I'd like to affirm my recognition to black culture for their wonderful and essential contributions to music and dancing)..."
This was the reaction of Lawrence Auster:
"Entertainment? Recognition of black culture and dancing? Isn't this the guy who just the other day was expressing his total disillusionment with American conservative Christians because they lack the steel to send the nonwhite hordes packing? Intellectual vagabond indeed."
It's interesting to see how everything gets translated in the mind of Auster. Reverse migration of Muslims, gets translated to "nonwhite hordes packing" in his mind. But the most interesting thing is in how he sees a contradiction in appreciating the great achievements to the world of black culture, and a stalwart resistance to Islam. Where the heck is that contradiction? Only for a mind small enough, could a contradiction.be found here.
Interesting insights and revelations to this new reader from CA, USA! Recent visits to LGF have left me wanting for more clarity from the viewpoint of Europeans and others "outside" the US box.
In particular the insightful comments of Zionist Youngster as regards the reality for Israel seem particularly poignant. I sense you've made a particularly difficult journey in coming to your conclusions. Kahanist or no, you seem to share many of the same viewpoints as the late rabbi - some of which many of us have had to embrace (sometimes with considerable reluctance) given the nature of islamofascism and its harsh realities.
There seems no middle ground on the confrontation before us (US included). Either we recognize whats afoot here or we will find ourselves eventually suffering the shackles of the caliphate.
Conservative Swede,
Machievallianism has its limits, of course. The Communists who propped up Khomeini in 1979 were executed by him by the thousands in the course of the 1980's. But what Charles of LGF has demonstrated is the polar opposite: the perils of insisting on ideological purity, absolutely, with no room for any compromise and no regard to the urgency of the situation, to what is at stake.
The fact that the Jewish nation can maintain cohesion despite being comprised of many races (Ashkenazim, Yemenites, Ethiopians, to name just a few) means it is possible to have an ethnicity that is not tied to race. But I agree that if the basis is cultural and not racial, then it needs to be a strong connector. The Jewish religion is just that.
The chief problem I see with the racialist view of Europe is that it covers too much and too little at the same time. There's the Asian-born British bishop Nazir-Ali, who is far more British than traitors like the white George Galloway. And although Islam, as the late Anwar Shaikh put it so eloquently, can be considered Arab imperialism, it accepts conversion of dupes of all races. I am a proponent of expelling all Muslims from within or near non-Muslim states without regard to their race. The basic supremacism of Islam means they immigrate to every non-Muslim country with the feeling that it is theirs to take over one day.
Tracy,
My attraction toward Rabbi Kahane's ideas started in October 2000, when the Muslims not just of the 1967 territories but of the 1949 ones as well (i.e. outside Judea, Samaria and Gaza) rioted, pillaged and burned in their usual way. The awful truth then dawned on me that they all constitute a rival to Jewish nationalism, a time-bomb ticking toward explosion, and that the only way to permanent peace for Israel is drive them all out, as prescribed for us long ago, by a certain Person who knows a thing or too about it all. See Numbers 33:50-56.
I remember that in the beginning of this whole spat, I complained that my global view on the War Against Islam had been shattered. But now that view is actually strengthened: the resistance to Islam everywhere is part and parcel of the legitimate demand of nations to maintain their cohesion and sovereignty in the face of invasions from those who would remake them in their own image. As I said on a comment that the Baron later made into a post: "This is ours, and since you didn't come to become part of ours, but to remake ours in your image, then you'll have to get lost".
God bless.
ZY
Hi ZY,
I have no idea of why you wrote this to me, or why you think that the "racialist view of Europe" is anything of importance. Who except for anti-Semitic nut-cases do you suggest have a "racialist view of Europe"? You are hunting mosquitoes.
ZY,
What I wanted to say is this:
You are contrasting your position with a strawman position. While your thinking is otherwise very clear, this part of your thinking lack nuances, probably due to lacking experience of Europe.
Obviously you are also putting me in this strawman position, since you addressed this answer to me.
When it comes to race and culture you still tend to think in black and white. It doesn't have to be completely one or the other. Both extremes are strongly ideological, and detached from reality.
Otherwise, I agree with much of what you say. E.g. of how Jewish national identity is more based on culture than e.g. Danish. And that we should accept that this is different in different places. That's what I call real diversity!
I'm obviously coming from a different perspective than the writers of this blog - although my opinion of the present state of Islam in the world has considerably soured over the past several years.
But that does not excuse consorting with fascists. Especially, fascists whose wish to have all "foreigners" expelled from their countries has historically included the ultimate scapegoat religious "foreigners" of Europe, the Jews.
This whole debate reminds me of the "united front" arguments on the left in the mid-20th century, when socialists, wedded to democratic principles, divided about whether they should make a tactical alliance with the communists. The final accepted verdict, with England's Labor party and the German Social Democrats in particular, was that such alliances were pacts with the devil.
For some lighter moments in the history of LGF, visit nodrogsgreatesthits.blogspot.com
You say:
So it’s dangerous for an American to make snap judgments about Europe, especially when there is no such thing as “Europe”. Despite what the mandarins of the EU would like you to believe, there is simply a collection of different countries and cultures which happen to lie in the same geographical area.
That's bullshit.
Yes, there is a collection of different countries and yes they lie in the same geographic area. But to imply they have nothing in common is totally totally mad.
These countries have been cheek-by-jowl since...since forever. So, they've exchanged ideas products and people since forever.
They are united by common political movements, common philosophical ideas, a common religion and a common history.
We could drill down into that a bit. For example, almost all European countries see themselves descended at least in part from the Graeco-Romans. Almost all place the classical authors at the start of their literary canons. Since the fall of the Roman empire, philosophical/scientific movements have happened across the continent in tandem. This includes the founding of the first universities, the building of the most impressive Gothic cathedrals, the renaissance, the enlightenment, romanticism, the rise of nationalism, the building of the nation state, the attempted revolutions of 1848 and much, much more.
If that doesn't convince you, then take these bunch of countries and compare them to say, a bunch in central Asia and see if they're any different.
And if that doesn't convince you, then you're denying the facts and beyond help.
Conservative Swede,
I advocate keeping the simple simple and the complex complex, so if you say my view is simplistic, then I'm ready to hear why.
So let me understand: When Europeans talk of "white", do they mean culture in addition to race? Apart from the fact that its Greek originators were white, what can be called "white" about democracy?
Laura Bush, answering her critics on donning Islamic dress, said, "These women do not see covering as some sort of subjugation of women, this group of women that I was with. That's their culture. That's their tradition. That's a religious choice of theirs" (source: Dhimmi Watch). Why is that answer not satisfactory? Is it right for girls who happened to be born to an Arab-Islamic race/culture to be condemned to all its "racial-cultural constructs"?
The problem I have with the Iraq War (and Afghanistan too) is the mistaken priorities: going on the offensive in the Muslim world when they're here. But the priorities are the problem, not the idea itself. Sometime in the future, the offensive will have to be taken to the Muslim world, otherwise we'll have just another 300 years or so of respite from Islam, as we'd had from 1683 to about 1979. It goes without saying that the Islamic presence is unacceptable on our home bases; but Islam isn't acceptable on their current lands either. Recall that North Africa was the home of Augustine before the Muslims gobbled it up.
Again, please don't berate me if I'm completely off base from the meaning you intended. This is a difficult topic, and the gap to be bridged here is far from being merely a geographic one (I'm not transatlantic; compared to the Americans, I'm your next-door neighbor).
God bless.
ZY
ZY,
I fail to see why you consider it the simple way, to first build a strawman and then argue against him, instead of arguing with real people of flesh and blood.
Anyway, if it makes you happy, it's you privilege. I don't have time for this.
Conservative Swede,
That's your problem, CS. You have no patience. You want the other side to get your meaning immediately, you get frustrated when they don't, and you aren't willing to go through the necessary process of making yourself clearer.
Me, I have patience, but my time is rationed by the various obligations I have in life, so I'm afraid I must deallocate the time I spared for discussions with you, in favor of more fruitful activities.
God bless.
ZY
ConservativeSwede said:
"BNP is in the process of cleaning out their anti-Semitism... we should not ostracize the BNP."
Swede, you almost had me convinced, until I read that total falsehood. The BNP is an organisation mired in Jew-hate, both historically and presently.
Its leader, Nick Griffin, is a Holocaust denier with a conviction for publishing anti-Semitic hate literature and an absolute obsession with "Zionist" conspiracies.
Take a look at its website. 9/11? Carried out by Mossad. The Iraq War? A Big Jewish Plot to benefit Israel. And by "developing in the right direction", I take it you mean this attitude:
"The master key to a sensible attitude towards the Jews is this: treat them like any other foreign people."
I don't know enough about the Vlaams Belang or the Sweden Democrats to make a firm decision either way. But I do know about the BNP. David Horowitz was spot on when he condemned the MSU's YAF decision to invite Nick Griffin to Michigan State:
“Bringing a neo-Nazi and Jew-hater [Griffin] to campus in connection with Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week would be worse than counterproductive. It’s antithetic to the purpose of the event which is designed to expose Nazis and Jew haters. Any attempt to associate me with this creep is a malicious misrepresentation of my efforts.”
Oh, and about your main point: "I fail to see why you consider it the simple way, [...]"
Your argument is far from simple. Proof of this is the verbiage, both in amount and in complexity, you've had to use in order to make it. No one could "consider it the simple way" except by reading your mind.
I'm tired of all this. Simplicity, for me, is the idea that there are nations and that they deserve to have the say as to their makeup, inside well-defined and non-imperialistic borders. All the rest, including the question what makes your particular nationality, is up to each nation. Culture, shmulture, race, shmace, I don't give a hoot. I know what makes the Jewish nation, so that's enough for me, and I go from there. All this theoretical talk is fruitless, just like LGF's recent obsession with Nazis, while I come here to discuss operative steps for stopping Islamization and bolstering nationalism. You're free to waste your time but not mine. Goodbye.
ZY: "I'm tired of all this. Simplicity, for me, is the idea that there are nations and that they deserve to have the say as to their makeup, inside well-defined and non-imperialistic borders. All the rest, including the question what makes your particular nationality, is up to each nation. Culture, shmulture, race, shmace, I don't give a hoot."
Fine. And thereby you have reached my position. It was not so complex really, was it?
Post a Comment